Audio recorded at Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Kyabje Rinpoche addresses a common misconception: that emptiness was explained only by later Indian masters like Nāgārjuna, when Buddha Śākyamūni himself taught it directly. In this 48-minute commentary on the 9th Chapter of the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra, he presents the three doors to liberation—three wisdoms needed to escape saṃsāra. Working with a flower as primary example, he systematically analyzes all phenomena as lacking true, inherent existence by investigating three aspects: the entity, its causes, and its results. He then applies this to the self, showing how ego-grasping (the mistaken belief in a solid, independent self) is ignorance itself, the root of suffering and rebirth. He concludes with Nāgārjuna’s Ratnāvali, demonstrating how realizing the body as not truly existent destroys ego-grasping. For practitioners with background in Buddhist philosophy.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 1994-10-24 – 13A – 9th Chapter – KR.mp3
UUID: 597cbff0-0dbe-477d-ab5a-0cb03da6b18a
Teacher: Kyabje Rinpoche
Collection: Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra
Date: 1994-10-24
Recorded at: Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide
Words: ~3,261
Buddha Śākyamūni in his teaching says, by not knowing emptiness, peacefulness, and the mode of non-birth, the migrating beings wander in suffering. Therefore, through hundreds of reasonings, the emptiness is explained. Therefore, also that’s one of the teachings and it may be interesting to bring this part for the evening because generally whenever there is a teaching or a talk or mention about emptiness, the popularly mentioned reference are the names of the subsequent Indian Buddhist teachers such as Nāgārjuna, Candrakīrti and so forth, which perhaps to some people might give the wrong impression that only these great commentators were the beings who explained emptiness and Buddha itself, the historical Buddha itself or himself didn’t teach emptiness at all. So this verse by going going through through it, it, this verse by going through it would be helpful to indicate that Buddha Śākyamūni as well taught emptiness and therefore we shall go through the meaning of the words. In brief, in this particular verse of teaching, the Buddha explains the manner of ultimate reality, the emptiness, by relating it to the three door three doors to complete liberation.
Regarding three doors to complete liberation, well, there are the aspects about emptiness which, when understood, leads to liberation from suffering and impure thoughts. And precisely for that reason, those three, which will be explained later on, are called the three doors to complete liberation. The verse starts by giving the advice that the ordinary migrating beings, by not realizing these three doors to complete liberation, are uncontrollably under the influence of suffering and impure thoughts, and the unwholesome actions are done through those motives, and that’s how it starts so far. Let’s look at an example. If there is a house which has an entrance, then that entrance would be called the door.
And if the house only has one door, then it is quite obvious that to be able to be to be able to enter the house one has to go through that sole door to the house. So no matter whatever manner of entrance to the house it would be, it is definite that whoever enters the house has to go through that one door. Similarly, the compassionate Buddha has taught the way of realizing reality through three main entrance which comes to be called the three doors to complete liberation. And the reason for that is firstly the Buddha with great compassion has taught so many countless ways through which the suffering, migrating beings could be elevated from their problems and sufferings. And when it comes to the explaining of reality, explaining of emptiness, the Buddha has taught it through presenting countless ways of comprehending it through countless reasonings.
Buddha Śākyamūni, when the teaching on emptiness was later on put into translations in our Tibetan case, where if we are to give a rough picture of how much and how many varieties of approach given about emptiness, well, in Tibetan text, we perhaps can relate as a book, be so thick a volume and of big paper size, and the extensive version would be 12 volumes. And if that is what’s called summarized into middling average version, then there are three volumes of the middling version. And even the most concise version is of one full volume of big size and in total the average way of cataloging brings the entire rough teachings in translation in Tibetan into 12 huge volumes. Oh, 16 huge volumes. Sorry.
When emptiness is explained by the Buddha, obviously it is explained in reference to what is to be negated as not existing truly or inherently. So in the most skillful approach of teaching, the Buddha brings in most cases firstly the obvious things which people can relate to in the investigation of reality of emptiness. So the referent object of which the emptiness is being explained, preferably explained is the functioning things which are products, in other words, things produced in which we can visibly see in the form of solid matter or visible things. So a functioning thing or a product. So it is explained in that form.
And if we, in that way of presentation, things we can relate to. If we say in way of example, let’s say flower, a flower is a product, a functioning thing, something which is produced. So when it comes to explaining emptiness in reference to flower, it is explained firstly by way of analyzing the very entity or nature of flower, and then the emptiness explanation investigates the flower from its cause point of view, what was produced by it and relating to its cause and then the investigation analyzes the results or the effects and so forth produced by flower itself. So in a way with each functioning thing or product, the investigation roughly falls into three major avenues, investigation of the thing’s entity, of its cause, and of its result. Those who follow the teachings of the Buddha in order to forsake suffering saṃsāra and in order to attain happiness can be grouped into four types of philosophical thinkers or practitioners.
Philosophical practitioners, what is called the four tenets: the lowest upward, the Vaibhāṣika, Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntika, Mind Only, and the middle way proponents or the middle way followers. So in essence we can say the followers of the Buddha’s teachings can be grouped into those four philosophical thinkers. Amongst the four Buddhist tenets or Buddhist philosopher thinkers, the three lower ones, Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntika, and Mind Only, they three by and large uniformly assert things as truly existent. What this in reference to example means, they would say the flower as an entity, flower as an object from its entity exists truly, as well the very seed, the cause which produced the flower as well exists truly. So in their case, in the case of the three lower Buddhist tenets of school of thought, it is explained all three avenues of the flower exist truly.
And the mind which grasped onto wrongly the flower, its cause and result as truly existing is called the truth grasping or grasping at true existence, grasping at true existence, and it is synonymous with ignorance, the mind of ignorance. And out of such mind of ignorance, one engages into contaminated actions. And if the action is a wholesome action, although basically tainted with ignorance, that wholesome actions bring good rebirth and happiness therein. And if the action is unwholesome, being also basically tainted with ignorance, then that brings a lower rebirth and the sufferings that goes with that. Therefore, in our case, if we really need or if we really want and need ourselves to be free from saṃsāra, the mundane existence, then we need to gain the realization that the flower as an entity does not truly exist.
The cause of the flower does not truly exist, and the result produced by the flower also does not truly exist. So it is necessary to realize the lack of true existence about all three. Until we have not realized these three, then there is no way to attain liberation. Therefore, the wisdom realizing the flower as an entity not existing truly, as well the wisdom realizing the cause of the flower not existing truly, as well the wisdom realizing the result of the flower not existing truly are called the three wisdoms, given the name the three doors to complete liberation. And the reason for giving that name to the three is because for anyone to attain liberation free from all suffering from saṃsāra, to be free from saṃsāra, one must produce the realization of these three wisdom within one’s mind stream, without which it would not be possible to enter into liberation.
So they are like a doors, the entrance in its true sense towards liberation. The earlier example we can relate again that if a house has only one door as an entrance into it, then one cannot be into the house, by and large, conventionally speaking, without going through that sole door into the house. So it is like that. If the flower is to exist truly, then we should find that true existence upon the flower through any of its spectrum, whether the true existence of the flower is present in the flower as an entity, or whether that true existence of the flower can be found in the cause, the seed of the flower, or whether it could be found in the result of the flower. But in the analysis, if we investigate, we would find that the flower as entity is not to be found truly existing, as well its true existence is not to be found in its cause and as well in its result.
So it would be quite conclusive that the true existence about the flower cannot be found at all. That flower is decisively to be proven as not existing truly. Same with the flower, the whole reasoning can be applied to everything. Say, we take next step of example to ourselves that oneself is not truly existent from the viewpoint of the entity as well oneself is not truly existent from the viewpoint of the true existence to be found in the causes which produced us, such as our parents and so forth. Similarly, the true existence of oneself cannot be found in the result we produce.
So, in reference to ourselves, as an example, we don’t find one to be truly existent. The true existence about oneself is not to be found at all. So then we can apply the similar way of going about those spectrum of investigation to just about any other phenomena. So in that way, we can just about apply to any other phenomena. Now going back with the example, say the flower, if it is supposedly existing truly, then it should exist as an entity without depending at all on its cause, its conditions, the factors on the name and the label ‘flower’ being given upon it, as well on its fragment parts, the component parts, and so forth.
That if if the flower is existing truly or inherently, then it should exist without depending on any of those which it normally depends on, that it should exist by itself solidly, independently, inherently, truly in that sense. But that’s not how it actually exists. To start with, that a thing came to be related as a thing comes to be related as flower only subsequent to having given the label a flower. So it does depend on the label being given flower upon the thing and then from then onward it exists as an entity of a flower. Likewise it depends on its causes, factors, conditions, parts and so forth.
So the very fact it depends on all these parts, label and so forth means the flower is not truly existing and this can be described in other alternative ways that it does not exist by its own characteristic, that it does not exist inherently. We don’t need to limit just to the flower instead we can relate to ourselves. That ourself, if as a being, as a person, supposedly does exist truly, inherently, then it would mean that we are a oneself, that oneself exists without depending on parental semen and blood, does not depend on previous karma actions done in the previous lives, not depend on impure thoughts preceding this rebirth in the present form as human, as well does not depend on individual name given to oneself as a person through which one can be related and or exist in that fashion. So if oneself is truly existing or inherently existing, then it would mean that one does not depend at all on any of these, that one’s soul should be an entity existing by its own without depending on anything at all. But in actual fact that’s not so, that we do depend for start with formation of our body with dependence on parental semen and blood, on previous lives, actions, impure thoughts and the individual name given to the person by which we relate.
So in that way, we as being oneself does not truly exist. Here at this point, we can relate to a very precious and inspiring teaching line from great teacher Nāgārjuna from his from his writing called Ratnāvali, the precious garland. And this particular teaching or the verse is extremely inspiring. Therefore, it would be quite okay and very helpful to you all if little bit about that is explained at this point. Well, Generally, when there is the feeling that I am going, I am sitting, I am eating, that I, the ego, the self, that I is conventionally existing, literally called the mere nominally existing I or ego.
That is undeniably to be presented there as functioning. Yet and and that I is the I presented or to be seen as dependent, merely labelled with dependence on the aggregates or the body. So that I, which is convention ally or mere nominally functioning and merely labeled with dependence on the aggregates of the body is not to be denied. It’s there. It exists, although not truly.
Yet the very misconception thinking that there is a solid I or ego or entity which exists on its own without depending at all on the body or the aggregates that it exists on its own, that very misconception thinking the I or the ego or the self exist in that way, that very misconception is called the ego grasping. So there is firstly that difference. So you all, note these points. Oh, all please listen attentively. These are extremely precious points.
Due to such ego grasping which is synonymous with ignorance, the mind of ignorance, there comes about actions being done by the being, the karma. Out of the force of karmic doing or karma, the aggregates or the birth or the body comes into being in the rebirth. So that’s how it is explained. Also, the basic, the root cause of our body to come into being, our body in the sense ordinary existence in the ordinary physical state, that the root cause of that is the ego grasping and the ignorance mind. And regarding that ego grasping, the ignorance mind which has produced this body, well it is a mind, the ego grasping, the ignorance, it is a mind which is completely confused, mistaken, totally opposite to the way the reality exists.
The reason why it is completely confused, mistaken, and opposed is because the way the ego or the I exist is it exist with dependence on the aggregates of the body. But the ego grasping, the ignorance mind grasp onto the view or it thinks or views that the ego exists on its own without dependence at all. So it is clearly a confused, mistaken and state of thinking opposed to reality. So we have the basic cause of our body and mind which is in that way. Ignorance, the ego grasping mind which was the producer producer of our body or aggregate is a mistaken mind.
It is a deceptive mind and deceptive in the sense that it is contrary to the truth, the actual reality. Therefore, if our body or the aggregate is a product of such a mind, then it is impossible for the body to be truly existent. And reason goes backward that the very fact, one which has produced this cause itself, that very cause which has produced this body, that itself was mistaken contrary to truth, a false a false entity. So it can the result produced by such false entity cannot be a true entity. As the cause was false deceptive contrary to fact, therefore, the result produced by such cause cannot be true existent, that it cannot be true, that it equally would be non truly existent, that it equally would be false.
Therefore relating such reasoning with the context of the referent which is the body our aggregate we can clearly say that the body the aggregate cannot be truly existent it is bound to be deceptive, it is bound to be false because the ignorance, the ego grasping the mind which has produced it was a false and deceptive one. Therefore, our body, the aggregate is not truly existent. And as it is not truly existent, the very realization of the body as not truly existent makes one able to forsake the ego grasping, the ignorance mind. That’s how it would work. Due to having attained the wisdom realizing the body as not truly existent, one is able to completely get rid of the ignorance mind, the ego grasping.
Therefore, from then onward, as one has gotten rid of the ego grasping, the ignorance mind, in future one does not have to one would not, in future one would not receive again any impure aggregates of the body. Having got rid of the ego grasping, one is able to not be one is not one is able to not receive any impure aggregates or the rebirth with own miserable body, and that very state of having got rid of all the two, the ego grasping as the cause and the result of the aggregate, that very state of having got rid of the two is called liberation. Do you notice? At that point, in Tibetan language, we call dgra bcom pa, and in original Sanskrit, it would it would be called arahat. Okay.
So how do you think what do you think of this reasoning? Very, very good. It’s very, very good. Such reasoning and the presentation in such clear word meaning the original where it come from cannot be found in it’s extremely rare to be found throughout the realms of the universes. Serious.
Based on such lines of instruction, if one meditates on the meaning, one would really get a feeling of confirmation that liberation is ready to be to be achieved. It is possible to achieve liberation. Liberation is fact it can be achieved. That it is possible through such way of training the mind one can overcome all suffering. One can overcome mundane existence, saṃsāra, and attain liberation.
About to pass away or scriptural language when the Buddha was about to enter into parinirvāṇa then at that point just prior to that the disciples requested a question asking the Buddha who would who would clarify your teachings on emptiness after your passing away? And in response response, the the Buddha Buddha gave gave a clear indication of the coming of the certain teachers and the lines these days come to be very prophetic where the lines in meaning says, after my passing away, after five hundred years henceforth in the southern part of the country in the area called Vidarbha there will be a bhikṣu named Naga and so forth that will revive my teachings on emptiness and so forth. So the meaning of that prophecy very clearly says that there will come about at that length of time subsequent to Buddha’s passing away, the teacher Nāgārjuna who would clearly explain the profound meaning of the reality of emptiness, clearly forsaking the two extremes, the extreme of nihilism and the extreme of permanence or eternalism and the correct understanding of what emptiness means. So in a way we can then say that relating the whole thing what just now explained from Nāgārjuna’s precious garland can be seen as directly coming as a prophetic and extremely precious teaching on the topic.