Audio recorded at Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 50-minute commentary on the ninth chapter of Śāntideva’s Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra, Kyabje Rinpoche addresses how the highest Buddhist philosophical tenet responds to objections about the two truths—ultimate and conventional reality. The core challenge: if things don’t inherently exist, how can anything exist at all? Rinpoche explains Śāntideva’s response: understanding emptiness and recognizing how things dependently arise must happen simultaneously, not sequentially. He illustrates this with the example of thinking of a sick friend and their sickness together as a model for how realization of emptiness naturally generates understanding of conventional functioning. The teaching walks through three levels of dependent arising, culminating in how phenomena exist merely as labeled by conceptual thought. For practitioners already studying emptiness; newcomers will find it challenging.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 1994-09-13 – 11A – 9th Chapter – KR.mp3
UUID: 669ab10a-443f-4361-9494-b2ccda3c0781
Teacher: Kyabje Rinpoche
Collection: Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra
Date: 1994-09-13
Recorded at: Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide
Words: ~3,215
Śāntideva mentions that. At this point, Śāntideva says if it is there, it would absolutely be there. Whereas if it is not there, then conventional truth would not be there. Here in the context of the Tuesday evening topics of ninth chapter, this is the point where the lower tenets tenets ask question or come to the upper tenet regarding the two truths and this is where we are at the moment.
As regards the qualm put up by the lower tenets to the Prāsaṇgika, the highest Buddhist tenets, let’s look at what background they are coming to question their qualm, or in other words, due to what background perspective they come up with their calm. Well, in their perspective they think if something exists it has to exist inherently. Therefore based on such background perspective they put up the qualm to the Prāsaṇgika, the highest Buddhist tenet, saying, if things do not inherently exist, if things do not inherently exist then it would mean things absolutely do not exist at all. Then that would mean in the case of a person and the aggregates which the person has as well would mean that they do not exist at all because they do not inherently exist. If that’s the case then they go further, they put the qualm further by saying.
In that case it would mean that there is not even conventionally existing person and five aggregates and due to that very fact it would also imply that there cannot be emptiness of the person as well the emptiness of the aggregates. In that way there as well would not be the actual truth phenomena and consequently it would mean that there are no two truths. The conventional, the deceptive truth and the actual, the ultimate truth. So this is then in brief, the qualm put up by the lower tenets to the highest. Here amongst the people attending this evening’s class, if there are if there are people who have heard about this topic of emptiness, Buddhist explanation of reality, then it would be not that difficult to relate to what is being talked about or discussed here.
But if there are people who have not heard about topic called emptiness then this may sound a bit unrelatable and unplaceable, another way of saying not very easy to understand. Well that is understandable because it is a very complex topic so it has to be accepted that it is a difficult point to understand and this would mean you have to listen attentively. Now as regards the argument or the qualm put forth by the lower tenets to the highest regarding the two truths there definitely is the qualm or the argument, firstly concerning the conventional truth phenomena or to simply put conventional phenomena, the deceptive phenomena. If that’s the case then it’s first important to differentiate conventional phenomena as being of two types: the gross or easily visible or understandable conventional phenomena called gross conventional phenomena and subtle conventional phenomena. As far as the first type, the gross conventional phenomena, that is something we can relate as the table, the flower, the book, the room and anything that we can quite easily observe to be so as conventional or deceptive phenomena and this is not the conventional phenomena over which the qualm or the argument is being raised.
Or or conventionally existing. So the very phrase which says conventionally existing or its exact verb meaning existing in convention, existing in deceptivity. That itself is no different. It is the same meaning to conventional, subtle conventional phenomena. So in a way then subtle conventional phenomena means existing conventionally or conventional existence.
Now then what actually is meant by conventional existence or existing conventionally? Well, as regards that, Śāntideva then at this point brings about very sharp answer and expression, meaning very on the spot answer to the opponent’s qualm. And the answer in meaning says, the understanding that things exist conventionally comes about only subsequent to a practitioner’s direct realization of emptiness because it is only when one has firstly ascertained or convincingly realized emptiness then it is possible following that understanding that within emptiness that in the very existence as emptiness in nature there is all feasibility of going and coming of things, cause and effect, karma, doing of works and activity and so forth. Everything is feasible. This in another way of putting would then mean although everything does not exist inherently or truly, yet in that non true existence there is undeniable functioning of conventional things going and coming and so forth.
And this very way of presenting conventional existence or existing conventionally becomes possible if one first has realized emptiness. Therefore subtle conventional phenomena is realized only subsequent to realization of emptiness. It would then very clearly mean first a practitioner has to realize emptiness and only after that then the practitioner can realize the fact that how things exist conventionally. So subtle conventional phenomena is something one can realize only, one firstly has realized emptiness. Therefore in a way we have a thought pattern in a practitioner’s understanding of how things conventionally exist in this way where firstly the practitioner realizes emptiness and out of such realization of emptiness the practitioner can very clearly see the undeniable working of things as merely labeled.
That in mere nominal function or merely labeled fashion things exist undeniably as going, coming, cause and effect and so forth. So there are two points to the thoughts. One thought is the realization of emptiness and and the other thought is the thought realizing that things undeniably function mere nominally, mere conventionally. So whenever these two thoughts assist one another as complementary to one another then only then it is possible for the person to present conventional existence of things. It would mean then if there is a conflict between the two thoughts in a person’s mind that while one is being in one state of mind the other is being negated or around the other when the other is being in one state of understanding when the other is being negated and in that way if there is a conflict then it is not possible for the person to present conventional existence of phenomena or conventional existing phenomena.
So it has to be two types of thoughts complementing one another and then it is possible to present how things really conventionally exist that they do in mere mere nominal, in mere labeled fashion or undeniably function. In the beginning of this year’s term, in Tuesday evening when we were going across a discussion on the three principal aspects of path to enlightenment we come across the verse which in meaning says, as long as there is on one hand the infallible infallible working of dependent arising and on the other hand the emptiness free of assertion being separate and not as one complementing another. One has not yet completed analysis of the view. So this in terms of example would mean if let’s say a table regarding its non inherent existence or its not existing truly, if one understands the table as not inherently existing yet at that very moment if one is not able to present it as being dependent arising phenomena, depending on its causes and condition and in that way conventionally in labeled form functioning then it is not yet a complete view understanding. Similarly the other way around where although one may understand the table as a product produced by its causes and condition but at that very moment of understanding if one is not able to understand the table as not truly existing although one may understand it has dependent arising due to or being dependent on its causes condition then that means one has not completed one’s analysis of view and perhaps you might say one’s analysis on the view has not finished yet.
Also in this way it would mean if the view analysis is not complete then there is a sequential presentation one negating the other and there is no simultaneous accommodation of the two. We have a scene where when one is being presented the other cannot be presented, when the other is being presented the one is not being able to be presented so it becomes a sequential presentation not simultaneous. Whereas if one’s understanding of view, meaning of reality becomes complete it should be where together simultaneously one should be able to present the emptiness, the non inherent existence along with mere nominal nominal existence in the form of dependent arising. This in the case of example would mean say the very moment moment one realizes the table as not inherently existing one would realize that very moment together by the power of that thought one would realize the table as dependent arising phenomena or dependent originated phenomena produced by its causes and conditions. Similarly, the very moment one thinks about the table as arising dependent originated phenomena, that very moment the power of that thought itself should naturally produce the realization at the same time the table as not inherently existing.
So the two, when the other understanding comes its other understanding as well by the power of the others naturally comes about together. So happens then this is what here Śāntideva explains about the subtle conventional phenomena being presentable together and which then becomes very what’s called agreeable and same explanation with what in three principal aspect was explained by Je Tsongkhapa so the two becomes same explanation. For example, if one has a very close friend who presently happens to be suffering from For example, if one has a very close friend and who presently happens to be in hospital suffering from very serious sickness, then whenever one thinks about or recalls even the face face of the friend, that very moment automatically, instantly one as well thinks about the sickness the friend is suffering from. Similarly, Similarly when one thinks about the sickness the friend is suffering from, automatically by the force of that thought there comes about in one’s mind the face of one’s friend.
So the two thoughts naturally assist one another, induces one another. So that is an example and it does really come about in our feeling whenever we have such friend and whenever a situation is like that. So it is a relatable example. Now here that is exactly what it would happen the moment moment one realizes emptiness that realization would produce the simultaneous realization of the thing or the phenomena being dependent arising. The moment one realizes dependent arising that would induce the realization of emptiness or in other words the moment one contemplates about emptiness of an object or a phenomena that very realization or contemplation induces at the same time the understanding of the thing being dependently originated or dependent arising phenomena.
So similarly when one is taught about, the other naturally comes about. So that’s how it And in the post-meditation period, perhaps the example might make more sense if you think about if you say, if you take the example as you’re a very, good friend or someone you think is a good friend to you. So without having in one’s thought the phenomena being emptiness in nature, it is not possible to have the thought of the phenomena being dependent arising or dependent originated or conventional phenomena. So it very clearly implies that one is not able to present the understanding of conventional existence of phenomena without firstly realizing emptiness. So it would mean that one first needs to realize emptiness.
If one has the thought where the two are present, the realization of emptiness and the realization of dependent arising, then one becomes immune from any damage by ignorance here called the grasping at true existence one becomes completely beyond harm by grasping at true existence which in other other words is ignorance because in all the time one has the understanding of phenomenon being emptiness at the same time being dependent arising so there is not anything a force or power ignorance or grasping a true existence can exert or can do anything about. We have the understanding here and the mention of the two things emptiness and dependent arising. By emptiness it means emptiness of existence by its own characteristic. Anything which is empty or lacking existence from its own characteristic is the meaning of emptiness. By dependent arising or dependent originated it can have various levels of understanding that on a very gross level dependent originated or dependent arising phenomena means phenomena existing with dependence on its causes and conditions.
And that is very gross, a very approximate understanding of dependent arising. If we go subtler then dependent origination or dependent arising means existing with dependence on its parts. And we can still go more subtle than that which is extremely subtle understanding of dependent arising or dependent originated and in that it means existing with dependence on mere name and label, or existing with dependence on merely being labeled. And that is the ultimate understanding of the understanding of what is meant by dependent arising. Because everything exists with dependence on their causes and conditions, parts, name and label, things do exist deceptively in the sense conventionally.
So conventional truth phenomena or simply conventional phenomena is something feasibly existing there. And the very fact that there is not any phenomena which exist without being dependent on causes and conditions, parts, name and label indicates there is not any truly existing phenomena by its own side without being dependent on any of these things at all. So that in meaning implies that there is an ultimate truth in the sense there is lack of inherent existence, the emptiness about phenomena which is the ultimate or the actual truth. So here the author of the ninth chapter then says in this system meaning the highest tenet system the two truths become something a validly presentable thing. So this so far becomes the answer.
So this then becomes the answer to the qualms about two truths being being negated or in essence it becomes the answer from the highest tenets validating that the two truths do actually exist. Now the next part is proving the answer to the qualm of the lower tenets regarding there is or there are reasonings to to support the non inherent existence of things. That part becomes where in the lines of the ninth chapter starts with the lines knowing and the knower and so forth, lines like that. Meaning the qualm put forth by the lower tenets is: in your tenets meaning in the highest tenets it is asserted that things do not inherently exist but we don’t think you have any proper reasonings to substantiate that assertion and in response the ninth chapter as representing the highest tenet explains this second part of the qualm’s response to that. Now if you remember earlier two weeks or a few Tuesdays ago we had what’s called outline: three principal qualms put by the lower tenets.
First is the qualm about the two truths being not valid. Second, the qualm about there being no reasonings to substantiate non-inherent existence of things. And third, the qualm being that the analyzing consciousness becomes endless. So out of those three, we are now on the second. Well, here the answers being given to the lower tenets’ qualm are extremely sharp answers.
The reason why they are sharp answers is because Śāntideva, the author of these answers, was a lama, a teacher who personally personally had the Buddha of wisdom, Mañjuśrī, as his personal or the specialized deity practice for the practices and understanding and so forth. So it is quite natural someone who relies on Buddha wisdom would have such sharp answers. So you have an argument, questions? Oh, now here at this point of the response to the second qualm, it becomes extremely subtle because that’s where in essence the most profound theory or assertion by the highest Buddhist tenet Prāsaṇgika comes about because it deals with how things are merely labeled and in that fashion how things exist. And this is the point where in the lines of nine chapter the line starts with knowing and knower and so forth, where we have a picture of a subject and object which we discussed during one of the Thursday evenings under the topic of what is object and what is subject. In brief, at this point the response being given is the understanding that everything is presented or or everything exists and the description of everything being existed existing is presented in the way that everything is merely labeled by concept.
So concept here can be understood as a conceptual thought. So everything is merely labeled by concept or conceptual thought. As the lines goes like space and other things where they are merely labeled by concept, everything is merely labeled by concept or conceptual thought. We can look at the two, we can look at the whole thing say in the case of example say flower, there has to be a concept or conceptual thought which labels which labels the object or the phenomena as flower and then there is the actual activity of labeling. So there is the interdependence between the concept or conceptual thought which labels and the activity of being labeled flower.
So the conceptual thought labeling the flower and the activity of being labeling are two interdependent, two interdependent thing. So anyway, that’s to start with how this then is seen in the way of explaining how things are merely labeled. So we can look at it in this way where the conceptual thought which labels and the flower being labeled which is done in the form of activity is two dependent agents or two dependent things. So in other words to clarify it would mean that the flower which is being labeled by way of the conceptual thought labeling it and the conceptual thought which actually labels it are two which depends on one another. In that way, things are merely labeled.
In this case, the object flower. So this becomes very subtle understanding of the dependent originated phenomena where it is only with interdependence of the concept labeling the object and object being labeled that there is the existence of the phenomena labeled object in that way that the object does not exist independently from the concept labeling it and the very label itself. So as well indicates that any phenomena do not exist inherently or truly, that they depend on the concept that labels it, and that is subtle dependent arising. Just ahead we went across the dependent arising can be understood in three levels of understanding. Gross is the understanding that dependent arising means things or phenomena are produced by their causes and conditions.
More subtle than that is that they depend for existence on their parts and the most subtle is that they depend on name and label. So this very fashion of things phenomena existing on mere label and name by way of concept, labeling it, and there is no phenomena.