Image of Buddha Nature

Buddha Nature

Buddha Nature and Four Parables

Buddha nature means discovering one’s true potential. Each one of us inherently have the potential to purify our mind, reach a higher mental state and overcome suffering. But the manifestation of this nature is prevented because our mind is buried under the load of unwanted thoughts and worldly desires, either due to our circumstances or conditioning.

Like the moon hidden behind the clouds, is not moved by them as its purity remains untarnished. Similarly, we shouldn’t be deluded into thinking that this defiled mind is our true mind or real nature.

If we continually remind ourselves of this fact and strive to awaken within ourselves the pure mind of Enlightenment. The mind that is not disturbed by things as they occur, that remains pure and tranquil under all circumstances, is the true mind and should be the master.

“As human beings we have the same experience of destructive and constructive emotions. We also have a human mind capable of developing wisdom. We all have the same Buddha nature.” 

~ Dalai Lama

Here are four parables to remind you of your Buddha nature and look beyond the delusions of the mind and find your real self taken from The Teachings of Buddha.

Parable One

Once upon a time a man looked into the reverse side of a mirror and, not seeing his face and head, he became, insane. How unnecessary it is for a man to become insane merely because he carelessly looks into the reverse side of a mirror!

It is just as foolish and unnecessary for a person to go on suffering because he does not attain Enlightenment where he expects to find it. There is no failure in Enlightenment; the failure lies in those people who, for a long time, have sought Enlightenment in their discriminating minds. Without realizing that theirs are not true minds but imaginary minds that have been caused by the accumulation of desires and illusions that cover and hides the real mind.

Parable Two

There is an old story told of a man who fell into a drunken sleep. His friend stayed by him as long as he could but, being compelled to go and fearing that he might be in want, the friend hid a jewel in the drunken man’s garment. When the drunken man recovered, not knowing that his friend had hid a jewel in his garment, he wandered about in poverty and hunger. A long time afterwards the two men met again and the friend told the poor man about the jewel and advised him to look for it.

Like the drunken man of the story, people wander about suffering in this life of birth and death, unconscious of what is hidden away within themselves.

Parable Three

There is a story of a wrestler who used to wear an ornament on his forehead of a precious stone. One time when he was wrestling the stone was crushed into the flesh of his forehead. He thought he had lost the gem and went to a surgeon to have the wound dressed. When the surgeon came to dress the wound he found the gem embedded in the flesh and covered over with blood and dirt. He held up a mirror and showed the stone to the wrestler.

Buddha-nature is like the precious stone of this story: it becomes covered over by the dirt and dust of other interests and people think that they have lost it, but a good teacher recovers it again for them. This nature exists in everyone no matter how deep it has been covered by greed, anger and foolishness, or buried by the persons own deeds and retribution. Buddha-nature can not be lost or destroyed; and when all defilements are removed, sooner or later it will reappear. Like the wrestler in the story who was shown the gem buried in his flesh and blood by means of a mirror, so people are shown their true selves, buried beneath their worldly desires and passions, by means of the light of Buddha.

Parable Four

Once upon a time a king gathered some blind men about an elephant and asked them to tell him what an elephant was like. The first man felt a tusk and said an elephant was like a giant carrot; another happened to touch an ear and said it was like a big fan; another touched its trunk and said it was like a pestle; still another, who happened to feel its leg, said it was like a mortar; and another, who grasped its tail said it was like a rope. Not one of them was able to tell the king the elephant’s real form.

Similarly if you try to define the nature of man, we would probably end up covering the flaws and the perfections. Not many of us are capable of fathoming our awakened selves or this nature of mind, given the fact that it is so rare to find awakened people.

Self and No Self

This post is taken from scholarly articles by Terry Marks-Tarlow and Mark Epstein, and from David Kalupahana's book The Principles of Buddhist Psychology 

Note: After reading, studying and contemplating this topic for months I had an epiphany - the idea of no self is not as mind bendingly complicated as I've been making it. Human beings are not separate from the rest of the beings on the planet. We are just another part of what is. When I stop and let myself float I can feel the energy of the world and I catch a glimpse of the peace that comes with no self. Our problem lies in the fact that we can think and relate to ourselves - our ego is constantly making concrete out of wind, trying to make us special and apart. This causes us to suffer and to feel lonely. It is good to just allow and be a part of everything.

After many intense years of meditation and mental development, the Buddha was sitting under a Bodhi tree on the night of a full moon and experienced a remarkable insight. He realized that any event we can see (observable phenomenon) is subject to constant change, to arising and falling away and that there is no permanent beginning or ending states—either physical or mental. Everything changes so there is no fixed essence or ultimate nature - only a process of becoming. Likewise, there is no static, permanent self or soul, only a constantly evolving pattern.

In Western culture, the word self usually refers to a unique, inherent core identity at the center of each person. Belief in the self is deeply entrenched in popular, scientific and philosophical traditions. In fact, the reality of an authentic self is normally taken entirely for granted. Beginning at an early age and continuing throughout a person’s life, the use of words such as me, me and mine reinforces the ideas of individuality and separateness. This in turn shapes how we explain the world and our place in it.

Reflecting the modern fascination and enchantment with the self, one of the few words recently added to the English dictionary is selfie — which is defined as a “complimentary self portrait photographs, typically taken with a smart phone and then displayed on social media”. The Oxford Dictionary even declared “selfie” as word of the year. Truly, the selfie seems to represent the apex of modern misunderstanding about the truth of the nature of the self and correspondingly, searching for happiness and equanimity by using pride and self admiration.

The assumption of the existence of the self has been a major preoccupation with psychologists. In 1890 the father of psychology, William James, offered a broad definition of the self: "In its widest sense a man's Self is the sum total of all that can call his, not only his body and his psychic powers (normal cognitive activity), but his clothes and his wife and children, his ancestors and friends, his reputation and works, his land and horses, and yacht and bank-account." Through the years many psychologists have offered their own ideas of a permanent self and while much has changed since the days of the early personality theorists, contemporary psychological theory does not address the standing of a more fundamental issue - the validity of an authentic, bounded and individualistic self.

In stark contrast to traditional Western views, the Buddha discovered through his mental training and awakening that the self is a fiction, an abstraction we continue to construct over the course of a lifetime. According to the Buddha one can observe and understand mental processes without any need for an innate "I" at the center of the experience. There is thinking, there is feeling and there is perception, but these activities do not require a substantial self as an authority except as a linguistic convention. In actuality, there is nothing authentic about the self except our belief in it. This realization is at the heart of the Buddha's truth of anatta or no self.

The doctrine of Anatta is the Buddha's most unique and radical teaching. Mark Epstein, psychiatrist and author, has said that, "this emphasis on the lack of a particular, substantive agent is the most distinctive aspect of traditional Buddhist psychological thought." Even though most people will commonly agree that our body, thoughts, feelings and experiences change over time, they also believe that underneath the change is a unique and consistent self and a majority of people still believe in the continuation of the self after physical death.

Similar to the famous conclusion of the philosopher, Rene Descartes, "I think therefore I am" it is normal to identify what we do, think and feel with our self - our I, me, and mine. For example, I am happy, this is me and the car is mine. For the Buddha, the roots of dukkha, or suffering, are found in such identifications. These identifications, although they are only conventional labels, once believed in, become psychologically established and propagate a view of the world in which we feel separate and alienated from out inner and outer experiences. Believing in the separateness of you and I and attempting to maintain, nourish and propagate this identification of I - often at the expense of others - we cause ourselves and others much grief and suffering through our self deception. 

While it has been said that the Buddha wanted to destroy the self or the I, this is incorrect, simply because there is no permanent and substantial basis of personal identity called self to destroy. The teaching of anatta is in no way a denial of the empirical reality of the individual personality. The Buddha taught that the individual personality is a functional, unified and casually interconnected integrity operating on many levels. Personality factors are consistent yet are also ever changing. While recognizing that the I or self is a fluid cognitive fiction, the Buddha also understood its convenient and helpful functionality. The Buddha himself used such terms and I, you, he, she, person, etc. but he did so only to facilitate communication in conventional speech with conventional understanding. So, the Buddha teaches to not destroy but transcend or surpass the ignorance which come from attributing a substantial reality to the self.

We see now that as much as the Buddha emphasized the elimination of egotism, he did not intend the annihilation or depersonalization of what modern psychology labels the empirical self or the individual experiences. The terms I or self are pragmatic linguistic conventions that reflect the living experience that all conscious living beings have. For the idea of no self doesn't mean we don't exist or that we are robots with no volition to act in the world, instead we are constantly changing beings, always in flux. Giving it a fixed name and identity is just a convention that humans came up with so we can talk about it. The whole idea of self is a fiction or narrative. The problem is that as soon as we attach labels and concepts onto something, our egos start objectifying it, conclusively establish and create fantastic stories to make something static and permanent out of it - and that begins our point of illusion and suffering.

Clinical psychologist, Terry Marks-Tarlow, describes how we cannot separate ourselves from our experience, which is organically based and which takes place through the body. He does this by saying that most of us take for granted the ability to distinguish between ourselves as observers and what we observe in the world. Outwardly our skin seems like visible proof of a clear boundary that encases and protects our organs. Inwardly our sense of self, when intact, also feels like a relatively clear boundary, at times even to the point of isolation from others. Yet whether we consider our bodies or minds, the subjective experience of closed boundaries rests precisely on the opposite state of affairs - wide open portals that continually allow transaction between inside and outside, body and world, self and no self. Cycles of re-entry continually oscillate between creating and erasing the seam where observer and observed, perceiver and perceived, inner and outer, intersect and cross paradoxically. At this seam, self and world appear mutually co-determining. These perspectives are analoguous to Buddhist psychology which seecks to transcend the distinct self/no self distinction.

As you can see, the concept of no self represents a challenge to the Western mind.

The Five Aggregates / The Five Skandhas

What constitutes a human, or any sentient being, according to Buddhism?

A human is a combination of five aggregates (khandhas), namely body or form, feelings, perceptions, mental formations or thought process, and consciousness, which is the fundamental factor of the previous three.

The first is the Aggregate of Matter or Form .  Matter contains and comprises the four great "primaries", known as solidity, fluidity, heat or temperature and motion or vibration.  These primaries are not simply earth, water, fire and wind; in Buddhism they are much more.

Solidity is the element of expansion.  Because of this element objects occupy space.  Seeing an object is seeing it extended in space and we label it.  The element of expansion is in solids, as well as in liquids.  When we see a body of water we are actually seeing solidity.  The hardness of rock and the softness of paste, the quality of heaviness and lightness in things are qualities of solidity; they are states of it. 

Fluidity is the element of cohesion.  This element holds the  particles of matter together.  The cohesive force in liquids is so  strong that they coalesce even after their separation.  Once a solid is broken up or separated the particles cannot coalesce again, unless they are converted to liquid.  This is accomplished by increasing their temperature, such as is done when welding metals.  The object we see is a limited expansion or shape, which is made possible through the cohesion.

The element of heat or temperature is transmitted to the other three primaries.  It preserves the vitality of all beings and plants.  When we say that an object is cold, we only mean that the heat of that particular object is less than our body heat.  It is relative.  

Motion is the element of displacement and also is relative.  To know whether a thing is moving or not we need a point which we regard as being fixed, so the motion can be measured.  Since there are no motionless object in the universe, stability is also an element of motion.  Motion is dependent on heat.  Atoms cannot vibrate when there is no heat

These Primaries are always co-existing and give birth to other phenomena and qualities; among them the five senses and their purposes: the eyes which see; the ears which hear; the nose which smells; the tongue which tastes; and the body or skin which feels.

  

The second is the Aggregate of Feeling or Sensation.  Feelings can be either pleasant, unpleasant or neutral and they arise from contact.  Such contact as seeing something, hearing something, etc., creates an idea or thought, and we get a feeling about that idea or thought.  An arising feeling cannot be prevented.

Feelings differ from person to person.  We don’t all feel the same way about the same thing.  Our feelings are dependent on our experiences and the way we process information.  Not every person processes information in the same way, nor do they come to the same conclusion.  And our feeling can and do change during our existence.

    

The third is the Aggregate of Perception.  This aggregate perceives or recognizes both physical and mental objects through its contact with the senses.  When we become aware or conscious of an object or idea, our perception recognizes its distinctions from other objects or ideas.  This distinction makes us familiar with the object or idea when we sense it in the future.  Perception is what enables memory.  They can also be deceptive, and they too change during our existence.

A familiar Buddhist illustration tells of a farmer, who after sowing a field, sets up a scarecrow for protection from the birds, who usually mistake it for a man and will not land to eat the freshly sown seeds.  That is an example of the illusionary possibilities of perception; this aggregate can produce false impressions.  A perception can become so indelible on our mind that it becomes difficult to erase.  

The fourth is the Aggregate of Mental Formations or Thought Process.  This aggregate includes all mental factors except feeling and perception, which are two of the possible fifty-two mental factors noted in Buddhism.  These factors are volitional; no action produces change or karma, unless there is intention, volition (choice), and action.  Contact through the senses brings about the necessity of choosing an action and the action we choose depends upon our thought process, which is the result of our experiences and our individual evolution, including that of gaining or loosing wisdom.  

The fifth is the Aggregate of Consciousness, the most important of the aggregates, because it is where the mental factors wind up.  Without consciousness there can be no mental factors; they are interrelated, interdependent and coexistent.  

The mind and its faculty is not something physical.  It is concerned with thoughts and ideas.  Forms are seen only via the eye, not via the ear, whose faculty of hearing is not that of the eye, etc.   Thoughts and ideas belong to the faculty of the mind.  The senses cannot think, nor can they mull over ideas, choose possible actions and arrive at conclusions.  

Consciousness is made possible through the interaction of the senses.  Thoughts and ideas originate in the mind, which in Buddhism is called the sixth sense.  The five aggregates are not permanent; they are ever subject to change and they do change as we experience life.  

A human is composed of mind and matter, and according to Buddhism, apart from mind and matter, there is no such thing as an immortal soul, an unchanging “thing” separate from these five aggregates.  

Thus the combination of the five aggregates is called a being which may assume as many names as its types, shapes, and forms. According to the Dharma, a human is a moral being with both positive and negative potentials.  We make choices concerning which of these potentials we choose to nourish thereby becoming a part of exactly who each one of us is, in terms of characteristics, personality traits, and disposition.  It is the potential of each human to gain wisdom and enlightenment.  Buddhism teaches that each one of us is the architect of our own fate, and we will reap what we sow.

Understanding the Anattalakkhana Sutta - Discourse on No Self

I will add my commentary soon.....


Thus I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was living at Benares, in the Deer Park at Isipatana (the Resort of Seers). There he addressed the bhikkhus of the group of five: "Bhikkhus." — "Venerable sir," they replied. The Blessed One said this.

"Bhikkhus, form is not-self. Were form self, then this form would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.' And since form is not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.'

"Bhikkhus, feeling is not-self...

"Bhikkhus, perception is not-self...

"Bhikkhus, determinations are not-self...

"Bhikkhus, consciousness is not self. Were consciousness self, then this consciousness would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus, let my consciousness be not thus.' And since consciousness is not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus, let my consciousness be not thus.'

"Bhikkhus, how do you conceive it: is form permanent or impermanent?" — "Impermanent, venerable Sir." — "Now is what is impermanent painful or pleasant?" — "Painful, venerable Sir." — "Now is what is impermanent, what is painful since subject to change, fit to be regarded thus: 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self'"? — "No, venerable sir."

"Is feeling permanent or impermanent?...

"Is perception permanent or impermanent?...

"Are determinations permanent or impermanent?...

"Is consciousness permanent or impermanent?" — "Impermanent, venerable sir." — "Now is what is impermanent pleasant or painful?" — "Painful, venerable sir." — "Now is what is impermanent, what is painful since subject to change, fit to be regarded thus: 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self'"? — "No, venerable sir."

"So, bhikkhus any kind of form whatever, whether past, future or presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near, must with right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.'

"Any kind of feeling whatever...

"Any kind of perception whatever...

"Any kind of determination whatever...

"Any kind of consciousness whatever, whether past, future or presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near must, with right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self.'

"Bhikkhus, when a noble follower who has heard (the truth) sees thus, he finds estrangement in form, he finds estrangement in feeling, he finds estrangement in perception, he finds estrangement in determinations, he finds estrangement in consciousness.

"When he finds estrangement, passion fades out. With the fading of passion, he is liberated. When liberated, there is knowledge that he is liberated. He understands: 'Birth is exhausted, the holy life has been lived out, what can be done is done, of this there is no more beyond.'"

That is what the Blessed One said. The bhikkhus were glad, and they approved his words.

Now during this utterance, the hearts of the bhikkhus of the group of five were liberated from taints through clinging no more.

Impermanace in the Sky

I have a fascination with lenticular clouds. I live in the mountains of New Mexico so I see lenticular formations begin but so far never a fully formed one. When I saw this photograph of such a spectacular formation I wanted to go see it! Of course its not there anymore, it has dissipated and transformed itself into what I don't know. But its moment has passed and the beauty of impermanence is evident to me. 

Lenticular cloud formation over Chile.

Understanding the Phenapindupama (Phena) Sutta - Like A Ball of Foam

My Commentary (Don't take my word for it!)

The Phenna Sutta opened my eyes. Until I read and studied it, I hadn't had a glimpse of at the Buddha was talking about. The ball of foam metaphor offered me my first look into Buddhism. Things are not what they appear to be. Where can you find a feeling? Is there any substance to perception or a mental formation? Can consciousness be located anywhere? Western Buddhists are being asked to look at things in a different way, to see things as they really are. The sutta is a discussion of The Five Aggregates - 1.) Form 2.) Feeling 3.) Perception 4.) Mental Activity 5.) Consciousness and how the misunderstanding of them is the ongoing personal experience of suffering. They point us to the idea of no self. When you see things as they really are you become disenchanted with delusion, when you become disenchanted you become dispassionate, when you are dispassionate you are released and when you are released there is knowledge.

h

On one occasion the Blessed One was staying among the Ayojjhans on the banks of the Ganges River. There he addressed the monks: "Monks, suppose that a large glob of foam were floating down this Ganges River, and a man with good eyesight were to see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a glob of foam? In the same way, a monk sees, observes, & appropriately examines any form that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in form?

"Now suppose that in the autumn — when it's raining in fat, heavy drops — a water bubble were to appear & disappear on the water, and a man with good eyesight were to see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a water bubble? In the same way, a monk sees, observes, & appropriately examines any feeling that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in feeling?

 "Now suppose that in the last month of the hot season a mirage were shimmering, and a man with good eyesight were to see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a mirage? In the same way, a monk sees, observes, & appropriately examines any perception that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in perception?

"Now suppose that a man desiring heartwood, in quest of heartwood, seeking heartwood, were to go into a forest carrying a sharp ax. There he would see a large banana tree: straight, young, of enormous height. He would cut it at the root and, having cut it at the root, would chop off the top. Having chopped off the top, he would peel away the outer skin. Peeling away the outer skin, he wouldn't even find sapwood, to say nothing of heartwood. Then a man with good eyesight would see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a banana tree? In the same way, a monk sees, observes, & appropriately examines any fabrications that are past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near. To him — seeing them, observing them, & appropriately examining them — they would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in fabrications?

"Now suppose that a magician or magician's apprentice were to display a magic trick at a major intersection, and a man with good eyesight were to see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a magic trick? In the same way, a monk sees, observes, & appropriately examines any consciousness that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in consciousness?

"Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he grows dispassionate. Through dispassion, he's released. With release there's the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'"

That is what the Blessed One said. Having said that, the One Well-Gone, the Teacher, said further:

Form is like a glob of foam;
feeling, a bubble;
perception, a mirage;
fabrications, a banana tree;
consciousness, a magic trick —
this has been taught
by the Kinsman of the Sun.
However you observe them,
appropriately examine them,
they're empty, void
to whoever sees them
appropriately.

Beginning with the body
as taught by the One
with profound discernment:
when abandoned by three things
— life, warmth, & consciousness —
form is rejected, cast aside.
When bereft of these
it lies thrown away,
senseless,
a meal for others.
That's the way it goes:
it's a magic trick,
an idiot's babbling.
It's said to be
a murderer.[1]
No substance here
is found.

Thus a monk, persistence aroused,
should view the aggregates
by day & by night,
mindful,
alert;
should discard all fetters;
should make himself
his own refuge;
should live as if
his head were on fire —
in hopes of the state
with no falling away.

Understanding the Sabba Sutta - The All

My Commentary (Don't take my word for it!)

All that we know comes from the information given to us by our sensorium. Eyes, ears, nose, tongue, the body and the mind. If we think we know anything from any other source, its confusing and not real.

"Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," the monks responded.

The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range."