Buddha Nature

What is Buddha nature or the "Tathāgatagarbha"? We'll begin by looking at the roots for these concepts in the early Buddhist texts. Then we'll turn to the origins of the mature concepts in later Mahāyāna texts. Finally we'll turn to some controversies and disagreements over what such concepts might really mean.
🧡 If you find this material useful, check out my Patreon page and get fun benefits like exclusive videos, audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: / dougsseculardharma
🧡 You can also make donations through: paypal.me/dougsdharma
📙 Check out my book, A Handbook of Early Buddhist Wisdom, with a Foreword by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook
☸️ Free mini-course at the Online Dharma Institute: onlinedharma.org.
🎙Check out my podcast with Jon Aaron, Diggin' the Dharma: digginthedharma.com/
✅ Related videos:
Is the Mind Luminous? - • Is the Mind Luminous?
Buddhas and Awakened Beings: What's the Difference? - • Buddhas and Awakened B...
The Preeminence of Dharma Among the Buddhist Refuges or Jewels - • The Preeminence of Dha...
✅ Books:
Paul Williams, Mahāyāna Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations (2nd Ed.) amzn.to/3TdOEKw
Tsugunari Kubo and Akira Yuyama (trans.), The Lotus Sutra (Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2007). amzn.to/4bQo1To
✅ Reference literature:
Anālayo, “Luminous Mind in Theravāda and Dharmaguptaka Discourses”. In JOCBS 2017 (13). www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hambu...
Michael Zimmerman, A Buddha Within: The Tathāgatagarbhasūtra, the Earliest Exposition of the Buddha-Nature Teaching in India. The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University Tokyo, 2002. web.archive.org/web/201311110...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddha-...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rangton...
✅ Suttas mentioned:
suttacentral.net/an1.51-60/en...
suttacentral.net/an1.41-50/en...
suttacentral.net/sn22.87/en/s...
suttacentral.net/dn27/en/sujato
Webpage: www.dougsdharma.com/
Facebook: / onlinedharmainstitute
Mastodon: mindly.social/@dougsdharma
Instagram: / dougsdharma
Threads: www.threads.net/@dougsdharma
Bluesky: bsky.app/profile/dougsdharma....
Thumbnail image courtesy of Dorothe at Darkmoon_Art on Pixabay.
❤️ Thanks to Patreon Patrons:
Anonymous (3)
John Oborne
DunJing
Jimmy Maa
Debbie Mattison
Steve H.
Ron Peat
Michael S. Kearns
Anne
Matthew Smith
Shantha Wengappuli
Karma_CAC
Jorge Seguel
Christopher Apostolof
GailJM
David Bell
T Pham
VCR
Upayadhi
Andi and Erik
ATGuerrero686
Michael Scherrer
khobe schofield
Alex Perdomo
Benji Forsyth
Blaze Way
Sonny Flink
Steve Marlor
Joy L Lee
Andrew Tom
Anthony Tucker
Karlee R
Ethan M
Billy in Singapore
Olivia Otter
Carl Lennartson
xiao mao
Jeff Harvey
Andrew Ingrouille
Kenneth Grandchamp
Rene Gariepy
Russell Needham
Smoggyrob
Mac Roja
Bernardo
Clémence Ortega Douville
Kwan Alex
Scott Johnston
Richard J Beninger
Nathanael O. Arnquist
SaturnianMandala
Trin P
Letesa Isler
Dorien Izel
Robert Paterson
Jake Tobiason
Louvenia Ortega
Steve S.
Richard Rappuhn
Sarah Kress
John Aaron
Paul Niklewski
Kong Ing Kai
Dave Gorman
rhys reed
Osanda Wijeratne
Scarlett Farrow
BJ - RetreaTours™
Michael Lefsky
Matthieu Tregnier
Roland Harris
karen
Dr Ru
Rob
John
00:00 Intro
00:59 Early Buddhism
09:05 Later developments: Lotus Sutra
10:54 Later development: Buddha nature
12:09 Buddha nature and early Mahāyāna
14:57 Controversy with Buddha nature
21:14 Upshot
Note: as an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Amazon links are affiliate links where I will earn a very small commission on purchases you make, at no additional cost to you. This goes a tiny way towards defraying the costs of making these videos. Thank you!

[@DougsDharma]

🧡 If you find benefit in my videos, consider supporting the channel by joining us on Patreon and get fun extras like exclusive videos, ad-free audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂 📙 You can find my book here: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook

[@smlanka4u]

The word Sunna/Sunya exists in early Pali texts.

[@DougsDharma]

For sure, I've done videos on it.

[@sonamtshering194]

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

[@DougsDharma]

Yes Ajahn Chah's views in some ways mirror ideas of Buddha Nature and the original, pure mind.

[@howdareyou5800]

You right Only Hinduism believes in Atman (the "higher" self) I'm Buddhism no self had inherent existence, it is a construction of elements that are capable of being base of your stream of conscience, your mind.

[@xiaomaozen]

Amazing, Doug! This is the best video about Buddha Nature (its origins and development) which I've ever watched so far! Thanks a lot! 🐱🙏 The view that Buddha Nature is something (some thing) resembles - imho - the Vedic idea that "Atman (individual 'soul') has to become one with Brahman (universal 'soul')" a lot. So much that I dare to say it contradicts the Buddhist No-Self so massively that it's not really Buddhist anymore... 🐱🙏

[@freetibet1000]

You’re right! It absolutely contradicts the essence of Buddha Dharma if it is interpreted as having properties like Atman or Brahma. For that reason the understanding of its Sunyata nature is so important! Buddha nature without the understanding of its emptiness of essence aspect effectively make it a Hindu or Vedic concept instead of a Buddhist understanding. The type of embodiment of the dharma that is understood as being synonymous with the Buddha Nature, often called Dharmakaya, doesn’t find its equivalence in Vedic or Hindu traditions for the simple reason that the Sunyata principle is not found in those traditions. Why? Because Sunyata undermines the position of both Atman and Brahma. This is the precise reason we cannot accept the proposition from some that Buddhas teachings should be seen as a branch of Hindu (or Vedic) tradition. The difference lies at the absolutely core of how these traditions define reality and therefor also the ultimate goal of ultimate achievement. Naturally, a discussion on these matters are very rapidly stepping over the line of what a mind can grasp conceptually and notions such as non-duality (that are often connected with these ultimate states) can not be logically or conceptually understood properly by anyone not yet in the position of enlightenment. But that of course have not stopped a whole plethora of make-believe non-dual (Vedic) teachers trying their wings as “awakened teachers” on KZbin anyways. Prescribing a non-dual worldview as the new remedy for anything. Quoting Einstein and other for good measure. But what they all lack is the insight into the Sunyata nature of reality which is the only pathway into real non-duality and thus also the only way beyond the mind-made causes of samsara.

[@FunnyMan-ez9vq]

@@freetibet1000thank you is enlightenment even possible? From my understanding it’s seem pretty difficult 😅 Can you please let me know if you follow the path of Buddha how should one start his „journey“ towards enlightenment maybe tips and topics one should focus on

[@DougsDharma]

Yes there are a lot of similarities, but it depends on the interpretation.

[@freetibet1000]

@@FunnyMan-ez9vq Thank you for your comment and question. I can only reply to you in the most general terms since I’m a person with no realization myself. For us to contemplate the idea of embarking on a journey towards a destination we have never visited before we firstly need to know something about the goal itself and if the vehicle we use will be able to take us there. Your question was composed in such a way that I understand that you have already understood those principles. That’s a very good start indeed! The life story of the Buddha, also the time before he reached enlightenment, is very much a story that can be translated into our own present situation. The fact that he was born a prince (Siddhartha) should not miss-lead us into the belief that his fate was utterly different from ours. The same principles apply to all of us, no matter who we are in this life. We still need to confront the basic components of life wherever we find ourselves. If anything, being born a prince (immensely rich and with worldly powers) can become an enormous obstacle for spiritual awakening since so many obligations are usually attached to those riches we inherit. No matter who we are we need to assess our present situation and detect those factors in our own life that are holding us back from the pursuit of truth and enlightenment. This is not a one-time event but rather an ongoing investigation and an integral part of our practice throughout. Most importantly is to find the reason and motivation to why we want to embark upon such a journey in the first place. We may be very inspired by the Buddha and what he accomplished but unless we find the determination within ourselves to the real reasons why we would want to follow in his footsteps, we will find it very hard to do much progress I’m afraid. For most of us our present life, although not perfect, appears to plod along quite nicely without the interference of some highflying spiritual principles, right? Well, this is where the teachings of the Four Noble Truths come in. From his own experiences the Buddha knew what the most essential obstacles are for all of us and for that reason he presented the teachings on the Four Noble Truths as the foundational teachings for us to contemplate. Without a thorough understanding and a subsequent response to these understandings our path going forward would be unfounded and fraught with unnecessary doubts and hesitations along with no real sense of urgency. So, long story short, my recommendation to you is to study the life story of the Buddha along with the contemplation on the Four Noble Truths. Additionally, the contemplation on the four general aspects of our present situation: * The extremely rare and precious occasion of having attained a human rebirth. * The unavoidable nature of impermanence of all life and phenomena. * The principles of karma and all its implications in our life and on our path. * The profoundly unsatisfactory nature of samsara and its sufferings. These teachings are easily obtained ether in a bookstore or on-line. I wish you all the best and good luck in this life, and beyond.

[@FunnyMan-ez9vq]

@@freetibet1000 thank you for your quick response and detailed answer Iam already familiar in some ways with the teachings of the Buddha If I got you correctly, there are certain aspects of life which can hinder each individual on its path to enlightenment the key is to recognize those hindrances and not be influenced by them since there is no individuality in its first place I just wonder if this is easily attained, if I got it right the 4th of the 4 noble truth is the 8 fold path and I guess to practice it correctly one must also devote himself to these teachings, so for a normal person it seems not possible while living a normal life Maybe only for monks…. Something else I wanted to add I saw a video from a guy he said when the Buddha was asked how people should call his teachings he responded with brahmayana the path to the absolute again the connection with Hindu concept of atman would be undeniable, another term that brings a little bit confusion is citta…. I wish the same best luck in this life and beyond

[@stevebelzer4758]

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

[@badbuda]

This I fell into cessation several times, and one of them it saw a disc of white light resting over an ocean of black water, it feels like its the root of mind resting on the colective unconcious. Thanks for so much great content

[@LordRoku-]

Hello Doug, Thank you for your videos. I’m currently doing my master’s in theology, and my studies have made me more curious to learn about other religions and philosophies. I’m delighted to see that there are similarities both in the scholarship and in the philosophical/theological ideas.

[@DougsDharma]

Wonderful!

[@seachd2268]

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

[@DougsDharma]

Wow, thanks!

[@Anthony_February]

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

[@smlanka4u]

Mahayana texts developed with the influence of Sanskrit and Hindi culture after the end of Nanda dynasty in Magadha. Early Buddhists used Prakrit languages until Hindi/Urdu language took power.

[@Karmaghna]

A clear commentary on the Buddha Nature concept and it's development. Well done!

[@thomasbeaver5671]

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

[@kraz007]

Perfect timing ❤

[@k.k.2749]

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!

[@DougsDharma]

You're very welcome!

[@howdareyou5800]

Bro with all due respect Tibetan Buddhism doesn't speak of any lasting self It must be a mistranslation

[@k.k.2749]

@@howdareyou5800 I'm not talking about tibetan buddhism in generel. There are certain schools of tibetan buddhism that holds this view of shentong such as mentioned in the video. Check out the part in the video where shentong it mentioned. Shentong (empty of other) holds that while all relative phenomena are empty of inherent existence, ultimate reality is not empty of its own inherent existence. In other words, ultimate reality is not empty or non-self, but permenant and everlasting. There are certain tibetan schools that holds this untraditional view. Look it up.

[@howdareyou5800]

@@k.k.2749 not nygma, nor any sarma linaje Maybe from a western tibetan Buddhist school you heard it from

[@howdareyou5800]

No brother in Buddha, I just rewatched the video and it's not that Mahayana or tibetan (vajrayana) states that there is an inherent, separated or intrinsic thing or being that does not change. What he talks about is 1. Early Buddhism approach is that the mind is not "enlightened by nature" but one can meditate to don't be reborn 2. Mahayana approach is that the mind is obscured but it's quality is cognizant, only have to be self aware 3. In no point in the video not tibetan Buddhism states we have a permanent self, as said in the video Nagarjuna expanded the notion from oneself is sunyata to all Dharmas (phenomenons) 4. I'm the video Doug states that the Buddha was later by Mahayana seen as "a god" and his kaya lives extremely long time but it does decay and change. Maybe you and I are talking about a different thing, as I started saying maybe a misunderstanding on words, concepts and meanings is the issue here, but no tibetan linage states that there is an intrinsic, non separated self.

[@valeriog8780]

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.

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks, glad to hear! I really enjoy history of ideas as well.

[@radoskan]

Great, Doug. Keep'em coming and thanks! To me, personally, that's too much thinking altogether. Too much attachment to doctrines.

[@nordmende73]

Thank you !

[@DougsDharma]

You're welcome!

[@warsmith100]

I always appreciate your content my friend. From the usual French monk in Thailand. Keep it up

[@DougsDharma]

Much appreciated!

[@davidmendoza1300]

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.

[@DougsDharma]

Yes, and note that the non-conceptual or non-dual mind is only one interpretation of non-self.

[@Hermit_mouse]

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

[@MassiveLib]

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

[@DougsDharma]

Well I think the concept originated in India, perhaps influenced by ideas from Brahminism.

[@MassiveLib]

@@DougsDharma it's pretty much akin to the idea of Christian soul.

[@animefurry3508]

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.

[@AscendingGuru]

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.

[@ultimanecat3091]

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'.

[@oldstudent2587]

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.

[@DougsDharma]

In the early texts such ideas are mentioned only in passing, they are not developed. And yes, the first "go to" texts in the Mahayana are the Prajnaparamitas; however the Lotus Sutra is key in integrating those texts with the early dharma.

[@jhhjyjkkkjgfjjk]

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.

[@pataroose]

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.

[@DougsDharma]

Oh no, I certainly wouldn’t want to claim Buddha nature was nonsensical.

[@ndril]

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.

[@DougsDharma]

It's a good question but if you read the texts you will see the differences. They are differences in degree rather than kind; one can find both types of text in each, though in Pāli the Buddha's humanity is central and emphasized although he is understood to be superhuman in several of his abilities, particularly his wisdom. "Superhuman" in the early texts also applies to achievable, trainable states such as the jhānas, so the concept itself is a bit slippery.

[@luizr.5599]

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

[@toericabaker]

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

[@toericabaker]

Thich Nat Hahn was taken care of by a manor house for the eliete not a monastery

[@aaronsmith1474]

oh no a religion being hypocritical /s 🤣

[@toericabaker]

@@aaronsmith1474 ....why are you acting like i am surprised? my request is to have a video about it. Pedant.

[@saralamuni]

To find a buddha, you have to see your nature. Whoever sees his nature is a buddha.

[@saralamuni]

Through endless kalpas without beginning, whatever you do, wherever you are, that's your real mind, that's your real buddha. 'This mind is the buddha' says the same thing. Beyond this mind you'll never find another buddha. To search for enlightenment or nirvana beyond this mind is impossible. The reality of your own self-nature, the absence of cause and effect, is what's meant by mind. This mind has no form or characteristics, no cause or effect, no tendons or bones. It's like space. You can't hold it. It's not the mind of materialists or nihilists. But this mind isn't somewhere outside the material body of four elements. Without this mind we can't move. The body has no awareness. Like a plant or stone, the body has no nature. So how does it move? It's the mind that moves. Your mind is nirvana. You might think you can find a buddha or enlightenment somewhere beyond the mind, but such a place doesn't exist. The buddha is your real body, your original mind.

[@normalizedaudio2481]

Trump has Buddha Nature. How you like that?

[@jhhjyjkkkjgfjjk]

How about Chogyam Trumpa and Sogyal Rinpoche? Were they living Buddhas during the time they were alive? Does their Luminous Mind matched the Luminous Mind of Siddhartha?

[@aaronsmith1474]

he's like the opposite of a buddha

[@khayon4364]

Indeed he does! That being said; he has many reincarnations to go before he attains anything......

[@andrewtom8407]

The Buddha had mentioned that no human languages can express what he knows. So often we have to “guess” what exactly He means when He conducted something really profound. In terms of “luminous mind” and “Buddha Nature”, did the Buddha mean “a hidden self” or something else? By logical inference, the “concept of individualism” leads to the “concept of self”. However, individualism and self are rather different from each other, but we can view that the concept of self is a result of attachment to the concept of individualism. When the Buddha brought up the “concept of non-self”, He did not mean there is no self. He simply stated that “self” is neither real nor unreal because the “self” in the future will be very different from the “self” today. Attachment to the notion of “self” is our illusion arisen from the desire of a permanent distinct identity. However, there is surely an “individual” with which the changes constantly take place, and we habitually label that “individual” as “self”. On this note, we may adopt the concept of individualism without the context of self. May be one day we can completely free ourselves from the notion of “self” and be able to see what the Buddha really tries to deliver through His teachings