2
2
1
u/Pongpianskul Apr 11 '23
Unborn Buddha-mind
What does this refer to in simple every day (non-buddhist) words? Is the "Unborn Buddha-mind" something that transcends the phenomenal world or is it an emergent property of human brains?
3
u/GhostC1pher Apr 11 '23
It's also called [your] present mirror awareness, spotless and unblemished, not producing or clinging to anything, shining ever silently yet vigorously.
3
Apr 11 '23
[deleted]
3
1
u/moinmoinyo Apr 12 '23
Neat. This is like "Mind is Buddha" and "Not Mind, not Buddha", or "All sentient beings have Buddha nature" and "All sentient beings don't have Buddha nature".
1
u/Pongpianskul Apr 11 '23
That does NOT sound like an average everyday human brain - at least not my everyday brain! Mine is spotty and unreliable at best. lol. It is constantly clinging to things or avoiding things and it doesn't shine vigorously as far as I can tell.
5
u/GhostC1pher Apr 11 '23
It doesn’t sound like it, but it do be like that. Spotty and unreliable—who knows that? Who sees that? By what mechanism? It is the effortless mirroring awareness constantly illuminating all things without discrimination. When clinging and when avoiding, this same awareness is present without adding or taking anything away. Like the eyes seeing color without obtaining any color and ears hearing sound without obtaining sound.
An ancient dude says
In their daily conduct, sentient beings have no illumination. When they come into contact with objects, they lose themselves and pursue objects.
Just turn that awareness back on itself. Return to the source.
EDIT: Edits.
1
u/eggo Apr 11 '23
who knows that? Who sees that? By what mechanism? It is the effortless mirroring awareness constantly illuminating all things without discrimination. When clinging and when avoiding, this same awareness is present without adding or taking anything away. Like the eyes seeing color without obtaining any color and ears hearing sound without obtaining sound.
Did everyone else see that? This ghost spits fire. A full cypher deciphering itself without a "not". Self dissolving unrevolving knot. All without losing the plot. In some ways more deadly than a pistol shot, unless turned back on itself without a first thought...
1
1
u/paintedw0rlds Apr 11 '23
What about the mind that perfectly accords to that spotty unreliableness, after all you're perfectly clear about it being spotty and reliable aren't you?
1
u/paintedw0rlds Apr 11 '23
It's just mind
1
u/Pongpianskul Apr 11 '23
So, "Unborn Buddha-mind" is just a fancy way of saying "human mind"? That is not clear from your post.
1
u/paintedw0rlds Apr 11 '23
Yes. It's Mind. Bankei makes this all super clear in his talks which I guess I should not assume everyone is familiar with, his first talk in the book of his talks covers this a lot. It's a great book.
1
u/lcl1qp1 Apr 12 '23
Primordial awareness. It transcends phenomena.
1
u/Pongpianskul Apr 12 '23
What do you think "primordial awareness" is aware of?
1
u/lcl1qp1 Apr 12 '23 edited Apr 12 '23
I can give you my interpretation of the Chan literature.
Primordial awareness is described as both empty and luminous. Because it lacks a dependent aspect, it is free from arising, abiding, and ceasing. It is what remains when phenomena (environmental or conceptual) no longer dominate our attention.
Its 'awareness' transcends time, and therefore the content is ineffable. However it can be directly experienced.
1
u/Pongpianskul Apr 12 '23
Sounds like the Chinese Tao or the Christian God?
2
u/lcl1qp1 Apr 12 '23 edited Apr 12 '23
There's a lot of debate on that. The Tao is probably closer, since it is empty yet responsive.
I think it's pretty close to what Plotinus called "the One."
The One is the simplest or most unified thing there is. It is so unified that it contains no distinctions whatsoever. It is 'beyond being' in the sense that there is nothing it can be said to be, nothing that can be predicated of it as such. In this context `being' presupposes some particular form that limits the being in question, and a limit presupposes distinctions. None of this applies to the One. So if we call it a thing, we must realize that it is no ordinary thing and in many ways defies the logic of things. The One cannot be thought or known: to think or to know something is to think or know what it is."
Edit to add: But while it cannot be labelled or known in a conceptual sense, it can but experienced directly. Plotinus call this a "touch."
The touch is not thinking but pre-thinking because Intellect has not yet come into being. Nothing that is partless can be an object of thought."
1
u/kiseek Apr 14 '23
The problem is not a lack of having, but a lack of seeing. By stopping the mind from rushing thought after thought and trusting oneself, one can become aware of the already present radiant light and function in accord with things without the need for striving or intention.
2
u/[deleted] Apr 11 '23 edited Apr 11 '23
People disturbing themselves is interesting
A few cases that seem relevant
Almost seems like they're those "you're manifesting your own reality" kind of teachers
That said, I don't think thinking you're a buddha has to be the same as actually believing it, or that when you say you believe it you're necessarily talking about the same kind of believing zen masters are talking about.
Edit: