buddha nature...

[alan...]

Hi, Alan,
I think you need to keep at the very forefront of your mind something Tilt said a while ago:

How buddha-nature/tathagatagarbha is used in the Mahayana varies greatly over time, place and school.

I would add "and level of knowledge" to what Tilt said, too.
I think that at the lay (dare I say "folk"?) level in many traditionally-Buddhist countries, buddha-nature is understood in a way quite close to the Christian "soul", and Buddha and bodhisattvas (mainly in mahayana but Kuan Yin has quite a following in Thailand) are understood and worshipped in a way quite close to the Christian God and (Catholic) saints - as benevolent immortal beings who can grant in the real world the prayers of their petitioners.

As for school A being "right" and school B being "wrong" ... that's much too big a question for me but I think it's most likely that most schools are partly right.


Kim

Couldn't agree more! The beliefs are all over the place.

[Awakening]

A better translation might be that the mind is "illuminating", not luminous. The term "luminous" makes it sound like something which is light, rather than which sheds light upon, for most people. That said, it is that very illuminating property that makes possible Buddhahood, therein the "illuminating" mind is the same as buddha-nature.

[alan...]

A better translation might be that the mind is "illuminating", not luminous. The term "luminous" makes it sound like something which is light, rather than which sheds light upon, for most people. That said, it is that very illuminating property that makes possible Buddhahood, therein the "illuminating" mind is the same as buddha-nature.

interesting point. thank you.