Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. The image of a master and servants anchors this 21-minute session, as Geshe Pema Tsering explains the difference between primary consciousness and mental factors: the main mind is the governor, while mental factors are accompanying servants that each perceive specific characteristics of an object — its color, shape, or make — with several mental factors possible alongside a single main mind. He then works through whether multiple afflictions can arise at once around one main mind. The session closes with a striking question about dreams: is dream anger real anger? The answer is no — dream objects are nonexistent, “like the horns of a rabbit” — yet dream emotions remain non-virtuous because they arise from imprints already on the mindstream. Suited to students beginning mind-and-mental-factors analysis.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 2005 11 29Q Bodhisattvas Way of Life.mp3
UUID: 89d0c4df-81c4-43e3-999c-7bff737caa0a
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Bodhisattva Way of Life 2005 Mar -2007 (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2005-11-29
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 21.5 minutes
Words: ~937
So what’s the difference between a primary consciousness and a mental factor? What’s the difference? What are the differences between but you often hear that someone is a primary consciousness and then their mental factors. So I want to get that across. So then so what what is the difference?
We’re gonna start it. Simply stating that the main mind the main mind is is like is like the the master or the governor. And the the the secondary minds or the the mental factors is is like the servants. So explain I can also explain that the secondary minds or these are these mental factors, they they they come how would I say that? They accompany.
They they they always following along or around. The word for that in Tibetan is usually “khorwa” or “around,” but you could say that they they are minor minds that accompany the main mind. And then can I give an example? So for example, the main mind that that perceives that vase. Okay?
The the mind that that perceives that vase in in general is as a main mind. And then together with that main mind, Geshe-la said there will come many many mental factors that will that will identify maybe the color or or the form or what the the manufacturer and and so forth. So then he says so Geshe-la is saying that together with one main mind, there will come many mental factors. But that at one given time, there will not come more than one main mind, right? And then Geshe-la again, he was explaining the meaning of some definitions to me, and he gave us an example.
The mind that perceives how would you translate that? You could translate it as a thing or or or or as an object or a phenomena. So the mind that that perceives the object in general is a main mind. So the mind that will be perceiving this this clock, the clock in in general, will be a main mind. And then the mental factors are those minds that perceive the characteristics, the the the varying characteristics of of the thing, of the object.
In this case, the shape of the clock, which is squarish and the color and and and or the manufacturer and so forth. So can we have several mental factors? Yes. So you can have several afflictions in your mind at the same time? Good.
Afflictions, he’s explaining his we’re gonna get to maybe to a different answer. He’s explained that each affliction these afflictions will come in relation, in dependence on different objects, right? So he says, what just what Geshe-la just said now is that the main mind to attachment, that attachment will be following or will be around, is different to the main mind that anger might be around — that the mental factor of anger might be around or following. It’s not clear to me, okay? But So can I say, for example, is what can I say is that one main mind will not have there will be one main mind for anger and one main mind for attachment?
And still I ask, and then I ask back. Okay. So but then so then to each main mind, there will will there be only one mental factor of of afflictive emotion or misconception? Instead, no. It’s still the the many that comes, for example, ignorance.
Ignorance, which is a mental factor, also comes. So I’m I’m maybe I’m not being able to to explain it or translate it. Leave it for now. One one more question. Are our dreams fiction, or are they an accurate reflection on our minds?
Fiction. You know, does that signify that we are angry? This is just an example. Okay. Okay.
Okay. So there are different aspects then. So I ask, is that anger that you once experienced in the dreams, actual anger. I asked like this, okay, in Tibetan. And he said, no, that’s not actual anger.
Still, it arose in dependence on on imprints of anger that one had in one’s mind stream. But it’s it’s too just the anger that one experience in the dream. So I said okay. So he says even though okay, it is not real anger because it’s a dream anger, but it is still a non-virtue. It is still non-virtuous.
Is that the same with fear? If you have a fear dream that comes back again and again and again, is that, So then again, the same is the same case with with fear. Because it is a dream, it’s a fear that you experienced in dream that did not have a real object for the an actual object for the arise of this dream. But still, this fear came out of imprints that were on one’s mind stream. So this is a so this is a so the the dream mind the dream mind is is a is a mistaken mind, is a non-virtuous mind.
And that is a non-virtuous, a mistaken mind, a mistaken consciousness. And then that object in the dream is merely nonexistent. You understand? It’s not an existing phenomenon, it’s a nonexistent phenomenon. It’s like a it’s like the horns of a rabbit.
Horns of a Horns of a rabbit. There must have been a cause for that to arise. For the object, you mean? So is the imprint that was placed whilst before previously one had experienced suffering with a certain object or fear with a certain object. So it’s a previous imprint.
It’s based on the previous imprint. Okay.