I thought I would provide my story just to see if some conversation can develop :)

I have always been someone that loves the "depth" and "breadth" of life.

As a kid I was inquisitive, in university I studied Religious Studies and Philosophy (Philosophy was my major as I enjoyed a secular analysis of concepts and thought).

I ended up discovering a real passion for buddhism in my early 20's.

Like many my first experience was to Mahayana buddhism and the sources available online/books.

I quickly found myself interested in Theravada and I felt this was the best "presentation" of "pure" buddhism.

I fell in love with deep writers like Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu, Bhikkhu Anālayo, and some of the more light but still pretty concept heavy writings of Ajahn Brahm (Mindfulness Bliss and Beyond) and Ajahn​ Amaro (The Island: Teachings on Nibbana).

I also enjoyed some of the more dense meditation instructions from Pa Auk, Mahasi, Ayya Khema, Ledi Sayadaw.

I have to be honest I fell in love with anapanasati as presented in the pali canon suttas. Same with mindfulness practice as described in the Satipatthana Sutta.

I did a bit of Jhana styled meditation.

I found this really "was" buddhism.

As I grew in experience and teachings I started to become a lot more humble and started to love aspects of the other traditions.

I got more into Mahayana. I did more study.

I fell in love with Soto Zen.

I ended up doing some training in a monastery.

My curious and adventurous side got me into Nyingma and in particular Dzogchen and Mahamudra practices/perspectives.

I will say at this point in my life after training a bit in the tradition of Kōdō Sawaki - Kosho Uchiyama through Shōhaku Okumura and having to humble myself fairly massively realizing my cup was way too full I really think Dogen and the practice of Zazen just captures it.

I don't say that from a primacy position I just think it was a dharma gate that when I finally got it I was like "Wow!"

So I thought maybe we could all tell a bit about our stories and what practices and styles finally just hit us and we realized "Oh shit I finally get this thing and this is the path".

:) thank you and may you all be well

Edit: I also spent some time in a theravada monastery :)

Those here may be interested in this Discord server. It's non-sectarian and geared toward traditional forms of the faith. It's also friendly toward the tathagatagarbha teachings.

https://discord.gg/uETQrzT

Hopefully that link works.

https://ocbs.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/awynne2009atijbs.pdf

https://www.academia.edu/9209365/The_%C4%81tman_and_its_negation._A_conceptual_and_chronological_analysis_of_early_Buddhist_thought

The respective punch-lines:

The Second Sermon is therefore proof that an important doctrinal change had taken place in early Buddhist circles. The old teaching that no ātman/attā can be found in the five aggregates was at some point taken to indicate that a person lacks a ‘self’ per se. In other words, a ‘not-self’ teaching had developed into a ‘no self’ teaching. It would thus seem correct to believe that the Vajirā Sutta represents a relatively late stratum in the Pāli Suttapiṭaka. Its ‘no self’ doctrine cannot be taken back to the Buddha, but was of such influence that it came to define the Buddhist mainstream for more than two thousand years.

And:

Early Buddhist thinkers were less philosophically parsimonious, however. In contemplating the Not-Self teaching, they came to believe in the non-existence of the self – against the explicit warnings of the Buddha. For in the Alagaddūpama Sutta, perhaps the single most important canonical exploration of the Not-Self teaching, the Buddha describes how others responded to his teachings by weeping, beating their breasts and thinking ‘I will be annihilated!’. Such people concluded that the Buddha had taught the non-existence of the self, although the Buddha rejected this charge. It is ironic that within probably a few generations of his death, the Buddha’s followers had drawn exactly the same conclusion, even if they did so with a little more composure and meditative calm.

We are so often told, by the so-called Critical Buddhist school, the Australian annihilationist monks (Ajahn Sujato, Brahmali, etc.), and others, that the Buddha "originally" taught a strict no-self view and that teachings like the Tathagatagarbha are later accretions that have betrayed the Buddha's original teaching on the nature of self, Nirvana, and so on. How fascinating that the complete reverse may be true, if this research by Wynne is to be believed!

I read on some encyclopedias that there was a historical school that had the Mahaparinirvana Sutra as its main text and was called Niepanshi 涅槃師 or Nieh-p’an-tsung/ Niepan zong in chinese and Nehan-shu in japanese (est. in the 4-5th century). On the wiki page on Korean Buddhism its written that there was a school called Yeolban (涅槃宗). It seems that it faded away and got extinct at some point and absorbed into other traditions.

Now where can I read what their rituals were and which sutras they used in their liturgy? There has to be information (historically) about their beliefs, interpretations, their patriarchs, lineage and commentaries. Is there any scholarly work?

Alas, this sub looks a bit long in the tooth, but I'm quite excited about having discovered it! I've had the growing awareness that the doctrine of anatman, as it is popularly presented and even academically presented at times, seems to conflict with the nature of nirvana found even in the Pali canon, not just the Mahayana canon, wherein the doctrine of buddha-nature becomes explicit.

Online, I've also noticed that there always seems to be a certain cadre of what one might call no-self absolutists (usually of Chan, Zen, and Theravada schools) inhabiting Buddhist fora, who are ready to pounce and flip a table whenever they perceive even the slightest hint of anything that smacks of "essentialism" or "eternalism." It's disappointing that this has become such an accepted attitude in Buddhist circles, when I think it's pretty clear that it's neither supported scripturally nor, if I may be so bold, by common sense and basic philosophical reasoning. If nirvana is not sheer oblivion, nothingness, or annihilation, then the doctrine of anatman must only apply to the world of samsara, not nirvana.

This sub appears to house a rich cache of information on the buddha-nature and related Pure Land teachings (the latter being the path I am most attracted to), and so I'm grateful to the contributors here for creating it and sustaining it for as long as you did.

The atman is the Tathagatagarbha. All beings possess a Buddha Nature: this is what the atman is. This atman, from the start, is always covered by innumerable passions (klesha): this is why beings are unable to see it. — Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra (Etienne Lamotte, The Teaching of Vimalakirti, Eng. trans. by Sara Boin, London: The Pali Text Society, 1976, Introduction, p. lxxvii.)

23. According to A Treatise on Eliciting Faith in the Mahāyāna, true suchness has two meanings, empty and not empty. It is empty because it never responds to the thoughts and differentiations of one’s false mind, and has neither appearance nor no appearance, neither one appearance nor various appearances. It is not empty because one’s true mind is eternal and changeless, and encompasses pure dharmas (T32n1666, 0576a24–b7). The pure dharmas encompassed in one’s true mind correspond to the benefits of one’s inherent awareness addressed in this sūtra, because in chapter 8 the Buddha says that one’s inherent awareness has a mass of profound virtues.

Hello everyone one! I've been studying Buddhism for a year or so now and came across the Tathagatagarbha teachings a few months ago, and they've definitely aided me in my practice. I've studied teachings from this subreddit, the whatdobuddhistsbelieve wordpress, the essence of buddhism site, nirvana sutra.net, the great middle way wordpress, the jonang foundation,the buddhism-guide website and a few others. Do you guys have any others to recommend?

The ultimate end of Buddhism is perfect self-realization, enlightenment. For the attainment of this purpose two basic principles are to be recognized. Firstly, the individual self must be negated. Secondly, the universal self and the oneness of all life must be affirmed.

According to philosophic Buddhism, all antagonistic selves are caused by the illusion of ignorance, and the Buddha is immanent in all things, thereby establishing the oneness of all things. Self-realization is attained through the wisdom of self-effort. According to religious Buddhism, the individual self is limited and ignorant by nature as long as it remains as an individual existence. The oneness of all life is realized only through the union of the individual self with Amida Buddha through faith. Self is ever perfectible, but it cannot be perfectly realized in this world. Self is perfectly realized only in the Pure Land through the aid of Amida Buddha.

Shinran Shonin Chapter VI Revealing the Transformed Buddha's and Lands (59)

With regard to Tathagata, there are two kinds of nirvana: the created and the uncreated. Nirvana of the created is without permanence, bliss, self, or purity; uncreated nirvana is characterized by permanence, bliss, self and purity.

We have been asked by numerous people interested in these teachings to create a list of Buddhist sects and teachers that teach True Self Tathagatagarbha Buddhism, so that people may be able to practice with these sects and or teachers.

If anyone wishes to add more teachers to this list, feel free to create a thread on this sub-reddit with their teachings on the subject and we will add the link to our list.

• Jodo Shinshu

Shinran Shonin

Priest John Paraskevopoulos

Priest Taitetsu Unno

and

Priest Taitetsu Unno

Priest Mark Unno

Senior Dharma Teacher G. Lewis-Bastías

[Dharma Teacher Paul Roberts] (http://web.mit.edu/stclair/www/truevsfalseself.html)

[Priest Nobuo Haneda] (https://whatdobuddhistsbelieve.wordpress.com/2-the-two-selves-of-the-forders-and-the-true-selfessence/)

[Rev David Matsumoto] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZewpurM7D0)

• Chan

Master Hsuan Hua

Bodhidharma

• Zen

Harada Sekkei Roshi

• Shingon

Kobo Daishi

• Shinnyo-En

[Ven. Shinjo Ito] (https://www.reddit.com/r/ShinnyoEn/comments/4gz1zo/the_buddha_taught_the_3_marks_of_samsaric/)

and

Ven. Shinjo Ito

and

Ven. Shinjo Ito

and

Ven. Shinjo Ito

• Seon

Master Jinje

[Venerable Chung-Hwa Sunim, Patriarch of Tae-An Monastery in Goksung Kun, Chonnam Province] (https://www.reddit.com/r/nirvanaschool/comments/3f4lg4/the_4_virtues_of_nirvana_by_venerable_chunghwa/)

also

[Full length teaching] (http://www.koreanbuddhism.net/bbs/board.php?bo_table=0020&wr_id=16&page=9)

• Jonang

[Ven. Dolpopa] (https://whatdobuddhistsbelieve.wordpress.com/2-the-two-selves-of-the-forders-and-the-true-selfessence/)

• Kagyu

Lama Shenpen Hookham

• Theravada

[Achariya Maha Boowa, Sangharaja 1939, Phara Thepyanmongkol] (https://whatdobuddhistsbelieve.wordpress.com/9-maha-atman-quotes-from-the-pali-canon-traditions/)

Priest Mark Unno

Namu Amida Butsu is the expression of foolish being coming to be embraced, resolved, and dissolved in the limitless flow of Amida’s primal vow, which is the vow to realize the oneness of ego-self and Amida-self, the oneness of all beings in the ocean of compassion.

And

As one gradually deepens awareness of the true self, the gentle awareness of foolish being becomes second nature and foolish being merges with boundless compassion.

Source

Shin Buddhism Bits of rubble turned into gold The World Honored one pg 143

Many legends surround the birth of the historical Buddha, one of which is the miraculous event that took place immediately after he was born. Legend states that the infant Buddha took seven steps in each of the four directions and, pointing one finger to the sky and the other to the earth, he proclaimed "Above heaven and below heaven, I alone am the World Honored One." In some accounts this is followed by the statement: "And he made sure that all beings attain the same state of bliss." This event symbolizes the Buddhist ideal that affirms the potential of each person to attain Buddhahood, the supreme embodiment of wisdom and compassion. It has nothing to do with the conventional ego self but everything to do with the possibility hidden in all beings to attain the same dignity, self-worth, and self reliance as the historical Buddha. This universal affirmation is symbolized by the magnificent garland of flowers placed on the universe at the very moment of his supreme enlightenment, as expounded in the Avatamsaka Sutra, or the Flower Garland Sutra. But this event contains another significant message about the religious life. The "I" that Buddha refers to is not the subject in relation to an object; it is not an I that can be replaced by any other I. It is what some philosophers call Existenz, the subject that is absolutely unique and irreplaceable. This comes about by taking the seventh step, transcending the delusory, dichotomous "I" that is transmigrating in the six realms of hell, hunrgy ghosts, animals, fighting demons, human beings, and heavenly beings. The seventh step means the liberation and freedom from the cycle of endless rebirths. The title World Honored One is bestowed upon anyone who takes the seventh step. Many enlightened people before Shakyamuni Buddha attained such liberation, but he was the first to articulate it and make it available to everyone in our historical world system. Here we must pause and distinguish between two different senses of the first person pronoun "I": the dualistic sense of I used in ordinary discourse, and the nondualistic sense of I that is found in the Buddha's proclamation. The dualistic or conventional "I" believes itself to be self sufficient; it is unaware that it is a fictive self driven by self centered blind passions. The historical Buddha, influenced by many factors, both known and unknown, turned inward and sought liberation and freedom from such a deluded self. After six years of immense spiritual struggle, he attained supreme enlightenment. His first proclamation after his awakening identifies the radical self delusion at the core of our conventional life. Called the Song of Victory, the Buddha declares:

I ran through samsara, with its many births, searching for, but not finding, the house builder. Misery is birth again and again. House builder, you are seen! The house you shall not build again! Broken are your rafters, all, Your roof beam destroyed. Freedom from the Samkharas has the mind attained. To the end of cravings has it come.

The "house builder" is the ego self that builds a protective wall around itself. It is said to be motivated by samkharas, which are instinctual, subconscious forces. Liberation from the house builder makes possible a newly realized self that is interrelated and interconnected with all beings. The legacy of the historical Buddha down through the centuries has focused on the dismantling of this house builder, by means of diverse methods and practices. Among them, the Pure Land tradition teaches that this is done through the working of boundless compassion which nullifies and transforms the ego self into its opposite. This dualistic I may also challenge in the christian tradition. In the preface to the religious classic theologia germanica, bengt hagglund writes: There is one mighty hinderance for everybody to lead a good life in a right relation to god and to his neighbor, ie.e in a true love. The name of this fundamental evil is "I" and "mine" and "me". He concludes with the command, :My many words on the subject can be summed up by a few: Cut of our self, cleanly and utterly." In Buddhism to "cut off our self, cleanly and utterly" means the realization of a newly awakened I that is interrelated and interconnected with all beings. In this vast web of interdependence, the title the World Honored One is bestowed on anyone who has awakened to this true and real nondualistic self. It should be underscored that in the famous injunctions of the Buddha to his disciples, "be ye lamps(dipa) unto yourself," or Be ye islands(dvipa) unto your self," the references are to the Nondualistic Self that manifests dhamma, "things, including the self, as they are." This self, then, is not the isolated, dualistic "I" but the nondualistic "I" that "holds fast to the dhamma as a lamp." Here, the self and dhamma co-exist in the double exposure; hence it has nothing to do with the conventional ego-self.

The same affirmation of personhood is also expressed by Shinran, but he does so in a language of the Pure Land tradition. In the epilogue to the Tannisho he states: "When I ponder on the compassionate Vow of Amida, established through five kalpas of profound thought, I realize that it was for myself, Shinran, alone." The phrase "Shinran alone" is not excusionary, making a claim only for himself. Rather, it is an affirmation availiable to anyone who awakens to the boundless compassion that is Amida Buddha, for whom each form of life is, as it were, his only child. Thus, every Shin person who engages in deep hearing can replace "Shinran" with his or her own name to proclaim, "The compassionate Vow of Amida is for myself alone."

INTERNATIONAL BUDDHIST COLLEGE Arkady Fayngor Professor Dr. Fa Qing ME6102 Mahayna Buddhism 27 February 2013

The Concept of Self as Expressed in Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra

Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvā a Sūtra is one of the most famous text of Mahāyāna Buddhism devoted to the positive affirmation of the eternal Self (or True Self) as opposed to impermanent non- self. The Sūtra belongs to the group of Buddhist texts known as the ;Tathāgatagarbha Sūtras As with the majority of Mahāyāna sūtras, the actual date of its creation is unknown.

Hajime Nakamura believes that “it must have been compiled in the period 200-400 A.D.” (212). There are several existing translations of Mahāparinirvā a Sūtra: “the shortest and earliest extant translated version is the translation into Chinese by Faxian and Buddhabhadra in six juan (418CE); the next in terms of scriptural development is the Tibetan version (c790CE) by Jinamitra, Jñānagarbha and Devacandra; and the lengthiest version of all is what is known as the “Northern version” in 40 juan by Dharmaksema (422CE)” (Page 1). In Mahāyāna tradition the sūtra is believed to be the last teaching of the Buddha before entering into Parinirvāna Although Mahāparinirvā a Sūtra discusses various topics related to Mahāyāna Buddhist doctrine and practices, the particular attention of the present paper is given to the notion of True Self that is expressed in the Sūtra. The great specialty of Mahāparinirvā a Sūtra lies in the fact that it equates the Buddha-nature or tathāgatagarbha present in every living being with the Self: “formerly, Buddhism, advocating the theory of Non-ego, was against the theory of ātman, but here in this scripture the Buddha teaches the theory of Great Ātman” (Nakamura 213). The Buddha explains in Chapter 12 of Mahāparinirvā a Sūtra as follows: "O good man! Self means Tathagatagarbha" [Buddha-Womb, Buddha-Embryo, Buddha-Nature]. Every being has Buddha-Nature. This is the Self. Such Self has, from the very beginning, been under cover of innumerable defilements” (101). Equating tathāgatagarbha with ātman is not only found in Mahāparinirvā a Sūtra, but also in Avata saka Sūtra. Buddha gives the following characteristics to the notion of Self: “The Self (ātman) is reality (tattva), the Self is permanent (nitya), the Self is virtue (guna), the Self is eternal (śāśvatā), the Self is stable (dhruva), the Self is peace (siva)” Such a notion of eternal True Self is explained in opposition to the concept of non-self, which is our mistaken idea of ego: “in contrast to our individual ego, Buddhism points us towards the Great Self which is the presence of the Dharma-Body in all of us, also known as Buddha-nature” (Paraskevopoulos 23). Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra clearly defines what belongs to the realm of selflessness and what possesses the True Self: “Non-Self is Samsara, the Self is the Tathagata; impermanence is the sravakas and pratyekabuddhas, the Eternal is the Tathagata’s Dharmakaya; suffering is all tirthikas, Bliss is Nirvana; the impure is all compounded [samskrta] dharmas, the Pure is the true Dharma that the Buddha and Bodhisattvas have” (29). Of course, such an exposition is rather unusual for the disciples of the Buddha who were previously trained by the Tathāgata to practice the contemplation on non-self. They express their perplexity and question the Buddha further. The answer given by the Tathāgata is rather definitive: “Even though he has said that all phenomena [dharmas] are devoid of the Self, it is not that they are completely/truly devoid of the Self. What is this Self? Any phenomenon <br> [dharma] that is true [satya], real [tattva], eternal [nitya], sovereign/autonomous/self-governing

[aisvarya], and whose ground/foundation is unchanging [asraya-aviparinama], is termed ’the Self’ [atman]”(32). Such a reply seems to have no room for any other interpretation but the literal one. The Buddha cautions his disciples not to fall into a one-sided view of seeing only emptiness and suffering in everything, which he compares with taking stones for gems.  He further instructs to “study well the Way, how to act, wherever you go, and “meditate on the Self, the Eternal, Bliss, and the Pure” (30). To illustrate this idea, the Buddha tells the simile of the King and the Skillful Doctor in Chapter 3 called “On Grief”. In very short rendering, this simile talks about the skillfulness of the Doctor who first prohibited to cure all sicknesses with a milk medicine, because such was the practice of an unskilled doctor before him. However, later on when the King himself got ill, the Doctor prescribed him the milk medicine, since he saw that it can help the King. In the same way the Buddha first wanted to subdue the unskillful methods of the teachers before him by saying “there is no self, no man, no being, no life, no nurturing, no knowing, none that does, and none that receives” (MMPNS 32). A very significant sentence uttered by the Buddha right after that explains why he teaches the doctrine of non- self: “This is to adjust beings and because he is aware of the occasion.” Therefore, the idea of non-self is used by the Buddha as skillful means to adjust to the level of understanding of his disciples. It is explained in Chapter 12: “Engaging in the notion that there is no Self with regard to the mundane self, they do not understand the skilful words of implicational purport of the Tathāgata … They have the notion that there is no Self and are unable to know the True Self” (Page 3-4). In the Chapter 10 “On The Four Truths”, the Buddha further warns his disciples of the wrong view of applying the characteristics of impermanent Samsara to the eternal domain of Tathāgata: “Any person who says that the Three Treasures are non-eternal and holds this view of life, then this is a false way of practice and is not the noble truth of the Way” (98). Such a person “annuls what is right and won’t allow it to live. On account of this, that person does not know “Dharmata” [essence of Reality]. Not knowing this, he repeats birth and death and suffers greatly” (97). The Tibetan version of Mahāparinirvā a Sūtra contains even a greater caution in the same chapter: “By having cultivated non-Self with reference to the tathāgata-dhātu and having continually cultivated Emptiness, suffering will not be eradicated, but one will become like a moth in the flame of a lamp”. Based on the above, we can see that, as claimed by the Mahāyāna tradition, the final teaching of the Buddha before entering into Parinirvā a, has a very radical position on the Self. Although the ṇ Buddha did not deny the traditional characterization of all dharmas belonging to the world of Samsara as impermanent, suffering, selfless and impure, such characteristics must not be applied to the domain of Nirvāna According to Williams, “This sūtra is quite categoric in asserting that the error here lies in looking in the wrong direction – in other words that finally there is an equal error in seeing impermanence where there is permanence, suffering where there is happiness, not-Self where there is Self, and impurity where there is purity, in failing to see the positive element in Buddhahood which contrasts with the negative realm of unenlightenment” (109). Nakamura states that the origins of such a position “can be traced to ancient times... a precursor of the concept of Buddhahood can be noticed even in Abhidharma Mahāvibhā a Śāstra ṣ ” (213). The Tathāgatagarbha Sūtras in general talk about the Buddha-Nature as existing in all living beings, but in the case of earlier Sūtras, prior to Mahāparinirvā a Sūtra, it was used more in a sense of describing the inherent potential in all beings to ṇ become a Buddha.

Although the purport of the teaching on the Self in Mahāparinirvā a Sūtra is the subject of an ongoing debate among the scholars , it undoubtedly explains the concept of True Self. Williams writes that “the Mahāparinirvā a Sūtra teaches a really existing, permanent element ... in sentient beings. It is this element which enables sentient beings to become Buddhas”. In whichever way we can understand

the notion of True Self, it is absolutely clear that Mahāparinirvā a Sūtra represents the positive aspect of the reality of Nirvāna and Tathāgata which is frequently forgotten or overlooked in the field of
Buddhist studies and practice.

The One Life

Let's further explain the nature of the ultimate dimension first presented in the previous web page, by exploring the reality of the One Life. As already mentioned, the holographic dimension of panenbuddhism affirms that at the deepest foundation of reality, the lives of every being, barring none, including the non-sentient realities of the galaxies, stars and worlds are not separate and solitary entities, but rather, the undercurrent life force and awareness that we call our individual lives is really the same Life and the same awarenness that is manifested in all beings and things, animate and inanimate throughout the endless universe in the space and time continuum.

.

In other words, your true and real self is the One Life shared by all beings and the universe. This One Life is primordial in nature, that is to say, it is ancient, unborn and deathless. In Mahayana Buddhism, this true and real self is also referred to as the dharmakaya, which is symbolized in concrete terms as Amida Buddha. In addition, it is carries other synonymous names like Oneness, One Life, Great Compassion, Buddha-nature, rigpa or Immeasurable Life and Light. Please, read further for an explanation. The galaxies, worlds and you are the one Life. The galaxies, worlds and you are the one Life

Waves on the Ocean

To understand further the panenbuddhistic nature of Amida, the image of a boundless spiritual ocean of life and light is often used to explain its nature. Like being in a vast and endlessly living ocean of light and light, all things within this vibrant realm may be akin to the unstable waves on the surface of that boundless ocean of space and time. All of the waves are made of the same water or spiritual substance. Every wave is different and unique. Some are bigger than others and some are calmer than others, yet all are finite and limited in the amount of water they carry. More than this, every wave is destined to rise to a crescendo only then to fall back and disappear into the stillness of the deep waters.

Kanmo Imamura wrote, “Nothing endures in this world. Everything changes according to karma. But, like the ocean, underneath the restless existence of countless waves there is one boundless stillness that embraces and gives life to all the moving waves.”

In all of this flux, the stillness of the ocean remains the same, undifferentiated and in oneness. Nourished by the ocean-like Life, we are one with Amida Buddha (the spiritual ocean) and Amida Buddha is one with us (the waves), yet paradoxically, like the waves are to the ocean, we are different from one another.

This paradoxical and panentheistic reality of oneness/separateness is illustrated in the Shin religious experience through the Nembutsu-Namu-Amida-Butsu, in which the finite and relative self (namu) and the one Life (Amida Butsu) are experienced as one but at the same time each maintain their independence and remain just as they are. Waves are just waves and the ocean is just the ocean but the ocean totally embraces the waves from within and without.

How does this relate to our daily spiritual life? Simply, by just changing our attention or perspective from viewing ourselves as finite and limited waves on the ocean of Life, destined to suffer and eventually die, to experiencing ourselves as the infinite and deathless Ocean of Life and Light, then and only then, will we be able to see ourselves as we really are and be liberated from the spiritual ignorance that holds us in the bondage of separation and fear. When we learn and truly awaken to our true ocean-like nature, then and only then will we realize that we are Buddha and intuitively know that we are truly eternal and everlasting. This is the nature of enlightenment available to all regardless of class, race, gender, age, moral status, sexual orientation or even religious belief.

but the true power of the citta’s own nature is that it knows and does not die. This deathlessness is a quality that lies beyond disintegration. Being beyond disintegration, it also lies beyond the range of anicca, dukkha, and anattã and the universal laws of nature.

Our real problem, our one fundamental problem—which is also the citta’s fundamental problem—is that we lack the power needed to be our own true self. Instead, we have always taken counterfeit things to be the essence of who we really are, so that the citta’s behavior is never in harmony with its true nature.

Ajahn Maha Boowa p99 Arahattamagga Arahattaphala, the Path to Arahantshiphttp://www.forestdhamma.org/ebooks/english/pdf/Arahattamagga_-_Arahattaphala.pdf

Question: If the mind ceases to be, what will become of its continuity? If there is continuity of mind, how can you explain its final cessation? Answer: What we speak of as cessation; is the cessation of the marks of the deluded mind only and not the cessation of its essence. It is like the case of the wind which, following the surface of the water, leaves the marks of its movement. If the water should cease to be, then the marks of the wind would be nullified and the wind would have no support on which to display its movement. But since the water does not cease to be, the marks of the wind may continue. Because only the wind ceases, the marks of its movement cease accordingly. This is not the cessation of water. So it is with ignorance; on the ground of the essence of Mind there is movement. If the essence of Mind were to cease, then people would be nullified and they would have no support. But since the essence does not cease to be, the mind may continue. Because only stupidity ceases to be, the marks of the stupidity of the mind cease accordingly. It is not that the wisdom [i.e., the essence] of Mind ceases.

Source:

Awakening Faith in Mahayana Text

Master Hsuan Hua taught this in a Chan meditation session:

You should all sacrifice your small selves and perfect your great selves, like the deacon who stole food for everyone else, not just for himself. This is sacrificing the small self and perfecting the great.

• The small self is the physical body;

• The Buddha-nature is the great self, for it is the total substance with great function.

Living beings are a part of the Buddha-nature and so they must return to the root and go back to the source, return the parts to the whole in order to realize the great function. This is to sacrifice the small in order to perfect the great.

Source: http://www.cttbusa.org/listen/listen2_21.asp

https://np.reddit.com/r/religion/comments/399vfz/til_buddhism_was_spread_by_the_sword_across_sri/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Buddhism/comments/4dkmem/til_buddhism_was_spread_by_the_sword_across_sri/

You may have seen the cross post in r/Buddhism. I did my part in explaining that Buddhists don't support murder, but since I'm not familiar with the Nirvana sutra my answer was probably lacking in eloquence. How would you guys respond to this sort of accusation?

Thanks for everything, friends.

Harada Sekkei Roshi is the abbot of Hosshinji, Japan, and the author of The Essence of Zen. This transcript is taken from the Hosshinji Newsletter of Spring 1995 and reproduced with their kind permission.

https://buddhismnow.com/2013/05/21/the-awakened-self-harada-sekkei-roshi/

S: You also speak of establishing the ‘true self’.

Roshi: Usually when we use this expression ‘shujinko’ in Japanese, we mean the central character or the proprietor of such and such a business. But when we use this word in Buddhism, it has a slightly different meaning. In Zen we use it to mean ‘an awakened person’, ‘a person who has clarified himself’.

S: To awaken to the self, does that mean . . .

Roshi: To awaken from delusion.

S: In other words, a person who has become the Dharma.

Roshi: Someone who has become such an awakened person cannot conceive of himself in that way. There is the expression, ‘To be the master of each place; to be one with each condition,’ sometimes being the master, sometimes being a farmer in a field. In that way being able to do various kinds of work—a truly free person.

S: Earlier you spoke of eliminating the ego-self, and now—at least in the Japanese language—to speak of being the master of oneself seems like a contradiction.

Roshi: The self we perceive is really a small self, a truly small self. But if we ask, ‘Where is the self?’ We have to say that essentially it doesn’t exist. And yet everybody thinks as if it does. It’s as if within the body there is a centre which controls us. We think there is something within the body which continually exists. This kind of thinking is delusion. If we become aware that it isn’t like that and never has been, then our condition as-it-is is the true awakened self. The self becomes big, a bigness beyond comparison. At that point there is only that awakened self. This is what is meant in Zen by the ‘awakened self’. In Buddha’s words, ‘I alone am holy throughout heaven and earth.’ Rinzai Zenji said, ‘A true person without rank.’ There are different expressions for the ‘awakened self’. If we get stuck on the words ‘master of oneself’, then it’s likely we will think of being such and such a master. But the real meaning is somewhat different.

S: In this connection we tend to think in western terms when we think of the ego-self, for example, or the establishment of the self. Japanese are often thought in this regard to be weak, and that, to the contrary, it would be ideal to firmly establish the self. If we think of this sort of objective, would this be a mistake as far as the teaching of the Buddhadharma is concerned?

Roshi: As long as you perceive your own self, this is a very small self. For exam­ple, things are comprised of the four elements—earth, water, air and fire. These four things are also comprised of many different elements brought together by cause and effect. Within these elements there is no place where the ego can be perceived.

S: This is ‘now’.

Roshi: That’s right. This self which is perceived is small and, for that reason, limited. Essentially all things, including human beings, are without limit because they come together through cause and effect. Because the self is perceived, limits are created in limitlessness. That is what is born and dies. But the law of causation is not like that. If you awaken to the true self, then you realise a self which is truly without limit, a vast self. The foreign monks here all think that to throw away ‘I’ is a defeat; for them this is a complete defeat. So in the process of practice, they firmly hold onto thought centred on the self. From this self-centred viewpoint, they try to coordinate their teacher’s words with their own thoughts. They really think and think how they can make these two agree. This is no good, but they don’t ask about it. They can’t. So whether it’s their teacher’s words or what they’ve read somewhere, they wholeheartedly think how to make these one with their own ideas. They can’t throw this away.

S: They have a stronger attachment to the self than we . . .

Roshi: That’s right. If you can’t throw it away, then carry it. Carry the ego. If by carrying the self you feel very much burdened, then how about turning it into a truly big self. Temporarily it may seem like a defeat, but in the future it will become a very great thing. The small self will turn into a large, awakened self.

THEN SAID MAHAMATI to the Blessed One: it has been taught in the canonical books that the Buddhas are subject to neither birth nor destruction, and you have said that "the Unborn" is one of the names of the Tathagatas; does that mean that the Tathagata is a non-entity?

The Blessed One replied: The Tathagata is not a non-entity nor is he to be conceived as other things are as neither born nor disappearing, nor is he subject to causation, nor is he without significance; yet I refer to him as "The Un-born." There is yet another name for the Tathagata, "The Mind-appearing One" (Manomayakaya) which his Essence-body assumes at will in the transformations incident to his work of emancipation. This is beyond the understanding of common disciples and masters and even beyond the full comprehension of those Bodhisattvas who remain in the seventh stage. Yes, Mahamati, "The Un-born" is synonymous with Tathagata.

Then Mahamati said: If the Tathagatas are un-born, there does not seem to be anything to take hold of--no entity--or is there something that bears another name than entity? And what can that "something" be?

The Blessed One replied: Objects are frequently known by different names according to different aspects that they present,--the god Indra is sometimes known as Shakra, and sometimes as Purandara. These different names are sometimes used interchangeably and sometimes they are discriminated, but different objects are not to be imagined because of the different names, nor are they without individuation. The same can be said of myself as I appear in this world of patience before ignorant people and where I am known by uncounted trillions of names. They address me by different names not realising that they are all names of the one Tathagata. Some recognise me as Tathagata, some as The Self-existent One, some as Gautama the Ascetic, some as Buddha. Then there are others who recognise me as Brahma, as Vishnu, as Ishvara; some see me as Sun, as Moon; some as a reincarnation of the ancient sages; some as one of "the ten powers"; some as Rama, some as Indra, and some as Varuna. Still there are others who speak of me as The Un-born, as Emptiness, as "Suchness," as Truth, as Reality, as Ultimate Principle; still there are others who see me as Dharmakaya, as Nirvana, as the Eternal; some speak of me as sameness, as non-duality, as undying, as formless; some think of me as the doctrine of Buddha-causation, or of Emancipation, or of the Noble Path; and some think of me as Divine Mind and Noble Wisdom. Thus in this world and in other worlds am I known by these uncounted names, but they all see me as the moon is seen in water. Though they all honor, praise and esteem me, they do not fully understand the meaning and significance of the words they use; not having their own self-realisation of Truth they cling to the words of their canonical books, or to what has been told them, or to what they have imagined, and fail to see that the name they are using is only one of the many names of the Tathagata. In their studies they follow the mere words of the text vainly trying to gain the true meaning, instead of having confidence in the one "text" where self-confirming Truth is revealed, that is, having confidence in the self-realisation of Noble Wisdom.

THEN SAID MAHAMATI: Pray tell us, Blessed One about the self-nature of the Tathagatas?

The Blessed One replied: If the Tathagata is to be described by such expressions as made or un-made, effect or cause, we would have to describe him as neither made, nor un-made, nor effect, nor cause; but if we so described him we would be guilty of dualistic discrimination. If the Tathagata is something made, he would be impermanent; if he is impermanent anything made would be a Tathagata. If he is something un-made, then all effort to realise Tathagatahood would be useless. That which is neither an effect nor a cause, is neither a being nor a non-being, and that which is neither a being nor a non-being is outside the four propositions. The four propositions belong to worldly usage; that which is outside them is no more than a word, like a barren-woman's child; so are all the terms concerning the Tathagata to be understood.

When it is said that all things are egoless, it means that all things are devoid of self-hood. Each thing may have its own individuality--the being of a horse is not of cow nature--it is such as it is of its own nature and is thus discriminated by the ignorant, but, nevertheless, its own nature is of the nature of a dream or a vision. That is why the ignorant and the simple-minded, who are in the habit of discriminating appearances, fail to understand the significance of egolessness. It is not until discrimination is gotten rid of that the fact that all things are empty, un-born and without self-nature can be appreciated.

Mahamati, all these expressions as applied to the Tathagatas are without meaning, for that which is none of these is something removed from all measurement, and that which is removed from all measurement turns into a meaningless word; that which is a mere word is something un-born; that which is unborn is not subject to destruction; that which is not subject to destruction is like space and space is neither effect nor cause; that which is neither effect nor cause is something unconditioned; that which is unconditioned is beyond all reasoning; that which is beyond all reasoning,--that is the Tathagata. The self-nature of Tathagatahood is far removed from all predicates and measurements; the self-nature of Tathagatahood is Noble Wisdom.

-Lankavatara Sutra

The eternal-unthinkable of the Tathagatas is the “suchness" of Noble Wisdom realized within themselves. It is both eternal and beyond thought. It conforms to the idea of a cause and yet is beyond existence and non-existence. Because it is the exalted state of Noble-Wisdom, it has its own character. Because It is the cause of highest Reality, it is its own causation. Its eternality is not derived from reasoning based on external notions of being and non-being, nor of eternality nor non-eternality. Being classed under the same head as space, cessation, Nirvana, it is eternal. Because it has nothing to do with existence and non-existence, it is no creator; because it has nothing to do with creation, nor with being and non-being, but is only revealed in the exalted state of Noble Wisdom, it is truly eternal.

-Lankavatara

Kobo Daishi said the Body-Mind to be non-dual. Is this negating that it is ultimately consciousness? Would this be a sort of neutral monism rather than idealism?

Does anyone know if Cheng Kuan, who has the Shingon/Chan lineage in Michigan, affirms the teaching of the True Self?