Audio recorded at Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 47-minute session, Kyabje Rinpoche explores a central paradox: if sentient beings lack inherent existence—like illusions—why does harming them create karma? He works through this using a vivid analogy of a magician charming a stone to produce illusory horses and oxen. Even though these illusions have no actual life, intention to harm them accumulates negativity through effort; yet because there is no genuine being, the karmic weight is slight. With real sentient beings, both the effort to harm and the presence of actual life create serious karma. The analogy extends further: sentient beings appear independent but lack inherent existence, yet karma operates fully at the functional level. A Q&A closes with questions on emptiness beyond intellect and the reliability of dreams. For practitioners with foundational Buddhist philosophical background.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 1994-03-29 – 3B – 9th Chapter – KR.mp3
UUID: 5c226f77-b06a-457d-9bf3-3e069bbf0f2e
Teacher: Kyabje Rinpoche
Collection: Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra
Date: 1994-03-29
Recorded at: Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide
Words: ~2,917
Now in response, the Prāsaṇgika says, in the case of illusion produced in magic session, when there is either horse or an ox or any apparent being produced as a manifestation. Well, in there, there is nothing wrong in striking or hitting or beating and so forth because there is no life. There is no life in the illusory horse. There is no life in the illusory ox. But it would still be valid that how a bad karma is accumulated or good karma is accumulated, meaning negativity is accumulated that point still would be valid.
For example although in the case of magic in manifestation if say during a magic session, a horse or ox is produced by the magician out of spell charm. Now if a person who inflict harm on even to illusory being, if there is an intention to hurt or kill, and through that intention, if the person hits or strikes it with weapons and so forth to the illusory being. There is negativity of effort because anyway, I won’t go into that. There is negativity of effort. But because is no there is not a being which has life, so there is no negativity of the actual basis.
Because as you would know in the to interpret in the discussions in karma, there are ways how negativity is accumulated on the basis of intensity of intention basis, the actual effort, and the completion at the end. So through four possible ways and negativity either together or through any of the four. So in that case, although there is no actual life in the illusory manifestation, but due to intention there is negativity through our effort of the actual exertion of effort of killing but there is no negativity on the basis of basis Whereas in the case of sentient beings, if one with intention to hurt or inflict harm does something either through weapon or through any means, then there is not only the negativity or bad karma being accumulated through exertion of effort to hurt, but also there is negativity or bad karma being accumulated through on the basis or through the actual basis because in the case of sentient being it is a case of a living being which has a life. So therefore the two are different and it is definitely serious and negativity the creating of bad karma or negativity is valid in the case of sentient being.
And the counter response by the highest tenets continue continues saying, the very analogy of sentient beings being likened to illusion is from only one perspective, and it should not be compared by all terms and all perspective because analogy is only on the basis of the comparison of what appears is not what it is. For example, in the case of illusion in magic session, there is a the manifestation appears to the spectators, but are the manifestation actually there to be felt and functioning validly? It’s not. Therefore, in the case of illusion, it just appears. But as it appears, it is not like that in its actual state.
Similarly, sentient beings may appear inherently existing, but in actual ultimate state of the way they exist, they are not inherently existing. Only to that extent the comparison must be seen, not in all cases. In the case of sentient beings, there is also that sentient beings have life. And because they have life, if one helps them, there would be merits or virtue being accumulated. If one hurts or harm them, there would be negativities accumulated, bad karma accumulated.
Therefore, it is different here in the case of the sentient beings. And the explanation by the Prāsaṇgika continues saying, whereas in the case of the illusory horse and illusory ox produced through substance charmed with formula or spell, there is only the appearance part of the illusory horse and ox. The way how it works is the magician charms through spell or formula the substance, either it is a small stone or a twig of a tree. And then that spell is absorbed or absorbed onto the substance. And then the spell, by medium of the substance, strikes at the spectator’s eyes, through which there is appearance of these illusory horse and ox and whatever the spectacle, the magician, and the power of the formula is supposed to produce.
But yet, in that case, the formula, the spell does not have the power to produce a mind and life in the spectacle produced, in the manifestation produced. So the spell does not have the power to produce mind and life. And in that way, the two cases are different. Now here, this whole point brings to the light light the point that when something is taken as analogy, the comparison is only on the basis of certain point. And it is not to be understood as the the thing two, being compared the example and the meaning by which compare is to be likened the two are to be likened through every angle and perspective that is not so if If that is to be done, then it is extremely difficult to find an example that suits the meaning in all ways and in all fashions.
From that point it is then necessary that when an example is given it is on the basis of certain point to be illustrated that the example is taken and the two do not relate to each other in all ways. And now here in the case of the illusion produced as horse, ox, or any other spectacles, say, elephant, we can say basically it is an example of what appears is not actually formed there. And now going deeper into the example, now let’s say when a magic session happens, so we can look at it as a classical time where this type of magic did happen, that magician would produce such spectacles through certain charms they have learned in their line of knowledge. So in that case, when a magic session happens, we can see three types of spectators happen. Or we can put it this way, when a magic session happens, we can say this onlookers can be grouped into three types.
First is the magician who himself or herself has produced produced the illusion in the session. And the second type of onlookers are those who were present right from the beginning of the session of magic. And then third would be those who have come late. Let’s say if the session started 01:00, then the third type of onlookers would be those who arrive 02:00. Therefore, they missed the actual session.
In this way, there are these three types. Now, going back to the first, the magician. Now, magician itself has produced the spectacle, the illusion. Now, to the magician, yes, the spectacle, the illusion does appear, whether it is a horse or ox or an elephant or whatever other spectacle. Yet, magician does not have the clinging, and the the word actual actual used is recognition, which is to be meant as the deliberate thinking that that it is there is no such recognition recognition, in this case, in the sense of deliberate thinking.
Yet the magician does not have the recognition that it is truly a horse or an ox or an elephant. So in this way, we can have the magician’s perspective. Although the spectacle, the illusion appears, there is no clinging. There’s no deliberate outlook thinking that they exist. Now with the actual spectators, they have two, meaning they have both both kinds, to the actual spectators, the horse, ox do appear.
And as well, the spectators cling onto the notion notion that that there there actually actually is is a a horse horse or or an ox. So there are those two present with the spectators, the appearance as well, the vision, the appearance, and the clinging board. Now if the horse and the ox do exist truly from their side, then they should appear to those onlookers who came 02:00 an hour late in the magic session. Now, to those onlookers, the horse and the ox do not appear. Why they do not appear is because the power of the spell has diminished already, and the horse and the ox does not appear anymore.
So that would be the case. Illusion produced by the magician do not exist truly, but yet, the spectator side, it is possible based on the illusion produced that attachment, lust, hatred, so forth can be generated. For example, if the magician produces a real beautiful attractive person, if the magician produces as this illusion, then from the part of spectators, it is possible to feel lustful towards the illusion. And in this way, it is possible that based on the illusion produced, that spectators can have increased or generate have lust, anger, In the case of sentient beings, although they do not although they appear yet, they do not inherently exist. That that is the case.
And they they do not truly exist. Yet, we can say it is on the functioning level, it is possible that to such a sentient being, one can accumulate both negativity and merits. For example, if one meditates on loving kindness by focusing on such sentient being, then merits can be produced. One would accumulate virtue, merits, and so forth. Similarly, if one one harbor enmity and be hateful towards them, then again negativity can be accumulated.
One would create bad karma and so forth. And in this way, although by appearing and not yet truly existing, it is still feasible, it is still valid that accumulation of merits and accumulation of negativity is possible. In the same way, reflection of face in the mirror and television screen TV, which we look at, there, the images are there, although they do not truly exist. So the host of similar examples can be looked in the same way, although they appear. They do not truly exist.
Now still, the basic point that on functioning level the things are feasible must be what’s called must be maintained because by looking at the reflection in the mirror it helps to remove black spot and as well to paint white or pink or whatever makeup one wants to do. And it helps to beautify oneself. So in this way, by looking looking at at the the mirror mirror and seeing the reflection, actually, although apparent, does not exist truly, can still be helpful. So going back to the point of our practice and daily spiritual life, it is still feasible that by harboring enmity and hatred, one would create bad karma, accumulate negativity, and by helping and meditating on love loving kindness and so forth. One would improve spiritually by accumulating merits.
In the same way, television with TV, there are images being appearing on the screen. And when people look at it, although the images appearing are not truly there, people can still have lust, passion, and so forth, when the images are attractive. And what’s the word images are attractive and spunky? I was going to use something else, but I can’t remember. And and if the images depict something one doesn’t like, there will be hatred, anger, and so forth.
So we can take television TV as a example of non inherent existence of things like illusion. So we’ll stop here for the evening. And if you have any questions, it it would be good. Question and answers arrive at an intellectual and logical proof of the a mere label of what is the direct experience and is itself beyond all logical labels. So you can’t actually prove emptiness anyway.
Mhmm. Because it’s beyond I mean, when you prove the that label emptiness, which you can’t prove the thing itself is because it’s far and beyond. So why is it necessary Now these are the arguments, but the actual reasonings to prove emptiness still has to come afterwards. So at the moment, it’s the argument part. the latter part was if one thinks the emptiness cannot be proven through reasoning because it is to be experienced directly by mind, well, might then the actual reasoning will come much more afterward.
Whether the responses are convincing or not, it would depend whether the responses are good enough to stop the argument because that is the measure of convinceability. If the response can refute the argument, then it is very convincing. You can have an example if overflow water is flooding down, if we can stop the over flooding, then it is a very convincing method. It is a workable method. The similar way here, as long as the Prāsaṇgika, the highest middle way, counter response helps to refute the misconceptions of lower ones, then it is convincing in its own standard.
Sweet, of course, is no doubt to be tasted directly by tongue. But then sweet has to be made in the first place. And in the making of the sweet, there’s all factors and conditions, ingredients, so forth necessary. Similarly, no doubt emptiness is subject directly to realization of direct awareness. In that way, it is true.
It can be seen as beyond intellect, beyond concept, conceptual understanding. But to come to that point of direct realization, one needs so many factors and conditions such as depending on lama’s instructions and the accumulation of merits and purification of negativities and applying of sharp reasonings, multitudes of sharp reasonings. So one has to prepare, and then we’ll come there. And there’s still more there. And and you don’t come to re the realization don’t come to you just by you staying there, opening mouth.
Good, Charlie. What is Yeah. Sorry. Very good. That’s a good question.
Oh, dear. Good to talk. Yep. Now to start with, dreams and images in dreams can can first be looked at as having three types. Dreams, which happen on the first part of the night, which is immediate after going to sleep, and the second part, is midnight dreams, and third, about dawn time dreams.
The first part of the night dreams mostly are dreams of which we had more habit during daytime, something which we have been very intensely associated during the daytime. And as an imprint, as a habit pattern, they seem to have effect for our dreams. So they are what we are more used to, more associated during daytime. The midnight and thereabouts dreams are due to firstly, they are meaning mostly due to the disturbances through nonhuman forces, for example, that’s the time. Mostly the nonhuman invisible, ordinary nonhuman beings are going about with their existence, they are more active.
And due to that, the dreams that happen are more related with the non humans activity at that time. Therefore, in terms of prediction and prophecy, these two types of dreams are considered not reliable as they are influenced by current circumstances and environment of the sleep state. And it has been explained. The first two parts of the night’s dream are mostly unreliable. Now we have the last part of the night’s dream, which is about pre dawn time dream.
Now that part of the dream, that part of the night’s dream are what can be used for predictions and signals for one’s coming events, work, travels, and so forth. And therefore, the dreams of that part can be used as analysis dream analysis, meaning of which the dreams are analyzed to determine certain facts, either prophecy, prediction, or facts about present events and so forth. Now, there’s also a way where dreams can be accomplished, a term a phrase meaning that one deliberately goes into sleep wanting to have a prediction of certain events in the dream in that part of the night. Through that way, dreams can be preplanned, expected dreams. So it is called dreams can be accomplished.
And the dreams of that period can be used in the dream accomplishment. But we can say the benefit of the predictions information achieved through dreams of the last part even are something very minor. And they are helpful only to the extent for these lives, what’s called limited period and limited events. So they are are not to be taken too seriously. But in general, dreams happen during the time when we go to sleep and when the mind is numbed into gloom.
So it is in that state, the dreams somehow with previous habit patterns or imprint of the mind with association with things, places, and activities happen to manifest as dream. And because of that, we can say that dreams not that to be relied upon and therefore not that to take into consideration. There therefore, is expression which goes, it is not true, like dream. And therefore, is taken as an example of lack of truth. Yes, we can say that they are not of any real significance.
But as said earlier, there is a type of dream which are accomplished dreams, where a person goes into pre planned session through practice sessions in which the dream is expected to forecast events and so forth. And in that, the dream is accomplished. It is a predictable outcome one expects to bring certain information. And in that, it is extremely reliable, Meaning, the information is accurate in that type of dream. Apart from that, yes, it can be not a helpful or significant reality.
Yeah.