Although I was concerned about the inherent dangers at the time, I did follow this approach briefly. I believe iut helped but now I won’t. I focus on insight through Vipassana.

Hope you are keeping well,

All the Best,

Bill Z

For HHPCR Buddha-nature was a major difference between the two traditions. So is it skilful to accept Buddha-nature? Marcus described his own use “Buddha-nature is of huge practical use. It is Buddha-nature which we let go to in meditation and in daily life, Buddha-nature that we rely upon, Buddha-nature that connects us to all things and which gives rise to all things.” For Marcus this is a skilful practice.

So I ask myself is there anything to be gained in my practice? I came up with taking responsibility for my Buddha-Nature as being more personal than the Unconditioned. There is a danger in this but I think it is skilful for me. Discussed more in my blog

And in Marcus’ same post he described seeing defilements for what they are can awaken us. If we have defilements see them and don’t purify them, are they not still defilements?

Thank you very much for taking the time to answer. It helped me a lot.

I read your postings as well as all the other participants’ in the conversations. All taken and looking at my own observation, I suppose I no longer critically need scriptural support for Buddha Nature. Since a long long time ago, I knew(felt) that everybody is basically good, no matter what ugly things they do out of ignorance. To this day, I haven’t met someone intrinsically bad. So, yes, all must be basically good. The more layers of obsurations are removed, the further we move towards enlightenment, the more Buddha Nature is revealed ?

Another point of observation : To me, Buddha Nature is a very good example of Mahayana/Vajarayana ’s encouraging/coaxing/you-can-do-easily(I mean compared to Theravada) approach to prodding it’s followers. As opposed to Theravada’s austere/you-rely-on-your-own-effort/we-don’t-promish-much approach which would always attract fewer followers. In general, I think Mahayana/Vajrayana has far greater marketing tools.

Finally, I suppose the concept of so many modern day Bodisattvas taking Bodisattva vows, has its very usefulness even if I find it literally not workable. I find that it is very uplifting and motivating to think of oneself as the savior to all sentient beings. You put yourself on the high pedestal of Bodisattva ; you are not going to stoop to do lowly things, right ? That’s really fantastic. As long as you know the parameters…

Respectfully yours,

Miemie

Of course different branches of Buddhism, as well as different Buddhist practitioners, all have different approaches. The best you can do, probably, is dig deep into the tradition in which you find yourself and allow its teachings and practice and support to take you to the goal.

So my comment is not to disagree with anyone, but just to point out that in the tradition in which I took refuge, Buddha-nature is of huge practical use. It is Buddha-nature which we let go to in meditation and in daily life, Buddha-nature that we rely upon, Buddha-nature that connects us to all things and which gives rise to all things.

But, though I see Buddha-nature as being very practical, still I agree entirly with your conclusion – “For the meditator of course, the question we are more interested in is not ‘what is enlightenment?’ so much as ‘what do I have to do?’”

Marcus

PS – Regarding the defilements….. yes, trying to purify them away will take 1000s of lifetimes! Seeing through them is the key. I think it was Seon Master Seung Sahn who said (but don’t ask me for a source I’m afraid) that even the dust on the mirror, or the mud on the tray in this case, can awaken us – if we simply see it for what it is.

The idea is that this nature is there exising in you and your experience if you can find it. It is already pure – hence the teaching that ‘you are already enlightened’ which HHPCR described as knowing you are already in Manhattan.

This is opposed to the idea that your enlightened defiled, and you need to purify yourself to perfection. Rather like gold might be alloyed with other metals, and therefore has to be smelted and purified. With Buddha nature your gold is already pure, but is hidden by the dirt (defilements).

Theravada is not opposed to this view, though admittedly many teachers seem to favour 1000s lifetimes of purification are needed to be Enlightened.

For the meditator of course, the question we are more interested in is not ‘what is enlightenment?’ so much as ‘what do I have to do?’

“…. each of us can …. realize the nature of mind and so know in us what is deathless and eternally pure.

“The wonder of this promise is that it is something not exotic, not fantastic, not for an elite, but for all humanity; and when we realize it …. it is unexpectedly ordinary. …. You don’t actually “become” a buddha, you simply cease, slowly, to be deluded.

“One of the greatest Buddhist traditions calls the nature of mind “the wisdom of ordinariness”. [p54]”

This reads a great deal of accessibility to me. Realising something of the nature of mind through insight is far more accessible through meditation than the Unconditioned. For me the Unconditioned seems unattainable. Daily life brings with it conditions. How can I get rid of those conditions? How can I live 24/7 in a situation of mindfulness so that no conditions arise? Some people may be able to but me …. no way. So I do the best I can.

And in doing the best I can I am occasionally lucky and have glimpses – insights. I realise the pleasantness of my ordinary life here in the sticks, and if any of those ordinary glimpses are truly wisdom I am grateful. Whether they are or not, they do feel attainable and accessible – occasionally.

This leads me to consider samsara. Although things are pleasant enough for me now I look back and see all the grief I have been through and some that I have caused, and I think:- do I have to do that again? That sometimes weighs heavily, but in truth I feel I can never attain the enlightenment of the Unconditioned to prevent the return.

But insight can teach me a little of the deathless, and I can perhaps prepare for the moment of death in a way where I might not have to come back. And again this feels more accessible than an impossible Nibbana – even if it isn’t.

Perhaps it is a more accessible buddha nature HHPCR was referring to?

Hope you are keeping well,

All the Best,

BillZ

“Suddenly happens.” I don’t know references to lifetimes but whilst there are moments of great joy isn’t it mostly about commitment to practice that leads to greater happiness? I do get the impression that some perceive enlightenment as just waiting to hit them suddenly. One friend described Theravada as too much hard work.

Based on the quote I made in an earlier comment Vajrayana asks for the practise of three yanas, and has an obvious implication. What are your views on the heart sutra? Can the teachings in Mahayana and Vajrayana be taken on the basis that if we perceive they are true for us then use them?

On Dharmakaya I had vaguely picked up this notion of evolving Dharma from reading Thich Naht Hahn. Yet in Thailand there is the Dhammakaya foundation, and then there is a Tibetan understanding. What do you understand by Dhammakaya? My own meditation is far from being Vipassana only.

If I am in Bkk I too would like to attend that talk ….  

Hope you are keeping well,

All the Best,

BillZ