Forgive what follows. I only write it to amuse myself, or something. But please say something back.
An letter I received some weeks ago is still bugging me (I've been trying to avoid it).
My correspondent wrote "Is buddha nature REALLY everywhere?"
OF COURSE buddha nature is everywhere. Buddha nature is just being-conscious.
Experiences are arising all the time. If being-conscious is just a matter of experiencing a non-solid flow of arising, then that may be called "being aware of buddha nature", because there is and is not something like an empty field in which the arising is happening.
This "is and is not" has been much discussed in the contemplative traditions within Tibetan buddhism.
If being-conscious is bewildered, then arising experiences are construed as a solid I confronting a solid universe.
All this is totally well-known buddha-babble, and I should not bore you with it, dear Grandmother. I know you can suck your own eggs.
But the only buddha-nature is the empty field of being-conscious, which (OF COURSE) doesn't exist in any solid sense. Although in a non-solid, pointing kind of a way, the emptiness of being-conscious (as such) is ENTIRELY UNAFFECTED by whether the being-conscious is non-solid or bewildered, and entirely unaffected by any contents whatsoever.
We abide at all times and unavoidably in the buddha nature.
QED. as Spinoza might say.
16th March 2001
Top of this page
Poems and Essays index