It depends on what you mean by 'unchanging'. Our true nature is
immovable, unborn and indestructible, but I wouldn't translate it
to be 'unchanging' because then people will mistake our true nature
to be an unchanging background amidst changing phenomena. This is
not the correct understanding and becomes the understanding of the
eternalist. But if the meaning is understood and one does not fall
into duality, then 'unchanging' is just another word you may use to
convey your message.
The term 'unchanging' may be valid as long as it is NOT understood
be mean 'unchanging in oppose to changing phenomena', but rather it
can be understood that 1) The luminosity and emptiness nature of
our Buddha Nature will never be lost. 2) Our true nature is unborn
and undying. 3) All is Mind-Only, nothing moves.
The true nature of all phenomena are also 'unborn and undying', and
are also expression of luminosity-emptiness inseparable. When this
is understood, our true nature cannot be said to be separated from
changing phenomena. Our true nature cannot be separated from
conditions. One of the important teachings of Zen Master Dogen is
that 'Buddha Nature is Impermanence'. If I can find a good article
to explain this, I will post it here.
As Thusness said, Pristine Awareness is the scenery, the sound, the
sensations all around. Nothing apart from the crystal clear
manifestation of appearances. Completely and fully real and gone.
According to the Buddha there is no seeing apart from the seen, no
seer exists. No hearing apart from the heard, no hearer exists. In
short, there is no observer apart from the observed.
There is a chapter in Shurangama Sutra that Buddha is trying to
tell Ananda not to take the mistaken notion of there being sound
'out there' or the notion of there having differing existences that
'arises and cease' out there to be our true nature. The notion of
'entities', 'sounds', etc, are concepts, and we must not mistaken
the concept of a sound to be Hearing itself. The moment a sentient
being projects what is heard and seen to be an objective reality,
and grasp on the 'sound' though its ultimate reality is ungraspable
and empty, he is going to see birth and death. (btw that is why
'don't-know' is important) In ultimate reality all phenomena has no
objective reality because Mind is the basis of all Samsara and
Nirvana.
In reality, our true nature is that all phenomena is Empty being
merely expression of our 'hearing nature' that is unborn and
unceasing, a.k.a our True Mind, that is luminous-emptiness
inseperable. And appearances do not oppose our true nature --
appearances are all our Pristine Awareness, thus they do not have
objective reality 'out there' -- they are dependent arising
Conditions, and empty of inherent existence.
Sound (and all phenomena) is ultimately not an object, there is no
objects out there that is 'changing' and that ultimately has 'birth
and death', there is no sound 'out there' can be grasped. It is
Mind-Only**! That is why the moment you think there is moving
objects 'out there', you have imputed an objective reality to it --
that there is really a 'form' or 'sound' out there that exists that
has birth and death, and you miss that it really is Mind-Only and
ultimately empty. And as Heart Sutra has so clearly stated that its
nature is empty, that there is ultimately there is "...no form, no feelings, no perceptions, no
formations, no consciousness; no eyes, no ears, no nose, no tongue,
no body, no mind; no color, no sound, no smell, no taste, no touch,
no object of mind; no realm of eyes...until no realm of
mind-consciousness; no ignorance and also no extinction of
it...".
All is just mere appearances of dependent arising thus its nature
is empty, and an expression of our Pristine Awareness. Our True
Mind is Luminous-Emptiness inseparable. According to Venerable
Buddhaghosa, No Watcher is needed, the process itself rolls and
knows. In Mahayana, "what is" is our true mind/buddha
nature/hearing nature/perceiving nature -- which means that the
heard, the seen, the touched, etc.. all is IT i.e Manifestation is
the Source.
As a Zen Master once said, "When I heard the temple bell ring,
suddenly there was no bell and no I, just the ringing."
BUT nothing has truly moved, ultimately -- every arising appearance
is spontaneous, 'discrete', complete in itself, Mind-Only. The
moment you see movement, you have already fallen into duality. If
all is Mind only, what moves?
The ringing is just appearance-emptiness inseparable, an expression
of our True Mind.
The 'ringing' is already our Buddha Nature. Therefore there is no
need to escape Maya in order to seek an eternal Source. What is
needed is only in seeing the true nature of reality. (see the quote
by Thusness below)
The problem is that when we shun the transience in order to seek an
eternal background, in this process we create separation. In
Buddhism our true nature cannot be separated from Conditions. And
all dependent arising is empty, lacking substance, being mere
dream-like appearances but a perfect expression of Dharmakaya***.
Therefore our true nature is luminosity-emptiness inseperable. All
is ultimately of the Unborn nature (see next post).
We should therefore not resort to seeking any background mirror nor
is there any maya to be escaped from -- but to realise the nondual
and emptiness nature of reality.
Thusness: With the willingness to let go of the I and
Mine, the emptiness nature is clearly understood. Practice is
neither going after the mirror nor escaping from the maya
reflection; it is to clearly 'see' the 'nature' of
reflection.
To see that there is really no mirror other than the ongoing
reflection due to our emptiness nature. Neither is there a mirror
to cling to as the background container nor a maya to escape from.
Beyond these two extreme approaches lies the middle path -- the
prajna wisdom of seeing that the maya is our Buddha
nature.
Thusness also wrote before, (http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/mistaken-reality-of-amness.html):
Since appearance is all there is
and appearance is really the source, what gives rise to the
diversities of appearances? Sweetness of sugar isnt the
blueness color of the sky. Same applies to AMness
Mr. Green all
are equally pure, no one state is purer than the other, only
condition differs. Conditions are factors that give appearances
their forms. In Buddhism, pristine awareness and conditions are
inseparable.
Although there is non-dual in Advaita and no-self in Buddhism,
Advaita rest in an Ultimate Background (making it dualistic),
whereas Buddhism eliminates the background completely and rest in
the emptiness nature of phenomena; arising and ceasing is where
pristine awareness is. In Buddhism, there is no eternality, only
timeless continuity (timeless as in vividness in present moment but
change and continue like a wave pattern). There is no changing
thing, only change.
Lama Zopa Rinpoche wrote
http://www.fpmt.org/faq/mod1_faq_p4.asp#3
As stated in the teachings,
buddha nature is defined as the emptiness of the fundamental clear
light mind. The clear light of death is still a relative level of
mind. But, because of the lack of conceptual thought at this level
- its clear, luminous nature - it is see as analogous to buddha
nature and used in meditation to approach complete union with
buddha nature.
The mirror is an imperfect, but useful, analogy for the mind. Like
a mirror mind 'reflects' what it comes in contact with. In that
sense it also changes from moment to moment. The basic clear and
knowing nature of the mind is sustained, just as the mirror's
clear, reflective nature does not change.
That which is clear and knowing (the definition of mind) is
eternal, as opposed to permanent. Eternal because it never ceases;
it continues in its momentary, ever-changing (impermanent) flow
into eternity. So, it is eternal and impermanent.
~ Lama Zopa Rinpoche
Regarding Lama Zopa Rinpoche's description, I wouldn't use the word
'eternal' either because of the misconceptions surrounding the term
'eternal'. But I think this description does not separate the
indestructible from 'manifestation'. But then all descriptions are
fine as long as there is correct understanding.
