Ed,
As I mull over your question to Edgar, I'd say that buddha nature never came to
be, and/but everything has piggy-backed on it "since".
(this is probably a form of one of those fourteen questions that the Buddha
refused to answer).
And as I recall the mechanics of the 3-D structural molecular model, even the
Double-Helix has a backbone of emptiness.
Emptiness is the spinal-chord of DNA.
Now, are Buddha-Nature and Emptiness two different things? How do folks here
see this?
--Joe
> "ED" <seacrofter001@...> wrote:
>
> Edgar,
>
> As per evolutionary theory or evolutionary psychology, how could buddha
> nature have come to be?
------------------------------------
Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
