Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 41-minute commentary, Geshe Pema Tsering uses two vivid examples — a parent drawn into harmful deeds for a child’s sake, an enemy driven to negativity by anger — to show how self-cherishing causes suffering for others, not only for oneself. The session continues a Mind Training series, tracing the causes of bodhicitta: recognizing suffering in cyclic existence, identifying self-grasping as its root, then generating the aspiration to achieve enlightenment for all beings. Geshe-la distinguishes the aspirational mind of enlightenment from the engaging mind, and conventional bodhicitta from the ultimate mind of enlightenment (direct realization of emptiness). Two Q&A exchanges close the session: one on whether a teacher becomes one’s Lama — entirely dependent on the student’s own faith and attitude, illustrated with a reference to the Dalai Lama — and one explaining why Mahāyāna is rightly called the great vehicle.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 34 2006 02 06 MT.mp3
UUID: f9291149-46b7-4a36-b2e7-a6014ff8b156
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Mind Training (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2006-02-06
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 41.3 minutes
Words: ~2,443
So then the text goes on to explain that we should show reverence or service to the Lama with body. We should make offerings to the Three Jewels. We should make offerings or tormas or make offerings to both dharma protectors and to harmful spirits. We should make prostrations. We should make circumambulations and so forth.
We should engage in whatever virtuous activity of body and make ourselves inseparable with them. Okay? And then again so then again, we’ve we’ve as for speech, we should go for refuge, which is reciting the prayer of refuge, or go for refuge to the Buddha, go for refuge to the Dharma, go for refuge to the Sangha and so forth. We should make recitations, and then we can make recitations of the mani mantra or other mantras and so forth. We should recite or chant prayers and texts.
And so there are many, many activities of speech, and then we should make, again, our speech inseparable with these virtuous activities of speech. Okay? Yes. One, this one. And then, as for mind, we should make our minds inseparable with the meditations and teachings and teachings and teachings and teachings on the two minds of enlightenment.
Okay? So then then Gela is is saying that, as for the meditation, the two minds of enlightenment, it is something very difficult to accomplish. So the two minds of enlightenment are the conventional mind of enlightenment and the ultimate mind of enlightenment, and then that even the conventional mind of enlightenment itself is something very difficult to accomplish. So then and then Geshe-la briefly explained. I forgot to mention that.
So Geshe-la briefly explained that conventional mind of enlightenment is to accomplish the conventional mind of enlightenment is to bring is the wish of enlightenment to make it uncontrived into one’s mind stream. And then, Geshe-la is now referring to the to the ultimate mind of enlightenment, which is which is the realization of emptiness, and it’s not just understanding emptiness in this case, but is being inseparable with the realization of emptiness, direct realization of emptiness. And then so then the text is saying the text is going to mention the text again that we should be inseparable from the two minds of enlightenment, and we should be inseparable from both the conventional and the ultimate mind of enlightenment. We should be inseparable from from meditating on both the aspirational and the engaging mind of enlightenment. And then so then Geshe-la is explaining, as for as for both the the aspirational and and the engaging mind of enlightenment, Geshe-la is explaining the causes of the aspirational mind of enlightenment.
So Geshe-la explained that in order to be able to give rise to the aspirational mind of enlightenment, which aspires to bring all sentient beings to enlightenment, and which thinks that in order to be able to do that, one oneself must achieve enlightenment, then first there must be causes for this mind to come about, must first understand suffering, we must realize our suffering condition in cyclic existence. Then we must understand have you understood that we can understand that all other sentient beings also suffer and there is nothing but suffering the whole of cyclic existence? And then understanding this, then we can go to the next cause, which is understanding that the causes, what causes all this suffering, is the thought of I, my, is the the self-cherishing, the self grasping thoughts that they are the causes of all suffering that we experience. So the thing that I think that usually, normally, we do not think that we cause or bring suffering to others. We do not think that I have contributed to their suffering, I have caused their suffering, how do you say?
We do not think of ourselves as such. So then I explained that, but if we understand, if we by many reasoning, by many different reasons, engaging many different reasons, we can understand that actually we, this I, this thought of I, this self grasping, this self-cherishing attitude is the cause of all suffering, not only of oneself, but also suffering of others also. And Geshe-la gave two brief illustrations. So, for example, if one’s being born in the hell realms or in the lower realms, for example, could be in dependence on reliance on one’s child. So for the sake of nurturing the child, we would engage in all sorts of activities, we might engage in all sorts of even negative deeds that will cause us to be reborn in the lower realms, or if, on the other hand, we have an enemy, then this enemy, by getting angry with us and engage in all sorts of negativities, he will be born in the lower realms.
So even friends or relatives or enemies, either way, this I, the sort of I and mind, is what causes both ourselves and others to experience suffering. So then, if we understand that, then if we are thinking this way, in just different ways, we will be able to understand that we are the cause of our all sufferings. We do not wish any suffering. We do wish happiness, and all other essential means just like ourselves do not wish any suffering, and then they wish they wish they also wish happiness. And then and then we can, how do you say, and then we can give rise to the mind of bodhicitta itself, then may I then we we in order to accomplish the happiness of all sentient beings, then I myself must achieve enlightenment.
And this is what is called the aspirational mind of enlightenment. So then and then so that is the mind, the aspirational mind of enlightenment. Enlightenment. And then what is the the the engaging mind of enlightenment? It is then it’s the mind that in order to accomplish enlightenment itself, we will engage in generosity and morality, patience, and so forth, and then the mind that how to say?
Is engaging those activities with the thought of achieving enlightenment for the sake of all. That is the engaging mind of enlightenment. Okay? So then the text, Geshe-la goes on to explain this the following sentence of the text, which is saying that it’s talking about self grasping and self-cherishing and so forth, and every afflicted conception that we have, in order to destroy all of them, in order to be able to get rid of all of them, then we must give rise to great courage. We have to have a very courageous attitude.
Yeah? Then in brief, the the text concludes this this this topic. In brief, at all times, we should make our actions of body, speech and mind inseparable from virtuous behavior, virtuous, what’s called, dharma virtuous behavior or or behavior that is virtual behavior that is accordance with dharma. I’m just telling Geshe-la that it went out well today because I felt I understood most of what he said, and I was able to translate properly into English. So yes.
So now if if anybody has any questions, yes? To see it. No. I think I understand. [unclear].
Yeah. I think I understand. Yeah. So what what what should what should we do in relation to this? So then Geshe-la is saying, so then, yeah, the situation is is different from from Indian.
So then, the situation is different from from from in here, the situation is definitely different from as we have in India, in the monasteries and so forth, but still, Gela says, whoever, you still have lamas, you still have geshes, you still have monks, and you still have teachers, even laypeople. And then whoever it is that is, for example, giving a Dharma teaching, that should be regarded as a Lama. And for example, this text of the mind training, for example, which came from tradition of Atisha and Geshe Chekawa, this teaching is their words, the words of Atisha and of Geshe Chekawa. So this teaching is the Lama. This teaching is the teaching of the Lama.
And the person who is teaching this should be regarded as the Lama. Geshe-la was furthermore, he was saying that even though he is not a fully characterized Lama himself, it’s not that Geshe-la is a Lama. People call him Lama. But, you know, for some people, some people come and hear the teachings and they like it, and think of him as a Lama. Other people, they have doubts, don’t understand, or they investigate, or they are a bit skeptical.
They try to analyze what’s being said, what’s Geshe-la’s conduct and so forth. And some other people, they just come for the sake of doing something different or entertaining themselves with something different. So those people do not regard him will not regard him as a Lama. But if if, as I said, if one regards the person who is teaching the Dharma as as the Lama, then one will be able to experience the teachings, to bring to to to how do say? To assimilate the teachings better.
So then I so then, again again, Geshe-la explained that it is in dependence on on on ourselves that we are going to have a Lama or not. Geshe-la says there are monks and there are nuns who teach us the Dharma. There are lay people who teach the Dharma. And if one has faith and respect for them and for the teachings, then one will will get will get oneself a lama. But if one if one is just coming for the sake of entertaining oneself or for the show, then one will not get a lama.
But it’s in dependence on oneself, on our attitude. So then Geshe-la is explaining. So then if one if one does not pardon. So if one does not how do you say? If one just comes for the sake of entertaining oneself, for the show, for the spectacle, and then one will not be able to to see the teacher, the person who is teaching, who is giving the teaching as lama.
But if one understands that, okay, the person that person is teaching is teaching the Dharma, those teachings will benefit me, those teachings are beneficial, if one thinks in this way, then one will be able to to develop within oneself the thought that that person is one’s lama. So then Geshe-la is giving an illustration, for example, there are some people Geshe-la is referring to the Dalai Lama, for example. Dalai Lama has great qualities, a great person, famous, known worldwide. And then there are some people who go to his teachings and they are not able to derive any benefits of his teachings. They have doubts.
They go just to see him because he’s important or whatever, just for the sake of the spectacle. And some other people, because they have faith in the Dalai Lama, because they they like the Dalai Lama, then they they they are more receptive to it, and they and then they see him as as their teacher, as their Lama. But it’s again again, Geshe-la says, it’s not that he is the lama or not. It’s just one’s liking, one’s attitude, one’s inclination. No.
It’s from the side of one’s self, of one’s liking, one’s faith in the person who is teaching the Dharma. So then the whole the whole thing, this whole thing with the Lama is not easy. And it’s up to oneself to think it over, to analyze the situation, the relationship, it’s up to oneself to to question if if one is is is deriving any benefits from from these these teachings, if one has benefited, and then if one is benefit is benefiting, then one can decide for oneself if the person is the teacher that teacher is one’s lama or not, but it’s up to oneself. And then on the other hand, again, Gala mentions again, if one just comes just come for the sake of of of the show of entertaining oneself, and then and one would not get would not would not would not have a Lama. Yeah.
So maybe one one last question. Yes? The essence. Yeah? I think so.
I’ll try. The So Geshe-la is explaining that what is called mind training. So that which is called mind training is referring specifically to training one’s mind in the mind of enlightenment, which is the Mahāyāna motivation, the achieving enlightenment for the benefit of all sentient beings. So then, technically, mind training, this teaching of mind training, which is the mind of enlightenment, is not in the small vehicle, it’s not in the Hīnayāna vehicle because the Hīnayāna vehicle does not aim at achieving enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings. So Geshe-la is explaining, as for the lower vehicles, so the hearer and the solitary realizer, for example, are ārya beings in these vehicles, and they can realize they can accomplish the welfare of many beings, of, like, innumerable beings.
They can accomplish the welfare of many, many, many beings. Again, like I said, uses specific words to to relate it, to describe many, many beings. But they they cannot accomplish the the welfare of absolutely completely every sentient being there is. You were going to ask something? Is it superior to others?
Is that what you were trying to ask? Is it better than other motivation? Is that what you’re trying to ask? I’m not sure if I understood. Without the motivation to achieve enlightenment, you cannot achieve enlightenment.
I’m not sure if I understand. Or achieving enlightenment for oneself. What is translated as Mahāyāna or both in Tibetan and English in Sanskrit, they have the same meaning, which in English is called the great vehicle, the big vehicle. So why is it called great? Why is it called big?
It’s because because it has a great mind, a great motivation, which is motivation that wants to accomplish the welfare of absolutely completely every single sentient being there is without exception. Then it has the greatest object of abandonment. So because in order to accomplish full enlightenment, a fully enlightened Buddha has absolutely, completely not a shadow, not an inch, nothing, not a speck of dust or fault. There’s no fault whatsoever. And the third one, because it accomplishes the greatest object of accomplishment, which is it accomplishes all, every quality there is.
So, because of this, it is called Mahāyāna, it is called Theg pa Chenpo, it is called great vehicle. All the other vehicles do not aim at that. Shall we finish here today?