Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Working through verses 62 and 63 of chapter four of the Ornament for Clear Realisations, Geshe Pema Tsering uses this 75-minute session to map the ten applications in skillful means that mark Bodhisattvas on the eighth, ninth and tenth pure grounds. He moves through each application in sequence — liberation from the four Maras, abiding in non-abiding, enacting others’ welfare through accumulated prayers, practices not shared with hearers and solitary realizers — before giving extended attention to the signless application, explaining what valid cognition (pramāna) does and does not perceive when it realises emptiness directly, and distinguishing inferential from direct cognition. A detailed breakdown of all four Maras closes the session. Suitable for practitioners with grounding in Mahāyāna philosophy.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 19 OCR 2005 05 05.mp3
UUID: bbdc15bb-97e3-4b70-8422-7702496c2d72
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Ornament for Clear Realisations (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2005-05-05
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 75.4 minutes
Words: ~5,129
Going to be looking at the application in. So based on the verses sixty two and sixty three of the fourth chapter of the ornamental realization, you can find that there are ten applications in skillful means. And so there’s three of these applications in skillful means, sorry. These ten applications in skillful means are defined by the object of the application as opposed to the application application itself. Did you have a sign?
Don’t touch I repeat that. Did you all hear? Yeah. Yeah. So there is ten different sections to the application in skillful means.
They are defined by the objects application as opposed to the applications themselves. Three of these are defined by complete liberation and seven of them are the seven different practices of Bodhisattvas. Or sorry, the seven different practices of enlightenment. The three Oh sorry, it’s got here the three doors of liberation. Okay.
Sorry. So there’s the the three doors of liberation, and then there is seven groups of activities of bodhisattvas. Which we’ve already talked about, apparently. So, apparently, there’s a verse that Geshe-la just recited and I can’t translate on the spot from the, ornament of clear realization in the beginning of chapter four, and it’s when we were looking at the application in all aspects and there was the different the hundred and whatever it was sections of it and there was thirty seven of those that related to the noble bases. Alright?
So in those, this is the group that that can be divided into groups of seven. So we’ve I guess Geshe-la said we’ve been through this. But, anyway, Anyway, yes, the the ones that we did before. I can’t find them. But, yeah, there was, like, we went through those, you know, the five powers and the five the five strengths.
Yeah. The sorry, ten powers and ten strengths and all those things. Yeah. So there’s thirty seven practices of enlightenment that that can be divided into seven groups. Mhmm.
Mhmm. Okay. So the definition of an application in skillful means is a yoga. Now yoga is a another word for a path in this instance. It’s another way of saying a path, an application or a yoga or a path, same thing.
Yeah? Of the pure grounds, so the pure grounds are the eighth, ninth, and tenth grounds when the Bodhisattvas on these levels are free from the stains of saṃsāra completely. That spontaneously accomplishes perfect enlightened activities. So spontaneously in that there is no effort that needs to be engaged in in order to accomplish these enlightened activities? This one?
Marty, I have a question about English. Can you accomplish activities? Does that make sense if we’re not in a dharma class? I don’t think so. You do activities, don’t you?
Yes. We can’t accomplish that. It doesn’t make sense. You tasks. Pardon?
If you define an activity by doing it correctly, then you can accomplish that activity. Yeah. Yeah. Sounds whack to me. Not poetry.
No. Anyway, I’m sorry. We will continue to strain the English language and go on with the the definition. Okay. It accomplishes perfect enlightened activities.
So the act this means basically perfect enlightened activities refers to the activities of a Buddha, right? So it’s working towards developing the activities of a Buddha, the enlightened activities of a Buddha in a manner of the of coarse exertion. I’m not gonna say anything. So what that means is that basically means that by getting rid of or pacifying the tendency towards needing to perform or exert themselves in a gross way. Alright.
So if they don’t There’s a gross exertion and there’s subtle exertion. So the gross exertion can be completely gotten rid of at this stage. So by pacifying the coarse levels of exertion, they’re able to begin to manifest the enlightened activities of a Buddha. Geshe-la said it doesn’t matter if the English is in this instance, it doesn’t matter if the English is good or bad. Do they understand what it means?
Are we okay with that? Alright. Mhmm. Okay. So the there’s a list then of the ten applications in skillful means, and Geshe-la read them all out from the text, as they’re all in front of you and he’s gonna go through them one by one, I’m not going to repeat that.
Okay? So the first one though that he is extrapolated on was the application in skillful means that is victorious over the four Maras. Now the four Maras that we’re talking about here then is the Mara that is the son of gods. There’s a Mara called Mara that’s the offspring of gods. The Mara of death, the Mara of the aggregates and the Mara of the afflictive emotions or the mental afflictions.
Okay. So once a being has liberated themselves from Samsāra as the Bodhisattvas on the eighth, ninth and tenth grounds have, they are not affected by these Maras anymore. Liberation from Samsāra means they were released from the effect of the Maras, all four Maras. So this is why it’s said that a more literal translation of what it says in Tibetan would be that they abide beyond the Maras, beyond the scope of the Maras in the same way that the word nirvana is to abide beyond sorrow. Yeah.
So the the beings on the in these grounds aren’t affected by the by the four Mara’s. And it’s a and it’s a it’s a synonym synonym for saying they have attained nirvana. Okay. Tell me. And then he was trying to jump in and I have not finished.
The second one, the application in skillful means that abides nominally and does not abide ultimately. The again, a more literal translation would be the application that abides in non abiding. Right? So what that refers to is a similar thing though, is that abiding and non abiding means recognizing the lack of inherent existence of all objects in that they don’t abide, objects don’t abide. They have no generation, they now have no abiding and they have no destruction.
So recognizing the empty nature of this means abiding in things that don’t abide, recognizing the lack of inherent existence. So although they don’t abide, the reason where it says it has this kind of pun where it says abiding and non is recognizing the appearance of these things although understanding that they don’t exist inherently. It’s recognizing that although things abiding and non abiding means that you’re recognizing the conventional nature of abiding but that you focused on the fact that they’re not inherently existent. Mhmm. Alright.
So the next of these divisions of the application in skillful means is the application in skillful means that enacts the welfare of others impelled by the force of previous prayers. So what this refers to is this, before they have reached the pure grounds, the eighth, ninth and tenth grounds of a Bodhisattva and the path of meditation, then these Bodhisattvas have spent a lot of time praying to attain enlightenment to be a benefit to sentient beings. So the accumulative force of all of the positive positively dedicated and motivated actions that they’ve performed in the past now enables them to fulfil those prayers. So, means that when they they are becoming able to do what they’ve been praying to be able to do for all those eons. So, they have accumulated the force of the the cumulative force of the prayers that they have performed in the past enables them to enact others’ welfare spontaneously as opposed to praying to be able to do it.
So and there is then the application in skillful means that is not shared. Now what is this is referring to is the fact that the Bodhisattvas on the eighth and ninth and tenth grounds of pure pure pure levels and has abilities or applications or it practices yogas that the hearers in solitary realizers don’t have. Now the reason this is the case is that that although hang on one second. Alright. I thought I tripped Geshe-la up, and I hadn’t.
Because I was about to say that the realization of emptiness is the same as the hearers and solitary realizers, but the hearers and solitary realizers are not motivated by bodhicitta, not motivated to get rid of the obscurations to omniscience in order to be of absolute or the of the utmost benefit to all sentient beings, to be able to lead sentient beings out of saṃsāra. And then I thought, wait a minute, Geshe-la is supposed to be teaching from the perspective of the Svatāntrika, and in that, do here in solitary realizers perceive emptiness. And that’s why I say, Gamma, do they? Because I didn’t think they did in this one. And he goes, of course they do.
And I said, you didn’t say that before. And then he said, they perceive emptiness. Their emptiness they perceive isn’t the same, but they they do what they are said to perceive emptiness. Alright? So in the Prāsaṇgika school or the consequential school, then they say that the emptiness that is perceived by the hearers and solitary realizers is exactly the same as emptiness that is perceived by Bodhisattvas, the Ārya Bodhisattvas in that they are both focusing on the lack of inherent existence and the lack of phenomena that are characterized phenomena or the lack of characteristics.
So in this case though from this the the autonomous school’s point of view, then they’re saying that although they do perceive this and you need to perceive their lack of inherent existence, you don’t need to perceive the lack of characterized existence and those who are developing emptiness in the lower schools, right, on the lower parts, actually do it mainly focused on the selflessness of the person as opposed to the emptiness of phenomena. So there is a slight difference there. Yes. Another application or another type of practice that these do is application in skillful means that is without attachment to true existence with respect to all phenomena. Okay.
That is without a nature. There’s no a nature in the translation. I don’t think it makes any sense. That is so it says that is without attachment to true existence with respect to all phenomena. So, you know, I said, guess so they put a nature in there and he said, well, that doesn’t make sense because if it had a nature, it wouldn’t be empty.
So to have like a lack of attachment, the lack of attachment that does have a nature or an entity. Yeah. Yeah. That isn’t attached to anything doesn’t make much sense. So you can, I reckon you can scribble out the nature?
That is without attachment to true existence with respect to all phenomena. So this means that these as these beings don’t have or the liberation or the klesha Mara, the afflictive emotions. It means that they don’t grasp onto any phenomena as being inherently existent. And as they are not grasping onto any phenomena as being inherently existent, that it means that there is not an instance of attachment or desire in their the way that they’re interacting with phenomena. Because in order to have attachment or desire, you have to have the concept of a subject and an object.
They understand the emptiness of both and therefore unattached. Alright. So the next one is that does not observe true existence. So So, sorry, so it was in Tibetan, it says that which does not observe, and this big explanation why that has to be true existence. And in your translation, says, that does not observe true existence.
So it kind of defeats purpose. So, you have to say from the because this is a Svatāntrika text or a autonomous text, you have to say that if it’s not observing something, it has to be not observing true existence. Usually, when we talk about observing things, I talk about observing or not observing the characteristics of phenomena. But as the Svartarika school says that things can be defined by the characteristics, we can’t say that they’re not observing the characteristics. So it has to be not observing true existence.
Yeah? As I’ve said here for the application, the name of the application. Now, the one after that is the application in skillful means that is signless. Now, this word that they’ve translated as sign, is also the word that is the root for the word that’s translated as characteristics and the root for the word that is character as translated as definition. Alright?
So you define something by its characteristics and and in this school they say things exist characteristically or by their characteristics. So when it says it’s signless, means it’s lacking characteristics. Alright? But what it’s talking about that is from then is from the ultimate point of view and also from the perspective of I’m sorry, ultimate point of view and specifically from the perspective of valid, the valid cognition of the ultimate. Alright?
So the valid cognition of the ultimate does not perceive any signs is what it’s saying. So the definition of a valid cognition or a Pramāna is that it is incontrovertible or it’s unquestionable. There’s no mistake about it whatsoever. So an incontrovertible knower or completely unmistaken knower is said to be a Pramāna or a valid cognition. But from this perspective it’s saying there is no there is nothing that is is perceived by that incontrovertible knower.
There’s no sign. There’s no usually the incontrovertible knower is understood by the things that it perceives. Yeah. So but in this case, ultimate is the lack of true existence, so there is no sign to that. There’s no sign that the Pramāna or the valid cognition recognizes So in general, when we talk about this word valid cognition or pramāna, it means an incontrovertible knower or a unmistaken perception of something.
Okay. So the reason I’m coming my my mouth’s coming. I’m stuck, and I’m getting frustrated with English is because the reason that they say a valid cognition is an incontrovertible knower and not a unmistaken knower and not a wrong and a correct knower is because there is a different word in Tibetan for that which we’re translating as incontrovertible, the word that’s translated as mistaken, and the word that’s translated as wrong. Right? And they’re three very different concepts.
And you can’t really change them over. So even though incontrovertible is a little bit of a mouthful, it’s best to use that word to describe the what the valid cognition what the nature of a valid cognition is. So when when you say incontrovertible, what it means is that there is no there can be no confusion coming into that perception. Alright? So there’s no room for confusion.
Yeah? And then a mistaken knower is all of experiences in saṃsāra. All our experiences in saṃsāra which aren’t the perception of emptiness. They’re all mistaken. Yeah?
And a wrong consciousness is one that sees something that isn’t even mistakenly true, like two moons or something like that. Okay? So that you have to use the word incontrovertible for Pramāna or valid cognition because it means that there’s no room for mistake. Yeah? And when you have valid cognition, there’s in there’s two different types of it.
In within valid cognition, there’s a division into two. There is inferential cognition and direct perception. Okay? So they’re both considered to be pramāna or valid cognition. Cognition.
Inferential cognition is a valid cognition or a Pramāna because it is a perception based upon an incontrovertible incontrovertible sign. Yes. So that’s an inferential cognition. It comes about based on an incontrovertible sign, you can have an incontrovertible understanding of something or or knowledge, conceptual knowledge of something without necessarily having direct perception of it. Okay?
A direct perception that is an is a incontrovertible knower or a valid perception is an incontrovertible direct knowledge, a non-conceptual knowledge of a phenomena. Alright. So one based on a sign is a conceptual understanding or conceptual knowledge as opposed to understanding, and the other is a non conceptual knower. Right? So when you have these two, this incontrovertible knower, they have this valid perception in effect, right?
What this means is that based on something, some kind of usually from a relative level, the characteristics of that phenomena, they can know that that phenomena, based on the characteristics of that phenomena. Yeah? But as we’re talking about emptiness here, they’re they’re not they’re not looking for characteristics. There is no characteristics there. It’s the lack of something.
Yeah? So what they perceive has no signs. Does that make sense? No characteristics. So when it says signless, oh, it could also say characteristic characteristicless.
Is that okay? No, Joe. They don’t see nothing. They see the lack of inherent existence, the lack of characteristics. I’m sorry.
I’m having, like, a little kind of brain meltdown here. How to translate it. Okay. Okay. See, the problem was, when I was translating it into Tibetan, that if I say you see nothing, that’s seeing something.
Because you’re seeing nothing and nothing is a something. Yeah. So I was having trouble translating it, but we’ve we’ve sorted it out. Okay. So Geshe-la said, when you’re perceiving the lack of inherent existence, yeah, you’re perceiving the lack of the characters or characteristics of something.
Right? So the way that valid cognition works is that valid cognition is an integral incontrovertible knower of something’s characteristics. That’s the way Pramāna the way the characteristics work. So it’s whether I mean, sorry, this valid cognition works. It’s to know something.
Yeah? And know something by its characteristics. So what it’s saying here is it’s a incontrovertible knower that knows by the lack of characteristics, by the the the the lack of inherent existence. Alright? So, if Sorry.
I’m just gonna make sure I get the last bit right. Oh, know you’re mad. Alright. So, what you’re perceiving the lack of is the way that appears to it used to appear to you as existing. Alright?
So So, you perceive the lack of the inherent existence of phenomena which is the way that things appear to ordinary beings. Yeah. So that you there’s a specific so things appear but they appear Mahāyāna that inherent existence that was superimposed onto them by ordinary beings. That’s what the signless application the application in skillful means that is signless, is signless. Okay.
Okay. Alright. So the next one, to literally translate it from the Tibetan we have in front of us, says, the application which fulfils prayers. Right? Yeah?
Or completely fulfils prayers. Right? Fulfils prayers. Right? And Geshe-la said, now that’s a bit strange.
Why would Bodhisattvas who spend a lot of time praying and have a lot of aspirations to fulfill, wanting to fulfil them, why would they wanna kill off their prayers? Right? So he said, so you can look at it from a lot of, different perspectives. You can look at it as they have in this translation here that it’s talking about the lack of inherent existence of the result of prayers. Yeah?
So, the results from so have you could look at it that way then the that which does not observe true existence could be the first door of liberation and talk about the causes for objects. That which is signless could talk about the lack of characteristics of objects and refer to the lack of their entity. And that which is wishless could refer to the lack of the inherent existence of the results of positive actions or negative actions. So that’s one way of looking at it. But another way of looking at it, considering it doesn’t say signlessness, it actually says in this translation, the fulfilling of prayers or the completing of prayers.
It can mean that there it can mean that the, there’s one way that we can we another way can we we could look at it is that they’ve achieved the results of prayers. So that’s one way to kill a prayer, to finish it, to finish it off. Alright? And it is if you get what you prayed for. Alright?
So if you pray for something and you get the results of that, then you don’t keep praying for it because you’ve already received the results of that prayer. Right? So there’s no the the things you’re praying for have been finished. So it’s finished. The prayer’s gone.
So that’s another way of looking at it that this that this that this at this level, the all of the things that the Bodhisattvas have been working for towards are coming to fruition. Alright? All their prayers are being established. You can’t establish a prayer. Sorry.
I’ll keep check check check. Yeah. Yeah. The results of their prayers. Thank you.
They they they they they achieved results. Right? So once they’ve achieved results, they’re gone. So that’s there’s there’s two different ways you can look at that. Oh.
Alright. So the next one, through the sign of irreversibility. Now, we went through all these signs of irreversibility that people achieve on the path of meditation beforehand. There was eight of them and these things that they develop, these signs of irreversibility that they develop on the path of meditation are still with the Bodhisattvas as they are on these three Pure Grounds and work towards Buddhahood. So that means that part of their application or part of their an aspect of their mind stream is that they are not turned they are not to be turned back.
There’s no way they can be turned back from Buddhahood. They are going to quickly attain Buddhahood. They understand they’re going to quickly obtain Buddhahood and they are able to develop that understanding in the continuums of other beings as well that they’re going to attain Buddhahood. I keep saying this. As I said, I’m thinking, so please don’t talk.
I mean, jump in. I didn’t mean not talk. Time I stop to think, he says something, I’m like, no. The reason I’m trying to think is because what it says here that they’re doing is being an instance of those applications in skillful means. So there’s this thing in Tibetan where you you have a very clear link between the word that indicates an instance of a phenomena and the word that defines that phenomena phenomena.
So you have a definition of something and then you have an instance of that definition. Does that make sense? So there is an the definition of table and then there is a table, alright, which is an instance of table. So it’s saying then that they have the application or they have their practicing the yoga of being an instance of the sign of irreversibility. That doesn’t make sense.
They they I don’t know how to put it. They have the app They’re practicing the application of manifesting or showing signs of irreversibility. Pardon? They they’re performing. They are examples, but Yeah.
But you can’t be an example of a sign of irreversibility in this instance. You can’t exemplify. You can you can be an example, but you can’t a sign of irreversibility and that’s kind of what it’s saying. So it’s they show signs of it. They they are their application is the showing of signs of irreversibility.
Okay. Yeah. So I guess I said it’s alright to say instead of saying they are exemplifying. I said, is it alright to say they’re showing signs of irreversibility to other beings? And he goes, yes.
You can say that. They it’s he says, it’s less technical, but if it works in English, you can say it. So they’re showing signs of irreversibility to other sentient beings. But, he said, make sure that you don’t say they’re showing signs of irreversibility to any old person. Alright?
They’re only showing signs showing signs of irreversibility to other beings who are equally as developed as they are and can actually understand that they have the signs of irreversibility. That is fine. Yes. The last application in skillful means of the Bodhisattvas and the pure levels is the application that is immeasurable. And so I said to Geshe-la that in the notes that you have here, it talks about the five sciences.
And he said, the five sciences including other things. So it’s not the idea of immeasurable an application that is immeasurable is that you can’t measure it. So you can’t say they can do that and they can’t do this, or they can’t do this, but they can do that. There is no measure. There’s no there’s no limit to what they’re able to do to do.
Immeasurable in that there is no limit. Mhmm. Okay. So I guess to say, just wanted to quickly he knows that you finished the the note. We just wanted to quickly go over because it talked about the first one of in this section was the application victorious over the Maras.
So he just quickly wants to go over what the MARAs are. Okay? So the first of the MARAs that we’re looking at in at then is the MARA that is the Mara of the aggregates. So the definition of the Mara of the aggregates is established by anything that is established on or based on because I’m just looking at this going, I have to translate this on the spot. Alright.
Okay. Woo hoo. Okay. So the definition of of aggregates, yeah, is a category of the four Maras that is either the contaminated aggregates arising in dependence upon their cause, actions, and afflictions, or that necessarily depends on a level of the latency of ignorance. Now what this level of the latency of ignorance refers to is everything up until the very subtle obscurations to knowledge that Bodhisattvas are getting rid of on these pure grounds.
Alright? So they’re not afflicted by these things anymore, they’re getting rid of them. And so the very subtlest obscurations to knowledge are said to be ignorance, the latent levels of ignorance and the Mara of aggregates is defined as that. Mhmm. Mhmm.
So there’s a two different levels of the Mara of aggregates. There is the subtle Mara of Aggregates and the gross Mara of Aggregates. The subtle Mara of Aggregates is defined as being the something like the body and mind that come about in dependence on these levels of the late level of the latency of ignorance. Right? So, this is subtle subtle levels of latent levels of ignorance that bring about aggregates in sentient beings that are Ārya Bodhisattvas.
And then the other type of The other type of Mara of aggregates is this normal Mara of aggregates that we experience, which is the afflicted aggregates. The aggregates that come about because of karma and delusion. This one. Mhmm. Mhmm.
Mhmm. Mhmm. So this the the examples of the Mara aggregates, the sorry. It’s got another definition of Mara of aggregates. Oh, no.
It doesn’t. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry.
Sorry. Next one, is the we’re on to the next one. It doesn’t have another definition of the Mara of aggregates. It’s on to the next one, which is the Mara of afflictions. Alright.
So the Mara of afflictions, sorry, is defined as being a category of the four Mara’s abiding in the class of obstructions that mainly hinders the attainment of liberation. So in other words, it’s like it’s the same thing as the obscurations to liberation. Okay. Alright. So then, the way that this keeps leading on from each other and why I got confused before is that then you’d say that so from the last one, so hang on.
The first one, the Mara of Aggregates, right? Now the Mara of Aggregates come about because of these latent levels of ignorance. Now the latent levels of ignorance are an example of the Mara of afflictions, right? So then from the Mara of afflictions, so you have the obstructions to liberation. Now, also depending on the obstructions to liberation, you have the next Mara, which is the Mara of the Lord of Death.
And it’s defined as a category of the four Mara’s abiding in the class of factors that uncontrollably stops the life force. Now, this Mara has a gross and subtle level. Right? The Mhmm. Mhmm.
Okay. So the subtle refers to the inconceivable death of Ārya Bodhisattvas, and the gross death is referred to the death that we experience. Alright. The last of the Maras is the Son of the Gods. Yeah?
And it’s defined as the category of the four Maras that hinders passing beyond the other Maras and is included in a class of desire realm. Gods. Right. Okay. It’s Mhmm.
Mhmm. Alright. Okay. So the last the last last of the Maras is the Mara that’s a god that is really into desires and knows when people wanna do good and tries to stop them. So it’s actually a being.
Now, the it’s a that can try and trick us and that trick us or encourage us to give in to our desires or our other afflictive emotions. So it’s actually a being. So even though the maras, whether we are influenced on the maras or not, depends on our minds and we say that that that you can’t say the maras are other than our minds, that we’re dealing with the effects of things other than our mind. Right? For example, our aggregates are said to be a Mara.
Yeah? But we create our aggregates. Right? So whether this Mara that’s the Son of the Gods is a problem to us or not, isn’t depending on them, it’s depending on us. So they’re the representation or Geshe-la says actually a being who tries and tricks people when they’re trying perform virtuous actions by tempting them with negative thoughts.
So someone who has the ability to a being that has the ability to enter our minds and wants to trick us out of doing good and is is like a trickster. Alright? So but in the same way that the aggregates can only we can only be affected by the aggregates when we’ve created them. We can only be affected by the Mara of the Son of the Gods when we are open to that kind of influence. Right?
So, yeah, that’s the fourth of the Maras, the Mara of the Son of the Gods. Oh, yeah. Oh, sorry. There’s one little bit, and he wants