Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Geshe Pema Tsering opens with a puzzle that briefly stumps even his interpreter: what is the difference between apprehending a “sign” and a “mark”? In this 61-minute class on the omnipresent mental factor of discrimination, he draws on two Abhidharma sources to distinguish signs — features grasped by the non-conceptual sense consciousnesses — from marks, which appear to conceptual mind. He then maps four bases of engagement (perception, hearing, differentiation, and logical inference) before climbing a cosmological taxonomy: discrimination of the small (desire realm), the vast (form-realm concentrations), the limitless (formless absorptions of boundless space and consciousness), and nothingness. The session ends at the peak of cyclic existence, where gross discrimination dissolves entirely — illustrated by Geshe-la imagining his own death and instantaneous rebirth into the formless realm, where nothing remains but the “mere I.”
File metadata (for organising)
File: 10 2006 10 26 M and MF.mp3
UUID: 1e3653fc-1401-4e0d-a937-55375861e008
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Mind & Mental Factors (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2006-10-26
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 61.0 minutes
Words: ~4,244
So Geshe-la is telling us then to give rise to a good motivation and then wishing to bring all sentient beings to to the state of enlightenment and then to accomplish that, to attain enlightenment oneself. And one is going to listen and study the teachings on mind and mental factors, and then one will adopt those those minds which are virtue and abandon those minds which are non virtue and in this way accomplish the state of enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings. So then we start today. We continue with the the the five omnipresent mental factors, and we start today with the the mental factor of discrimination, which is called discrimination. And then we we have a quote from from an Abhidharma Abhidharma text, which is telling us that what is then what is then the defining characteristic of discrimination.
And so it is defining characteristic. It is it is that which has the defining characteristic of knowing upon aggregation. And then Geshe-la was explaining that this this word that was translated as aggregation is making reference to the aggregation of an object, a sense power, and and and consciousness related to that sense power. Okay? And then And then so then that that how to say?
Discrimination is it can be apprehending what was translated as a mark or distinguishing mark or sorry, a sign, a distinguishing sign, or it can be apprehending mark, and that’s And then so then so then, I guess, I was explaining, so then this apprehension of a sign has to do with a non conceptual consciousness, and the apprehension of a mark is making reference for conceptual con of a conceptual consciousness. And then so then the the this entity that apprehends this the the sign and the mark can apprehend by different means. How is it that it apprehends? It apprehends through perception, through hearing, through differentiation, and through knowledge the object. Is this the right page?
Yes. And and in this way, he designates conventional attaches a convention or designates an expression to to the to these objects. Okay? Okay? So then Geshe-la is then again explaining that by by perceiving or hearing or differentiating or knowing the object, then then the mind and the consciousness then that that consciousness of of discrimination, how do you say, gives attaches or or imputes conventionalities or names or saying this is this, that is that, and so forth.
Okay? So then so then this is what is was stated in in the this Abhidharma text, and then we go then to the to the actual definition or to the actual defining characteristics of discrimination. This this sentence then is telling us that it is that lower, which then apprehends mark, apprehends the the the the the distinguishing signs of an object upon the aggregation of the tree, which is the object, the sense power, and the consciousness, and then and and apprehends this this uncommon mark of the object. This one. Oh, sorry.
Uncommon sign of the object. Okay. So just to follow with the translation you have. Yeah. And then we have from another text, which is the text distinguishing the five aggregates.
We have in this text, it is asked what is then what is called discrimination? And it is that which apprehends the the signs of of of an object, we are told. And then Geshe-la was explaining, so then giving an illustration, general illustration, so then when an eye consciousness apprehends an object and is that, which is then saying that there is yellow, there is red, there is blue, and so forth. And when also, when when one hears, oh, that is called vase, that is called a pillar, and so forth. And so this is this is all different examples of discrimination.
So then if we if we divide then discrimination, we have the discrimination which apprehends signs and the discrimination apprehends marks. Okay? So You could explain that. It will be explained. Between a sign and a mark.
It will be explained. Next. Are you looking at this like I was supposed to know what you’re talking about? Oh, no. No.
I’m looking at from my own perspective because the words both words can be translated in both ways. It is amazing. In the dictionary, you have this word in Tibet and a sign in mark, and this word in Tibet and a sign in mark. And it’s like I I myself I didn’t understand. So then we are explaining right in the next sentence.
So then, that which apprehends a sign, it is it is the apprehension of the discrimination apprehends a sign, which is an uncommon feature of an object which appears to a non conceptual consciousness. That’s what it is referring to. So then visualizing and explaining, and when this this non conceptual consciousness is making reference to the five sense consciousness, and this five sense consciousness, each one of them have have its own object of perception. And then the apprehension of in the apprehension of this objects of perception and discrimination with this object of perception is then this apprehension of of signs or is called apprehension of signs. And then as for and then as for as for the the discrimination which apprehends Mark, then we are told it is it is the apprehension of a sign, which is the an uncommon feature of an object which appears to a conceptual consciousness.
Okay? Or is the perception? The direct perception. No. No.
No. Not direct perception. The perception. Yeah. Yeah.
Okay. So then, yes, the of a sign, which is the uncommon feature of an object which apprehends, which app which appears to a conceptual consciousness. Okay? So then Geshe-la was gonna give you an example that how the five sense consciousness upon contact with the the respective objects. So the the eye sense conscious upon contact with the visual objects, then we’ll differentiate, we’ll discriminate between forms and colors and shapes I mean, sorry, shapes, colors, and and and sizes and so forth.
And then how a a near sense consciousness will then discriminate between different qualities of sounds, and then a a nose, different qualities of smells, of good smell, bad smell, and so forth. And then the different it’s the same with body and tone and so forth. So then that’s that’s what is being referred to. And then I guess, that is then explained. And then so then in the whilst discriminating while you have a discrimination apprehends the signs, which is based on the five sense consciousness, then was having apprehended and discriminated in the signs, then the the the the mind then comes.
And so then I guess, I was then giving an example. So then if I have apprehended a form or a smell, which is either good or bad, then that the conceptual mind would then come and say, so then that is bad, that is good. And in this way, you will apprehend what is what was called here, the mark of that object, which is something that appears to that conceptual mind. Okay. So then what what are the basis of engagement of these two these two types of kinds of discrimination.
So then you have the basis of engagement, which are perception, hearing, differentiation, and knowledge. So then so then we are So then you just you everybody’s is hearing what Geshe-la is expression, and Geshe-la is explaining. So then the meaning of this, each one of them, the first one, which is perception. So then the basis of engagement of discrimination, which is perception. So then that is explained as being then attaching a conventionality or a name, so to speak, to an object, which is then directly perceived or seen.
And then Geshe-la was then explaining. Geshe-la then said, you you heard him saying, It’s just saying that this is this is that. That’s what it is. And then as for as for hearing, then we are told that it it refers that that it makes it is it is that which then attaches conventionality or imputes conventionality or names on the the basis of having heard credible credible, believable believable words. And I I was explaining.
So then so then this is again having having heard word words which are not misleading, which are not mistaken, and then then attaching conventionalities on the basis of what one has heard. And then, then explaining then how is it that discrimination comes about by means of of differentiation. And then we are told that then then it is then this this base of differentiation, basis of engagement of which is differentiation is then that which then attaches names of conventional analysis to an object, having ascertained it on the basis of a of of a logical reason or of a reason. You you have the word sign there in English, I guess, within which then is going to confuse with anything else, but it’s it’s it’s on the basis of a reason. So then Geshe-la was explaining that that’s that refers to hidden phenomena.
So, for example, impermanence. So then we had we we Geshe-la was then giving a very basic argument that that novice monks study in the logical classes. So then impermanence, something is impermanent because a phenomena is impermanent because of of its being a product because it because of its being a product. Product. Yeah.
It’s just a logical argument. So then it’s just to say that what is being said here is is to make reference to phenomena which are not directly realized by the senses, hidden to the senses, so one can only infer them logically. So then it’s on the basis of a logical reason, then one attaches conventionalities or names to the phenomenon. So then, I guess, that was explained. So then the the basis of engagement, which is knowledge, then is that which then attaches conventionalities by having discriminated an object, how to say, which has been directly ascertained.
And the English language was going back to to that which was translated as as perceiving or perception. Perception. The let me see. Perception. Yes.
So then the perception, it is then directly perceiving an object and then attaching names to that object or to that object. And I was then saying, so then perception can be a mistaken perception or or not. And then in knowledge, we have this direct direct ascertaining of an object. So then it is it is, how to say, is correct. It is ascertaining that which is as opposed to to to doubts and so forth that one might have to to and with respect to what the object is or is not.
Okay? I’m gone. What’s next? You you understand? So then so then this is the meaning of of these these words, of these terms according to to the higher Abhidharma text.
Okay? The compendium compendium of knowledge. And then according to the Treasury of Knowledge, we have So then according to the treasury of knowledge, then you have then the apprehension of of of a sign of the object, of the actual of the actual thing, and then apprehension of of of a sign of the conventionality or of the convention. Okay? And then as for as for then the the apprehension of a sign of of of the actual of the actual object itself, then you have which is the apprehension after having distinguished having finally finally distinguished the particularities of of the object and then determining that this is this is blue, this is yellow, and so forth.
Okay? And then as for then the the the apprehension of a sign of conventionality, then you have then is that it is that apprehension of fine distinctive particularities of of the object, of the conventionality, which then which then thinks, oh, this is a man. This is woman. This is a car. This is a motorcycle, and so forth and so forth.
Okay? So then, again, we can divide discrimination by means of of of of basis, and then you have six, and then you have so then the discrimination which arises from the upon the aggregation of form, an eye, sense power, and an eye consciousness, and then a sound, an ear, sense power, and an ear consciousness. Consciousness. And then, again, that discrimination which arises upon the contact of of a a smell, an odor, an odor, nose sense power, and a nose consciousness. And, again, the same for tongue, the the taste, the tongue sense power, and the and the tongue consciousness.
And, again, for the for the tactile object, the body sense power, and and the body consciousness. And then, finally, again, mental phenomena, the, how you say, the mental sense power and the mental consciousness. So the English language is explaining that, in as as we have here, discrimination arising from the contact upon the aggregation of of whatever sense power and and and subject and its consciousness. So then when when when when the text is talking about discrimination that arises upon the contact, so there’s arising from the contact, and Geshe-la explains, so then those are two different phenomena. In that, they are not concomitant phenomena.
They are not concomitant in five different ways as it was explained with other phenomena. So then what is being said is that discrimination arises has must arise after after contact has happened. So contact from contact, then discrimination arises, and that also means to say that contact will be the directly preceding condition for the arise for the arise of discrimination. Okay? So the English language is important to understand that and to keep it in mind that you must must understand this in terms of of it being of contact being a direct proceeding directly preceding condition of discrimination.
Pardon? So then, it’s like this. So Geshe-la will explain. So then this this is contact. This is the mental factor of contact, the omnipresent omnipresent mental factor of contact.
But when when one is saying when in the text here is being said that discrimination which arises from the contact, that is this contact which is being referred here in the text as we see it where was it? As we see in the bottom of page twenty twenty one, it is not the contact which is concomitant concomitant with with this discrimination. It is it is a contact which has arisen in the previous moment, and that which has arisen in the previous moment has concomitant with it another discrimination, another mental engagement, another all the other five, all the other four of the present mental factors with it. And then with discrimination that arise upon this previous moment of of of of then you have another contact and and all the other omnipresent mental factors Is it is it is it making sense? Okay.
Can you give an example? What I’m thinking is that that my contact is to see this as a to see this, and then my discrimination is to is to label this book. So that you just have something different. No. No.
No. It’s it’s like this. What Geshe-la was explaining right now, there’s a consciousness, and there’s the five omnipresent mental factors. Amongst these five omnipresent mental factors, we have discrimination, we have feeling, we have contact, we have mental engagement, and so forth. So then one moment of of the consciousness, they are omnipresent, they arise at every moment of consciousness.
So that one moment of consciousness, then those those those omnipresent mental factors arise. They arise together and they cease together. Now this discrimination is is a a temporal sequence that you have here. We’re talking about contact, the omnipresent mental factor, and we’re talking about the omnipresent mental factor. But we’re talking about a concomitant discrimination which are not arising at the same time.
Even though with this contact that is being referred here, there is a discrimination arising together with it. But it’s not the discrimination which is being referred here in the same sentence. Discrimination which is being referred here in the same sentence has arise in a later moment after this contact has already disintegrated together with each discrimination. Okay. Because we haven’t described contact yet.
No. No. We’re going to get to contact. But it’s the fourth one. Yeah.
But as Geshe-la was explaining, and this all the because they are called omnipresent mental factor, they are called omnipresent factors because they all arise simultaneously. They are concomitant in these five ways, and they arise simultaneously, and they disintegrate simultaneously. So is is that okay? Making sense? And then you have also a division of discrimination by means of its object of observation.
And then you have then a discrimination which is reasoned, a discrimination which is unreasoned, discrimination of the small, discrimination of the vast, discrimination of the limitless, and discrimination of nothingness. And then so then so then we have those six discriminations by means of subject of observation. And then the first one of them, which is reason discrimination, has is divided in in in in three. And the first one is then discrimination of of being of of being skilled of of one who is skilled in the relationship between names and objects. Okay?
And then secondly, discrimination which observes, how to say, that compounded phenomena are impermanent and so forth. And then thirdly, then discrimination, which, how to say, has clearly sees the object of observation in its aspects. Okay? And then secondly, we have the unreasoned discrimination, which we are told that then the opposite of those three, which has also division of three and is the opposite. Those three are the opposite of of the three that were previously mentioned.
So then you have then a discrimination which is unskilled in the relationship, which is not skilled in the relationship between names and forms, discrimination which is not able observe, to understand, to observe that, how to say, compounded phenomena, impermanence, and forth. And thirdly, discrimination which which does not clearly sees the object of observation and its aspects and so forth. Clearly distinguish. And then the discrimination, as for the discrimination of the small, we are told it is it is that which is included in the in the that discrimination, those those discriminations which are included in the mental continuum of an ordinary being of the desire realm, which has not attained to an actual concentration or absorption, and also everything that is discriminated, discrimination which is observing, how to say, phenomena of the of of the desire realm. Okay?
So so just like our like ourselves and our our discriminations of of the world around us. And then the discrimination of the vast is is making reference then to those discriminations which have as as as objects of observation phenomena of the form realm, and also those discriminations within the continuum of being of the form realm. So then I guess the level of sense can also then the difference. Why is it why is it that this this discrimination is called vast and the other one is called small. It’s just because, again, the one one is is within the desire realm, and and it has to do with everything of the desire realm, which is just small small things and important things.
And then Geshe-la was in saying, we and then these discriminations of the form realm, they are vast because they are they have transcended already the desired realm. They they they are they are they they they had referred to the attainment of higher levels of concentration and higher attainments and so forth that might that might even be used to lead one to enlightenment and so forth. So then, again, so then those concentrations, the the of of of the small so the discriminations of the small, which have to do with discriminations within the desire realm and the continuum of ordinary beings, which are not attained to higher concentrations, then those are those are discriminations which cannot which have to do again with only with the the the objects, with phenomena of the desire realm, which have not attained to calm abiding and the concentrations above calm abiding and so forth. So then they’re called small because of that. So the guy’s life is explaining again.
So then this this is probably the the meaning between this distinction of the small and vast, discrimination of the small and discrimination of the vast. And, again, was again again, reading again for the the the what is explained as as the discrimination of the vast discrimination, which is vast, which is then, again, the discrimination within the continuum of a being of the form realm or a being which has attained concentration of the form realm. And, again, Geshe-la was explaining it. Again, these these are vast because also these concentrations are necessary in order to be able to attain to to the how to say, within this this was abiding in this in this concentrations or abiding in the form realm, there are no coarse afflictive emotions. And then, again, these these concentrations are necessary in order to be able to eradicate afflictive emotions, in order to be able to realize selflessness and so forth.
So then because of that, because there is so much importance to them and meaning to them, so they are called vast. And then, again, if I was explaining that together with this with this consciousness, which is abiding in the in the form concentration or or or which is consciousness of a being of the form realm, then there is a there arises also a feeling, the mental factor of feeling. And the mental and the feeling that arises of that is only there are only feelings of of of happiness and bliss. There are no feelings of suffering and no no neutral and and suffering feelings arising in in in the being of this realm or one who is abiding in this concentration? And then and then we have, again, the next one, which is the discrimination of of the limitless, which is explained to be then a discrimination how do you say a discrimination, which has as as its object as as its object of observation, then the limitless space and the limitless consciousness.
And then this, again, Geshe-la explains this makes something that makes reference to the formless concentrations in the formless realm, and then which are then are just, like, limitless, just like space is limitless and so forth. Okay? And then lastly, the sixth one, which is then the discrimination of of nothingness. So discrimination of nothingness. Is that it?
Yeah. Of nothing whatsoever or or nothingness. It is then that discriminate those discriminations which have as its object of observation the source which is nothingness. Again, And then and then, again, this this discrimination of of nothingness, again, is making reference again to to the third formless concentration, the third concentration of the formless realms, which is then nothingness, which is called discrimination of nothingness. Okay?
And then Geshe-la is explaining, and there are four form concentrations, and there are four formless concentrations. And then the fourth one, which is the highest one of those formless concentrations, is not mentioned because in this last one, which is called the peak of cyclic existence, there is no discrimination there. Okay? It’s called the peak of cyclic existence, and it’s referring to that which there is no gross discrimination, but there is no absence of discrimination either. So it’s a bit I guess I was saying there is no discrimination whatsoever.
So That’s the. The formless is the the highest of all concentrations, of all absorptions. Then Geshe-la was briefly explaining that this is a formless absorption. Right? It’s a formless concentration, a formless realm of existence also.
So one cannot see, one cannot grasp, one cannot hold on to it or anything. And then explaining that it is it is a a place, so to speak. This Geshe-la was then giving the example of himself. If if he were to die now and be born if if he had the karma to be born in in the formless realm, then he would immediately as soon as he would die, that for the very moment he would be born there, he would appear there. There is no intermediate state for one who who wish to be born in such a place or in such a concentration of whatever there is.
Yeah. You wouldn’t know you were there because this mind is coming like that. On that one? Born was born in this place. There’s nothing but the mere I, and there’s nothing else.
There’s no other consciousness. There’s only the mere I. Geshe-la was explaining. Only me. Mere I.
Mere I. Mere I. Mere Mere is one word. I is another word. Mere means Only I.
There’s only the I. Finally. Just. Just. Yes.
Just the I. There is no discrimination, no contact, no no any other consciousness. If there’s no discrimination, why do you discriminate as a formless? Because we we have discrimination, don’t we?