Bodhidharma teachings

[Robert (Bath)]

Hi all
I'm currently reading a book called the zen teachings of Bodhidharma translated by 'Red Pine'

I'm just wondering the following:

1. Are the Bloodstream, wake-up and breakthrough sermons generally considered to be an accurate account of what he taught? I'm not sure that anything he said was recorded.
2. He talks about seeing your own true nature! by this is he referring to your base nature, desires personality etc and seeing what yr real desires and motivations are or does this refer to yr actual buddha nature that everyone has in them? he seems to defrentiate your own nature, which should be seen first, from that of enlightenment!

Is seeing your own nature different from attaining enlightenment?

If anyone can shed any light on these points I'd be most grateful.

Thanks everyone.
Rob.

[Shaolinfist]

Hello Robert,

I am afraid I have never heard of the Bloodstream, wake-up and breakthrough sermons before so I cannot comment on them.
However I am 99% sure that when Bodhidarmha talked of seeing your own true nature that he is referring to the Buddha nature, which is a way of describing the attainment of Enlightenment.

by this is he referring to your base nature, desires personality etc and seeing what yr real desires and motivations are

No he is not, this is not our true nature it is our imaginary ego. Our true nature is Buddha nature.

Regards

Phil

[George]

Hi Robert,

Like Phil I am not familiar with the text you are referring to.

Perhaps you could quote a few passages that inspired your second question?


Best wishes,

[Kingmonkey]

Hey Phil,
how about the other 1%? ;-)
Yours Pat

[Benedikt]

If you're interested in Zen I would like to recommend you the "complete book of zen" by Grandmaster Wong Kiew Kit. Sigung writes with enormous clarity so it's easy to learn from it.

[Shaolinfist]

Hey Pat,

Hey Phil,
how about the other 1%? ;-)

I like to leave some room for me being wrong
And I could not agree more with Benedikt, it is an amazing book!

Phil

[Adam B]

how about the other 1%?

Maybe that last 1% was to take into account that seeing your true nature/Buddha nature is a way of describing having a Satori which doesn't necessarily mean that you have attained Enlightenment.

[Kingmonkey]

Maybe that last 1% was to take into account that seeing your true nature/Buddha nature is a way of describing having a Satori which doesn't necessarily mean that you have attained Enlightenment.

Bingo !

[Shaolinfist]

Maybe that last 1% was to take into account that seeing your true nature/Buddha nature is a way of describing having a Satori which doesn't necessarily mean that you have attained Enlightenment.

I was actually half way through typing that in my original post and i decided against it! Thought I would keep it simple, but your absolutely right, I am not a master so am bound to make the slight mistake here and there!

Phil

[Kingmonkey]

I am not a master so am bound to make the slight mistake here and there!

Phil

You're a good student then!

I am not a master

Nor am I

I just started reading the Bloodstream Sermon, its great!

If I understand it right, Bodhidharma is using the term of "seeing your self nature" in both ways, on one side to describe attaining Buddhahood and on the other as a satori which is indispensable to attain Buddhahood....

....so we were both right and both wrong related to Roberts question.
Perfect! Once more proven; there is no right nor wrong although there is...

Sincerely
Pat

PS @ Robert: This is typical Zen teaching

[Robert (Bath)]

Thanks all, I knew this was a good place to ask

Its an excellent book. My favourite passages are:

"Once you stop clinging and let things be, you'll be free even of birth and death. You'll transform everything"

"Once you recognize your moving, miraculously aware nature, yours is the mind of all buddhas. Buddhas of he past and future only talk about transmitting the mind. They teach nothing else. If someone understands this teaching, even if he's illiterate he's a buddha"

I've not read Sifu Wong Kiew Kits book on zen for a while, so am about due for a refresher!

Cheers all.

Robert.

[Shaolinfist]

so we were both right and both wrong related to Roberts question.

As far as I am aware my answer was not incorrect, merely incomplete. I cannot see anything you have said wrong either for that matter!

Thanks all, I knew this was a good place to ask

Its an excellent book.

You are welcome Robert, and thank you for suggesting the book, I shall have to look it up!

Kindest Regards
Phil

[Kingmonkey]

Dear Robert

The right place to ask
is the place where you ask.

You're welcome.

As far as I am aware my answer was not incorrect, merely incomplete. I cannot see anything you have said wrong either for that matter!

yes

Pat

[George]

"Once you stop clinging and let things be, you'll be free even of birth and death. You'll transform everything"

"Once you recognize your moving, miraculously aware nature, yours is the mind of all buddhas.

I think this this talks about the impermanence and the illusion of "self" as separate from the "universal mind" - in my understanding that's about as deep as it gets.


Best wishes,

George.

[Kingmonkey]

I find This passage very profound;

If you use your mind to study reality, you won't understand either your mind or reality. If you study reality without using your mind, you'll understand both. Those who don't understand don't understand understanding. And those who understand, understand not understanding. People capable of true vision know that the mind is empty. They transcend both understanding and not understanding. The absence of both understanding and not understanding is true understanding Seen with true vision, form isn't simply form, because form depends on mind. And mind isn't simply mind, because mind depends on form. Mind and form create and negate each other. That which exists exists in relation to that which doesn't exist. And that which doesn't exist doesn't exist in relation to that which exists. This is true vision. By means of such vision nothing is seen and nothing is not seen. Such vision reaches throughout the ten directions without seeing: because nothing is seen; because not seeing is seen; because seeing isn't seeing. What mortals see are delusions. True vision is detached from seeing. The mind and the world are opposites, and vision arises where they meet. When your mind doesn't stir inside, the world doesn't arise outside. When the world and the mind are both transparent, this is true vision. And such understanding is true understanding.

Enjoy!

Pat