Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. A four-line verse attributed to Drakpa Gyaltsen — no Dharma without turning from this life, no renunciation without turning from saṃsāra, no bodhicitta without releasing self-concern, no view without releasing grasping — opens and structures this 45-minute talk with Geshe Pema Tsering. He unpacks each line in sequence: the small scope of working toward a good rebirth, the middle scope of renunciation aimed at liberation, the large scope of bodhicitta for all beings. He then introduces the Prāsaṇgika (consequentialist) view of mere labeling as the philosophical position required for full enlightenment. The second half turns to the practice of listening: why study is indispensable, how the three baskets of scripture map onto ethics, meditation, and wisdom, and how three faulty cups — upside-down, holed, and stained — illustrate the listening habits practitioners must abandon.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 05 PP 2003 07 29.mp3
UUID: 6b54a036-83b8-4dda-8555-e968efea26bc
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: DB Presenting the path (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2003-07-29
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 45.1 minutes
Words: ~3,636
So, Drakpa Gyaltsen said that if there was attachment to this life, there was no Dharma. If there was attachment to saṃsāra, there is no renunciation. If there is attachment to our own purpose, there is no bodhicitta, and if there is attachment to grasping, there is no view. What this means is that if we’re doing something with the motivation of doing it for the benefit of this life, if the outcome that we’re searching for involves something in this life, then whatever it is that we’re doing or whatever it is the person who’s doing this action is doing, what they’re doing isn’t Dharma. Because if there’s grasping at this life and that’s motivation, then the outcome isn’t a Dharma practice.
Likewise if someone has in their mind stream a grasping at saṃsāra, at the pleasures and the excellent aspects of saṃsāra. If they’re grasping at that or if they’re attached to that, then there is no renunciation. It means that in their mind stream, is no renunciation. Similarly, if we’re doing something for our own purpose, for our own benefit, and we’re attached to doing something for our own benefit, then we can’t generate bodhicitta, which is the mind searching to benefit for others. Similarly, if we have grasping at true existence or grasping at a sense of self and we have attachment to that grasping, then we don’t have the right view.
So if we’re doing something with a motivation for for a good outcome in this life, if we’re doing something in order to benefit ourselves in this life, then whatever it is that we’re doing isn’t a dharmic practice. For something to become a dharmic practice, we should at least be for the least that we can be working towards is to have a rebirth, a good rebirth in our next life, that is to have the rebirth of a God or human. So that’s the least we can do. That’s the lowest level of practicing Dharma we can aspire to. This is what’s called the motivation of this small being or the limited scope motivation.
And in a similar fashion, if we can expand if we start off with that sorry, it’s not a similar fashion if we expand from that, if we expand our view out from that and we develop the the idea of achieving liberation and not just a good rebirth, then we develop this idea of renunciation. Renunciation comes about when we expand our view out because we’ve turned our mind away from saṃsāra and we’re working towards liberation, we get renunciation. Then if we can expand our view out further from that and not just think about ourselves, but think about all sentient beings, then our scope becomes even bigger, our motivation becomes even greater because we’re working towards enlightenment for the benefit of all sentient beings and not just ourselves. So when we read about Buddhist Dharma, when we hear teachings on Buddhist Dharma, then they talk a lot about practicing Dharma or doing Dharma or these things. But if we are doing anything, whether it’s prostrating, whether it’s saying mantras, whether it’s listening to teachings, and we’re doing these things without one of these motivations.
It’s not actually Dharma. It doesn’t depend on the action that we’re actually doing, but the motivation that we have when we’re doing those things. So we at least need to have this idea of whatever it is we’re doing, we’re doing it to get a good rebirth. We should at least have that idea. If we don’t have that idea, then it’s not dharma.
So when we talk about the first out of these four different things in this verse, the first one was that if we don’t if we have attachment to this life, then whatever we do doesn’t become a dharmic practice or doesn’t become Dharma. So if we look at this one in more detail, if we noticed we will notice that when we get up in the morning and so when we go to bed at night, most of the things that we do during the day are for this life, so therefore they’re not dharmic practice. We don’t think about what’s going to happen to us in our next life very regularly. We seem to spend most of our time trying to make ourselves more comfortable or trying to make ourselves more happy in this life, this time. So we focus most of our energies.
We can see that by doing these kind of things, by focusing on this life, then we’re not going to develop any kind of renunciation. But even if we start focusing on what’s going to happen in the next life, even if we start thinking, I’m doing this in order to become a god or a human in my next life, and we stop thinking about the positive things that were going to happen to us in this life, even when we start thinking about the next life, that’s still not to be a cause for us to achieve liberation. It’s still a cause for us to cycle in saṃsāra. It may be a virtuous cause, but it’s still a saṃsāra cause. What this means is that by focusing on this, by focusing on the idea of achieving a good rebirth in our next life, then we’re creating merit, but it’s not pure merit.
It’s not pure karma. It’s a samsaric virtue. We think about it being reborn even as a god or a human is still going to be a cause for suffering. There’s still going to be suffering that we have to experience when we’re born as a god or a human because in the existence of gods and humans, there is still a fair amount of suffering. So we’re still working towards the samsaric end by working towards that kind of rebirth.
And then we’re not working towards liberation at all when we’re focusing on the next next rebirth. So that’s why it’s called the small scope. But at least it’s a dharmic practice if we’re focusing on the next life. So even if we do manage to develop this sense of renunciation for saṃsāra or if we turn away from our attachments to all the excellent and pleasant things in saṃsāra and develop renunciation, then that’s still not really good enough. That’s still a limited scope of a limited focus because in that case, everything that we may be doing may be pure motivation in terms of that it will get us out of saṃsāra.
It will take away our own suffering. But if we look at it, then once we’ve developed renunciation for ourselves, we’ve determined that we don’t want to experience suffering for ourselves and we’ve turned our mind away from suffering for ourselves, then we have to think about other people as well. And we note that if we’re just doing for our own purpose, if we just have renunciation for our own purpose, then there’s no way that we can achieve bodhicitta, which was the third line of the quote from Drakpa Gyaltsen. So we need to develop bodhicitta in order to reach enlightenment. Now, what we mean when we say bodhicitta is the thought or the wish to attain enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings.
And so we need to develop this thought in order to be able to develop Buddhahood in the end. And the way that we need to do this is to give up completely, to completely throw away any concern or focus we may have on our own benefit, for our own benefit, and start thinking about the benefit of others. We need to be able to think about the benefit of others solely and not our own benefit in order to develop bodhicitta. And from then, what happens is that however hard we have to work, however much we have to do, then we do it happily. There’s no tiring that happens.
We don’t get exhausted by what it is that we have to do benefit of all sentient beings because we have this wish to achieve enlightenment for their benefit. So that’s what happens when we give away our own, we get rid of our own focus, the focus on our own benefit if we give that away and we start focusing on others. So this is what it means when he says there’s if you focus on self, then there’s no bodhicitta. Okay. Okay.
So the first thing so so to recap, the first thing that we needed to do is develop the idea that we’re working towards the next life and not this life because then whatever we’re doing becomes a practice of Dharma. After that, we have to expand our view out and start thinking about the shortcomings of all of saṃsāra and realize that even a rebirth as a god or a human will also include suffering. So in order to eliminate suffering completely, we need to develop our own work towards our own liberation. After that, then we start thinking about others after develop renunciation, this this searching for liberation, then we start thinking about others and realize that in order to really fulfill our purpose, then we have to start working for the purpose of others. That’s what comes next.
But even if we have this idea of not working towards this life, even if we have renunciation, and even if we have bodhicitta, if we don’t have an understanding of the view, then we can’t achieve liberation and we can’t achieve the all knowing state or Buddhahood. We can’t achieve either of those things without the right view, the correct view. So what this means is that we need to focus and to try and understand focus on and try and understand what the correct view is because if we don’t have that, then we don’t have liberation or enlightenment. So in the quote, then it said that if there is attachment to grasp grasping or if there’s attachment to holding, then there is no view. So what this means is if there’s attachment to self grasping, if there’s attachment to grasping at true existence, if there’s attachment to grasping at the self of persons or the self of phenomena, if we’re grasping at any of these things, then we don’t hold the right view.
We don’t have the view that will take us to the the final all knowing state or to the the final Buddhahood. We don’t hold that view if we have this grasping. Now there’s different tenet schools or there’s different philosophical schools within Buddhism. So, people who follow each of the different types of schools will naturally follow their philosophical ideas of that school towards its final outcome, Hence, achieve the liberation or the final realizations of someone who follows the mind only school or they will realize the final view of someone who follows Autonomy school. But the view that we should be trying to strive for towards the most, view that’s considered the most specific and the view that’s considered the one that will take us to final enlightenment is what’s called the Prāsaṇgika or the consequentialist view.
So if we can struggle to understand that view properly, then that’s the best thing because that’s the view that we need in order to take us all the way to enlightenment. So we need to practice for the next life, and let’s start by focusing on our next life in terms of practice. Then we need to develop renunciation to the whole of Samsāra. Then we need to develop bodhicitta in accordance with the view. So if we have both these things, the view and then bodhicitta, then we can work towards attaining enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings.
Now, this view that we need to focus on when we talk about the view, we’re talking about the consequentialist school’s view of reality. And what this is also called the view that doesn’t accord the view that doesn’t accord characteristic, I’ve never heard this one before, characteristic existence? The view that doesn’t accord characteristic existence. Okay, that’s another way of saying the Consequentialist school. So that’s the view that we need to focus on.
Now basically what this view says is that things don’t appear the way that we think that things aren’t the way that they appear to us. The way that they actually exist is not the way that they appear to exist to us. So we need to understand things really are as opposed to the way that they appear to us at the moment. Now the way that they really are is they are merely labeled. A collection is merely labeled as something which is a process that we do from our side.
It doesn’t come from their side. So what this means is that in order to achieve enlightenment, which is merely labeled, then we need to focus on understanding this view, is merely labeled and walk on the, what are called, or progress through the five paths of the three vehicles, which are all merely labeled, and eventually become a Buddha, which is also merely labeled. And in order to do this, then we need to generate the mind of enlightenment, which we need to understand is empty from its side and we are merely labeling it. And then we should try and focus on generating this merely labeled view because we merely labeled people need to achieve merely labeled enlightenment. So so we should think I need to achieve enlightenment for the benefit of all sentient beings and and try and concentrate or or meditate on that thought for a few minutes.
So we have to think that I, who is trying to generate this mind of enlightenment, the mind of enlightenment itself, and its final outcome, is Buddhahood, none of these things truly exist as well as meditating on the idea. Okay. So we’re talking tonight about listening to the Dharma, listening to the Dharma. And usually when we’re talking about listening to the Dharma, then we have to first of all understand what Dharma means in this context because we’re just talking about practicing Dharma, but that’s not the same thing as the same meaning of Dharma as when we talk about listening to the Dharma. Now, when we talk about listening to the Dharma, we’re actually talking about listening to the three different types of teachings which are called the tipitaka or the three baskets of the Buddha.
And the three baskets of the Buddha being Vinaya, Sūtra and Abhidharma are very easily connected to what’s called the three higher trainings that we must try and engage in. So Vinaya which is the instructions on vows etc. Is linked to the higher training of ethics. The instructions in the sutras are linked to the training of meditation, which is the second higher training. The third basket of Abhidharma is linked to the training of wisdom.
Within this basket is included things like the perfection of wisdom sutras, any of the other types of Abhidharma studies that are included and it’s got many different layers to it. So when we’re talking this is what in terms of what the Buddha taught, that’s what’s often referred to as the Kangyur, which literally means the Tibetan translations of the Buddha’s teachings. But when we talk about the three baskets in general, we also include within it all the commentaries that have been given about the Buddha’s teachings. So we’re dealing with everything the Buddha said and everything everybody has said since the Buddha about the Buddha’s teachings. So they’re all included within these three different baskets.
And when we say listening to the Dharma, that’s the Dharma that we’re referring to here. So listening to the the Dharma is is incredibly important thing to do, listening and studying the Dharma. The Buddha said that by listening you have understanding, by listening you can stop negativities, by listening you can figure out what to abandon, and by listening you can achieve nirvana. So with the first one, the only way that we can properly understand something is by first of all hearing it and studying it. And then by doing this, then we can understand what it is that is going to be positive for us and what it is that’s going to be negative for us.
And eventually, by listening first, will later be able to achieve nirvana or Buddhahood. So from this, we can understand that listening becomes incredibly important. Listening and studying becomes an incredibly important thing to do and something that we shouldn’t be dismissive of. And because because listening to the dharma is so important, because studying the dharma is so important, then it’s there there are certain ways that it’s described that we should listen, to the dharma. In specific specifically, there are said to be three faults that we should abandon, which are likened to three faults of a vessel or cup or a bowl.
And then there are six ideas that we should rely on. So six ideas we should generate when listening to dharma and three faults we should abandon when listening to dharma. Okay. So, the three faults of, the three faults of listening or the three things that we need to abandon when we’re listening to the dharma is, first of all, we shouldn’t be like a upside down cup or we shouldn’t shouldn’t be like an upside down cup. We shouldn’t be like a cup that’s dirty, and we shouldn’t be like a cup that has a hole in the bottom.
The reason for this, there there are metaphors for three different ways that we shouldn’t listen to the to the Dharma. Now the first one, being being we shouldn’t be like an upside down cup is, for example, if we actually go to somewhere where they’re teaching their Dharma and where people are listening to the Dharma and we don’t hear a thing, we’re concentrating on something else. We it does nothing goes into our head, then there’s no way that we can learn from what is being said. And this is the same as being like an upside down cup. No matter how much water you pour into the upside down cup, we pour onto an upside down cup, nothing is going to be retained.
So when our mind is scattered and we’re not concentrating on what being is being said, it said that we have the fault of being like a turned an upside down cup. Okay. So let’s just skip into the third one now. The third type of of cup we don’t wanna be like is one with a hole in the bottom. And what this is referring to is an example of, someone who goes to the teachings, and listens, but doesn’t actually retain anything that’s said or doesn’t ponder on anything that’s been said.
So although they went and actually listened to the teachings, after they leave there, if someone says to them, what did the person say? They wouldn’t have a clue because they haven’t retained anything or remembered anything that was said. So therefore, that going to the teachings hasn’t actually done them that much good because they haven’t learned anything from being at the at the teachings. So so this is likened to a cup with a hole in the bottom because no matter how much you pour into a cup with a hole in the bottom, then it’s all gonna leak out. Nothing is gonna stay in there.
So this is another fault that we need to abandon in order to be able to listen to the teachings properly. The second. The second, sorry. The third type of cup that we shouldn’t be like is one with stains in it or, yeah, a dirty cup or one that has a a bad smell or some other kind of defilement.
So so for example, how this works in actuality as opposed to at least how it works in terms of the metaphor is if we have things like rotted food or garlic or poison, in fact, in a cup, then we know that, whatever it is we put into that cup, afterwards, that it’s gonna take on the the those that essence into it. Garlic smells so bad that if we put something in afterwards, no matter what it is that we put into the the cup or the bowl afterwards, if there is no if it it will take on the the stain of or the the smell of the garlic, and so we won’t be able to eat it properly unless it blends with garlic. So it’s the same with the if there was something that had rotted in the cup. And if we put things in afterwards, then they take on the the rottenness of the thing that was there before it, so that that’s wasted as well. And definitely the same with poison.
If we have some poison in a cup, no matter what food we put in there, there’s no way that we can eat the food. So the food is completely wasted or the that anything we put in the cup is completely wasted because, it’s it’s it’s stained or it’s it’s affected by these things that were in beforehand or that were still in the cup. That’s the same as if if we go to a teaching and we have this, self centered idea when we go there and we think, well, I like what he said about that or I like what they said.