Audio recorded at Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 46-minute teaching, Kyabje Rinpoche opens with cultivating the awakening heart, then engages a central philosophical debate in Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka: whether the mind basis of all (Alaya Vijñāna) must exist. The Mind-Only school asserts it as a repository for karmic imprints; the Consequentialist Middle Way school refutes it, arguing instead that transitoriness itself — treated as a functional phenomenon — preserves karmic potency across time. Throughout, he emphasizes how emptiness and dependent arising mutually illuminate each other: understanding one awakens understanding of the other. He clarifies that all superiors in the Prāsaṇgika view realize selflessness of both persons and phenomena, treating what other schools present as separate realizations as one understanding applied to different bases. For advanced practitioners with philosophical training.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 1991-08-29 – 23A – KR.mp3
UUID: a5d6d456-052a-4928-9a51-5f73d68b78d2
Teacher: Kyabje Rinpoche
Collection: Entering the Middle Way
Date: 1991-08-29
Recorded at: Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide
Words: ~2,660
Begin by cultivating healthy motivation that of the awakening heart. If we engage in activities for the sake of only ourselves, then such a way of acting has little potential, has little power. On the other hand, if we were to engage in activities with the healthy attitude of the awakening heart as our motivation, that is to say, engage in activities for the sake of oneself and all sentient beings, then since the motivation is so very vast, the activity is very vast and it will have a vast result. But additionally, in addition to that, since we are seeking to practice that of the universal vehicle then in our present situation of listening and reflecting upon the Dharma, it’s necessary that we seek to develop the awakening heart as our intention for listening. So the foundation for the attitude of the awakening heart is love and compassion.
So, as a prerequisite to develop the awakening heart, it’s necessary that we develop the attitudes of love and compassion, compassion being expressed in the thought, May myself and all sentient beings be free of suffering and the causes of suffering. In love expressed in the thought, May myself and all sentient beings have happiness and causes of happiness. Based upon that, then we then go on to generate the thought, I must, for the sake of all sentient beings, in order to lead them to an ultimate happiness divorced of all suffering, rid myself of all my faults, and bring to consummation all my excellent qualities. That is to say, I must attain Buddhahood. Having attained that, then I will be able to lead all sentient beings to complete happiness.
In order to achieve that end, I am going to engage in the activities of listening, reflecting and meditating upon the Dharma of the universal vehicle, and for the next three minutes cultivate such an attitude as the awakening heart. Quoting from a verse by Nāgārjuna, in discussing a type of practice which we are to carry on. If we were to listen and reflect and meditate upon the emptiness of all phenomena being naturally established or naturally existent and understand that emptiness. And additionally to come to a conviction and to carry on the practice conviction with respect to karma, that is the actions and the results, and carry on the practice of adoption and rejection and beginning to abandon the causes of undesired suffering and beginning to implement the causes of desired happiness, this is a wonderful practice. This is the supreme of practices.
This is an exceptionally golden opportunity in which we can all rejoice and stand in awe of. And as a human being this presents a golden opportunity whereby to create vast accumulation of creative potential. And we all are in such a position. There are some who are reflecting upon emptiness come to avoid implementing the practices of action as causes and results. That is to say, they no longer implement what is to be adopted and what is to be rejected.
Some, on the other hand, though observing karma cultivated and what is to be abandoned, do not have an understanding of emptiness. But what is the most wonderful wisdom of all is a combination of these two understandings. Emptiness and and arising are mutually dependent. They are the counterparts of one another. Emptiness being the non inherent existence of phenomena, and dependent arising being in dependence upon the quality of the cause, a concordant quality of result will arise, that there is an infallible relationship between causes and results.
If by understanding that from non inherently existent causes, non inherently existent results arise, and that by understanding that in dependence upon a quality of the cause, then a specific quality of a result will rise, which aids in our understanding of emptiness, then we can begin to understand that dependent arising is dependent upon emptiness and emptiness is dependent upon dependent arising, that the two imply one another. Therefore when emptiness appears to our mind this will cause to dawn dependent arising. And when dependent arising appears to our mind this will cause to dawn our understanding of emptiness, that these two are not contradictory but in fact imply one another. This is in the case of in order to work well it’s necessary to have two hands. These two hands assist each other in performing the task.
With only one hand it’s quite difficult to carry out the task well. Likewise with dependent arising and emptiness, that these two are mutually reciprocal in their understanding, that coming to an understanding of one assists in understanding the other. Without this mutual understanding of these two, then one cannot come to an ultimate or complete realization of either one. So Previously we were discussing the eight difficult points which are unique to the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school, and these are set forth in terms of the basis paths and fruits. From the point of view of the basis, there is the presentation of the difficult point of the mind basis of all.
From the point of view of the presentation of the path, it is that whether a superior realizes that all phenomena lack natural existence. And as to the point as to whether the conception of true existence, being an afflictive emotion, is an afflictive obstruction. Also the point of self knower or apperception. Then with respect to the presentation of result, there is the point as to whether the Buddha realizes the non true existence of all phenomena. Beginning with this first point, that of the mind basis of all.
Who is it that asserts the mind bases of all? That is the mind only school, the Cittamātra. By mind basis of all, we mean the repository of the latencies of various karmas, both skillful and unskillful. So the place in which the karmas, the actions, the latencies of actions, both skillful and unskillful are placed, are deposited. That’s the mind basis of all.
But the consequence of Middle Way School refute the existence of a mind basis of all. They say it does not exist. It’s not necessary to posit such an object because of the reason that all phenomena do not naturally exist. The mind bases of all, the Alaya Vijñāna, is refuted by the Consequentialist Middle Way School, there is a great deal of debate. The mind only school returns to the argument saying there must exist a mind basis of all.
Why? Because actions that we create, both unskillful and skillful, are consciousnesses. They are mental factors of consciousnesses. And consciousnesses do not remain. They are transitory.
They arise, abide and cease. And if the results of the actions are not to be lost then there must be a place where the latencies of these actions are deposited. If there is no place for them to be deposited, if we are to experience a result in the future, then either these latencies must be permanent, consciousness must be permanent or they will be destroyed and they will occur no result. The Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school retorts, returns with the argument that we do in fact create karma and these karmas are not permanent, but in fact they do the second moment after their production deteriorate, but the potential of the karma is not lost. So the debate centers around mind only school and the consequence middle school agree that some karma is being created, actions are being accumulated.
And there has to be a way in which the karma comes to a result, that is, even over the course of hundreds of years, that there must be a way in which the result can arise, even if there is a gap between the commission and the experience of hundreds of years. Now they say it can’t be that karma is permanent. So the mind only school says that there is a place in which the latencies of these actions are deposited until they ripen. But the consequence of middle way school, they don’t accept that it’s necessary to deposit such a mind basis at all. They say that the unique typical point which is being set forth by the consequence of the middle way school is that transitoriness or the destruction or the deterioration of the karma is a functional object.
This is the difficult point, and this is the unique view, that the deterioration of karma is a functional phenomenon, just as in the case of the 12 links of dependent origination. The 12th link is aging and death. Death is a functional object. They’re coming to like the flower. It exists and then it’s coming to a non existence.
It’s dying away. Is a functional object and it’s this which has the potency to bring about a future result. The Buddha, in teaching the 12 links of dependent origination, taught the links of birth, aging, disease, and death. And birth is the coming into being of the being. Then aging is a transformation of the entity of the being.
Then there is death which is that which previously possessed the life force, losing that life force. And this is termed death, when there is a loss of the life force of the being. This is what we term death or in a more technical term, what we’re using is deterioration deterioration. And this is a functional phenomenon, Death, deterioration, the destruction of the object is a functional phenomenon. So at the time of death, the person who previously possessed a life force ceases to exist.
That is to say this is the dying person. But the dying person does not become, this is what we label as the dying person. But the dying person does not cease to exist. The person will go on to take rebirth. And necessity of a repository for the latencies of actions is unnecessary and therefore is refuted.
It is an uncommon characteristic of the consequence of middle way school that they posit this deterioration as a functional phenomenon. All the tenets lower than the consequent middleway school posit the factor of deterioration as a permanent phenomenon. And the reason we’re to establish it as a functional phenomenon is because it’s not existent. Then with respect to assertions regarding the attribute to the path, the uncommon assertion as to the superiors or as say aryas is that whether they are hearers, or bodhisattva superiors, they all realize the selflessness of phenomena. On the other hand, all of the tenet systems below Consequence and Middle Way School have no such presentation in that all of the various types of superiors do not have a realization of selflessness of phenomena.
It is only the consequence of middle way school that says if an individual is a superior, it is pervasive or necessary that this individual have realized selflessness of phenomena. Candrakīrti says that there are many varieties of emptiness. For example, there’s the division into 16, but we were to condense all the varieties of emptiness and we can condense them down to two. That would be the selflessness of phenomena and the selflessness of persons. So it is the assertion of all of the tenet systems, whether it’s the Great Exposition School, the Sūtra School, the mind only school or the middle way school, that if an individual is the superior, then this individual necessarily has realization of the selflessness of persons.
But it is only unique to the middle Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school that if an individual is superior he must additionally have the realization of the selflessness of phenomena. This is because the Consequentialist Middle Way school says these two are in fact the same. That if the superior necessarily must have a realization of the selflessness of persons, then because there’s no difference between selflessness of persons and selflessness of phenomena, then he must necessarily have a realization of selflessness of phenomena, addition. According to the consequence of Middle Way school, there is no difference between why is it necessary that if a superior has a realization of the selflessness of persons that it necessarily follows that she has the realization of the selfless phenomena. This is because according to the consequence of middle way school, there is no difference in the degree of subtlety with respect to the selflessness of phenomena and the selflessness of persons.
That simply by means of realizing the emptiness upon one particular basis, once one understands that nature upon one basis, simply transferring that understanding to another basis, one immediately will come to understand the emptiness of the second basis. The superior is one who has direct realization of emptiness and that it is merely a difference in basis and no degree of difference in the subtlety between selfless phenomena and selflessness of persons. Therefore if one has realization of the selflessness of one phenomena simply taking that understanding and applying it to another phenomena, whatever it might be, whether it’s persons or phenomena, one will immediately come to realize that selflessness of that or person. By person we mean the being which is imputed to the five aggregates, the five aggregates being forms, feelings, perceptions, thought constructs and consciousness. in dependence upon those five aggregates, the I or the person is designated or imputed.
The basis of the imputation of persons, as we mentioned, aggregates being forms, feelings, perceptions, thought constructions and consciousnesses are phenomena. So the selflessness of a person is understood in terms of the non natural existence of the eye. The eye which is designated to the aggregates is found to be empty of natural existence and this constitutes the selflessness of persons. Whereas the basis of the designated person, that is the aggregates, are found to be also to not naturally exist. They are empty of natural existence.
So in both cases it’s simply a finding of the non natural existence. It’s simply a difference in what is taken as the base. In one case it’s the person which is designated to the aggregates and the other case it is the basis of the designation, the aggregates themselves, which are found to be nonnaturally existent. Proceeding in the meditation on emptiness, one initially begins in terms of meditating the emptiness of the I which is imputed to the aggregates when one is seeking to be liberated from cyclic existence. The emptiness which is to be realized initially is in terms of the I.
One again and again cultivates the realization that this self is empty using such reasons as dependent arising or it is free from being one or many. What is the reason that we begin a meditation on emptiness with respect to trying to realize the emptiness in terms of the I? This is because the person who is carrying out this particular meditation is one who is seeking, one who longs for liberation of cyclic existence. And the root of cyclic existence is the conception of the truly existent I. Therefore, since they want to longing, wishing to be free from cyclic existence, they begin by meditating on the root of cyclic existence, that being the conception of the truly existent I.
So once one has realized emptiness in terms of the I, one then begins to analyze for emptiness in terms of the aggregates by means of reasoned analysis. And because one has already realized emptiness through analysis, by simply turning the mind and applying this analysis to the aggregate immediately one gains realization of the emptiness of the aggregate. The reason for this was established by the Buddha and by using the example to illustrate that once we begin by meditating, for example, on the emptiness of the flower. In order to realize emptiness of the flower, we have to exert a great deal of difficulty, a great deal of effort. It’s quite difficult to initially realize emptiness.
Once we have gained that realization,