Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Why is renouncing the lower realms easy while renouncing all of saṃsāra feels nearly impossible? Geshe Pema Tsering takes this contrast as the pivot of this 45-minute Lamrim commentary, arguing that we have so thoroughly conditioned ourselves to treat samsaric pleasures as genuine happiness that reversing the mind requires real analytical effort. He walks through the three forms of suffering, explains why developing what he calls “definite emergence” — full renunciation of saṃsāra — is far harder than simply dreading lower rebirths, and prescribes analytical meditation (vipaśyanā) as the primary tool, later supported by śamatha. He then traces all samsaric suffering to its root: self-grasping, the mistaken belief in a solid, inherently existent “I” — illustrating through names like “Ruth” how what we cling to as a solid self is, on examination, only a label pointing to a concept.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 19 2004 05 11 RG.mp3
UUID: d10aa4f8-684b-4918-abba-de08bfe6b3f7
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Essence of Refined Gold (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2004-05-11
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 45.0 minutes
Words: ~3,374
Today, we’re going to be listening to the Lamrim, listening to teachings on the Lamrim and thinking about the Lamrim. So, because we’re going to be doing this, we need to develop the right motivation. Now, the right motivation for listening to the Lamrim is that the reason we’re doing it, or the purpose for our study, is in order to be able to understand the graduated path, in order to be able to contemplate properly on the graduated path, and then through this listening and contemplation, to be able to put it into practice through meditation, and therefore achieve the state of a Buddha in order to benefit all sentient beings. So we should be thinking that we’re listening to it in order to be able to practice it, in order to become a Buddha. And may this be a cause for us to become a Buddha.
So, in order for us to be able to meditate on the idea of bodhicitta, we first have to recognize with our minds what it actually is that we need liberation from personally, and what we need liberation from personally is the sufferings of saṃsāra. Once we’ve understood this, then we develop the idea and think that all other beings as well don’t want to experience suffering and want to experience happiness, so therefore, we need to develop some way or develop the skills to be able to get them out of the state of suffering that they’re in. The only way that we can actually lead beings out of the state suffering and lead them into a state of happiness is to become a fully enlightened Buddha, because only as a fully enlightened Buddha we can show those other people how to achieve enlightenment and then, therefore, how to get out of suffering.
So, in order to bring that about, we are going to do whatever it is that we’re going to do, whether it be listening to the teachings or any other practice. The other thing we need to remember, however, is that state of Buddhahood, achieving Buddhahood, isn’t something that is inherently existent, that exists in a solid way, that we as solid individuals are going to achieve in a solid way. Ourselves, the path we’re going to practice, and the outcome of that path are all only labeled as such. They don’t exist inherently in that way. This means that we have to have this idea of this process going on, but there’s nothing solid in the process.
So, with this idea that this is what we’re doing, we’re trying to achieve enlightenment for the benefit of all sentient beings, so we can show them how to stop suffering, but none of this is inherently existent, we should meditate for a few minutes. Even though we have by training in the abandoning of the negative actions and the practicing of the positive actions I described in the also, even though we have developed the causes for experiencing a higher rebirth, that is we have abandoned the causes for being reborn as an animal spirit or health being, and we are developing the causes for being born as human or god, we have to recognize when we say that even rebirth as a human or god is still rebirth in saṃsāra. It’s still a it’s still in existence, not outside of saṃsāra. And the happiness that we may experience in those situations is only temporary happiness. We may experience happiness, but it’s not something that we can rely on or something that we can define as true happiness.
So in order develop ourselves more fully, in order to get rid of even the the the standard of suffering that we experience in saṃsāra, we need to develop the mind turned towards or the mind focused on liberation liberation from saṃsāra.
So, the mind that is searching for nirvana or searching for liberation is actually the mind of the intermediate scope. It s the way of thinking of being of this intermediate scope. But before we re able to develop this idea, the idea of the intermediate scope or searching for liberation, we have to first develop renunciation from the experiences of the lower realms and the causes of the experiences of the lower realms. So, we can’t develop the idea of renunciation without the idea of the lower scope, that is renouncing the causes of the lower realm. We can’t understand renunciation from Samsāra unless we understand the sufferings of the lower realm because they’re included within it.
First of all, we have to look at the more gross experiences of suffering that we may experience in saṃsāra, that is being born as a hell being a ghost or a spirit or an animal. Then after we develop that, then we can develop the idea of being revolted by the whole of saṃsāra, of turning away from the whole of saṃsāra. And this idea of being turned away from the whole of saṃsāra moves us from being a person of a lower scope to a person of a middle scope. So, developing the idea that we don’t want to be reborn as an animal or as a spirit or as a being in a hell realm is pretty easy. If we meditate on it a little bit, we should be able to develop that idea.
People don’t understand it if they haven’t looked at it, if they haven’t contemplated the idea, but once we can contemplate it, once we have belief in it, it’s very easy to develop the idea of renunciation from those existences. It s very easy for us to develop the idea we don want to be born as an animal, don want to be born as a spirit, and we don want to be born in hell. It s a fairly logical conclusion, and if people focus on this, if people meditate on this, then there wouldn’t be anyone who wouldn’t develop that idea. The problem we have is not so much developing this idea, it’s remembering it. We don’t have so much need to convince ourselves of it.
We need to remember it and through remembering it act in accordance with that. We naturally don’t want to experience suffering. We know about the happiness of being a human. That being a human is an alright existence. What we need to do is to take it one step further than that, not just know it, but try and reinforce it or become familiar with that idea so we don’t forget it.
So, what takes a little more convincing or what takes a little more work and is a lot more difficult to achieve is the idea of renunciation from saṃsāra in its entirety. Developing the idea of renunciation from Samsāra is actually called well, something called definite emergence. That is, once you have developed the idea of renunciation, you are definitely on your way out of saṃsāra. This is more difficult to develop. This is much more difficult for us to get our heads around and actually believe in.
The reason for this is that we have conditioned ourselves so thoroughly into believing that samsaric happiness is happiness. That our whole existence and most of the things we do are based on the premise that samsaric happiness is it, is what we are looking for. Everything that we do, most of the things we think about are ways to find samsaric happiness. It’s what we strive for on a day to day basis. We don’t strive for liberation, strive for saṃsāra.
The reason we strive for saṃsāra is because we don’t understand saṃsāra’s nature properly. We don’t understand what makes it up. Instead of recognizing it as the three forms of suffering, we think of it as a place of happiness. We think of the happiness we can achieve in saṃsāra. The three forms of suffering that we need to recognize saṃsāra as are the suffering of suffering or manifest suffering, the suffering of change, or the pervasive suffering of conditioning.
So, this creates a problem because we don’t recognize the nature of saṃsāra and we don’t recognize liberation either. We don’t recognize what liberation from saṃsāra is. Because we don’t know what it is that we are striving for, or we could be striving for, through our habits, through the way we’ve conditioned our mind, we instead focus on trying to achieve samsaric happiness through this misunderstanding. It’s very easy for us to strive for samsaric happiness and it’s difficult for us to develop the concept of liberation from saṃsāra mainly because we don’t get it. Don’t understand what liberation from saṃsāra is.
We don’t understand the difference between true happiness and what we perceive as happiness, which is the excellent bits in saṃsāra. So I said translating this word which is is very difficult because it means the collections of good bits in Samsāra. And Geshe-la said, okay, just say. So, I guess it was difficult to translate and you said, Well, you can say there were happinesses of saṃsāra, he said, But it does have this sense of being the collections of the happinesses of saṃsāra, a collection of the happinesses of saṃsāra. So good bits.
So, what we’re being asked to do, or what we need to develop the idea of is that the things that we normally consider to be happiness are actually suffering, and we have to get rid of those in order to experience true happiness. This is a big ask. It’s very difficult for us to achieve this. It’s very difficult for us to develop this understanding. All of the things that we have been conditioned into accepting as happiness, we have to see as actually suffering and then strive for something that is more reliable as happiness.
It takes a lot of work to develop this idea. It takes a lot of meditation. Without a lot of meditation and a lot of contemplation and a lot of study, we are unable to turn our minds around in this dramatic fashion and develop this mind of renunciation. All of us, without having to put in much effort, can develop renunciation from the lower realms. We can develop the idea that we don’t want to experience that kind of suffering and we want to experience the temporary happiness of being God or human.
It’s not that difficult. Anyone who focuses on it can develop that understanding, but to actually turn their mind away from saṃsāra and focus on liberation is a much more difficult undertaking. In order to develop this idea, in order for us to turn our mind around in this way, the thing we need to rely on in the main is what s called analytical meditation, in Sanskrit, vipaśyanā. We need to rely on this in a very consistent manner. Then once we have turned our mind away from saṃsāra in this way, then we start using placement meditation, or Shamatha, as well, in order to solidify that understanding.
The two things that we need to rely on in the main to develop renunciation is vipaśyanā and śamatha, analytical and placement meditation, with the main emphasis in the beginning being on vipaśyanā or analytical meditation. So, when we’re doing this analytical meditation, the first thing that we need to focus on is where our misunderstandings come from, why we perceive Samsāra to be a happy place to exist and we aren’t striving for liberation instead. When we’re doing this analysis, the first thing we have to recognize then is our ignorance. As ordinary beings who haven’t perceived the way things exist or the lack of inherent existence of things, we are ignorant. We have this base level of ignorance that we work from.
We don’t understand either the lack of inherent existence of things or what’s called the vastness of things, the way that they do exist. So, we don’t understand the nature, the way things are. We don’t understand the way things are and we don’t understand the lack of inherent existence. Through this base of ignorance that we work from, we can create two different types of karma, where we can do two different types of action. We can do a positive action and we can do a negative action.
The results of positive actions is rebirth in a positive realm or positive existence. The results of negative actions are rebirth in a negative existence. But both of them use their base or rely on the base of ignorance, rely on the base of the misperception of the way things are. Now from this sorry, I thought Geshe-la finished but he was pausing for effect. So, what happens then is we have this base of ignorance, right?
So, start from a mis conception. Now, on the base of that mis conception, we then develop attachment, aversion, pride, all of the other negative emotions or destructive emotions that we develop in our mind stream. Through those destructive emotions, through the influence of those destructive emotions, we then go on to accumulate karma, or we go on to accumulate action and effect. Do all these different actions and we have to experience the results of those different actions. The reason that we are doing these things is because of our misconception.
We have this idea that through these actions we can achieve happiness without dealing with the root problem which is the misperception of the way that things are. We have this idea that by doing this or doing that, then we are going to achieve happiness. We spend all that time trying to achieve happiness without dealing with the root problem. We’re trying to find through desire we try and get things and through aversion we try and avoid things. In doing all these things, all we’re doing is creating more actions that we have to experience the results of.
We’re doing more actions we have to experience the results of. So this is the way we spend most of our time, or what we think in general. So, from this basis of ignorance, from this misperception that we have of the way things are, we then proceed to try and create a situation for ourselves where we are happy and we don’t have to experience suffering. Because we’re doing this from the point of view of ignorance and not doing it from the point of view of wisdom, we’re not actually creating the causes for happiness. We re creating the causes for suffering, which we misperceive as happiness.
We do positive things. We do negative things. All of these things, because they come from ignorance, are the causes for suffering, whether they are the suffering of change, which is actually pleasant and is a result of virtuous action, or the suffering of suffering, which is unpleasant and is the result of negative actions. Whether they’re negative or positive actions, they all come from ignorance and, therefore, they all create karma which keeps us in Samsāra. In the past, we have performed or we have done things that we have experience the results of and that’s why we’re in saṃsāra and in the present because of our conditioning we continue to perform actions based on ignorance or coming from the point of view of ignorance that mean we are creating the cause to continue to experience saṃsāra.
This may be positive or negative and it may be based on desire or based on the wish to help, but if it’s coming from the point of view of ignorance or misperception of saṃsāra, sorry, misperception of reality, then it still creates a cause for saṃsāra. So we need to recognize what this ignorance is. We need to recognize what our misperception is because it’s this misperception, it’s this ignorance that has caused us all of these problems. It’s this misperception or this ignorance that has led us to creating the causes for experiencing saṃsāra, that has led us to continually experiencing the results of those actions as well. Now, this ignorance that we’re talking about here is basically grasping itself, the idea of I.
This is me. I am a solid entity. I need this. I need that. I, I, I, I.
We have this thought in our head, I, I, I. This thought of I, the grasping of an inherent self, a solid self, what causes all of our problems, what causes every experience we have of suffering. It’s the root of all the negative emotions we develop or the root of all of the destructive ways of thinking that we have. All of these come from what’s called the source of poison or the original poison of self grasping, of perceiving something that isn’t there to be there that is this solid, inherent, truly existent self. This self that we so highly regard, not only do we have an idea of self, but we have a very high idea of self.
We regard this self as being a very, very important thing, and we spend most of our time trying to figure out ways to make this self happy. Now, the problem with this self is it doesn’t exist. The reason we know it doesn’t exist is because if we look for it, we can’t find it. If we can’t find something that we’re looking for and there’s no way that it could possibly be, then we have to say it doesn’t exist. If something is unfindable, it is nonexistent.
As it is nonexistent, then there is no reason for us to base our whole lives around something that doesn’t exist. Now, that doesn’t mean to say that it is completely non existent. It just doesn’t exist in the way that we perceive it as existing, as a solid, inherent, real thing that we can grasp onto. It is existent in the form of a label, in the form of a concept, a non inherently existent concept, a non solid concept. For example, this idea of I or, as Geshe-la said, if someone was saying Ruth Ruth Ruth Ruth, then there’s a label there.
There’s an idea surrounding that. There is either an I or a label that someone else has given us which we refer to as ourselves, but that isn’t to say that that label itself is inherently existent, either. It’s s a concept. So, what we’ve done is misperceive an idea for a solidly existent thing. So, it isn’t that these things that we perceive as inherently existent, as it solidly existent as an individual unit aren’t existent at all.
They are existent. We can perceive them. We interact with them. We understand them to be there, so they are there. Anything that we can label, anything that we can name, anything that we can conceive of is there, in the way that we can conceive of it.
That isn’t to say, however, that the way that we perceive things, the way that we relate to things, is the way that they exist. Things may exist in a conceptual way. They may exist because we see them in that way. That doesn’t mean that they exist as a solid entity the way that we naturally, we spontaneously view them as existing. It’s not like we have to work at it a lot.
If we say a name, we don’t think, Oh, that’s the concept that I give to this person, or, That’s the concept I give to this thing. We instantly have this idea the way we relate to things that they are inherent, solid, truly existent things that we, an inherent truly existent, solid thing, need to relate to as an external entity. Instead of understanding that we’re dealing with labels, we’re dealing with concepts. If someone says Ruth Ruth Ruth Ruth or Geshe-la Geshe-la Geshe-la or Hillary Hillary Hillary, either the person saying it may have an idea that they’re talking about something solid or the person hearing it may have an idea that they’re talking about something solid that someone’s referring to them. But in actual fact, all we’re talking about there is a label, and we’re talking about there is an idea.
So