Bill, Buddha Nature is not so much everything as the true formless nature of everything in which their forms appear.
If all forms disappear Buddha Nature is still there. it's the fundamental nameless 'stuff' of reality that makes whatever form appears within it real. Buddha Nature is like the ocean in which waves, ripples and currents appear. Waves, ripples and currents are the forms of the world but their true nature is all water which corresponds to Buddha Nature in the analogy... That's not trivial. Edgar On Jun 17, 2013, at 4:25 AM, Bill! wrote: > Chris, > > I do agree with you both in changing the emphasis on the term to 'meeting > God', and I do agree with you that all these terms are made up after-the-fact > to try to communicate a holistic experience in dualistic terms (language). > Not an easy task. > > I also think 'Buddha Nature' and especially 'God' have too many meanings now > to be really useful. That's why I e-bend over backwards to clearly define > what I mean when I use the term 'Buddha Nature'. It's definitely not the way > Edgar uses it and different from Buddhist literature also. I don't think > however it is much different than purely zen literature. > > Also I think most in the West (and Buddhist literature, and especially Edgar) > have not trivialized Buddha Nature but super-sized it to mean EVERYTHING. I > like the idea of trivializing it. That's what I try to do. Buddha Nature is > quintessentially mundane. > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], Chris Austin-Lane <chris@...> wrote: > > > > That is pretty much what Sensei Warner is calling the experience of meeting > > God. Only afterwards, of course, not during. He favors this word over the > > Buddha nature word for Westerners who have a tendency to trivialize Budda > > nature. > > > > Thanks, > > --Chris > > 301-270-6524 > > On Jun 16, 2013 9:40 AM, "Joe" <desert_woodworker@...> wrote: > > > > > Chris, > > > > > > Warner gets a demerit. > > > > > > One-Mind is the state where-from God can be perceived. > > > > > > From No-Mind there is no such thing. Nor is there anything else. > > > > > > --Joe > > > > > > > Chris Austin-Lane <chris@> wrote: > > > > > > > > I think a more exact parallel is "meeting God" with "experiencing Buddha > > > > nature." > > > > > > > > As a non-Christian mystic I wonder how you derived your theory of seeing > > > > God being fundamentally distinct from no-mind. Surely you are not > > > speaking > > > > from experience? > > > > > > > > Credit to Brad Warner for this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are > > > reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
