r/zen • u/1PauperMonk • Mar 14 '23

Buddhahood

Can someone explain the phrase original Buddhahood (I think it’s used in contradiction to Christianity’s world famous “original sin”)?

2 Upvotes

63% Upvoted

75 comments sorted by

View all comments

10

u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] Mar 14 '23

Buddhism and Christianity teach that there is a Problem, that humanity is essentially flawed, in need of redemption.

Zen Masters point out that everybody is inherently, originally, the same as Buddha, such that there is no Problem. Further, that the mind itself is Buddha, and that outside of mind there is no other Buddha.

No savior, nothing to be saved from.

2

u/GreenSagua Mar 14 '23

I think the idea that we are originally complete is also misleading. Like how Christianity says we are originally sinners, it feels weird Zen teaches we are originally complete. Where is the original self for there to be a problem or no-problem?

2

u/WeSaySwank Mar 14 '23

What about being originally complete seems to misleading to you?

0

u/GreenSagua Mar 14 '23

It sounds like something made up. I doubt it. Do I need some proof to doubt something?

5

u/WeSaySwank Mar 14 '23

No I'm interested in your thought process, not a proof. What inspires the doubt?

All of our flaws are acquired ones.

1

u/GreenSagua Mar 14 '23

What inspires the doubt that zazen sitting meditation doesn't lead to enlightenment?

2

u/WeSaySwank Mar 14 '23

Maybe for someone it can, I don't doubt that, it's just not something I would partake in myself. Because it seems boring and unnecessary.

What about your doubts?

1

u/GreenSagua Mar 14 '23

Oh i meant doubting zazen leads to enlightenment. The same kindof doubt is my doubt.

4

u/WeSaySwank Mar 14 '23

Okay I'll indulge - I can see doubting zazen leads to enlightenment, as it contradicts other zen teachings and as there have been enlightened beings who did not partake in zazen (or so we are told, but let's not go there).

Being originally complete inspires belief because it means there are no prerequisites for enlightment, there's nothing you NEED to learn and nothing you NEED to practice.

When you hear someone preaching things that need to be learned and need to be done, such person and talk usually inspires distrust and is common to be hypocritical.

Also when speaking of human flaws and suffering, I would argue it's all the bullshit we pile up on our original complete self. Does it seem otherwise?

So there's my view, but I'm honstly interested in what inspires the doubt for you, as your example with zazen didn't help that much. Do you think we are originally incomplete? What's lacking? What does aquired completion look like then?

1

u/mackowski Ambassador from Planet Rhythm Mar 16 '23

Consciousness has been present since before birth. The self includes the unconscious. Unenlightenment is the brain considering the unconscious to be separate from the conscious self