I rarely use the term “true nature” since it suggests certain knowledge, although I also understand why they call it that in Buddhism.
My own apparent true nature
When I explore it for myself, I find I am capacity for the world as it appears to me. What I am is what my experience – of myself and the wider world – happen within and as.
One aspect of this is being capacity for the world as it appears to me. I can also say it’s no-thing full of everything. Or void allowing any experience. Or awakeness and all happening within and as awakeness. Or oneness since all is happening within and as what I am. Or love and all happening within and as love. (This is the love of the left hand removing a splinter of the right, not the type of love that is a feeling or dependent on a feeling.)
It can also be called Big Mind, Brahman, Spirit, the Divine, or any of the labels that points to roughly the same.
So I understand why they call it “true nature”. It’s difficult to imagine anything more fundamental than finding ourselves as capacity for all content of our experience, including awakeness, love, and whatever else it may be.
The true nature of existence
If my true nature is capacity, or capacity and awakeness, what about the true nature of the rest of existence?
The honest answer is that I don’t know.
Another answer is that, yes, it appears – to me – to be the true nature of all of existence. To me, the world happens within and as capacity and awakeness, so it naturally appears that way to me.
It makes logical sense that it’s the true nature of existence. After all, what’s more basic than capacity for anything and all? I am not so sure about the other qualities like awakeness. Is the universe and existence awake in itself? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Perhaps in part. I don’t know.
And yet another answer is that there are signs that suggests it’s the true nature of existence, for instance synchronicities, ESP, distance healing, and more. At the very least, this hints at the oneness of existence.
Exploring this for ourselves
As I often write about, there are ways to explore this for ourselves. Any words are pointers and questions, at most, and this only comes alive and has meaning as we discover it for ourselves.
Headless experiments is an excellent way to explore this, as is the Big Mind process and the Living Inquiries, and many other approaches out there.
I can say something about what appears to be my own true nature. I can say that existence itself appears to me to have the same true nature. It makes logical sense. There are some hints. And that’s about what I can say.
This is something we all can explore for ourselves. What do I find when I investigate for myself? Is it similar? Different? Would I talk about it differently?
–––– NOTES ––––
small and big interpretation of awakening, psychological and spiritual
can seem reasonable, but don’t know for certain, for me, most honest to hold both and shift between them while acknowledging I cannot know for certain
When I explore it for myself, I find I am capacity for the world as it appears to me. What I am is what my experience – of myself and the wider world – happen within and as. One aspect of this is being capacity for it all. Another is no-thing full of everything. Or void full of the world. Or awakeness. Or love. It can also be called Big Mind or any of the synonyms out there.