Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Much of this 48-minute teaching is devoted to analyzing and refuting misconceptions about emptiness. Geshe Dhawa Gyaltsen begins with developing a sincere heart and different levels of Buddhist motivation, then focuses entirely on what emptiness actually is: not nothingness or non-existence, but the absence of an inherently independent ‘I.’ Through careful analysis, he guides students to logically refute this false ‘I’—if it existed independently, could it be found apart from body and mind? He explains how things actually exist: conventionally, through designation and thought, always dependent on causes, conditions, and parts. His example of a Dharma centre clarifies this: though it doesn’t exist independently, it functions perfectly. The session closes with practical guidance: choose practices suited to your capacity, sustain effort, and trust that results follow sincere practice. For practitioners committed to rigorous study of emptiness.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 07 SoM no date.mp3
UUID: f67b88ef-147b-4566-b9e1-a30aceab762f
Teacher: Geshe Dhawa Gyaltsen
Collection: Stages of Meditation (Geshe Dhawa Gyaltsen)
Date: 1983 (exact day not recorded)
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 47.8 minutes
Words: ~5,641
As I mentioned, it is very skillful means or it is very skillful to first develop your heart in good condition, or you must begin — yours also, you must begin to be quite humble and quite noble. Right? Quite good heart, quite a good person. Right? So no matter, even if, what’s called, you are using some unpleasant words.
Right? If you have some manner, if you have some habit of using unpleasant words, no matter, that will not become your, what’s called, fault. If and when you have a real pure heart. Right? Real pure heart.
Because people will judge you from your dealings, from your normal intentions. Right? In other words, so they will find — normally, we say, even if somebody is not so skillful in terms of using words. We will say, oh, this is his way of speaking, but his mind is quite good, quite clear. So we must not blame him or we must go and trust him because his normal dealings or his normal activities are quite good and quite beneficial for all.
Therefore, we must, what’s called, heed what he said. Right? So in this way, even if you use unskillful terms, that won’t make you down. Right? Because others are there to judge your mental quality.
Thus, the first important thing is to develop all the good qualities within yourself so as to share them amongst our fellows. Mhmm. So your mental qualities will surpass your small and minor faults. Therefore, it is important to develop the mental quality or mental, what is it called, qualifications. Right?
You will find there are some people who are temporarily trying to deceive others by various means. Right? So at first, people may get trapped in those pretensions. Right? But if you look very deeply, you’ll find his way of speaking, his way of doing is just on an artificial level.
Just right? Just very — it’s not deep. Just artificial level. So therefore, he will not be, what’s called, relied upon by others ultimately. Right?
So if you want to win the hearts of others, be honest, be free from pretension, and try to work honestly with, what’s called, good heart. So by doing that slowly and gradually, all the people will start liking you and you will also have very good, what’s called, reputation, whatever, as a result of that. If you haven’t got a big bodhicitta mind, a strong bodhicitta mind, then at least try to have a small one. Okay? So how you have the small one is through generating all those, what’s called, good conditions or good heart as I mentioned before.
Right? So whether you accept yourself as a practitioner of anything or you don’t accept yourself as a practitioner, it doesn’t matter. The matter is the implementation of the teachings. If you implement, if you put them into practice normally in your daily life, such as trying to be good-hearted to all, trying to help others whenever they need, and so forth, you are doing it, you are practising the teachings and you are, what’s called, implementing all those things which you have heard. But even if you say that I’m a great practitioner of such and such, but if you don’t practise all those kinds, you are not a practitioner as you have asserted.
But even those who don’t assert so — even those who say I’m not a practitioner — but if their actions are related with good heart and good things, they are practising the teachings and they are putting those things into their actions. So that will be the real implementation of the teachings. So this is what you call — this is how to put them into implementation and to enhance one’s good side of their mental continuum. Okay. Got them.
Mhmm. In this way, you have to generate bodhicitta mind thinking, I must, okay, I must try to obtain Buddhahood for the sake of all the suffering sentient beings. And if you have that kind of thought within you and it constantly remains immutably, then you — oh, you are generating the bodhicitta mind. Okay? And if you’re not able to do it in this way, then you also try from that side, thinking: I am trying to generate — trying to obtain liberation for one’s own sake through understanding the sufferings of the cycle of existence in general.
And having strong renunciation for those, you must do your practice. That is called this is the Dharma of a small scope. And even in case if you are not able to do that, then at least, right, at least try to think in this way: that for the sake of removing the sufferings for my sake, I must engage into the virtuous actions in order to obtain a good rebirth in the next life. So if you do this within this frame of mind, you are practising pure Dharma according to the smallest scope.
Right? So as I have told, there are three kinds of scopes one can choose from according to one’s mental ability and according to one’s mental understanding. Buddhists then mainly stay in the meditative equipoise of the wisdom of emptiness. Right? So that is the actual antidote to the delusions.
So the Buddhists, they always — what’s called, alright? The Buddhists, they stay in the meditative equipoise of the wisdom of emptiness. And when they arise from that meditation or from that equipoise, they start accumulating the merits or the virtuous merits — the six perfections. So by doing this way, they progress on to the levels of the Bodhisattvas. Then eventually, they are able to remove all the delusions by the power of the wisdom of emptiness, and thereby they obtain the Buddhahood.
The Bodhisattvas take the main object of meditation — the wisdom of emptiness — which is the true and actual antidote to the mental delusions. So this: they stay in the meditative equipoise on this wisdom, and having arisen from their meditative stable equipoise, then they start accumulating the meritorious merit, what’s called virtue, which means they start collecting the virtue by practising the perfection of generosity, perfection of morality, perfection of patience, and perfection of concentration. The perfection of joyful effort and perfection of wisdom, and also the perfection of, what’s called, skillful means and wisdom and so forth. So in this way, those Bodhisattvas engage into the, what’s called, six perfections and other perfections so as to perfect their continuum in order to get enlightenment. Enlightenment.
How to train one’s mind? So you have found that at the moment, your mind is, what’s called, full of delusions. So now you want to get rid of them. So we are finding some method to remove those so you can get the wisdom of emptiness. The wisdom of emptiness is the only method which can remove the delusions.
So therefore, in order to get the wisdom of emptiness, we start practising and we start doing our, what’s called, trainings. The meaning of emptiness is really hard and is really profound. The person who is a profound person who explains the meaning of emptiness should explain very, very carefully and very, very clearly. Likewise, the person who receives teaching on this topic should receive it very, very carefully and should pay very careful attention to what the teacher says. The wisdom of emptiness is the heart of all the Buddha’s teachings, so it is, of course, a bit hard to understand.
I’ve been going everywhere giving some teachings in many places. And I met many students, especially the westerners, who have real interest in terms of knowing the meaning of emptiness. They have heard a few teachings before from someone, and their understanding wasn’t so sure, wasn’t so correct. So if you misunderstand the meaning of emptiness, it is really, what’s it called, bad for both. So therefore, to be able to receive the meaning of emptiness, you will need some time. A teacher should also speak on this subject very, very clearly, precisely, without mistake.
Likewise, students should, what’s called, receive the teaching precisely, correctly, without mistake. So therefore, we need to have some time in order to present completely the meaning of the emptiness. A few students who have been asking me that they are meditating on the emptiness. When I ask, how do you meditate on the emptiness? Then they say, I’m doing meditation on the emptiness mainly thinking nothing.
Right? So nothingness — this is nothingness, thinking nothingness — would be my meditation on the emptiness. So that is not the proper understanding of emptiness. So nothing — that will not become any nothingness — one will never find the meaning of emptiness there. So therefore, there is a way to stop one’s, what’s called, inner wandering thoughts, but that is not even — that meditation is not called a meditation on emptiness.
Also, many students, they ask me. They say in this way: all phenomena or all things are only existing to our thought. And in reality, there isn’t any phenomenon. They have kind of — okay. Some many people have this understanding.
This is also mistaken in terms of understanding the emptiness. All phenomena and other things are just like a dream. No? They appear like a dream. And actually, in fact, there isn’t anything.
Therefore, there isn’t — their non-existence. So they say that — that is totally, I would say, an incorrect way of understanding the meaning of emptiness. Identification of the wisdom realizing emptiness. So as I told you before, we experience sufferings. Okay?
How we experience suffering is because of the cause of the sufferings. We have sufferings because of the cause of sufferings. Okay? And how the cause of suffering starts functioning is because of our ignorance. Right?
Now, the wisdom realizing emptiness should go right — you know, should go right to the end of that ignorance. If we say, sir, everything is just like a dream and there’s nothing there, then how does this wisdom go against the end of that ignorance? So there’s no way to go. So therefore, nothingness is not emptiness. So thus, emptiness — sorry.
The wisdom of emptiness is that wisdom which has the ability, which has the power to eliminate the ignorance completely. So, you know, so from that we have to understand. In order to establish the emptiness, first of all, we have to recognise the object of negation. Right? Object of negation, in other words.
So we have very, very strong feeling of I, or conception of I. Right? This conception of I is existing within us very, very tightly. Right? So now we have to see how this tight conception of I exists.
As I mentioned, we have very, very strong conception of I. We hold it very tightly. Right? In this case, all of a sudden, if somebody says to you, hey. You — you are a great thief.
You have stolen blah blah blah. At that very moment, there is very strong manifestation of an I. You think, how come you dare — how dare you use the word thief to me? So therefore, at that time, there is very, very strong as well as manifest conception of I. So just investigate that particular I, how it exists and functions.
Mhmm. Okay. Our self-grasping holds our I as inherently existent. Right? So therefore, first of all, without going anywhere, first of all, we must try to investigate how our self-grasping, what’s called, holds the I and how it exists.
So this is our first step to be taken in order to establish something. Whenever we think — whenever our self-grasping holds our I — we say very tightly, and we have very concrete conception, thinking: I, and then we use — we have — we say first I, then my head, my leg, my hand, my things, and my possessions. Right? Whenever we use in this way, it appears to us there is an I which possesses all those, what’s it called, all those things. We have this kind of conception, all things: my head, my body, my legs, my hands.
Some say, I have got a very good head, and some people say, I haven’t got a very good head. Some people say, I have got a big head. I have got a small head. Some people say, I’ve got very good hair, and some people say, I haven’t got good hair. So whatever it may be, all those things seem that all the head and all other above-mentioned parts belong to the I, and I is something which owns, which possesses those things.
We never say here is I. Here. Right? We never say here is I. Therefore, it seems to us that there is someone who possesses all those.
Yes. I have got very muscles. I have got big muscles. I’ve got a very good body and big muscles. And some people say, I haven’t got — I’m very weak and I’m very — I’m very big, so I haven’t got big muscles.
Whatever it may be, still, the — there is a feeling that the I is there who owns the muscle and the body and so on. Those muscles and body are objects which belong to that I. Some people say I have got a very good consciousness. I have got a good mind and memory. Therefore, I can remember very clearly and very profoundly.
Some people say, I have got good intelligence. Therefore, I can understand perfectly and profoundly. And where some people say, I have got — I haven’t got good intelligence. Therefore, I can’t remember. I can’t do.
So some people say, I have got a very good memory. Therefore, I can remember everything very clearly. Whereas some people say, I can’t because I haven’t got good memory. So our consciousness also becomes the object of that I, and I is something which owns the physical body as well as the consciousness. So this is our own feeling and our own way of cognizing.
Now we should think very carefully. This is the way our innate self-grasping holds an I. Now let us see very carefully. If there is an I who belongs — who owns — the head, body, and so forth, and also who possesses all five aggregates.
Right? Right? So then see, where is that I, apart from those five aggregates? Clear? You try to search within yourself.
We have very strong conception of I. That I says I have a good or bad head. Right? And similarly, let us take the example of the five aggregates. I says, I have the five aggregates.
Right? So now let us analyse all five aggregates. So what is that I? Where is that I who possesses the five aggregates after having done the analysis properly? So just you do the analysis by yourself within yourself. Our inborn self-grasping holds an I very tightly as being existing inherently. Because of that conception, we have strong feeling of an I and think the body and the mind or the consciousness belong to I.
Belongs to I. Right? So here, I begins to own and the body and consciousness begin to be the objects owned by the I. Right? In this case, now let us see.
If it were valid, then if Buddha comes and says, would you like to change your body and mind to mine — your body and mind to mine? Then under non-analysis and non-analytical investigation, probably you would say, yes, I would. Right? So now you give your body and mind or the consciousness to the Buddha. Right?
So after having given these two, who remains on the same spot and takes Buddha’s body and mind? Right? If there is still an I existing after having given the body and the consciousness, then it’s the real way of — must go. The real existing as apprehended by our inborn self-grasping. Right?
But if you don’t find the existence of I after having given the body and the consciousness, then it is not valid as being apprehended by our inborn self-grasping. Right? So if you do this analysis quite — now, let’s go. If you get this analysis quite clearly, then we are trying and we are able to negate one portion of the object of negation. Clear?
What have you not understood? In the place of having given your body and mind to the Buddha, if still there is an existence of an I who takes Buddha’s mind and body, then it is the real existence as being perceived by our inborn self-grasping. Right? But if there’s no existence of I, then the way our inborn self-grasping apprehends the I is not valid. It’s not true.
Right? Therefore, if you form the understanding of this logical mark, you will be able to refute, or you’ll be able to negate, a portion of the object of negation. Clear? How would you know it? What?
I mean — all very clearly. When you say I have good consciousness and all — bad consciousness, right, when you say in this way, then how do you think: who is the object and who is the subject? Is this — is this consciousness belonging to the I, or is the consciousness the I, or is I the consciousness? Who are they, and what are they? When you say I have good consciousness or bad.
Body, when you say — alright, when you say I have a very good body, you don’t think that the body is I, do you? I mean, you do your thing or not? Is — how do you understand? Because it’s more — there’s more than the things that make up what you might call — No.
No. Geshe-la — the question was: when you say I have a good body, right, when you say I have a good body, so that — so when you say I have a good body, does that mean the body itself is I? I said no. You said no? Yeah.
So how do you understand that? How do I know that? Yes. Yeah. Well, I’d say because I think there’s more — there’s more than a body to a person.
Sorry? There’s more than just a body that composes a person. Mhmm. So which is this person, more than a body? I’m not really sure — that perhaps these five aggregates is a — And they came as the —
Which aggregate? What? A form of body — or form and feeling — No. No.
You said no. Maybe the five aggregate. So Geshe-la said, which aggregate is the person, or which aggregate is the I? What? I’m not sure.
Have a minute. It might be my view. I can’t call it. Altogether. How about the —?
They’re hard to understand. So, you know, whenever we say, I have — I have very good — I have very good aggregates, five aggregates. Right? When you say, I have very, very good five aggregates. So it seems there is something — there is someone who possesses those five aggregates.
Right? So who possesses the five aggregates? When I say, I have five aggregates. So, five aggregates here. So there’s something that says, I have five aggregates.
So it seems that the five aggregates belong to someone. Right? Belong to someone, and that someone possesses all five aggregates. Right? So at that time, you have to see very clearly who is that one who possesses the five aggregates and how that something is existing.
Right? So ours, what’s called, inborn self-grasping thinks that all the five aggregates belong to it. I don’t know. So therefore, this self-inborn self-grasping is something which is totally existing from its own side, independently without depending on any object, on any causes and conditions. So this, first, we have to recognise, and this we have to check out how it exists in real form.
Could that I be the thing which binds us together? So is there any such I which binds the five aggregates together? If there’s any I existing which binds the five aggregates together, it should be findable. Did you find it? I — well, I don’t understand.
Maybe if you take one of the five aggregates apart, then the I dissolves. I mean, no. As you said, you asked Geshe-la. You seem to say there is an I which binds the five aggregates, which binds the — or which makes the five aggregates. Right?
So Geshe-la said, is there any I existing in that way which binds the five aggregates together? If there is an I which binds the five aggregates together, it should be findable. When something is findable, we should find it when we analyse. So the next question is, did you find that I? Up.
Which binds the five aggregates? Did you find it? It’s the thing — which you — last, when you asked me the question last night and you hit my knee, I said my knee hurts. No. No.
No. You — I’m not — no. I’m not gonna — I’m sure. It’s an extension of the same thing, certainly. But but if he’s asking you a question: what is it that binds these things together?
What is it? Does it exist in fact? Can you find it? Can you prove it? Can you verify — So it is extremely hard to get a conclusion whether or not an I — as — no.
Look. I’m using the word I — exist — whether or not I exist as being apprehended by our inborn self-grasping. Okay? So probably when you read any kind of book on this subject, you might find the word saying non-inherent existence, or something existing by the power of, what’s called, designation and terminology. So whenever you come across those words, right, you have to think that something which has been mentioned is not existing individually, what’s called, in dependence upon its own side concretely without depending on other causes and conditions or other parts and portions.
Right? Normally we have very strong conception of I. Right? We think I and I, which seems very obvious actually, but if you try to find it out, it is unfindable because it is being apprehended by our own self-grasping, what’s called, inborn self-grasping, which is not existing in fact. Right?
So whenever you think, ah, it seems that something is concrete. Something — you know, it seems concrete and it seems quite obvious. Now we have to find it out. If something is existing, it must be findable. If something is findable, it should be found when analysed.
Right? So therefore, whenever you start doing this analysis, you are just doing an analysis on the part of the object of negation. So having negated that kind of object, you’ll be able to establish the proper understanding on emptiness. As I mentioned before, you will come across the word: something is not existing independently or ultimately or inherently. Wherever you come across those words.
So it doesn’t mean that something does not exist even conventionally or even nominally. It doesn’t mean in that way. Right? When we say something is not inherently existent, it does mean that that particular something is existing conventionally or nominally. If suppose if I say the person is not existing inherently, it means by the power of negating inherently existent, we must be able to establish that person as existing conventionally or nominally.
Right? So if something is existing, what’s called, conventionally, then this conventionality has power to perform the action, function, and everything. Therefore, we can walk. We can do something. We can create accumulation of merit or bad.
Therefore, because we are existing conventionally, therefore, we are performing our own functions. Right? There are some people I came across. Some people say, when we say the person is not existing inherently, they understood the word inherently as a non-existence. Then they say, isn’t the person non-existent?
They ask this. We are not telling that the person is not existing. Persons are existing, therefore they are existent. Right? All objects are existent because they are existing conventionally, nominally, therefore they are able to perform their own functions.
I will let you know. So how things are existing. Right? So things are existing mainly due to the power of terminology and thought. Okay?
I’m using the word here. Due to the power of terminology and thought. Right? We must have a valid object upon which we have to give proper name or the term by our thought. Right?
Having given a particular name to a particular object by our thought, we can — what’s called, that particular object will be able to perform the functions. Right? So this is the way phenomena exist. By means of that terminology and by thought, first of all, that object must be qualified with three features. So the object must be qualified in order to give it a certain name by our thought.
If the object is qualified, then we can label the name, which is called terminology, and with this terminology having been given by our thought. Something is not existing from its own side without depending on the causes and conditions and the parts and portions. Therefore, all phenomena are existing due to meeting with other causes and conditions and depending on other causes and conditions. That object or that phenomenon which has existence — which is existing due to the causes or conditions, right — has to be given the proper name by our thoughts. So this is how things are existing.
Let us take the example of Dharma centre. So a Dharma centre is existing. The way it exists is conventionally or relatively or nominally because you people are coming to receive teaching in the Dharma centre, and there are people who are working for the Dharma centre, and you are the student of the Dharma centre. So therefore, conventionally and relatively or nominally, the Dharma centre is existing. How did the Dharma centre come about?
So to the valid object, the designation called Dharma centre was given to a particular object. Right? Before giving the name Dharma centre, there isn’t anything which appears from its own side saying, look, I’m here at the Dharma centre. There isn’t like that. So through your own thought,
we have given the name Dharma centre to a valid object. Then since then, we have called it the Dharma centre, and it’s able to perform its own function. Before giving the particular name Dharma centre to this particular object, right, there won’t be anything which appears or which, what’s called, exists in dependence upon its own side saying, I’m the Dharma centre. Though it is not a Dharma centre because before I established the Dharma centre, it was already there. At that time, it is not called the Dharma centre.
You people are not the Dharma centre, because if you were the Dharma centre, it should be so before giving the name, because you are already existing before giving the name Dharma centre to this particular object. Right? But still, due to the aggregation or due to the gathering of many conditions together, we were able to establish the Dharma centre and to give it the name Dharma centre. Since then, the Dharma centre is able to perform its own function. Even now, the Dharma centre can — the members of the Dharma centre can talk to others in the name of the Dharma centre.
They can bring people in. They can perform the function in the Dharma centre. So therefore, in this case, if you try to say there isn’t a Dharma centre at all, people will laugh at you because there is a Dharma centre which is able to perform its own function. So this is, let’s call, how to get an idea of those, let’s call, words suggested being used before. The house itself is not the Dharma centre or the people themselves are not the Dharma centre.
But the Dharma centre came to exist through the, what’s called, meeting of many conditions: the house, the people, the committee, and the students, and on and on. So therefore, we have given it the name Dharma centre. Therefore, since then, it’s functioning well. So now if we are able to do any kind of functions in the name of the Dharma centre, which is the way of existing conventionally and nominally. Every phenomenon is in dependent origination or arises dependently.
Therefore, there is no single object which is not depending on any other causes and conditions to be able to show its own existence. Mhmm. It’s not that. Continue, wasn’t it? As I mentioned, there is no single phenomenon which exists without depending on other causes and conditions or other factors.
Each and every single phenomenon or object or thing has to depend on many other conditions and causes and conditions to be able to exist. Right? So therefore, therefore, all the phenomena and things are in interdependent origination. Right? So I have just given you what’s called a brief way of identifying the object of negation.
Right? So now you start doing this, and this is the first step to lead to the understanding of the wisdom of emptiness. Having done this analysis, you have to, what’s called, establish the meaning of emptiness by various reasonings you may come across sometime later. And then by your own meditative concentration, you can generate perfectly the understanding of the wisdom of emptiness. So as I have given a very brief explanation on the wisdom of emptiness so as to establish some propensities on our mental continuum.
Yeah. That is — that’s tough. Yeah. That is tough. Yeah.
That one is tough. And what? By this way, we have finished a weekend course. So at the end, I would like to speak a few words before ending our course. So although I have spoken roughly on all subjects from beginning to end, right, it may be — or may not be — or it may be hard for you to implement all what I said, but I’m not going to insist you to practise all, but I want to request you to implement those which you find beneficial either for your mental development or for the benefit of all — you and other sentient beings — or for the sake of practising the teaching so as to generate some good energy for all.
So although we have covered a lot of subjects such as death and impermanence, right, the importance of human rebirth, its value and so forth. We have covered the way of generating the compassion, bodhicitta mind, and so forth. So try to relax. First of all, try to relax yourself. Just be calm.
So a practitioner shouldn’t be very worried. Shouldn’t be, what’s called, nervous. Must be relaxed. Try to tame your mind. Try to pacify your mind.
And having done relaxation — having done relaxation, try to pick up a subject which is most suitable for you, right, of many. You don’t have to jump from one to end without getting much of a lesson or without getting much result. Practising the teaching is unlike drinking a wine or the whiskey, which definitely gives you some change. If you drink a whiskey or something, definitely, immediately you will find the result of that. Practising of teaching is not like that.
It may take some time. Right? It may take some time. But if you continually go on practising it, at the end, definitely you will find some experience, and definitely you will find some change by the power of that practice. So whenever you find some change or whenever you find some, what’s called, benefit out of such practice, that is the result of doing the practice.
So therefore, you just choose one from many so as to enhance your development, mental development, and to increase your practice. Okay? So with these words — with these words, maybe we can just do the grand, what’s called, grand dedication and prayers. He wrote to his king, signed it. Although I have mentioned from beginning until the attainment — I have written instructions about the — Excuse me.
So the author said, no. Although I have written from beginning until the attainment of enlightenment, but to be able to practise all my instructions, it may be found hard even for those great Bodhisattvas. So therefore, you just practise only those which are quite beneficial for your mind development and for your benefit. Right? So he said in this way, similarly, I want to urge you to practise those which you find beneficial and which is most beneficial for your mind development and for the benefit of others.
Right? So otherwise, right, so we have to think which is most beneficial for this life as well as for future life. Whichever is best for those two, one must try to do it. Right? If you do practise sincerely, you will receive the result without doubt.
Right? It is a matter of our practice or not. Otherwise, in the past, many Buddhas and Bodhisattvas have got realization through practising these paths. And in the middle, many have also achieved their realization through this practice. And even today, I have also witnessed many scholars and many realized persons who got realization through practising these paths.
So therefore, there isn’t any fault in terms of the teaching, but it is our duty now. It is our enthusiasm and our practice.