Yes, it seems to have something to do with equanimity, so that we will see ourselves as equal to all, neither above nor beneath, nor separated in any way. I heard an interview recently, with a man who had been horribly tortured as a victim of racism. When asked how he survived and thrived after this experience, he said that he always knew that he was as good as his torturer. What struck me was the quality of equanimity - I am as good as my torturer. Not thoughts such as I hope this scum who is harming me rots in hell, etc.. Now that's someone who has realized Buddhanature.
Thanks, Diana --- In [email protected], woof puppy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Interesting take on "Buddha Nature," Bill. It's given > me alot to think about. > > Personally, I've always thought of Buddha Nature (and > the Holy Spirit) as ways to illustrate the > interconnectedness of all things. To put it in > theistic terms, God is everywhere and everything, > therefore one can discover God's true nature in a tiny > bottlecap. > > Like a broken mirror-shard that still reflects the > same image as a whole mirror, a tiny drop of water > holds in it the secrets of the entire Universe. The > macrocosm is in the microcosm, so to speak. > > Am I making sense? > > > SPROCKET > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 18:40:23 -0000 > > From: "rbs000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: Digest Number 1287 > > > > --- In [email protected], woof puppy > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > All this talk of Christianity and Buddhism reminds > > me > > > of a Zen story I've drawn inspiration from in the > > > past... > > > > > > A university student while visiting Gasan asked > > him: > > > "Have you ever read the Christian Bible?" > > > > > > "No, read it to me," said Gasan. > > > > > > The student opened the Bible and read from St. > > > Matthew: "And why take ye thought for rainment? > > > Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow. > > They > > > toil not, neither do they spin, and yet I say unto > > you > > > that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed > > > like one of these... Take therefore no thought for > > the > > > morrow, for the morrow shall take thought for the > > > things of itself." > > > > > > Gasan said: "Whoever uttered those words I > > consider an > > > enlightened man." > > > > > > The student continued reading: "Ask and it shall > > be > > > given you, seek and ye shall find, knock and it > > shall > > > be opened unto you. For everyone that asketh > > > receiveth, and he that seeketh findeth, and to him > > > that knocketh, it shall be opened." > > > > > > Gasan remarked: "That is excellent. Whoever said > > that > > > is not far from Buddhahood." > > > > > > > > > As for the theology, one could argue that the Holy > > > Spirit is one's own Buddha Nature. Buddha nature, > > > like the Holy Spirit is present in all things. > > The > > > real trick is learning to see it. > > > > > > > > > SPROCKET > > > > When I was very little, I asked my mom about God. > > Where is God? > > It's in all things. Ok... is he in that TV over > > there? Yes, was the > > doubtful answer. I doubted the answer too. I > > couldn't see > > anything "in" the tv. All I saw was the tv. Since > > I couldn't see > > anything "in" the tv, and all that was apparent was > > the tv, I pretty > > much came to the conclusion that the whole idea was > > bogus, because it > > seemed like nonsense to say the tv IS God. > > > > So here I am all these years later, wondering what > > sense to make of > > the idea that something called "Buddha nature" is in > > the tv. Or > > whether the tv IS Buddha nature. Or why bother > > calling that which is > > apparent, by some mysterious name. It seems to me > > that that which is > > apparent, is exactly it's apparentness. Allowing > > for the distinction > > between the apparent and ideas about the apparent. > > > > Any thoughts here? I'm inclined to jettison this > > "Buddha nature" > > idea completely. Can't see what good it does. > > > > Ian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 08:24:39 +0700 > > From: "Bill Smart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: RE: Digest Number 1287 (Deus ex Machina) > > > > >On Saturday, December 17 in Zen Digest #1287 Ian > > wrote: > > > > <When I was very little, I asked my mom about God. > > Where is God? > > <It's in all things. Ok... is he in that TV over > > there? Yes, was the > > <doubtful answer. I doubted the answer too. I > > couldn't see > > <anything "in" the tv. All I saw was the tv. Since > > I couldn't see > > <anything "in" the tv, and all that was apparent was > > the tv, I pretty > > <much came to the conclusion that the whole idea was > > bogus, because it > > <seemed like nonsense to say the tv IS God. > > < > > <So here I am all these years later, wondering what > > sense to make of > > <the idea that something called "Buddha nature" is > > in the tv. Or > > <whether the tv IS Buddha nature. Or why bother > > calling that which is > > <apparent, by some mysterious name. It seems to me > > that that which is > > <apparent, is exactly it's apparentness. Allowing > > for the distinction > > <between the apparent and ideas about the apparent. > > < > > <Any thoughts here? I'm inclined to jettison this > > "Buddha nature" > > <idea completely. Can't see what good it does. > > < > > <Ian > > > > Ian, your intuitive feelings here are correct. > > There is actually no 'buddha > > nature', no 'enlightenment', and even no 'buddha' > > and no 'zen'. There is > > just THIS. All of these terms are just > > teaching-words used to try to point > > you in the right direction to experience THIS > > directly and without > > prejudgments. This is why many of the zen masters > > avoided using words when > > asked about buddha nature [remained silent, walked > > away, hit the > > questioner], or used responded with apparent > > 'nonsense' words or phrases > > [mu, three pounds of flax, the tree in the garden, > > wash your bowls]. They > > did not want to try to explain something > > unexplainable, or rationalize > > something that is irrational, fearing that any > > attempt to do so would be > > more misleading than helpful. Some zen masters, > > especially today, believe > > it is necessary to try to communicate rationally > > with their students, > > especially in the beginning, so they use words like > > 'buddha nature'. > > > > Some caveats: > > - Don't think the Judeo-Christian-Islamic term 'God' > > and the Buddhist term > > > === message truncated === > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/S27xlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Current Book Discussion: Appreciate Your Life by Taizan Maezumi Roshi Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZenForum/ <*> 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/
