Nosta wrote:There is a point in Buddhism that i still not understand and cannot be sure if, due to my bad english, i am able to tell you correctly my question.
But, here goes:
If Nibanna is our "original nature" how can we explain that we are not Nibanna since always? Another wa to point my question: if Nibanna is pefection, how is that such perfecton is not all over all beings? Wouldnt be logical to say that such great perfection is the natural state of everything, since always? A perfection that is attained is like a single point and not a supreme thing. If Nibbana is the original nature - and that means the first nature - how could we have descended into the ugly state of samsara?
I mademany questionsbut in fact they are all the same faces of the same question.
Thanks for answering.
Nosta wrote:If Nibanna is our "original nature" how can we explain that we are not Nibanna since always?
Don't worry – there's nothing real about your confusion.
Also, we all start as deluded beings on the path. If that were not the case there would be no need for a path.
SonamZangpo wrote:What I meant is that the Buddha consciousness is universal, primordial. Our consciousness is made of the stuffs of that, but then deluded by karmic perception. In this way I mean we are already Enlightened, but made ignorant by our perceptions and must realize it.
Huseng wrote:Using the word "original" is misleading.
It assumes that at one point Nirvana was the initial state and that samsara arouse from it.
That is entirely false of course.
I recommend saying "fundamental" instead.
"Within the Mahayana, the term buddha nature has different shades of meaning. In the Mind-only school, buddha nature refers to our fundamental uncontaminated mind that, when untapped, is said to be our "naturally abiding' buddha nature, and when awakened is said to be our 'transformed' buddha nature. This naturally abiding buddha nature is also known as natural nirava, or natural liberation, for it exists naturally in all of us. It is because of the presence of this natural nirvana that the pollutants obscuring its expression are said to be separable from the essential nature of the mind, making enlightenment possible. In the Middle Way School, buddha nature is defined differently: it is defined in terms of emptiness, specifically, the mind's emptiness of intrinsic existence. This is also called the Clear- light nature of the mind."
Q: How did illusion begin?
His Holiness the Dalai Lama: As the continuum of the mind has no beginning, ignorance does not have one either. If it did, we would have to discover from within a state of consciousness that predates ignorance and is different from it in an enlightened mind, -- a cause resulting in ignorance. This makes no sense.
Nosta wrote:Astus, it seems that you dont see such teaching (O.Nature) as very useful.
Also, i would say thats a shame that some teachings may not be real Buddha teachings (like that one from O.Nature and maybe Amithabba existence) because they just appeared after Buddha death.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 16 guests