Audio recorded at Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 89-minute teaching, Geshe Jampa Gyaltsen completes his commentary on the 37 Practices of the Bodhisattvas, focusing on the emptiness teachings and the perfections. He opens by reviewing the structure of the text—preliminaries, main body, and conclusion—then systematically covers verses 22–27, which address how all phenomena lack inherent existence (verses 22–24), and the practices of the first three perfections: generosity, ethics, and forbearance (verses 25–27). Each verse is unpacked through its traditional Tibetan subdivisions, with concrete examples like King Yeshé-Ö’s sacrifice and the rainbow-like appearance of beautiful objects. The talk concludes with an extended interactive Q&A session where Geshe Jampa invites students to articulate their own understanding of the small-scope, middle-scope, and great-scope paths, then teaches directly by questioning them on definitions, antidotes, and the distinctions between ordinary and virtuous motivations. Pitched at practitioners already familiar with Lamrim structure and ready for rigorous dialectical engagement.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 01-700101_1008.mp3
UUID: 27f0307e-b1ac-4831-b482-7f84ace6bb02
Teacher: Geshe Jampa Gyaltsen
Collection: Awakening Heart
Date: 1970-01-01
Recorded at: Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide
Words: ~3,301
We will now meditate for two minutes on generating the motivation to listen to these teachings on the path of the being of all three scopes. And everything depends ultimately on the motivation with which it is practiced as Je Tsongkhapa, the Lord of Dharma said, before the thought there is no result, with the thought there is a result, therefore train in generating the thought. In this context both contingent and ultimate goals depend on the motivation with which one engages in practice. At present, we have not attained the state of full enlightenment endowed with the four bodies, but content contingently, we should make prayers for this to happen, and we will therefore generate the motivation to listen to these teachings. Today is Sunday, and we are meeting together.
I think Geshe-la would like, therefore, to salute you. So Geshe-la will be completing the teachings on the 37 practices of the Bodhisattvas within two or three sessions at the most and to encapsulate or resume what has been presented so far, the 37 practices of the Bodhisattvas have been presented in the traditional Tibetan subdivision of preliminaries, main body of the teachings and conclusion. The preliminaries here are the preliminaries to the practices of the being of three scopes which enables a practitioner to train up to that level and the main body of the text is a practice of the being of all three, beings of all three scopes. All the conclusion is the dedication of the results of these practices. And what can be said to be the path of the being of small scope.
The path of the being of small scope is the path of a being who trains his mind in the antidote to the vanities of this life, which is the realization of death and impermanence. And by the means of the realization of death and impermanence, focuses exclusively on future lives relying upon an ethics which is an abandonment of the 10 non virtues. In turn, what is the practice of the being of the middling scope? The being of middling scope is a being who understands that this human rebirth which he or she has obtained at present is a result of virtuous karma accumulated through ethics in past lives. Nonetheless, such a rebirth is marked by the happinesses and sufferings which characterize it and the happiness of such a rebirth is transient, it is not permanent nor can it be.
Such a being therefore searches for a permanent state of happiness and understands that the foundation for suffering is the presence of the five or the four contaminated aggregates. Therefore, he tries to find a means to be liberated from these five or these four contaminated aggregates. The uncontrived spontaneous mind which is searching for that liberation is the mind of a being of the middling scope. Now regarding the practice of the being of the great scope, a being is said to be a being of the great scope. If bodhicitta is generated in dependence on the practices of or based on the reasons of the practices of the beings of the small and the middling scope.
A mind which aspires to place all sentient beings in the state of a fully enlightened Buddha endowed with the four bodies. However, the mere generation of bodhicitta is not sufficient. This bodhicitta must be generated in dependence on great compassion from within the sevenfold cause and effect process of generation of bodhicitta. And this great compassion is a mind which cannot bear the all pervasive suffering which afflicts all sentient beings and wishes to free them from this suffering. And one can say that bodhicitta has been generated within the mind of a being when in dependence on the great compassion which cannot bear the thought of the all pervasive suffering afflicting sentient beings, an uncontrived and spontaneous mind wishing to attain full enlightenment for their sake arises.
At this point, bodhicitta has been generated. As Geshe-la has previously explained, there are two means of generating bodhicitta through the sevenfold cause and effect process or through the interchange of self and others. The sevenfold cause and effect process is described quite succinctly in this text. This text focuses mainly on the interchange of self and others. And generally speaking, there is no difference in terms of coarseness or subtlety between the bodhicitta generated through the sevenfold interchange of self and others and the bodhicitta generated through the sevenfold cause and effect process, there is a difference in terms of their intensity and this is clearly explained by Tokme Zangpo when he says that the practice generated through exchanging self and others is extraordinarily powerful.
And generally speaking, there are two different ways of generating bodhicitta. The way of generating bodhicitta which characterizes being of sharper faculties and that which characterizes being of duller faculties. A being of sharper faculties initially generates the direct realization of emptiness and on this basis in turn gives rise to bodhicitta. As Shāntarakshita says in his Ornament for the Mādhyamika, the Madhyamakālaṃkāra, having initially generated the mind which perceives reality, then in turn generate bodhicitta. This refers to the practice of the being of sharper faculties.
A being of duller faculties, on the other hand, initially generates bodhicitta and on this basis in turn generates the direct realization of emptiness. As one of the verses of Shāntarakshita’s Madhyamakālaṃkāra says, having generated great compassion with that aspiring towards bodhicitta generate in turn the mind realizing the ultimate. This refers to the practice of the being of dull faculties. Here, in the context of the 37 Bodhisattva practices of Tokme Zangpo, Geshe-la believes that Tokme Zangpo presenting initially the practice of generating bodhicitta through the interchange of self and others and then on that basis presenting emptiness is presenting the practice of the being of duller faculties. And this is therefore how one should train in accordance with Tokme Zangpo’s teachings on these 37 Bodhisattva practices.
Geshe-la explained in the Wednesday teachings on Pabongka Rinpoche’s Liberation in the Palm of Your Hand, the three Kadampa lineages, the textual Kadampa lineage, the Kadampa lineage, and the Kadampa lineage of the oral instruction. And in the context of the 37 Bodhisattva practices, someone who were to interiorize the three subdivisions of the 37 Bodhisattva practices which Geshe-la shall explain the preliminaries, the main body of the text, the practice of the being of three scopes, in other words, and the conclusion, such a person would probably qualify as a Kadampa practitioner of the oral instruction lineage. And we will therefore move onwards with a commentary on the emptiness section of the 37 practices of the Bodhisattva starting on stanza 22, page 8 of the English translation you have. The manner of all appearances is of one’s own mind. The nature of mind from the beginning is free from the extremes of elaboration knowing this is a practice of Bodhisattvas not to make mental distinctions between object and subject.
So the first verse here, the manner of all appearances is of the nature of one’s own one’s own mind, refers to the fact that all phenomena from their own side appear as being inherently existent, they actually lack this mode of appearance. The second verse, the mind itself is beginninglessly free of the extremes of elaborations refers to the fact that in as much as the mind lacks inherent existence through being a mere nominal imputation on the previous and later instance of mind, the previous and later moments of mind, it lacks inherent existence. The following verse, through knowing this, it is a practice of bodhisattvas not to make mental distinctions between object and subject refers to the fact that here object refers to phenomena in general or subject refers to the mind apprehending phenomena. Bodhisattvas do not make an inherently existing distinction between these two. And the following stanza on page nine, stanza 23 refers to the abandonment of desire for objects or lust for objects through understanding their lack of inherent existence.
It is the practice of bodhisattvas to renounce attachment when meeting with pleasant objects for although they appear, it’s beautiful in Tibetan, not lovely, like a rainbow in summer, they are not really being seen. They are not really being seen as truly existing, you should add, that is missing in the in the English translation. So here, the first verse refers to the fact that when meeting beautiful objects, bodhisattvas are fully aware of the fact that these beautiful objects such as forms, sounds, smells, tastes, and bodily sensations appear to be truly existing. And yet, as is explained in the second verse, they are akin to a rainbow in the summer sky. They do not exist in the way they appear.
This is explained in the third verse in which it is said that even though they appear to be beautiful, nonetheless, when one looks at them, one sees that they lack truth. In other words, they lack true existence. And stanza 24 on page nine explains how to address the sufferings we experience. The various types of suffering are like the death of a son in a dream. There is weariness due to holding elusive appearances as real.
Therefore, when meeting with unfavorable conditions, it is a practice of Bodhisattvas to view them as illusory. So here, phenomena do not exist in the way they appear to exist. They appear to be inherently existing, to exist from their own side, yet they do not. When we apprehend phenomena as existing inherently, great hardship results from this and this is explained with the example of a mother dreaming of the death of her son. When a mother dreams of the death of her son in the dream taking the death as true, she experiences tremendous sorrow.
The response or the way to address the sorrow is formulated in the third verse which is whenever one experiences unfavorable conditions, in other words, hardship, to view these as mistaken or illusory. This is a practice of the Bodhisattvas. And at present, stanza 25 begins the explanation of the practices of the merit component of the path. So generally speaking, there are two broad subdivisions, the accumulation of wisdom and of merit. The accumulation of wisdom has been covered in the previous stanzas.
At present, the author presents the practices for the accumulation of merit, which are the five first perfections, generosity, ethics, forbearance, enthusiasm, and concentration. And this stanza presents the perfection of generosity or charity. The first verse reads, if it is necessary to give even one’s body when desiring enlightenment, then here it is said that to attain full enlightenment, one must offer one’s own body for the sake of others. The case, historical case which elucidates this is that of King Yeshe-Ö who donated his body for the teachings. This was reported to Atisha by who said to him, for your sake to bring you to Tibet and for the sake of the teachings, my uncle gave his life, gave his body, in other words.
The second verse reads, what need is there to mention outer objects? Here obviously, if one is ready to give one’s own life, then it is obvious everything else is covered as well. Therefore, the third verse, it is a practice of bodhisattvas to give gifts without the hope of present or future gains irrespective of what bodhisattvas give, their body or material objects, they do this without expecting anything in return. The following verse, verse 26 on page 10 explains the practice of the perfection of ethics, the second perfection. If when lacking ethics, one cannot achieve one’s own aim, wanting to achieve benefit for others is ridiculous.
Therefore, it is a practice of Bodhisattvas to protect ethics without craving for worldly affairs. In this verse, the first verse, in the stance of the first verse, if one lacking ethics one cannot achieve one’s own aim, refers to the fact that if one does not have ethics, one cannot achieve liberation. In other words, one cannot achieve the state of a Śrāvaka, a hearer or a Pratyekabuddha, a solitary realizer. Both Shravakas and Pratyekabuddha necessarily need ethics since to become either of these, one must attain the wisdom which realizes selflessness. This wisdom realizing selflessness is none other than insight.
To obtain insight, one needs śamatha or calm abiding. There is no śamatha without the practice of ethics. Therefore, without ethics, one cannot achieve one’s own goal. If one cannot achieve one’s own goal, in other words, if without ethics one cannot become a hearer or a solitary realizer and attain liberation, then it is simply ridiculous to say one would be able to benefit others. Therefore, it is a practice of bodhisattvas to protect morality without striving for the affairs of this life.
The affairs of this life or the affairs of life refer to striving for both this life and for future lives. And stanza 27 on page 10 refers to the cultivation of forbearance, the third perfection. To Bodhisattvas who desire the wealth of virtue, all agents of harm are like a precious treasure. Therefore, cultivating the patience that lacks hatred and animosity towards all is the practice of Bodhisattvas. Here, the first verse to bodhisattvas who desire the wealth of virtue, in the wealth of virtue refers to bodhisattvas who are striving for virtuous states such as liberation, nirvana, parinirvāṇa, and so forth.
All agents of harm are like a precious treasure. This refers to all harm coming from others such as being on the receiving end of verbal misconduct, of lies, of theft, being beaten and so forth. In every single case, the bodhisattva engages in a practice where he cultivates a patience which lacks hatred and animosity. In other words, a patience which is bereft of anger, of competitiveness, and of reactivity towards all. This is a practice of Bodhisattvas.
So at present, we will stop here for today to give us more time for questions and Geshe-la will welcome your questions and then in turn he apologizes in advance. He is going to ask you directly questions. And the way Geshe-la will do this is he will ask you questions and then ask you individually exactly what you think about it and you should respond in keeping with your inner feeling. So Geshe la’s first question for you is, as he explained the this teaching is about the practice of the being of small of all three scopes. Now regarding the practice of the being of small scope, how would you go about defining and generating it?
What is your feeling? Thirty minutes. So anyone can answer. Geshe is not going to point his finger at you. Raise your hands.
Yes please. Anyone else? Yes. Anyone else? Uh-huh.
Molly. Molly who is Geshe-la’s teacher. Yes. Chris? What is your name?
Your name is Simon. Your name is the gentleman to Simon’s right? David. That’s very good. If we can practice correctly the path of the being of small scope that is outstanding and Geshe-la sees improvement in your answers.
So if we try to understand therefore what is this practice of the being of small scope? It is and we have to make a difference between the path of the being of small scope and a practitioner who is on the path. A practitioner who is on the path of the being of small scope is a practitioner who is striving for better future rebirth and he does this through clearly understanding the object of abandonment which he must abandon. What must he abandon? He must abandon the vanities of this life.
In other words, bluntly preoccupation with this life, then the question is what is the antidote, what is the opponent force which enables him to abandon preoccupation with this life? Then Geshe-la would like to ask you, what is this antidote? Take your time, think carefully one or two minutes. So this is the Sera Je system of instruction where after a subject has been fully presented, the teacher interrogates the students and he points at them and says, what do you think, what do you think, what do you think and so forth. So if you reflect on your answer, you will see that an Arhat who is the pinnacle of the practitioner of the middling scope has actually abandoned the ignorance which apprehends persons as inherently existing and yet he has not begun to abandon self-cherishing.
So the abandonment of self-cherishing does not even occur on the path of the being of middling scope. Then if we have time we will open the stage to questions regarding the practices of the being of middling and great scope. At present Geshe-la will welcome your questions. Yes. So it is sufficient in those cases to practice generosity since the Bodhisattva practitioner is giving from his own side without any expectation of return or gratitude.
And then obviously in the context of someone who from their side is unable to return the favor, they are unable to do so because they are poor or they are in difficulty, then this is a very good ground for helping them. Easy question, Gesheela says. It is a difference between someone who practices and has experience and someone who doesn’t practice and has no experience. The teacher who gives the transmissions practices and they have experienced the results. We also have received the lineages and the transmissions, but we neither practice nor have experience.
Yes. Sorry? And you must, I mean, Geshe-la would even he wouldn’t even know how to count in this. There are so many great teachers. Vajra?
Geshe-la will take one other question. Aaron? Aaron, do you have a That’s very difficult, Geshe-la thinks. If one is truly a being of the small scope, then one’s goal is only to attain samsaric happiness in the next life. Then it is impossible for one to practice the path of the being of the middling or of the great scope, since one goal is only samsaric happiness.
On the other hand, a being of the great scope, who is the foremost trainee of the Lamrim, is a being who practices the teachings of all three categories of beings which are compatible with his path. So he or she practices the teachings of the being of small, of middling, and of great scope. So on the present occasion, the occasion of someone who is actually a person practicing the small scope, The opportunity for practicing the practices of the middling or the great scope does not arise. But such a person trains in such a way that eventually down the line in future lives, their mind becomes broader and they can practice this. So indeed there is a big difference between not killing someone out of fear of the law or the police and not killing someone for religious reasons.
If one does not kill someone out of fear of the law or the police, one does not accumulate any virtue. On the other hand, if one does not kill someone out of a fear of lower rebirth, one accumulates virtue. This is called virtue because such a deed acts as the cause for the attainment of a higher rebirth, which is the Buddhist definition of the beginning of virtue. This is, however, contaminated virtue. It is contaminated virtue because it is done out of partly self-cherishing.
Today went very well and Geshe-la was delighted with your questions. Some of you who are attending the teachings were not able to ask questions. He would like to ask you to put them in writing and we will answer them next time.