Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Geshe Pema Tsering opens by pressing on a deceptively familiar idea: despite knowing we are always changing, we habitually cling to a sense of self as fixed and permanent — a confusion that culminates, he says, in failing to reckon honestly with death. In this 40.5-minute Q&A with an IB Philosophy class, student questions carry the session through Buddhist cosmology: Buddhas’ omniscience and omnipresence and why ordinary minds cannot perceive them; whether Buddhas existed before Śākyamūni; and whether past, present, and future are equally real. A student’s sharp observation — that a Buddha cannot be a Buddhist, since Buddhism means taking refuge from suffering a Buddha has already overcome — prompts Geshe-la to distinguish personal from altruistic refuge. The session closes on the Dalai Lama’s status as a Buddha. Aimed at students with no prior Buddhist background.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 04 2004 05 17 P and M.mp3
UUID: 3cbc1d61-801b-4bee-a7eb-e8939af953f2
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: IB Philosophy and Meditation (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2004-05-17
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 40.5 minutes
Words: ~3,387
Change. So we don’t have an idea of ourselves in this way. We have more of an idea of ourselves as a permanent entity as opposed to what we really are, which is a constantly changing entity. We develop the fault then, the fault of not understanding our true nature, not understanding that we are these impermanent beings who are changing in every moment, like from one instance to the next instance to the next instance. We’re constantly in a state of flux or change.
We think, Okay, this me who yesterday went to work and came from home in a car to where I am now and is going to go home in that car and then is then going to prepare to get up in the morning so I can go to work tomorrow. We have this idea of that being one single being that isn’t undergoing change. So we don’t have this we don’t have a clue that we’re changing in such a constant way, that in every moment, we’re changing and changing and changing and changing and changing, but that doesn’t mean that it’s not happening. If we look at things when we know that eventually the change is going to come to its ultimate conclusion in this lifetime and we’re going to die, our bodies are going to change so much or disintegrate so much that we’re not going to be able to inhabit them anymore. But we don’t keep an idea of this in our head.
We don’t understand this totally. We also understand that haven’t stayed the same in our whole lifetime. Again, I said at one stage he was a very, very cute child. But he stopped being a cute child and he turned into a teenager and then got older and older and now he’s all old. He said that now he’s old.
He didn’t used to be old. He was a child. And so, this isn’t something that is constantly in his head because he keeps forgetting that he is impermanent, he is constantly changing in every moment. If he understood properly, he said that he would perceive that from the moment that he was conceived until the moment that he passes away there is a constant state of change going on. But because he doesn’t see properly, he said, then he holds on to this idea of himself as a permanent entity that does things on a daily basis.
That’s interesting. So we can stop there and you have any questions. We’ll stop there first evening if you have any quest yeah. Maybe is a good one to use here. Bloody.
How about? He goes he doesn’t think it’s alright to kill them. He thinks it’s alright to find any way you can to stop them from doing it, but, ultimately, it’s important even to have compassion for people like this because they aren’t doing things out of wisdom they’re doing them out of ignorance. They’re harming people because they don’t understand the consequences of their actions. So, if you can show them ways or find ways to stop them from doing something, these horrible things, then that’s the best thing to do it.
But you should also try and have compassion for them because they’re the ones who are gonna have to experience the consequences of their actions. Yeah. We couldn’t unless we have developed ourselves to this stage where our minds are clear enough to perceive who has realizations or not, and that’s a fairly high level of meditation, of meditative realization. Until you develop a really high level of meditative realization, you can’t tell who is a Buddha or not. And when you can, then you can tell not only who is a Buddha or not but where they all are.
And perhaps there are some that we can’t perceive because of our delusive minds or deluded minds, I should say. So the way that we can know that there are Buddhas is that we investigate the Buddha’s teachings enough to develop faith in the Buddha’s teachings through the way that everything is presented. Develop faith in the way that a Buddha explains things and realizes that he or she must have wisdom in order to explain things in that way, then we develop belief in whatever they say. And once we develop belief in what they say, then we can look at the instances where they say, There are Buddhas working for us all the time in different ways, and then we develop faith that there are Buddhas through their words. Okay.
Are you ready for existential gymnastics? Okay. So according to the way the Buddha explained it, right, the Buddha is like an idea as well as a being. The Buddha is said to have these three different elements to them. The Buddha is said to have these three different elements to them.
They’re said to have a mind, and from this mind comes speech, and then also from this mind comes physical form, in whichever physical form they choose to manifest. So, when the Buddha’s intent or their thought is said to be presented, then it is said to be that the Buddha is there, right? And there’s also this other thing that the Buddha is said to be omniscient, therefore all phenomena are things that are known by the Buddha. So, if all phenomena are known by the Buddha, that means that the Buddha’s mind is omnipresent, because it’s perceiving everything. And if everything is being perceived by the Buddha then that means that there’s this constant process happening where the Buddhas, I should say, are constantly working for the benefit of others in every direction, in every place, because there’s nothing that they don’t know, if that makes sense.
And that’s that omniscience is the logical conclusion of getting rid of all the obstructions to knowledge. Yeah. Right. So then this question always comes up. It’s just that everyone keeps asking the question, If there’s Buddha here, how do we know?
Or, Why don’t Buddhas come to teachings? And they keep getting questions like this in all the different ways. And so he said, the answer is that we have to be looking at it from two sides. There are these more refined levels of mind which the Buddha works at, that are able to perceive everything. But because we don’t have them, then we’re not able to perceive things.
So the Buddha’s presence is everywhere and is working constantly for the benefit of others But if we don’t have the perception to perceive that, or the ability to perceive that, then we’re not going to be able to see anything. So it’s one thing to ask where the Buddha is, but it’s another thing to actually focus on ourselves and work on ourselves so we can develop those understandings. He says, Now what question have you got? A Buddhist or Buddha? Buddhist.
He said he doesn’t have a clue. And so he said he he can’t tell who’s a Buddhist because whether you’re a Buddhist or not depends on whether you have refuge or not. Seeing another person whether person has refuge or not is incredibly difficult. So even if you were a Buddhist, he couldn’t tell, let alone whether you’re gonna become one. He said it’s it’s very hard to.
This is like a translator rarity problem because you’re saying Buddha wasn’t a Buddhist. In the English, that’s not possible. Right? Buddha can’t Christ wasn’t a Christian. Yeah.
Yeah. Okay. So Geshe-la’s giving I know I don’t know. He may not be, but he lot of credit here because he thinks you’ve come up with a very clear logic in that you can’t say that Buddha was a Buddhist by the definition of Buddhist that he’s given this evening. He said that a Buddhist was someone who goes for refuge to the Buddha in order to get rid of suffering or to not experience suffering.
But because a Buddha has completely gotten rid of suffering, they can’t be someone with refuge, therefore they can’t be a Buddhist. And he thinks that that’s what you meant. And he was saying, This is true, and it was very astute of you to pick this up. But then he also said, But there are different types of refuge, right? Because the Buddhas perceive that all sentient beings are experiencing suffering.
So although they may not need a sense of refuge for themselves, they have developed the idea of working towards all sentient beings stopping experiencing suffering. And so in that way, they do have a sense of refuge on behalf of all other sentient beings, that they wish all sentient beings to be free from suffering. So they may not have a personal refuge they may not be turning towards Buddha, Dharma and Sangha from a personal point of view because they have nothing that they need refuge from, on behalf of all other beings, then they are working towards that so that in that way they have what’s called an altruistic refuge. It wasn’t called. I didn’t think so.
Yeah. He said he doesn’t know about that. That’s that’s that’s that’s because that’s your opinion. He says, so he thinks that you can start a science religion. But, yeah, I don’t know if that’s more science fiction religion, I think.
What are the names that had the policy before the Buddha? Uh-huh. Okay. Do you mean like the historical Buddha Śākyamūni? Okay.
Did you guys hear that by the way? No. So were there beings that actually had the qualities of a Buddha? There were Buddhas that had the qualities of a Buddha before the historical Buddha, but didn’t articulate that, didn’t say talk about it. According to the Buddhist tradition, Buddha Śākyamūni was the fourth Buddha, fourth what’s called wheel turning Buddha or fourth Buddha who instigated an era of Buddhist Dharma in the history of the world.
There were also other Buddhas that didn’t necessarily teach Dharma but were Buddhas. There are many of them. Yeah? But hang on. That doesn’t make any sense.
Well, it does make sense, but I have a very pedantic mind. And so so the the Buddhas how long do they remain a Buddha is a different question to what do the Buddhas do on a day to day basis when they’re alive on earth? Does a Buddha have a whole day? Yeah?
Yeah. Okay. Okay. So Buddhas have completely given up any idea of working for themselves. They do nothing for themselves.
Everything that they do is for all other beings. Not only that, but they don’t have any problem with that. It’s not difficult for them to do that. It’s very easy for them to do that and it makes them very, very happy to work for the benefit of all sentient beings. They don’t get tired because they don’t have this sense of self that needs to get tired or whatever.
So that means that every single moment of a Buddha s existence, they are focused on working for other beings. They don’t need a moment off, let alone a day off. They’re always working for others. Yes? The focus on this year’s side, does that it’s just mentioned in all directions.
Does that Right. Okay. I can see that this is the easy question evening. Right. Well, not only Buddhists, but all beings exist.
Yeah. So not only Buddhas, but all beings exist in all three times. Right? Because We, as beings in our self, up until now, have been the past, right? So every moment from now backwards is past.
And our various incarnations, in various rebirths, we have all through the past. Okay? And we exist in the moment now. Yeah? And we will exist in the future.
Alright? Mindful for this kind of thing. Well, yeah. But yeah. Yeah.
Yes. The the continuum will exist in the future. Right? Okay. So therefore, all beings exist in all three times.
There was yesterday, there’s today, there’s tomorrow. There’s a continuum that goes through all these. All beings exist in all these three times. Okay. Sort of exist.
I mean, like, I can’t meet currently this this instant. Currently, this instant is gone. Think instantly from now. I’m just trying to figure it out. It is that it should be overwhelming for me.
Because otherwise, it’s a lifetime. Yeah. But is it there’s a continuum that exists all three three. Was actually taking from the point of view that says, you know, the idea that not really any such thing as the the past or the future, that the past is just a memory. That present is the only thing that exists, but is ever changing.
Of course. Okay. So I guess this disagrees with you. He said that anything that happened up until now was the past and that happened. Yeah?
And the present exists in a very momentary way at the moment. And in the future, the future is what’s going to happen in the future. So therefore, the past exists, the present exists, and the future exists. So the future when we want to we wanna experience happiness and we don’t wanna experience suffering in the future, and that will depend on what we do in the moment in the present. So therefore, the future plays out in that way as well.
Okay. But but there’s a difference, Geshe-la said, but you’re not saying I can’t believe. Sorry about this. Geshe-la said, you’re not saying the present is the future. You’re saying the present you know what I mean?
You’re not saying the future is the present. If you’re saying the future is the present, then that’s not a nonexistent. But you’re not saying the future is the present. You’re saying the future is the future. Alright?
So as long as you say the future is the future and the past is the past and the present is the present, and then you they all exist. Right? But as soon as you say the future is if you say the future isn’t now, of course, it’s not now. It’s the future. And the present isn’t now.
Of course, it’s not now. It’s the past. And the past isn’t now. Of course, it’s not now. It’s the past.
Right? So they all exist relatively. Right? But when you say the future isn’t now, of course, it’s not now. It’s the future.
If you start the future is now, then you’ve got a problem. Then then it’s not true. Whatever’s gone is gone. Whatever’s coming is coming, and whatever’s now is now. So we may have experienced happiness in the past and suffering in the past, that’s all gone and that’s what we’re experiencing now, right?
But it’s the past. So in that way, all those experiences were in the past. They’re not now, but they were the past. They are the past. So the way to look at it, then, you said, is that whatever’s happened in the past is gone.
What we need to be focusing on is the future. And what we need to be focusing on in terms of future is establishing the causes now for experiencing happiness in the future as opposed to experiencing suffering in the future. So, if we focus on the present and try and create the causes for happiness in the future, then we’re looking at it the right way. Oh. Said, most Tibetans consider the Dalai Lama to be a Buddha, but he can’t tell you for certain because he doesn’t have the realization to be able to perceive whether someone’s a Buddha or not.
Doesn’t recognize or doesn’t experience it? Yeah. Yeah. Sure. So because the Dalai Lama, it’s believed, chose to be reborn as a human being in this planet in order to benefit beings, it means that as a human, he has to experience suffering of being a human.
But because of his perception and his abilities, he doesn’t actually experience that suffering the same way we experience that suffering. So it looks from the outside, when we look we say, Okay, he’s getting old he’s experiencing that suffering or this suffering. But from his side, he doesn’t experience it as suffering he experiences it as happiness because he’s been in control of his mind in that way. So if a Buddha chooses to incarnate themselves or to be reborn into an instance to help beings, then they will experience whatever that incarnation has to experience. For example, if they choose to be reborn as a human to help beings, then they will experience humanness.
If they choose to be born as a cat to help beings, then they experience cat ness. But the difference is the way that they experience it. The way that they experience it is as bliss and happiness because they’re working for others instead of worrying about themselves. Yeah. Do you hang on?
Is because Oh, okay. Is it yeah. But is it a clear one? Quick? Or maybe we’ll give this lady a go and then we’ll come back.
Yeah. Other people’s suffering. Because they’re wise, because they know so much that not only do they know that we’re experiencing suffering, they also know what the cause for that particular experience of suffering is and how we can get rid of that cause of suffering so we can stop experiencing the result, which is the suffering. So it s not only that they know that we re experiencing suffering, they know why we re experiencing suffering, they know how to make us stop experiencing suffering because they know things. They’re supposed to be omniscient.
They not only experienced suffering, but they were exactly the same as us in experiencing suffering. So they experienced all these different lifetimes with all these different types of suffering that could possibly be experienced. So they have an idea or a memory of that as well. Okay, yes, quickly. Okay.
So that’s fairly straightforward. I’m just going, oh no, it’s kind of a complicated one. Okay. Okay. So he said, first of all, he does believe that the Dalai Lama is Buddha.
Right? And the the difference between believing that the Dalai Lama is Buddha and seeing that the Buddha Śākyamūni, the historical Buddha was Buddha, was that the historical Buddha Śākyamūni came as Buddha. He taught as Buddha, he performed all these deeds as a Buddha, and he went down in history as a Buddha. The Dalai Lama hasn’t done that he’s come in the form of a monk. So Geshe-la says when he looks at him he sees a monk, he sees someone behaving as a monk, and he’s been chosen to be reborn as a monk to benefit beings, so he sees him as a monk.
That doesn’t mean he doesn’t believe he’s a Buddha because he’s actually a Buddhist. Geshe-la said he tries to practice Buddhism. So, that means that he has faith in the Dalai Lama and he has faith in the Buddhist teachings. So, he believes that the Dalai Lama is a Buddha. But the reason it’s more difficult to establish whether Dalai Lama is a Buddha or not as opposed to the historical Buddha is because of the aspect that they’ve taken in his lifetime or the body they’ve chose to inhabit in his lifetime.
Mhmm. He said, of course, there would be a Of course, there would be a connection between the Buddha that is the Dalai Lama and other Buddhas because they have the same nature of their mind, right? So they have the same understandings and the same perception about things, so of course they would have some kind of connection. And he said, the other thing you need to remember is that Buddhas, because of their telepathic capacities and their very subtle levels of mind, don’t need to go and visit each other. So he said, the Dalai Lama doesn’t go, Okay, I’m going to go and see another Buddha now, their minds are in sync.
Is that okay? Anyone else gonna die if they don’t ask questions? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah.