Видео

If you research how Buddha’s teaching, You can apply lot to your life

If Siddharta Gautama could 'become' a Buddha through the realisation of non-self, he must have discovered or uncovered that which already 'was', the 'state of Buddhahood' if you will. If that was not already there, then it was produced by 'attaining Buddhahood' and therefore conditioned, impermanent and not liberation, making the realisation of non-self meaningless. Since all beings have the potential of liberation just like Siddharta Gautama, then that which he 'became' upon 'attaining' Buddhahood by realising non-self, is also present 'in us' in essence; hence the term 'Buddha nature'.

Sati did mean rememberance. I hope this debate does not affect secular mindfulness. We should have let go of Buddhist textual fundamentalism some time ago.

Can you do more elaborate insights and how Mahayana Buddhism was spread across Malaysia?

Thank you Doug for interesting talk. I am a former student of advaita vedanta and they also use the term anatman, i.e the bodymind construct that where no self is to be found. You are that which persists over time, the awareness that observe the changes. As far as i understand the Buddhas Middle way, he refuted both no self at all and eternal self. Both views creates an identity as i understand it. Don't you think that Buddha used the religious terms of his time and as i understand it engaged in religious debates with both atheists and eternalists. The deathless, the divine abodes points to that which the Buddha refused to give and selfidentity i suppose. Advaita Vedanta borrowed thoughts from both buddhism and upanishadic shastra but changed the emptiness or noself to Atman/Brahman, and Nirvana to Brahmanirvana, but its strange somewhat what say that there is so much enphasis on working on the subtle body and physical body in buddhism, if its True that the Buddha tought similar view on the body and the world as an illusion supperimposed on the Self. The atheists of his time also, fortgot their name( carvakas?) said there was no self so no person could inherit karma, and the Buddha refuted all that, so who is in account of his karma If there is no one there.

❤❤❤😂😂😂😂😂 what a really precious work done by you. Congratulations for you future works 👏 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉

Well, it's some Hindu influence in Mahayana Buddhism.

Zhentong (1) The natural, beginningless absence from the clear light level of mental activity of "other" levels of mental activity, which are all limited by fleeting stains. (2) Voidness, beyond words and concepts and which can only be cognized non-conceptually: it is "other" than the voidnesses of truly established existence, truly established non-existence, both and neither, which can only be cognized conceptually. - From the Berzin archives

If I heard the concluding words correctly it really is that simple Increase the positive Eliminate the negative Cultivate compassion Buddha nature is every time we turn away from the distractions of the world - when we help others recognize the worldly dharmas and when we work to make positive change in the world for no other reason besides positive change There have been many buddhas - many and probably most of which have never heard of the Buddha we think of It’s mind state and action and not a magical rank earned through dogmatic belief

I have been chasing this nirvana for a bit. Here is what I have found, that seems to be feasible: States of relaxation with focus, alpha, beta, theta, delta and gamma, seemingly dead and hibernation. These are attainable, these are documented. I know some of these are attainable, even if never you have done so in your life, view learning something called focus 21, using the gateway tapes of CIA. Some yogis have been measured seemingly dead, for example Sadhguru. And hibernation is when they just meditate for days and don't wake up before starvation is intense enough, this phenomena is well known in Buddhism, documented to have been achieved by multiple practitioners. All I can say is that the more you play around with it, the deeper you go, the trippier it gets. I once saw the guy holding the Tibetan Wheel of Samsara, but the painting cartoon character, not like an actual cowheaded tauron. I also once saw a buddhist monk thing manifest, but only nerves and blood circulation system, and a few others. He eminated at me with the symbol of buddhas eyes, because his face did just gave skin grafted on top of it, no mouth, He looked like old no mask x-man deadpool.

🙏

Hearing you tell the stories of the Nagas and their appearance in the Buddha story reminds me of the Krishna birth narrative in the Baghavat Purana... Since they put Buddha as one of the scheduled Avatars of Vishnu it sure illustrates a "tie-in". The "Supreme God Vishnu" is also depicted as reclining on the Celestial, many-hooded Naga, known as Ananta Sesa. Here is a snippet of the story told in the Baghavat Purana: Krishna's parents were imprisoned by the wicked King Kamsa because of the prophecy that the 8th son born of Devaki (Kamsa's sister) would kill him. Kamsa had already killed Devaki's 7 previous newborns during imprisonment and the 8th was nearly ready to enter the world. Devaki finally gave birth on a dark and stormy night, and the Gods cooperated to ensure THIS CHILD ( Krishna) would be safe. Everybody in the palace including the prison guards fell into a deep slumber. The prison doors were mysteriously unlocked and swung open. Devaki's husband (father of Krishna) Vasudeva gathered the newborn into a blanket and carried him into the night and into the STORM. The celestial serpent Ananta Sesa appeared, spreading its divine hoods becoming a living umbrella over Vasudava's head shielding him and the newborns from the torrents of rain as they escaped. They traveled to a rural village of cow herders, familiar to Vasudeva. He SWITCHED the male child with a newly born female of her sleeping mother Rohini... and then carried the female child back to the prison in the palace.....

I love the section of the Dhammapada about Brahmanas. Thanks for all the interesting subjects you have covered on this wonderful channel Doug. Happy Independence Day!

buddha stopped believing in rebirth as he matured as a teacher. He believed in past life and future life, not past birth and future births. Buddha may have believed in collective arising (sam-udaya) and not past birth or next birth of individual because buddha clearly taught that there is no individual consciousness or eternal inner self to be reborn. So individuals are not born individually but collectively through recycling of the individual with the collective.

<3

The nectar could be considered the living primordial slime. Single cell or colony cell organisms. And the creatures that developed spinal vertebrae, which lead to brains were the luminous creatures that held desires, consumed the primitive organisms, and made discriminatory judgments of beauty & ugliness (the social aspect of Natural Selection). So there you have it, a perfectly accurate, yet primitively comprehensible description of the origin of Mind on planet Earth, and perhaps throughout the Universe. Let's face it, the Buddhist Sutras have always contained the first examples of quality science fiction literature. Now you're telling me that it falls into the category of hard (scientifically plausible) science fiction.

Thank you kindly 🙏

🙏

🙏

The concept of buddha nature seems so confusing when I read about it, because it's described so differently in literature. At one point I was reading about tibetan buddhism and came across the subject and I was so confused when it was described as a permanent and everlasting self. I thought this is definitely not in accordance with what the Buddha taught about non-self. Now I see that it must have been a particular tibetan school that supports the view of shentong about a permanent and everlasting self. It's strange that this particular tibetan school supports such a view when it seems to directly contradict the original buddhist teachings of non-self, but still consider themselves buddhist. It seems more like what the upanishads where teaching, which the Buddha opposed. Great video and thanks for making it clear about this subject!

I left Christianity for Buddhism. In my opinion Christians Focus way too much on Hell Sin & Fear.

buddha said non-inner self. an means non atta means inner self. However, buddhism is against any self-conception, unless for practical reasons.

When you mentioned extending metta boundlessly to everyone, even those who have ill will towards others, I was reminded of a book I just finished that I wonder if you've read: "The Buddhist on Death Row," about Jarvis Jay Masters who has been on death row for decades for a crime he didn't commit who turned to Buddhism. There's this passage where he's talking to Pema Chodron about the judge who sentenced him: "In Judge Savitt's face I saw her confusion, even her fear. It's hard to stay angry after that. It's not that I don't still blame her sometimes. I don't know if I can completely forgive her, either. But when I think of her and see her as a person like the rest of us, flawed, trying to get through life, it feels different." And Pema responds, "That feeling is compassion." Wild stuff, extending compassion for the woman who sentenced you to death.

Great video. Thankyou🙏

Hello , what school do not fallow rebirth doctrine ?

Thanks!

And what to do if no one wanna be your friend or the ones u have are gone😅

This kinda reminds me of the one interpretation of the Madhyamika teachings that Sunyata is not mere absence but a creative space.

Thank you !

“ Oh Nobly Born , sons and daughters awake and understand WHO YOU ARE .” ❤

There is no Nothing, there is no Being, there is only Becoming. There is no Apriori Essence, only Post Priori Essence. The apperance of apperance, the negation of negation.

BUDDHA is your mind And the Way goes nowhere. Don’t look for anything but this. -Ryokan

I like that solution you mentioned, that Buddha nature is non-self. I could be wrong, I believe that’s how our Kwan Um School interprets it. To access Buddha nature, you go to a “before thinking” mind.

consciousness, awareness, the phenomenon of knowing arising due to constituent cause and conditions, just like phenomenon of rainbow or horizon depending on conditions to exist.

Interesting concept Buddha nature. I spoke to a monk once and told me that due to the lack of interest in early Chinese Buddhism, which predates Zen in Japan by many centuries, that they introduced the idea of Buddha nature to get more bums on seats. I once asked "Does Buddha nature not change"? It really put the cat amongst the pigeons

Thanks!

Hi Doug I always enjoy your videos. I could be wrong but this video almost watches like a persuasive essay arguing that buddha nature is essentially nonsensical. is that correct? If so, I think it would be more persuasive to non-scholars like myself if you gave more direct and pithy teachings as to how people in the other camp are mistaking a transient, empty experience for a permanent buddha nature. Because while I find your historical overview persuasive I just have to look at my own mind and disagree with the ultimate conclusion it seems like you're making. Yes, it is paradoxical and seemingly nonsensical, but that's to be expected as it's beyond words or concepts. But I've always been a lay person and could be wrong. As buddhism grows in the west and on the internet I assume this will be a disagreement westerners keep having for a few centuries as we all come from and are exposed to different lineages that used to be more geographically isolated than they are now.

I guess I'm not seeing how if the early texts mention the luminous mind, and in the early texts, the Buddha equates himself with the Dharma, using the term dharmakaya, how does the subsequent development of these things require hagiography or deification? There is left open, in early Buddhism, how one who perfects the Buddha's teachings becomes an Arhat, while when Siddhartha Gautama did so he became the Buddha. The term doesn't mean teacher, it means the enlighened one. And luminous mind doesn't really require a lot of circuituous interpretation into making the mind malleable, so much as a state of mind which is a precursor for enlightenment -- somewhat because it allows understanding sunyata. Most of all, I'm finding it hard to understand why the go-to text for understanding early mahayana is the Lotus Sutra and not the Prajnaparamita.

So Buddhist enlightenment is all about knowing there's nothing after death 💀??

islam does not influence, islam converts through violence! why are you trying to downplay the importance of islam in destruction of buddhism? are you some kind of globalist trumpet too? Afganistan was a buddhist country, not anymore, just an example.

Does Mahayana stand out that much as far as deifying the buddha? Even in the Pali, there are 'olympian' like gods up on top of mount Meru, and then floating paradises of even higher excellence than that, and then Brahma realms of still higher excellence, and in fact, the "human" Buddha is incomparably superior to all of these beings, both in terms of both wisdom and magical abilities. I guess the dharmakaya concept elevates buddha to a kind of pantheist super being, but it's not unique in thinking of the buddha as beyond all human limits.

Very contradictory, one verse against another I think even early Buddhist are not sure about consciousness and it's nature

Thank you so much!

Dude, you're super knowledgable. I know you meditate. You must have had some profound experiences. Either meditating, during sleep, accidental spontaneous quick trances(satori) or something. Burning purple light when letting go of eyesight? Waking up half way during the night, entering the longest REM sleep awake and entering samadhi? Entering psychedelic visuals upon seeing the darkness of your eyelids? Seeing seemingly remote view hyperimposed on wall gazing etc. Over here its going on! I have rainbow bodies and bloodvein, nerve- and lymph bodies, spooky spooky, everyone is visiting here.

do a video on the hypocracy of how buddhism is suppoesd to be about non material things, yet thai and other offshoots gild the place up with gold and jewels and icons while they live in a city with thousands of homeless

Incredibly well explained. Probably the best video about this subject. Thanks.

But Yocaracara teaches that there are "ichantikkas" (those who can never be enlightened). It takes kalpas of rebirth to attain enlightenment. Does having a satori means that we are perfectly enlightened? Being true to ourselves, we are so far from what the Buddha has attained in perfection.

My personal opinion is that the Buddha Nature isn't the self and that it only affirms the potential of enlightenment for every sentient being. Also, I came upon the idea of the Buddha is the Dharma/Dhamma in one of the books by Ajahn Chah

I love this type of concept-history videos. I think that early and later Mahayana gave us some of the highest peaks on philosophical buddhist concepts, but sometimes these speculations have gone too far compared to the early pragmatic view taught by the Buddha.