Mike:
 
It's very true that buddha nature can't be expressed out in a form of 
description.  But can be sensed through our actions, writings.  For instance 
when we are diligent in the practice the way we expresses ourselves is very 
different as when we have being distracted.
 
  When the writings have been created through the energy of "Buddha Nature" no 
matter in the zen or chan tradition that person has been educated that there is 
no separation between the writer and the receiver.  Buddha nature cuts through 
the educational background form from different buddha, zen traditions the 
communication amongst practicioners is clear and the same. Although in 
appearance may look differently expressed the essence is the same. But,  when 
we are involved in the "I" real communication vanishes.  This post just to say 
that buddha nature can be experienced at any time but given a description on it 
is not possible as at the moment of trying to do so it vanishes!
 
Mayka
 
 
--- On Wed, 23/3/11, mike brown <[email protected]> wrote:


From: mike brown <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Add Nothing Extra
To: [email protected]
Date: Wednesday, 23 March, 2011, 17:16


  





ED,
 
I may be wrong here, but you still seem to think of 'Buddha Nature' in terms of 
something that has qualities 'out there' that can be experienced and known if 
we just follow certain steps (whether zazen, reason or science etc) 'Buddha 
Nature (or whatever) is not something that is attained, gained or even 
experienced (but 'experienced' is ok if we understand there is no 'I' for an 
experience to happen to). In fact, it's more about dropping/losing than 
adding/finding. 'Kensho'/'satori' are just rough pointers, 'tools' if you like, 
that symbolise a 'state' where our sense of 'I' has been dropped and duality 
has been transcended (Dogen's 'dropping of body and mind' is the best 
description IMO). This 'state' is impossible to be conveyed by words/logic 
although it can be hinted at. How this is done depends on the 
idiosyncronies/personality of the person expressing it and so will always be 
different from person to person. Thus Mayka's method of conveying
 what she has 'experienced' will be different to Bill's. How this 'experience' 
has been further cultivated and intergrated into one's daily living will 
also have a bearing on how it is expressed. The feeling I get on this forum is 
that some people have being practicing Zen for some time, doing all the 'right' 
things, going to sesshins, reading lots of material etc. but have yet to 
'experience' that 'experience' that turns the conceptual world upside down and 
so feel (maybe subconsciously) they have to knock (or hint at) other people's 
insights as just woo-woo or delusional. Just saying. 
 
Mike 




From: ED <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thu, 24 March, 2011 1:02:23
Subject: [Zen] Re: Add Nothing Extra

  



Mayka,
Then, can we ever know whether the 'Buddha Nature' you talk about is the same 
as or is different from the 'Buddha Nature' Bill talks about?
--ED
 
--- In [email protected], Maria Lopez <flordeloto@...> wrote:
>
> ED;
>  
> I have to tell you that I don't understand a word about Scholastic terms.  
> But that doesn't stop me to open the gate any time I want to experience 
> buddha nature.  What a slap over all increasingly commercial zen writers, 
> isn't it? 
>   
> Mayka
 





Reply via email to