Making sense of types of thought

General forum on the teachings of all schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism. Topics specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by Aemilius »

Never mind. There are some interesting things concerning this issue:

"The Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya mentions the figure of Devadatta, but the description and attributes of this figure are entirely different from those in the vinayas of sects from the Sthavira branch. In fact, there is no overlap in the characterizations of Devadatta between the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya and the other five extant vinayas which all come from the Sthavira branch. This has led some scholars to conclude that the story of Devadatta was a legend produced by the Sthaviras after they split from the Mahāsāṃghikas in the 4th century BCE. André Bareau has discovered that the earliest Vinaya material common to all sects simply depicts Devadatta as a Buddhist saint who wishes for the Monks to live a rigorous lifestyle."

Records from Chinese pilgrims to India

"Faxian and other Chinese pilgrims who travelled to India in the early centuries of the current era recorded the continued existence of "Gotamaka" buddhists, followers of Devadatta. Gotamaka are also referred to in Pali texts of the second and fifth centuries of the current era. The followers of Devadatta are recorded to have honored all the Buddhas previous to Śākyamuni, but not Śākyamuni. According to Faxian, Xuanzang and Yijing's writings, some people practised in a similar way and with the same Books as common Buddhists, but followed the similar tapas and performed Rituals to the past three Buddhas and not Śākyamuni Buddha. Many followers of that sect listened to the lessons in the Nālandā with the others, but it is believed by many that they were not students of Devadatta. However, there are still those who say they follow Devadatta today at Bodh Gaya."

http://www.tibetanbuddhistencyclopedia. ... =Devadatta
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by LastLegend »

Astus wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 7:33 am
LastLegend wrote: Thu Oct 21, 2021 8:50 pmIt’s still going in circle…even when at calmest and empty, there is still a sense of being. Even you sense there is no being, that’s still being.
No matter what one senses or what it's perceived as, just as they arise according to conditions so do they pass quite rapidly. But unless one pays close attention, feelings can seem constant and personal.
One can be free from suffering arriving at the clear mind but it’s not the fruit of Buddha. I am responding to your whole view and approach not particularly to this above paragraph. In the even the clearest mind and thoughts are very subtle, they still arise. Lankavatara Sutra said non-arising means everything extinguished in Samadhi. Non-arising = Samadhi. Even the ‘seeing’ is extinguished. Then when not in Samadhi, everything functions just as it is. The reason why it needs to be extinguished is because karma will continue to cloud our mind.
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by Astus »

LastLegend wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 3:06 pmLankavatara Sutra said non-arising means everything extinguished in Samadhi. Non-arising = Samadhi. Even the ‘seeing’ is extinguished. Then when not in Samadhi, everything functions just as it is. The reason why it needs to be extinguished is because karma will continue to cloud our mind.
Karma and suffering does not come from phenomena but from ignorant craving and clinging. If it were things themselves that caused suffering, then no liberation would be possible.

'Reverend Koṭṭhita, the eye is not the fetter of sights, nor are sights the fetter of the eye. The fetter there is the desire and greed that arises from the pair of them. The ear … nose … tongue … body … mind is not the fetter of thoughts, nor are thoughts the fetter of the mind. The fetter there is the desire and greed that arises from the pair of them.'
(SN 35.232)

'Q: What does "to perceive without perceiving any object whatsoever" mean?
A: Perceiving all sorts of things without grasping -- that is, not being clouded by the arising of any thought of love or hate, etc. -- is perceiving without any objects. If one can see without seeing any object whatsoever, that is using the Buddha-Eye, which is like no other eye. On the other hand, if one sees all sorts of things that cause thoughts of love and hate, etc., to arise, that is known as "perceiving objects" with ordinary eyes, and sentient beings have no other kind of eyes. This is true, likewise, with all of the other sense organs.'

(Treatise On Entering The Tao of Sudden Enlightenment)
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by LastLegend »

Astus wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 4:14 pm
LastLegend wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 3:06 pmLankavatara Sutra said non-arising means everything extinguished in Samadhi. Non-arising = Samadhi. Even the ‘seeing’ is extinguished. Then when not in Samadhi, everything functions just as it is. The reason why it needs to be extinguished is because karma will continue to cloud our mind.
Karma and suffering does not come from phenomena but from ignorant craving and clinging. If it were things themselves that caused suffering, then no liberation would be possible.

'Reverend Koṭṭhita, the eye is not the fetter of sights, nor are sights the fetter of the eye. The fetter there is the desire and greed that arises from the pair of them. The ear … nose … tongue … body … mind is not the fetter of thoughts, nor are thoughts the fetter of the mind. The fetter there is the desire and greed that arises from the pair of them.'
(SN 35.232)

'Q: What does "to perceive without perceiving any object whatsoever" mean?
A: Perceiving all sorts of things without grasping -- that is, not being clouded by the arising of any thought of love or hate, etc. -- is perceiving without any objects. If one can see without seeing any object whatsoever, that is using the Buddha-Eye, which is like no other eye. On the other hand, if one sees all sorts of things that cause thoughts of love and hate, etc., to arise, that is known as "perceiving objects" with ordinary eyes, and sentient beings have no other kind of eyes. This is true, likewise, with all of the other sense organs.'

(Treatise On Entering The Tao of Sudden Enlightenment)
Agreed: craving and clinging will produce and pull karma associated with it. Here one would arrive at the clear mind, and if there are no thoughts at all, it would be the fruit of Arahant. But it didn’t not end there for Sixth Patriarch, he went beyond the clear mind. Sixth Patriarch said fundamentally there is no thing. There is no thing to see (even the clear mind) and that ‘seeing’ isn’t there either; he was referring to [in his mind]. That’s the fruit of Buddha…

Non-arising is unborn mind. Non-arising of mental appearance, and mental appearance is what we can (‘see’, feel, sense, etc) specifically because appearance is what appears what comes to being, including the ‘seeing’ is appearance of being. That’s what born. Mahaprajnaparamita Sutras say Buddha nature is non-appearance (which refers to the non-characteristics, specifically of mental appearance including all aggregates their functions).
Last edited by LastLegend on Fri Oct 22, 2021 5:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by Astus »

LastLegend wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 5:12 pmNon-arising is unborn mind. Non-arising of mental appearance, and mental appearance is what we can (‘see’, feel, sense, etc) specifically because appearance is what appears what comes to being, including the ‘seeing’ is appearance of being. That’s what born. Mahaprajnaparamita Sutras say Buddha nature is non-appearance (which refers to the non-characteristics, specifically of mental appearance including all aggregates their functions).
Eliminating appearances is not the correct way.

“Master Gotama, it’s when the eye sees no sight and the ear hears no sound.That’s how Pārāsariya teaches his disciples the development of the faculties.”
“In that case, Uttara, a blind person and a deaf person will have developed faculties according to what Pārāsariya says. For a blind person sees no sight with the eye and a deaf person hears no sound with the ear.”

(MN 152)

'there are deluded people who empty their minds and sit in quietude without thinking of anything whatsoever, claiming that this is great.'
(Platform Sutra, ch 2, BDK ed, p 29)

Rather, as Huineng taught:

'Nonthought is to be without thought in the context of thoughts.'
(Platform Sutra, ch 4, BDK ed, p 43)
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by LastLegend »

Astus wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 8:53 pm
LastLegend wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 5:12 pmNon-arising is unborn mind. Non-arising of mental appearance, and mental appearance is what we can (‘see’, feel, sense, etc) specifically because appearance is what appears what comes to being, including the ‘seeing’ is appearance of being. That’s what born. Mahaprajnaparamita Sutras say Buddha nature is non-appearance (which refers to the non-characteristics, specifically of mental appearance including all aggregates their functions).
Eliminating appearances is not the correct way.

“Master Gotama, it’s when the eye sees no sight and the ear hears no sound.That’s how Pārāsariya teaches his disciples the development of the faculties.”
“In that case, Uttara, a blind person and a deaf person will have developed faculties according to what Pārāsariya says. For a blind person sees no sight with the eye and a deaf person hears no sound with the ear.”

(MN 152)

'there are deluded people who empty their minds and sit in quietude without thinking of anything whatsoever, claiming that this is great.'
(Platform Sutra, ch 2, BDK ed, p 29)

Rather, as Huineng taught:

'Nonthought is to be without thought in the context of thoughts.'
(Platform Sutra, ch 4, BDK ed, p 43)
You can eliminate all thoughts (including thoughts are as fine as dust motes that we barely notice them). I don’t know how that’s done. You are then left with a bare consciousness. But this is not the way of Mahayana…in direct traditions you recognize spontaneous nature and that’s the king. It’s even better if you practice Samadhi but here you are not deluded like Sixth Patriarch said sitting without thinking of anything that’s somewhere along the line of constructing such state.
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by Astus »

LastLegend wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 10:30 pm…in direct traditions you recognize spontaneous nature and that’s the king.
All things are conditioned. What do you call spontaneous?
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by Aemilius »

Astus wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 12:01 pm
Aemilius wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 8:46 amWhy was Shakyamuni upset when some of his followers had flocked to the congregation of Devadatta, if "Devadatta" is a mere expression without basis?
Why do you say the Buddha was upset? Do you think he failed in patience, was driven by the eight worldly concerns, and has not removed completely the three poisons?

'Subhūti, in a former lifetime my body was cut into pieces by the Rājah Kaliṅga. At that time, I was not abiding in the notions of self, person, sentient being, or life span. And why not? If, at the time my body was cut into pieces, I had been holding to the notions of self, person, sentient being, or life span, I would have felt ill-will [toward Kaliṅga]. Subhūti, I also remember some five hundred lifetimes ago having practiced forbearance as a renunciant sage. At that time I was also free from the notions of self, person, sentient being, and life. Therefore, Subhūti, the bodhisattvas should free themselves from all notions and arouse the aspiration for peerless perfect enlightenment. They should not arouse this aspiration while abiding in form, and they should not arouse this aspiration while abiding in sound, odor, taste, touch, or conceptualization. They should give rise to the aspiration that has no abode. If the mind abides, then this is not abiding.'
(Diamond Sutra, ch 14)
It does not really change anything, banks are still banks and money is still money, even if they are mere words and worldly conventions. Economists know that "money" is a convention or a contract, and yet everything functions as if money was a real existent. That is the nature of things.
'“Even if we know that all is like illusion,
How,” you ask, “will this dispel afflictive passion?
Magicians may indeed themselves desire
The mirage-women they themselves create.”
The reason is they have not rid themselves
Of habits of desiring objects of perception;
And when they gaze upon such things,
Their aptitude for emptiness is weak indeed.
By training in this aptitude for emptiness,
The habit to perceive real things will be relinquished.
By training in the thought “There isn’t anything,”
This view itself will also be abandoned.'

(Bodhicaryavatara 9.30-32, tr Padmakara)
You are confusing real and basic needs with endless desires. Therefore banks are still banks and money is still money. On the gut level: do you use money, pay the rent and buy goods yourself? Or are they just "empty" for you?
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by LastLegend »

Astus wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 8:43 am
LastLegend wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 10:30 pm…in direct traditions you recognize spontaneous nature and that’s the king.
All things are conditioned. What do you call spontaneous?
You would need to know that yourself. It’s quite personal. If you examine your mind, you would need to what are thoughts, and what arises before thoughts, and what spontaneous knows before all of that happen.
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by LastLegend »

All things are conditions but if it is unborn it’s not conditioned. When examine your mind, you can ask: before born what is born?
Last edited by LastLegend on Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by Astus »

Aemilius wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 12:32 pmYou are confusing real and basic needs with endless desires. Therefore banks are still banks and money is still money. On the gut level: do you use money, pay the rent and buy goods yourself? Or are they just "empty" for you?
Emptiness is not a negation or denial of conventional reality, rather the understanding that they are merely conventional designations.

'The Inquiry of Ugra also says, “By correctly giving wealth to sons, wives, male and female servants, employees, and hired laborers.” In this way, whether you have renounced possessions or not, they will not create obstacles to the study and other practices that are conducive to the Awakening of yourself and others. And if renouncing, or not renouncing, would create obstacles to the achievement of an equal or greater good by a bodhisattva of greater power to help sentient beings, or equal power, you should not do it.'
(The Training Anthology of Santideva, ch 7, p 139)

'Renunciation is born when you know that there is ultimately no satisfaction in samsaric life. Since ordinary joys are short-lived dreams, there is no reason to long for success or to fear failure. If you happen to grow rich, there is no reason to feel attached or proud; simply use your wealth positively and meaningfully. Whatever power you gain, use it to serve the Three Jewels and the great teachers, and whatever land you own, make it available for the benefit of the sangha; in short, whatever you acquire, use it to preserve the Dharma and to benefit others. Used in this way, your dreamlike wealth and influence will bring you more and more dreamlike merit, which in tum will bring you closer and closer to the threshold of dreamlike enlightenment.'
(The Heart Treasure of the Enlightened Ones, p 102)
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by Astus »

LastLegend wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:00 pmIf you examine your mind, you would need to what are thoughts, and what arises before thoughts, and what spontaneous knows before all of that happen.
Mind is what is aware of something. If there is nothing to be aware of, there is no mind to talk of either.

'If the hearing consciousness is permanent,
It follows that it’s hearing all the time.
And if there is no object, what does it cognize?
On what grounds do you call it consciousness?
If something that’s unconscious knows,
It follows that a stick has knowledge also.
Therefore in the absence of a thing to know,
It’s clear that consciousness will not arise.'

(Bodhicaryavatara 9.60-61, tr Padmakara)
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by LastLegend »

Astus wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 8:10 pm
LastLegend wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:00 pmIf you examine your mind, you would need to what are thoughts, and what arises before thoughts, and what spontaneous knows before all of that happen.
Mind is what is aware of something. If there is nothing to be aware of, there is no mind to talk of either.

'If the hearing consciousness is permanent,
It follows that it’s hearing all the time.
And if there is no object, what does it cognize?
On what grounds do you call it consciousness?
If something that’s unconscious knows,
It follows that a stick has knowledge also.
Therefore in the absence of a thing to know,
It’s clear that consciousness will not arise.'

(Bodhicaryavatara 9.60-61, tr Padmakara)
Then when consciousness arises, does it have any appearance characteristics? Before consciousness arise, what is there?
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by Astus »

LastLegend wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 8:33 pmThen when consciousness arises, does it have any appearance characteristics?
'Then the Buddha said to the mendicants, “Mendicants, do you understand my teachings as Sāti does, when he misrepresents me by his wrong grasp, harms himself, and makes much bad karma?”
“No, sir. For in many ways the Buddha has told us that consciousness is dependently originated, since without a cause, consciousness does not come to be.”
“Good, good, mendicants! It’s good that you understand my teaching like this. For in many ways I have told you that consciousness is dependently originated, since without a cause, consciousness does not come to be. But still this Sāti misrepresents me by his wrong grasp, harms himself, and makes much bad karma. This will be for his lasting harm and suffering.
Consciousness is reckoned according to the specific conditions dependent upon which it arises. Consciousness that arises dependent on the eye and sights is reckoned as eye consciousness. Consciousness that arises dependent on the ear and sounds is reckoned as ear consciousness. Consciousness that arises dependent on the nose and smells is reckoned as nose consciousness. Consciousness that arises dependent on the tongue and tastes is reckoned as tongue consciousness. Consciousness that arises dependent on the body and touches is reckoned as body consciousness. Consciousness that arises dependent on the mind and thoughts is reckoned as mind consciousness.
It’s like fire, which is reckoned according to the specific conditions dependent upon which it burns. A fire that burns dependent on logs is reckoned as a log fire. A fire that burns dependent on twigs is reckoned as a twig fire. A fire that burns dependent on grass is reckoned as a grass fire. A fire that burns dependent on cow-dung is reckoned as a cow-dung fire. A fire that burns dependent on husks is reckoned as a husk fire. A fire that burns dependent on rubbish is reckoned as a rubbish fire.
In the same way, consciousness is reckoned according to the specific conditions dependent upon which it arises.”'

(MN 38)
Before consciousness arise, what is there?
'consciousness exists dependent on a duality. And what is that duality? Eye consciousness arises dependent on the eye and sights. ... Ear consciousness … Nose consciousness … Tongue consciousness … Body consciousness … Mind consciousness arises dependent on the mind and thoughts.'
(SN 35.93)

See also from a commentary to MMK ch 9:

'The one who sees form cannot exist before - that is, independent of - the experience of seeing the form, for if she did, it would absurdly follow that she would always see that form. The reason for this is that if an individual is called a "seer of form," it is obviously because she actually sees some form, and thus if the seer of form existed independent of the experience of seeing it, the self who was called the seer of form would always see the form in order to earn that name. The same would be true with the other objects of the senses and the ones who experience them-if the experiencer existed before the experience itself, it would follow that the experiencer would always have that experience.'
(The Sun of Wisdom, p 60)
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by LastLegend »

It denies an independent self. Would you say Buddha nature is only the object of consciousness?
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by Astus »

LastLegend wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 11:09 pmWould you say Buddha nature is only the object of consciousness?
Buddha nature is a concept, and whatever is not an object of consciousness is unknown. Assuming something beyond awareness is itself a conjecture formed in the mind.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by LastLegend »

Astus wrote: Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:46 am
LastLegend wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 11:09 pmWould you say Buddha nature is only the object of consciousness?
Buddha nature is a concept, and whatever is not an object of consciousness is unknown. Assuming something beyond awareness is itself a conjecture formed in the mind.
What is grasping? Since what you said there along line of abandoning grasping.
Last edited by LastLegend on Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9438
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Astus wrote: Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:46 am
LastLegend wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 11:09 pmWould you say Buddha nature is only the object of consciousness?
Buddha nature is a concept, and whatever is not an object of consciousness is unknown. Assuming something beyond awareness is itself a conjecture formed in the mind.
The concept of Buddha nature is a concept.
Buddha nature itself is a quality that all beings have the potential to realize. It was there even before anyone had any concept of it.
Most beings, in fact, have no concept of it.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by Astus »

LastLegend wrote: Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:20 amWhat is grasping?
'There are these four kinds of grasping. Grasping at sensual pleasures, views, precepts and observances, and theories of a self. Grasping originates from craving. Grasping ceases when craving ceases. The practice that leads to the cessation of grasping is simply this noble eightfold path'
(MN 9)
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Making sense of types of thought

Post by Astus »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:40 amBuddha nature itself is a quality that all beings have the potential to realize. It was there even before anyone had any concept of it.
What is that quality? Is it a quality of the aggregates or not? If it is of the aggregates, it is just as impermanent and empty as they are. If it is not a quality of the aggregates, what would it have to do with beings?
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”