"All Buddha-Nature is One"

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.
muni
Posts: 4532
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by muni » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:33 am

I listened to the first part of the posted youtube ( Krishnamurti.) Thank you. It reminds on the energies:
Zal (the appearance of a seemingly external world):is the energy of the individual that appears as a seemingly external world. The individual sees himself as a separate entity that lives in outer world of objects.
But these outer objects/world are actually projections from his own energy. This compared to a crystal. Light (energy) enters the crystal (the individual) and projects into rays and patterns of colors which are seen as separate from the crystal, but in fact they are functions of the crystal's nature. In reality there are no external independent or separate phenomena; they are manifestations of the energy of the individual. (See Zal, Rolpa, Dang.)


Then the idea that someone/some individual realizes nature which excludes others, how would that be possible? At the same time the idea that someone is awaken and by that everyone is awaken would be great but alas mistaken as well.
Fals
Fake news.
Last edited by muni on Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:53 am, edited 2 times in total.
:meditate:

User avatar
Wayfarer
Global Moderator
Posts: 4227
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Wayfarer » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:51 am

I think it is a re-statement of the understanding of non-duality, which really means 'not divided' or 'not two'. 'Advaya' is the Buddhist term for non-dual (as distinct from advaita).

Non-dual is not the same as 'one' as it doesn't refer to a singular or numerical one. It is, if you like, a unity which is not an entity. It is more that all sentience originates from the same source, or is cut from the same cloth, so to speak.

Here's something I wrote on Philosophy Forum about it:
I think the idealist or perennialist understanding of the fundamental unity of being ought to be understood in terms of a unity which is not an entity. What I mean by that is that the underlying unity of the Cosmos ought not to be conceived of as numerically singular, that is, as one of something, but as being the underlying unity from which diversity emanates.

But the notion of 'the one' as being numerically single, that is, an instance of something, straight away implies another, namely, someone who is aware of that one, or at least the possibility of something or someone else who is distinct from 'that one'. In other words, if you have a numerical '1', then by implication you already have other numbers from which '1' is distinguished, as the concept of '1' is only meaningful in relation to other numbers.

Whereas, the One in the classical sense, is beyond enumeration and any sense of discrete identity (i.e. being 'this one' as distinct from 'that one'.) So 'the One' is a unity which is not an entity. It is more like: the One that the Many arise from, but from which they are never really apart, because to the extent that they are beings, they embody and reflect the One which gives rise to them (which, I think, is a Neoplatonist way of understanding it.)
But I don't think it's very Buddhist. It's much more characteristic of syncretistic philosophies, like the Evans-Wentz translation of The Tibetan Book of the Great Liberation, which drew in ideas from many sources. (A new translation of that same text, Self-Liberation through Seeing with Naked Awareness, John Myrdhin Reynolds, has comments on Evans Wentz's translation, but there's nothing at all in it about the 'one mind' that Evans-Wentz waxed eloquent about.)

The other point is that mysticism is a recognisable trait in many different traditions. Mystics all tend to have some things in common, no matter what the background. And mysticism is really hard for the non-mystic to understand - hence the use of the word in a derogatory sense, as a kind of catch-all term for 'woolly-headedness'. But it has own inner logic and consistency for those with ears to hear.
Only practice with no gaining idea ~ Suzuki Roshi

Dharma Flower
Posts: 1035
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 9:03 am
Contact:

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Dharma Flower » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:47 am

Astus wrote:
Dharma Flower wrote:Also, according to the Huayan teaching, all Buddha-nature is one:
The interpenetration of phenomena does not mean there is a single buddha-nature, but that appearances are interdependent. The quote provided does not even mention buddha-nature. Furthermore, in the article given as the source mentions buddha-nature as the principle, that principle is simply emptiness, but once we arrive at the fourth dharmadhatu there is no mention of the principle at all.
I recommend reading the chapter on the Flower Ornament Sutra in Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations.
http://www.khamkoo.com/uploads/9/0/0/4/ ... dition.pdf

There's more to the concept of interpenetration than what you are saying. It's not simply another way of describing emptiness.

Instead, Huayan teaching is closer to a deliberate integration of Yogacara and Madhyamaka. If all things are empty of independent existence, then the One Mind interpenetrates everything. These things are well-explained in Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations.

Anonymous X
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:43 am
Location: Bangkok

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Anonymous X » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:57 am

Wayfarer wrote:I think it is a re-statement of the understanding of non-duality, which really means 'not divided' or 'not two'. 'Advaya' is the Buddhist term for non-dual (as distinct from advaita).

Non-dual is not the same as 'one' as it doesn't refer to a singular or numerical one. It is, if you like, a unity which is not an entity. It is more that all sentience originates from the same source, or is cut from the same cloth, so to speak.
We live in an age where there is tremendous influences converging on all cultures. It has both a downside and an upside. The way we express our ideas will change with the times and reflect all kinds of influences. We have to open our minds a bit further to allow different expressions to take place without our usual judging.

Oneness, One mind, Self, True Self, are just ways of trying to describe what is not really describable. Some Buddhist treatises use the word Self, but they don't mean the same thing as Advaitins. So important for us not to become dogmatic and attached to words. I agree with what you said.

White Lotus
Posts: 1173
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by White Lotus » Thu Jun 15, 2017 3:17 pm

If we can speak of the One mind: we can speak of Buddha Nature as one. That one expresses emptiness/nonduality and sunyata sunyata as outer aspects of the One Mind. "Neither Mind nor No Mind" are an aspect of sunyata sunyata that is included in the concept of the One Mind. Absolute Zero is an aspect of the One Mind that contains simple uncompounded 1 (also an aspect of the One Mind). The 1 i am speaking of is not self. It is just 1. The One Mind contains this 1. Like the pupil of an eye. Emptiness within emptiness: zero within zero containing 1. The infinite of the infinite containing 1 point. Simple and uncompounded. Not reliant on any aggregates whatsoever. The Dharma Eye is Mind. Mind is One, and so Buddha Nature is one. Please note that this is speculative, but it seems right to me at this time. Tom.
in any matters of importance. dont rely on me. i may not know what i am talking about. take what i say as mere speculation. i am not ordained. nor do i have a formal training. i do believe though that if i am wrong on any point. there are those on this site who i hope will quickly point out my mistakes.

Anonymous X
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:43 am
Location: Bangkok

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Anonymous X » Thu Jun 15, 2017 5:41 pm

White Lotus wrote:If we can speak of the One mind: we can speak of Buddha Nature as one. That one expresses emptiness/nonduality and sunyata sunyata as outer aspects of the One Mind. "Neither Mind nor No Mind" are an aspect of sunyata sunyata that is included in the concept of the One Mind. Absolute Zero is an aspect of the One Mind that contains simple uncompounded 1 (also an aspect of the One Mind). The 1 i am speaking of is not self. It is just 1. The One Mind contains this 1. Like the pupil of an eye. Emptiness within emptiness: zero within zero containing 1. The infinite of the infinite containing 1 point. Simple and uncompounded. Not reliant on any aggregates whatsoever. The Dharma Eye is Mind. Mind is One, and so Buddha Nature is one. Please note that this is speculative, but it seems right to me at this time. Tom.
No one can stop you from speculating, but to me, it introduces more complexity than the way the teachings talk about it. The less conceptual is easier for me to comprehend.

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2156
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Minobu » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:03 pm

you know ...i am saying this without any agendas so please do not read one into this..it's more of a question than a statement...

I read people here at DW and some really great scholars and scholars in the making come across my screen..i mean wow some of the stuff people are able to know and discuss are pretty well right up there with these poets and Chinese and Indian masters of the past..
But none here can nail it down...i mean really nail it down..

Relying on past masters and poets is nice, but it is the same as the DW scholars i just implied. they cannot nail it down..they point to and talk of...and it ends there....


at present

At best whats shaping up in my read is there is this aspect to the definition of Buddha Nature given all over this site that my Mystical Catholic Irish Grandmother would call "The Hand of God" .

I find it odd that 42 years after i started studying Buddhist thought I now see this implication. why is it even on my radar...
why...whats going on?...It's almost , dare i say it like it is conspired ....For it was never there back then...nothing we read or studied ,pointed to this, and really it seemed to try hard to avoid this sort of thing. i know for i was brought up atheist and had a radar sense towards anything that pointed this sort of thing.

i know ...i know...take me out back and place a red letter on my shirt for nutcase who might also next tell us he sees dead people...

Anonymous X
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:43 am
Location: Bangkok

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Anonymous X » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:16 pm

Minobu wrote:you know ...i am saying this without any agendas so please do not read one into this..it's more of a question than a statement...

I read people here at DW and some really great scholars and scholars in the making come across my screen..i mean wow some of the stuff people are able to know and discuss are pretty well right up there with these poets and Chinese and Indian masters of the past..
But none here can nail it down...i mean really nail it down..

Relying on past masters and poets is nice, but it is the same as the DW scholars i just implied. they cannot nail it down..they point to and talk of...and it ends there....
That's why I said you have to get beyond the words. Words never nail it down no matter how good they are, and some are very good!

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2156
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Minobu » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:26 pm

Anonymous X wrote:
Minobu wrote:you know ...i am saying this without any agendas so please do not read one into this..it's more of a question than a statement...

I read people here at DW and some really great scholars and scholars in the making come across my screen..i mean wow some of the stuff people are able to know and discuss are pretty well right up there with these poets and Chinese and Indian masters of the past..
But none here can nail it down...i mean really nail it down..

Relying on past masters and poets is nice, but it is the same as the DW scholars i just implied. they cannot nail it down..they point to and talk of...and it ends there....
That's why I said you have to get beyond the words. Words never nail it down no matter how good they are, and some are very good!
I realize that...and just saying i respect your take on things...your words make me think about stuff in a different way than i would...this is what i mean by this site is similar to poets of the past and past masters...
But lately those "WORDS" brought me to my previous post in this thread...

those words are pointing to what i deem a sort of creationism , and it hits me hard.

Even the the ancient poetry is now being interpreted to suit a form of creationism.

the Big Authors and Scholars in America are making it so ??????? a bunch of these ??????? so as to afford the license to actually say what i just did.

the Big Authors and Scholars in America are making it so ???????

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1746
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Mantrik » Thu Jun 15, 2017 7:25 pm

Surely, only a Buddha can say, as only they can experience it, rather than describe or discuss it from ignorance. So, untranslated, unvarnished and unexplained direct quotes from Buddhas are the only reliable source.

We are hard put to find those, so answers here will vary from the monosyllabic to the mystically poetic and on to the elaborate, extensive and explanatory.

It is a delight that Buddhism has so many approaches, so many paths. We are fortunate if we find the one which most suits us.
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2156
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Minobu » Thu Jun 15, 2017 7:43 pm

Mantrik wrote:Surely, only a Buddha can say, as only they can experience it, rather than describe or discuss it from ignorance. So, untranslated, unvarnished and unexplained direct quotes from Buddhas are the only reliable source.

We are hard put to find those, so answers here will vary from the monosyllabic to the mystically poetic and on to the elaborate, extensive and explanatory.

It is a delight that Buddhism has so many approaches, so many paths. We are fortunate if we find the one which most suits us.
Though a beautiful post that deserves a
:good:
It's defeating and leaves one with the concept "He knows something you'll never know.unless you become He"
which is cool with me...after all, i bought that very ticket in order to ride this quest.

That out of the way...may i ask if anyone can help out this way...
new angle for me...just popped into the picture so to speak a few minutes before reading that post...was going to make a new thread but now i figure everyone that is anyone here at DW is reading this thread anyway.

From the Madhyamika view that emptiness refers to the absence of inherent existence due to the fact that everything co arises and is interdependent:

What would co arise to become Buddha Nature?
what is the interdependent nature of Buddha Nature, or how is it interdependent ?

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 6478
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Queequeg » Thu Jun 15, 2017 8:17 pm

Minobu wrote: What would co arise to become Buddha Nature?
what is the interdependent nature of Buddha Nature, or how is it interdependent ?
If you position it a certain way, and catch the sunlight from a particular angle at a certain time of year...

"Ignorant" Nature?

Awakening is distinguishable only in contrast to Sleeping.

And now we are back in the tangle of dualism...

siddhanta. upaya.
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

smcj
Posts: 5858
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by smcj » Fri Jun 16, 2017 1:42 am

From the Madhyamika view that emptiness refers to the absence of inherent existence due to the fact that everything co arises and is interdependent:

What would co arise to become Buddha Nature?
what is the interdependent nature of Buddha Nature, or how is it interdependent?
The idea of Buddha Nature comes from the Yogacara/Shentong 3rd Turning of the Wheel teachings. It does not arise, therefore it is not interdependent.
Madhyamaka is from the Prajnaparamita 2nd Turning of the Wheel teachings.
There's a little apples and oranges thing going on in your question.
I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against Lama abuse.

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2156
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Minobu » Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:43 am

smcj wrote:
From the Madhyamika view that emptiness refers to the absence of inherent existence due to the fact that everything co arises and is interdependent:

What would co arise to become Buddha Nature?
what is the interdependent nature of Buddha Nature, or how is it interdependent?
The idea of Buddha Nature comes from the Yogacara/Shentong 3rd Turning of the Wheel teachings. It does not arise, therefore it is not interdependent.
Madhyamaka is from the Prajnaparamita 2nd Turning of the Wheel teachings.
There's a little apples and oranges thing going on in your question.
So are there other teachings that do not mesh due to the various Turning of the Wheel teachings...

that might be too complex and long to answer ....
so in this case ;
How do they not mesh and become an apples and oranges thing..

maybe if i understood your intention and meaning when you say that Buddha Nature does not arise...
for my simpleton mind maybe an example of something arising in the way you mean it and then show me why Buddha Nature cannot arise...

it might end my confusion with people saying everything is Buddha Nature ....which leads me to this creationist thing happening...

You might be the one that finally does it for me!

if i could see how it does not arise and how other things do...this would be really good...


i've tried saying this in so many ways as to articulate where i am at...sorry for the mind lag...


ok just read my preview and i might have answered my question...

Buddha Nature does not arise for everything arises from it....<<<< egads they might just have turned me into a creationist....Lord help me...save me from the creationist thing...for it sounds like some sort of pantheism ...which by the way would please Allan Watts .

Anonymous X
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:43 am
Location: Bangkok

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Anonymous X » Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:01 am

Minobu wrote: What would co arise to become Buddha Nature?
what is the interdependent nature of Buddha Nature, or how is it interdependent ?
Tathatagagarbha is the Buddha-in-embryo present in all sentient beings. It is not a 'thing' and doesn't arise, come, or go. It is not dependent on phenomenon. It's nature is Buddhanature. It is not separate from the alaya-vijnana, which is the storehouse of all sensual consciousness and karmic seeds. In its awakened aspect, alaya shares the same nature as Tathagatagarbha. It is a totality working in tandem. It is all buddhanature in its real aspect, It is ignorance in its unreal aspect. To get the conceptual picture, you have to study what the masters have said. In the "near-vana" thread, I quoted some sources.

smcj
Posts: 5858
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by smcj » Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:51 am

Minobu wrote: So are there other teachings that do not mesh due to the various Turning of the Wheel teachings...

that might be too complex and long to answer ....
so in this case ;
How do they not mesh and become an apples and oranges thing..
Basically Madhyamaka takes everything in the phenomenal universe and deconstructs it until nothing is found. It does not accept any intellectual formulation on how things abide, therefore it "has no view".

Yogacara says that everything is the nature of either:
A. mind, which exists, or
B. a "Wisdom" that is more primordial than mind.
maybe if i understood your intention and meaning when you say that Buddha Nature does not arise...
for my simpleton mind maybe an example of something arising in the way you mean it and then show me why Buddha Nature cannot arise...
A candle flame comes about from the candle, heat and oxygen combining. It is causes and conditions coming together to make it happen in the phenomenal universe.

You will not be able to locate or take Buddha Nature as an object of consciousness. That is "unarisen".
it might end my confusion with people saying everything is Buddha Nature ....which leads me to this creationist thing happening...
There is a wide gamut of interpretations on Buddha Nature. Some say it is just a latent potential in all of us, like wood has a potential to burn. Then others get crazy with it and it becomes "everything is Buddha Nature". So it depends on what school and which author you are reading. There is no consensus on this so of course it gets confusing.
Buddha Nature does not arise for everything arises from it....<<<< egads they might just have turned me into a creationist....Lord help me...save me from the creationist thing...for it sounds like some sort of pantheism ...which by the way would please Allan Watts .
I think "panentheism" is the correct word.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism
*****

I personally do not have an elegant way to explain how Buddha Nature and Yogacara relate. Is it correct to say that Yogacara is a philosophical interpretation of Buddha Nature teachings?
I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against Lama abuse.

Anonymous X
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:43 am
Location: Bangkok

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Anonymous X » Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:27 am

smcj wrote: *****I personally do not have an elegant way to explain how Buddha Nature and Yogacara relate. Is it correct to say that Yogacara is a philosophical interpretation of Buddha Nature teachings?
Seems more like an interpretation of Alaya-Vijnana.

Jeff H
Posts: 891
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 8:56 pm
Location: Vermont, USA

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Jeff H » Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:34 pm

Minobu wrote:Buddha Nature does not arise for everything arises from it....<<<< egads they might just have turned me into a creationist....Lord help me...save me from the creationist thing.
It seems to me that “Buddha Nature” merely refers to the potential for a sentient being to wake up to the truth of existence. “To create” is a verb that implies an agent bringing something into existence. But according to Buddhism, nothing can be brought into or removed from existence: that which is not existent cannot be transformed into something that exists; and that which exists cannot be transformed into something that does not exist.

In Buddhism the creators are our deluded minds which believe that things have true existence and proceed to create our personal worlds of falsehoods. It is our delusions that arise interdependently; Buddha Nature does not create them. The potential of Buddha Nature is realized when we wake up and dissolve all the delusions. That can be seen as the One Truth, but it does not mean everything is one because the very awareness that illuminates existence at all consists of myriad perspectives.
We who are like children shrink from pain but love its causes. - Shantideva

Dharma Flower
Posts: 1035
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 9:03 am
Contact:

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Dharma Flower » Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:44 am

When I am angry at or judgmental of others, it helps to subside these feelings if I remind myself of their intrinsic Buddha-nature. The practical application of concepts like Buddha-nature is always more important and useful than metaphysical speculation.

Dharma Flower
Posts: 1035
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 9:03 am
Contact:

Re: "All Buddha-Nature is One"

Post by Dharma Flower » Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:11 am

The Tathagatagarbha sutras identify Buddha-nature with Nirvana:
It is pointed out in this passage that the 'tathagatagarbha' is empty in its nature yet real: it is 'Nirvana' itself, unborn, without predicates. It is where no false discrimination (nirvikalpa) takes place.
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha191.htm
+

As did Shinran Shonin, along with other Buddhist teachers throughout history:
Tathagata is nirvana, nirvana is the inexhaustible, the inexhaustible is Buddha-nature, Buddha-nature is unchanging, the unchanging is highest perfect enlightenment.”
http://shinranworks.com/the-major-expos ... -and-land/
In his Notes on 'Essentials of Faith Alone', Shinran, in commenting on a hymn from Shan-tao, makes the following observations about Nirvana[20]:

"Nirvana has innumerable names. It is impossible to give them in detail; We will list only a few. Nirvana is called extinction of passions, the uncreated, peaceful happiness, eternal bliss, true reality, Dharmakaya, dharma-nature, suchness, oneness and Buddha-nature. Buddha-nature is none other than Tathagata. This Tathagata pervades the countless worlds; it fills the hearts and minds of the ocean of all beings. Thus, plants, trees and land all attain Buddhahood. Since it is with these hearts and minds of all sentient beings that they entrust themselves to the Vow of the dharma-body as compassionate means, this shinjin is none other than Buddha-nature. This Buddha-nature is dharma-nature. Dharma-nature is the Dharmakaya."
Zen Buddhists use the term Big Mind or One Mind, as to emphasize the oneness of Buddha-nature in all things and beings:
mind: mind, heart, spirit, psyche, soul. Mind with a capital "M" is used for absolute Reality, total awareness, just hearing when listening, only seeing when looking, the experience of satori or self realization, often referred to as Big Mind, Unborn Mind, No-Mind, etc.
http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhis ... ossary.htm
And as mentioned previously, Dogen identified all being, as in total-existence-itself, as Buddha-nature.

I share the above things for whoever might be interested in considering the above concepts. People can come to whatever conclusions they so desire. :anjali:

Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests