[Buddha-l] Re: G-d, the D-vil and other imaginary friends

[William Magee]

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:39:53 -0500, Dharma Grandmother
<DharmaG at webtv.net> wrote:
> Stan Ziobro wrote :
> "...If there are, conceptually, sentient beings which lack Buddha
> nature, are they responsible for their misdeeds? Also, could such a
> being be ...."
> 
> With deep respect, my understanding is that in Mahayana Buddhism (which
> is only "yana" that teaches BN), "all" sentient beings have Buddha
> Nature so the question would seem to have no basis.  ??
> 
> Metta,
> Amrita Osborne
> 
> Blessings to all.  May peace and peace and peace be everywhere.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
> 

Are Buddha Nature doctrines solely Mahayana? Alex Wayman considered
the Lion's Roar of Queen Shrimala Sutra ( shriimaalaasimhanaadasuutra)
to be the oldest of the extant Buddha Nature group of sutras. Wayman
claimed it was a Mahaasaangika composition. See Alex and Hikedo
Wayman, The Lion's Roar of Queen Srimala (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1974), p.6.

Also, Conze claimed that some Mahasanghikas equated emptiness with the
tathagatagarbha. For them, 'all beings, both worldly and supramundane,
have the Void for their basis. The Void is the Buddha nature and the
great final nirvana. The Buddha nature must therefore necessarily
exist in all beings." See Conze, Buddhist Thought in India (Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press, 1967), p.198.

Somewhat weirdly, the Ge-luk system asserts that the Buddha Nature is
the emptiness of the mind of an ordinary being. Buddhas do not have
it!

Cheers,

Bill

-- 
Dr. Bill Magee
Chung-hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies
Jinshan, Taiwan