How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Forum for discussion of East Asian Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
ItsRaining
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by ItsRaining » Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:38 am

Many texts and practitioners talk about how the mind was originally pure: Huineng, Shen Xiu, Chen Guang, Awakening of Faith, etc but if so how did it become deluded? And if something pure can be deluded what stop the pure minds of the Buddhas from becoming afflicted again?

diamind
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:19 pm

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by diamind » Tue Dec 26, 2017 9:55 am

Great question

muni
Posts: 4458
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by muni » Tue Dec 26, 2017 10:46 am

Became nature ever defiled? Perhaps due to confusion? "Because this came into being, that came into being.
It is thus: Due to ignorance volition arises…"

https://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/depend.htm
May all beings have happiness and the cause of happiness.
May they be free of suffering and the cause of suffering.
May they never be disassociated from the supreme happiness which is without suffering.
May they remain in the boundless equanimity, free from both attachment to close ones and rejection of others.

User avatar
Aryjna
Posts: 589
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:45 pm

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by Aryjna » Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:52 am

There was not a once pure nature that now is defiled. The nature is pure in any case. That is my understanding at least.

User avatar
Losal Samten
Posts: 1408
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 4:05 pm

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by Losal Samten » Tue Dec 26, 2017 12:21 pm

^ Aye, the 'purity which became defiled' premise relies on a starting point, which goes against the infinite regress of dependent origination. The purity in question refers to the fact that all phenomena are dependently originated, aka empty/free from extremes.
Lacking mindfulness, we commit every wrong. - Nyoshul Khen Rinpoche
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔
ཨཱོཾ་མ་ཏྲི་མུ་ཡེ་སལེ་འདུ།།

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1690
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by Vasana » Tue Dec 26, 2017 1:09 pm

I think Dzogchen cosmology speaks on this but I don't know what the regular mahayana take on it is.
In short, the appearances arising out of the mind's creative nature were not recognized as self-displays and so 'self and other' and the afflictions were set in motion driving the manifestation of the lokas. The purity was blinded /obscured by it's own creative potentiality just as we are 'blinded' by the mind's diverse creativity when dreaming when we don't recognize them as the mind's display. The purity never became impure but just obscured it's self from being known and experienced as pure and free of suffering.

Cognitive err0r :coffee:
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 6878
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by Astus » Tue Dec 26, 2017 1:38 pm

ItsRaining wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:38 am
Many texts and practitioners talk about how the mind was originally pure: Huineng, Shen Xiu, Chen Guang, Awakening of Faith, etc but if so how did it become deluded?
It is not that first there is a pure ground that gets defiled, but the true nature of defilement has always been purity. The Awakening of Faith in Mahayana, for instance, has an extensive explanation on what being deluded means.
And if something pure can be deluded what stop the pure minds of the Buddhas from becoming afflicted again?
Ignorance has no beginning, while if the cause of delusion is removed, there is no basis upon which it can recur.
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"

Sentient Light
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 8:40 pm
Location: Fairfax, Virginia

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by Sentient Light » Tue Dec 26, 2017 8:20 pm

The Discourse on the Beginning (T26.51), Madhyama Agama wrote:One cannot know the point where craving for existence began, the point before which there was no craving for existence and at which craving for existence arose. But one can understand the causes for craving for existence. Craving for existence is conditioned; it is not without conditions.
:buddha1: Nam mô A di đà Phật :buddha1:
:bow: Nam mô Quan Thế Âm Bồ tát :bow:
:bow: Nam mô Đại Thế Chi Bồ Tát :bow:

:buddha1: Nam mô Bổn sư Thích ca mâu ni Phật :buddha1:
:bow: Nam mô Di lặc Bồ tát :bow:
:bow: Nam mô Địa tạng vương Bồ tát :bow:

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27530
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Dec 26, 2017 8:34 pm

Vasana wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 1:09 pm
I think Dzogchen cosmology speaks on this but I don't know what the regular mahayana take on it is.
In short, the appearances arising out of the mind's creative nature were not recognized as self-displays and so 'self and other' and the afflictions were set in motion driving the manifestation of the lokas. The purity was blinded /obscured by it's own creative potentiality just as we are 'blinded' by the mind's diverse creativity when dreaming when we don't recognize them as the mind's display. The purity never became impure but just obscured it's self from being known and experienced as pure and free of suffering.

Cognitive err0r :coffee:
No, this is not how it is at all.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1690
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by Vasana » Tue Dec 26, 2017 10:35 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 8:34 pm
Vasana wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 1:09 pm
I think Dzogchen cosmology speaks on this but I don't know what the regular mahayana take on it is.
In short, the appearances arising out of the mind's creative nature were not recognized as self-displays and so 'self and other' and the afflictions were set in motion driving the manifestation of the lokas. The purity was blinded /obscured by it's own creative potentiality just as we are 'blinded' by the mind's diverse creativity when dreaming when we don't recognize them as the mind's display. The purity never became impure but just obscured it's self from being known and experienced as pure and free of suffering.

Cognitive err0r :coffee:
No, this is not how it is at all.
In that case, everyone please ignore my post and in future I'll try and avoid commenting on stuff I can't remember properly or understand.
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

ItsRaining
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by ItsRaining » Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:56 pm

Astus wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 1:38 pm
ItsRaining wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:38 am
Many texts and practitioners talk about how the mind was originally pure: Huineng, Shen Xiu, Chen Guang, Awakening of Faith, etc but if so how did it become deluded?
It is not that first there is a pure ground that gets defiled, but the true nature of defilement has always been purity. The Awakening of Faith in Mahayana, for instance, has an extensive explanation on what being deluded means.
And if something pure can be deluded what stop the pure minds of the Buddhas from becoming afflicted again?
Ignorance has no beginning, while if the cause of delusion is removed, there is no basis upon which it can recur.
The Awakening of Faith says that Ignorance can perfume Tathata, so ignorance which in reality Tathata itself can effect the pure suchness? But then this ignorance can’t rise again once removed because it’s cause is extinguished?

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 6878
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by Astus » Wed Dec 27, 2017 11:46 am

ItsRaining wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:56 pm
The Awakening of Faith says that Ignorance can perfume Tathata, so ignorance which in reality Tathata itself can effect the pure suchness? But then this ignorance can’t rise again once removed because it’s cause is extinguished?
The treatise differentiates between the permeation of ignorance and the permeation of suchness. The former is how delusion originates, the latter is how enlightenment comes about. Then "Because of the cessation of ignorance, there will be no more rising of the deluded activities of mind." But it is not the case that suchness is in any way affected or changed: "The essence of Suchness knows no increase or decrease in ordinary men, the Hinayanists, the Bodhisattvas, or the Buddhas. It was not brought into existence in the beginning nor will it cease to be at the end of time; it is eternal through and through."

Let's translate this into other terms. The aggregates are impermanent. Conceiving the aggregates as permanent is ignorance, but it does not negate impermanence. Realising that the aggregates are impermanent is liberating knowledge, but it does not make the aggregates impermanent. Once the wrong view of permanence is completely gone, there is no more basis for attachment to arise again.
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
daibunny
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:22 am

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by daibunny » Thu Dec 28, 2017 12:07 am

Arent "pure" and "defiled" just mental formations?
The best way is not difficult (1)
It only excludes picking and choosing
Once you stop loving and hating
It will enlighten itself.
~Sengcan
"You have truly comprehended the Dharma as it is; the deepest truth lies in the principle of identity. It is due to one's ignorance that the mani-jewel is taken for a piece of brick, but when one is suddenly awakened to self-enlightenment it is realized that one is in possession of the real jewel. The ignorant and the enlightened are of one essence, they are not really to be separated. We should know that all things are such as they are. Those who entertain a dualistic view of the world are to be pitied, and I write this letter for them. When we know that between this body and the Buddha, there is nothing to separate one from the other, what is the use of seeking after Nirvana [as something external to ourselves]?"

O'Brien, Barbara. "Dazu Huike, the Second Patriarch of Zen." ThoughtCo, Jan. 18, 2016, thoughtco.com/dazu-huike-second-patriarch-of-zen-449936.
And the real message here imo, at least for me, is that there is no difference in what one sees in oneself, whatever you see in your self, thats you looking at the buddha nature while being the buddha nature. The universe in a grain of sand.

There is more from Huike, who elaborates this situation very directly, simply and plainly, in the Masters and Teachers of the Lanka chapter of the book Zen Dawn
Nothing remains
Of the house that I was born in--
Fireflies.

- Santoka, 1882-1940
Mountain Tasting: Zen Haiku by Santoka Taneda, 1980, p.48
Translated by John Stevens

SunWuKong
Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:15 pm

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by SunWuKong » Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:49 am

ItsRaining wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:38 am
Many texts and practitioners talk about how the mind was originally pure: Huineng, Shen Xiu, Chen Guang, Awakening of Faith, etc but if so how did it become deluded? And if something pure can be deluded what stop the pure minds of the Buddhas from becoming afflicted again?
Originally pure yes, deluded because attachment to desires was preferred, and the whole Moving Van was filled with all the garbage that came with them, and where would you like the TV to go?

Temicco
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:47 am

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by Temicco » Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:02 pm

ItsRaining wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:38 am
Many texts and practitioners talk about how the mind was originally pure: Huineng, Shen Xiu, Chen Guang, Awakening of Faith, etc but if so how did it become deluded? And if something pure can be deluded what stop the pure minds of the Buddhas from becoming afflicted again?
From the Baozang lu (tr. Sharf), attr. Sengzhao, a favourite in Zen:
Extended above are the mysterious [stellar] schemata, and arrayed below lie the courts of darkness. The primordial pneuma is contained within the great schemata, and the great schemata lie concealed in the formless as the numen of sentient things. Within the numen are spirits, and within the spirits are bodies.

No action, yet change and transformation—each endowed with spontaneity. Subtly there arise phenomena and functions, and gradually there develop forms and names. Forms emerge from that which has no substance, and names arise from that which has no name. As forms and names multiply, the roaming pneumas confuse [what was] pure.
As to what this concretely means, I have no idea. The nouns used have little meaning to me, and the operative principle behind *why* the pneumas become confused (are they as if programmed with an "if {lots of name and form} then {aaaahhhh}" clause?) seems to go unexplained still. But maybe this will generate some discussion.
"Deliberate upon that which does not deliberate."
-Yaoshan Weiyan

"Right now if students are in fact truly genuine, source teachers can contact their potential and activate it with a single word or phrase, or a single act or scene."
-Yuanwu Keqin

thecowisflying
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 12:35 am

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by thecowisflying » Sun Jan 07, 2018 1:53 pm

Temicco wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:02 pm
ItsRaining wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:38 am
Many texts and practitioners talk about how the mind was originally pure: Huineng, Shen Xiu, Chen Guang, Awakening of Faith, etc but if so how did it become deluded? And if something pure can be deluded what stop the pure minds of the Buddhas from becoming afflicted again?
From the Baozang lu (tr. Sharf), attr. Sengzhao, a favourite in Zen:
Extended above are the mysterious [stellar] schemata, and arrayed below lie the courts of darkness. The primordial pneuma is contained within the great schemata, and the great schemata lie concealed in the formless as the numen of sentient things. Within the numen are spirits, and within the spirits are bodies.

No action, yet change and transformation—each endowed with spontaneity. Subtly there arise phenomena and functions, and gradually there develop forms and names. Forms emerge from that which has no substance, and names arise from that which has no name. As forms and names multiply, the roaming pneumas confuse [what was] pure.
As to what this concretely means, I have no idea. The nouns used have little meaning to me, and the operative principle behind *why* the pneumas become confused (are they as if programmed with an "if {lots of name and form} then {aaaahhhh}" clause?) seems to go unexplained still. But maybe this will generate some discussion.
Those words look like various ways to express Ultimate vs Conventional reality, the Huayan used Li/Principle and Shi/Phenonmena and here it looks like Sengzhao chose different originally Daoist looking words to express it. "mysterious [stellar] schemata" is Ultimate as is considered higher and below array are the numerous phenomena within the conventional truth or courts of darkness I'm guessing. At first I thought the primordial pneuma is emptiness that of course lies in all dharmas hidden from ordirnary beings but the next line makes it a bit confusing.
the great schemata lie concealed in the formless as the numen of sentient things.
The schemata being concealed in formless is probably just a allusion to emptiness being unseen or transcending existence and it is the Buddha Nauture of all beings.
Within the numen are spirits, and within the spirits are bodies.
And the mind whose nature is emptiness is of course contained in the Nature, Suchness, Nemen, etc and in turn the physical body is produced from the Alaya.
As to what this concretely means, I have no idea. The nouns used have little meaning to me, and the operative principle behind *why* the pneumas become confused (are they as if programmed with an "if {lots of name and form} then {aaaahhhh}" clause?) seems to go unexplained still. But maybe this will generate some discussion.
Since the Buddha said not to wonder too much about the world's beginnings as it has none, I'm going to go with sentient beings have always been deluded, cognising things with tainted consciousness not recognising that whatever pure or impure is part of the Ocean of Suchness. I don't think it is pneumas that get confused but rather the Spirit it speaks of has never really properly seen the nature of phenonmena.

So the Nature is never really defiled but rather the waves (Phenomena) on the ocean (Principle/Suchness) are not seen as being part of the ocean. It can't be defiled after Enlightenment as the "Ignorance perfuming Suchness" spoken of in the Awakening of Faith is actually just the Waves of Suchess causing some turbulence in the Ocean causing problems for sentient beings. But once it is seen the waves are still suchness no matter how much crashing and pulling they do it is known nothing differs them from the ocean.

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1552
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by Coëmgenu » Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:29 pm

Pneuma is a theological term for the spirit/wind/breath that God blows into/breathes into people to make them alive.

I wonder what the original Chinese term was.
世尊在靈山會上拈華示眾眾皆默然唯迦葉破顏微笑世尊云
The Lord dwelt at the Vulture Peak with the assembly and plucked a flower as a teaching. The myriad totality were silent, save for Kāśyapa, whose face cracked in a faint smile. The Lord spoke.

吾有正法眼藏涅槃妙心實相無相微妙法門不立文字教外別傳付囑摩訶迦葉。
I have the treasure of the true dharma eye, I have nirvāṇa as wondrous citta, I know signless dharmatā, the subtle dharma-gate, which is not standing on written word, which is external to scriptures, which is a special dispensation, which is entrusted to Mahākāśyapa.

thecowisflying
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 12:35 am

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by thecowisflying » Mon Jan 08, 2018 12:11 am

Coëmgenu wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:29 pm
Pneuma is a theological term for the spirit/wind/breath that God blows into/breathes into people to make them alive.

I wonder what the original Chinese term was.
The original term was 灵.

User avatar
Nicholas Weeks
Posts: 3093
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:21 am
Location: California

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by Nicholas Weeks » Mon Jan 08, 2018 3:12 am

ItsRaining wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:38 am
Many texts and practitioners talk about how the mind was originally pure: Huineng, Shen Xiu, Chen Guang, Awakening of Faith, etc but if so how did it become deluded? And if something pure can be deluded what stop the pure minds of the Buddhas from becoming afflicted again?
Our true nature never did, nor ever will become defiled or deluded. When clouds obscure the Sun one might say or think the sky is defiled, but not really.
Manjushri is the hallowed Dharma, the ruler of the Dharma, the shining one, the superb illuminator of the world;
He is the powerful lord of Dharma, the king of the Dharma, the one who shows the most excellent pathway of mind. Manjushri-namasamgiti

ItsRaining
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: How did the originally pure nature become defiled?

Post by ItsRaining » Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:30 am

Nicholas Weeks wrote:
Mon Jan 08, 2018 3:12 am
ItsRaining wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:38 am
Many texts and practitioners talk about how the mind was originally pure: Huineng, Shen Xiu, Chen Guang, Awakening of Faith, etc but if so how did it become deluded? And if something pure can be deluded what stop the pure minds of the Buddhas from becoming afflicted again?
Our true nature never did, nor ever will become defiled or deluded. When clouds obscure the Sun one might say or think the sky is defiled, but not really.
I think I get it now, thanks guys!

:bow:

Post Reply

Return to “East Asian Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests