Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. A student’s persistent question — if emptiness doesn’t exist from its own side, does it exist at all? — drives this 26-minute Q&A with Geshe Pema Tsering. He carefully unpacks the distinction: emptiness is real and can be directly realised through meditation, unlike the horns of a rabbit, which no meditation will reveal. He grounds the abstract in personal existence — we conceive ourselves as independent, yet we depend on causes, conditions, parents — then uses space as a directly perceivable example of absence. The discussion closes with a striking mirror analogy: one object reflected in ten mirrors produces ten distinct images, yet one original — showing how a phenomenon appears differently to each mind while remaining one external thing. Suited to students already following the Mind and Mental Factors series.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 05 2006 10 06 M and MF QnA.mp3
UUID: 3f0def97-7cdb-4c21-856d-4000e47ce1a3
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Mind & Mental Factors (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2006-10-06
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 25.9 minutes
Words: ~1,270
So then I never I don’t remember hearing this this this before. So then, example, emptiness itself, it does exist. And then but the emptiness was not created. It was not it was it was not made by something or someone. And then it is it’s just it’s just it’s just there.
And then I guess I was using this word which is usually what? Dharma or phenomena or phenomenon. Phenomena itself, from itself, is there by itself, so to to speak. Is that making sense? Pardon?
Is the way the way of existence of the phenomena. The way of abiding, for example, of the way of existence of emptiness, for example, emptiness does not depend on cause and conditions or on a creator or maker and so forth. It’s permanent, yes. That’s exactly I didn’t I didn’t hear that. I’m sorry.
I didn’t hear. Okay. So then so then Geshe-la was explaining trying to explain trying to make me understand. I didn’t understand. I’m sorry.
What he was saying before, but then Geshe-la is saying, so then let’s explain in a different way. Geshe-la just now said. So let’s try then, the way of existence of a phenomenon is that it is empty. It does not exist from its own side. But it is not to say that it does not exist at all.
It does exist. And that I’ll bring right after class, I’ll come back here, and and I’ll bring all the translations of this word that I’ll find in the dictionary. So then, yeah, this this took a lot of time. Guess, if I to stop here today, next next Thursday, we start with discrimination. Yeah.
That’s a So is that the implication is Emptiness. Emptiness. Emptiness. Emptiness itself because even emptiness is empty. So so what is the question?
I don’t I don’t I don’t get it. So my question is is, Geshe-la talking about, So then, emptiness does exist, but emptiness itself is empty of existing from its own side again. But and then Geshe-la further explained that emptiness is something that one can realize. If one meditates, one will realize directly that emptiness does exist. There is emptiness.
And it’s not like the horns of a rabbit. The horns of a rabbit, as as as long as as much as one might meditate, one will never realize the horns of a rabbit. But emptiness, one one can realize is something that is realizable, so to speak. So then it does exist, but it does not exist from its own side. So does that mean it doesn’t exist?
Sorry. What do you mean? Doesn’t from its own side. So then you don’t need to think much about it, suggesting that you exist, but and then and you see yourself, you conceive yourself to exist from by yourself, from your own side, to be exist from your own side. And then, but in actuality, you do not exist from your own side.
You depend on causes and conditions. You depend on your father and mother and so forth. So you do not exist from your own side, but you still you conceive you conceive yourself. You see yourself as existing from his own side, from your own side, independently. And then he said, but if you were actually to exist from your own side, you wouldn’t need causes and conditions.
You wouldn’t depend on causes and conditions. Okay. Okay. Yes? Yes.
Yeah. Or a mark. Very good. What was the context again? I know what you’re saying.
I just had to to put into context to put a question for Geshe-la. What is that? What were we talking about? Geshe-la mentioned space. Right?
Yeah. Yeah. I mean, we can see things So then maybe maybe with my interpretation, it was bad. Okay? So because Geshe-la was in I I we came back to when Geshe-la was talking about space.
And Geshe-la said, with space, we can realize directly. We can all understand space. Space we can see it directly in space, the empty space. And English was then saying he was talking about he was giving the example of space, you know, to refer to empty, and that that empty is there by itself. And one can realize that by by from its own sign, from its own mark.
There was a not not not reason. There was a wrong translation. Okay? So from from from from its own mark, one can realize that. Okay?
Sign, not specific. Sign. Only mark. Mark. Mark. Yeah.
Or sign. A tag, the word that can be translated in so many different ways. And in this case, I think I shall always then refer you to to to to a mark, which is characteristic of a particular phenomenon. So it means space is not the form of our recognition. Say that again?
Is space sorry. So does that mean space is not a form of our recognition? You mean the space cannot be recognized? Is that what you mean? So then, space is an object of observation, an object of awareness, is an object of knowledge.
So then one can realize from one’s mental sense power, or mental consciousness, one can realize that So then one can one can directly realize the wall by one’s eye consciousness, and then if the wall is not there, one can directly understand that absence of of obstruction for one’s mental consciousness, and then one then understand the spaces in this way anytime. So the wall is there as well as in our mind. You you you know, wall is there by our observation as So then, yes, there is the wall there, there. Japan is there, and there’s also Japan in your mind. There’s the wall, and there is the wall in your mind also.
There’s not only two. There’s infinite number of Japans. Within every mind, there is one different Japan. From the side of the mind. Yes.
So then, yes, so the wall the wall from the side of the mind. Yeah. Because there are many different minds, and then, again, there will be many to each mind, there will be a different one. So it’s not one. So then if if inside here there was five there was an object in the middle and there were ten mirrors, so then it will be the object here, and there will be the object in each of the mirrors also in the same way.
You understand that? Object in the mid ten mirrors. Ten mirrors. Yeah. So what what what is ten?
Just an example. Ten mirrors, hundred mirrors, one thousand mirrors. Doesn’t matter. So then, yes. So then if there is ten mirrors So then if there is ten mirrors, then, again, reflecting one phenomenon, that phenomenon is in each one of mirrors, and the same for Japan and the wall then.
So the object is in the mirror. And you know, the type of Each mirror has a different reflection because, you know, different condition. Then for example, the the mirrors reflecting Geshe-la, and there will be Geshe-la in every mirror. And then so then there’s one mirror which is dirty, one mirror which is clear, one mirror which is big, one mirror which is small, and there will be then a small Geshe-la, a big Geshe-la, a clear Geshe-la, a dirty Geshe-la, and it says, yes. But the root Geshe-la, the original Geshe-la, is only one, and it’s the same. You really understand?
I didn’t. Even if I didn’t understand, if you understood, that’s good. Okay? Okay.