Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. The core question driving this 45-minute session is deceptively precise: what must a bodhisattva abandon at the peak moments of each stage of the path? Geshe Pema Tsering works through a systematic list of perverse conceptions — wrong views that misread phenomena as inherently existent — covering objects, their natures, the dharmakaya, the two truths, the Three Jewels, skillful means like bodhicitta and compassion, and meditation itself. He first unpacks the difference between ultimate and conventional truth in terms of what appears to a wisdom mind in meditative equipoise, working out the translation on the spot. The session ends with a lively Q&A on renunciation: Geshe Tsering uses a money analogy to argue that genuinely seeing the qualities of liberation makes the path feel easier, not harder.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 02 ST10 2003 10 15.mp3
UUID: ba885ba1-1e0b-433f-a7ec-674afc864e49
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Seventy Topics (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2003-10-15
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 45.0 minutes
Words: ~3,337
Okay. Right. Here we go. Okay. Now the next the the the in the explanation of this definition, the first thing that we need to get to is a bit where it says it’s we’re trying to get rid of seeds or ideas.
Yeah. Seeds or ideas of when we see the two truths. The two truths being ultimate truth and relative truth as not being suitable to be included in a single entity. So that is Buddhists see things as being ultimately and relatively true and in the same instant no no no other beings do. Yeah.
So it’s getting rid of those things that stop that. Now the definition of ultimate truth, alright, as far as I can understand it and translate it on the spot is the Pramāna or the valid cognition that views emptiness directly and does not have the appearance of the two separations to a wisdom mind. And does that make sense? Kind of? Yeah.
Yeah? Yeah? Okay. Now the now now I don’t know how to translate the the conventional truth. Okay.
Okay. So the first one is consciousness that perceives the sorry. The the valid cognition that perceives things to be perceives emptiness directly and to which the two aspects do not appear. Yeah? Right?
So and the second one is the consciousness to which emptiness does not does not appear directly and to which the two concepts, right? The concept of duality does appear. Okay. So that’s conventional truth. Ultimate truth, it doesn’t appear.
Conventional truth, it does appear. Yeah. So Geshe la says, for example, this table, if someone was in meditative equipoise on emptiness, yeah, they would be focused single pointedly on the emptiness of that table and would not be perceiving the conceptual reality, the the conventional reality of the table. But the way that we perceive table and the way that we perceive all phenomena is as it’s conventionally established. We don’t perceive the ultimate the the emptiness or the ultimate phenomena of that say of that object directly.
But I’ll work out the clearer translation of the definition of ultimate truth and relative truth by sitting down and doing it as opposed to trying to do it on the spot. I’ll do it while you guys are in discussion group. It should be fine. Okay. Okay.
So what this is talking about is the abandonment of the the abandonment of the actual conception and the seeds of the conception that the emptiness of an object for example the glass and the object itself are two separate entities the way that we view them is as being two separate entities we can’t see it until we’re Buddhas as being one singular entity. Now, this perception is what’s called grasping at true existence or grasping an inherent existence. It’s one form of that. There’s different forms of this grasping inherent or true existence. However, we can have it as a manifest form like we have now and that’s what’s called an afflictive emotion.
We can have it as a seed which is also an afflictive emotion or we can have it as an imprint. If it’s an imprint that means that it doesn’t have the power to generate anything from that. That’s what’s differentiating a seed in this instance with an imprint. Is not talking about imprints, was talking about seeds. So we got seeds and the actual things themselves grasping at true existence by not being able to see that the emptiness of an object and the object itself are the same entity.
And it’s something that we need to abandon. Hence, the wrong establishment or perverse conception. Okay. Because the actual Because this act all of these peaks all of these peaks that we’re talking about here are the final moment of each of the different section of the path. Right?
And in each of the different sections of the path, at the final moment, there is a meditation on emptiness going on. Yeah? People are meditating in emptiness in one way or another. And all of this is being done to eventually establish the abandoning of the grasping at those two things as being separate. The emptiness of an object and the object itself.
Yeah? So that means that this is talking about the things that are abandoned at these peak points when people are meditating, when bodhisattvas are meditating on emptiness. Okay. Now the first of the divisions of these things that needs to be eliminated is it says perverse conceptions regarding feasibly observed objects. Perverse conceptions regarding feasibly observed objects.
Now, perverse conceptions is obviously wrong views. Feasibly observed objects is another way of saying all phenomenon, right? Because anything that can be observed means all phenomena and likewise all phenomena can be observed. Yeah? So this means all relative phenomena and ultimate phenomena like emptiness basically.
Yeah? So emptiness and all relative phenomena are feasibly observed objects. So what’s perverse about the conception of these feasibly observed objects is that we perceive them as being inherently existent. So we have to get rid of the idea or the perverse conception of all phenomena being inherently existent. Okay.
So in this instance, we’re not talking about the ability to see an object and an object’s emptiness as being a single entity. We’re talking about just basically getting rid of the idea of inherent existence. So what we have to establish in this abandoning of perverse conceptions is that things do exist, but they don’t exist inherently. So the perverse conception being abandoned is the inherent existence of all phenomena. Okay.
The next thing to be abandoned is the perverse conception or the wrong mind, wrong view that regards the entity of observed objects as being definitely apprehended or definitely able to be conceptualized, which means seeing the entity of things as being inherently existed, okay? So the entity means the nature of something, right? So for example, until we die, we are humans, yes? So our nature entity is our humanity or our humanness, not our humanity, but our humanness, yes? Yes, like not as in our humanity, but just the fact that we’re human, right?
And so we’re not supposed to we have to get rid of the idea that, that humanness or whatever it is, the tableness, is inherently established. So when it says apprehended definitely apprehended, it means perceived as being truly in existence. So it’s the nature as well as the object itself, if that makes sense. Okay, the next thing, perverse conceptions regarding an exalted wisdom that is very exalted and honorable aspects. So this is a wrong conception that sees the dharmakaya of the Buddha as being it can inherent it as being inherently existed.
And Geshe la and I are having this running argument about what the dharmakaya is at the moment. He goes, oh, so you’ve got that. You’ve got the dharmakaya, don’t you? So that’s what you think is inherently existent. Okay.
So the next thing, perverse conceptions regarding the two truths. Now this is referring to the two truths themselves. So it’s thinking that the nature of the two truths themselves is inherently existent. So you think that conventional or the idea of conventional reality itself is inherently existent, that by its nature or its entity, it is inherently existent, and that the ultimate existence or ultimate truth, sorry, ultimate truth is inherently existent by its nature. Okay.
The next one, perverse conceptions regarding applications. So this means that applications, viewing the uninterrupted peak application, the other peak applications, the application of all knowing the what’s it called? Application of all knowing the wisdom understanding or wisdom, what is it? Anyway, the whole fourth chapter bit, right? And all of the different types of applications that we can have or that the Bodhisattvas have is they need to be viewed as being empty of true existence or and not inherently existent as well.
Okay. So there’s the next one is the Three Jewels, the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha, perverse conceptions regarding the Three Jewels. Now there’s many different perverse conceptions regarding the Three Jewels. People can see the Three Jewels as not having qualities. They can see the Three Jewels as being permanent.
Okay. So they can see the Three Jewels as being permanent. They can see the Three Jewels as being within at the same level as other beings. But this isn’t referring to all of these. This is just referring to the fact that the Three Jewels are not inherently existent.
So it’s the perverse conception regarding the Three Jewels as not inherently existent. Sorry, the perverse conception regarding the Three Jewels as inherently existent. The next one is perverse conceptions regarding skillful means. Now skillful means refers to things like bodhicitta, compassion, loving kindness. If we see any of these as being inherently existent, then this is a perverse conception. And the next one, perverse conceptions regarding the clear realizations of a Subduer — Subduer is a Buddha.
So he’s basically talking about the realizations of a Buddha. And to literally quote quote Geshe la, he said, there’s there’s so many different minds that a Buddha has. I go for refuge. Perverse conception regarding the mistaken means wrong mind. So it means things like saying that karma doesn’t exist, not thinking true things truly exist, thinking that the Three Jewels don’t have qualities, those kind of things.
So the mind thinking that those particular ideas or those particular minds are truly existent. Next one, the perverse conceptions regarding paths, there are five paths of the three vehicles and or the paths of the Buddhas. So if you think any of those or if the Buddha’s is sorry, the bodhisattvas have to review all of these as being non inherently existent as well? Okay, the next one. Next, perverse conception regarding the discordant class and antidotes.
The discordant class are then afflictive emotions. So for example, desire, anger, arrogance, ignorance, and jealousy. And the antidotes to those are the practices which negate them. So the absence of hatred, the absence of malice, the absence of arrogance, then there’s also the practices of the perfections of giving, of ethics, of effort, and the rest of the other perfections. So they are the antidotes.
So we have to see all of the discordant class of minds and the antidotes to those discordant classes of minds as being non inherently existent. Conceptions regarding characteristics of phenomena. So that means that basically that we have to view the characteristics of phenomena as not being inherently existent because if we did view them as being inherently existent, we would have a perverse conception. The first conceptions regarding meditation, what meditation technically means when it’s talking about as a practice is any mind from calm abiding upwards. So if you’re able to focus single-pointedly on an object and you’ve developed for any of those any of the paths afterwards, then that’s perverse conception sorry, that’s meditation.
And if you view any of those as being inherently existent, then it’s a perverse conception regarding meditation. My god. I forgot to translate that. Okay. So the the then there’s just the quote from the the root text, which says basically the same thing.
I guess they just read out the quote. And then the the boundaries of this is exist from before entering a path through to the seventh ground. And it’s just saying, anything that’s a fault and starts from before the before you enter the path. So it’s like, anything that we have is a fault. They talk about this.
So we’re just gonna stop there and if anyone has any questions. Yeah. At the end of the class, but I’m not going to ask about him because we’ll go start squirming. So I’ll just say in general with No, no, no. If I say in general when you go to a teaching, Is that all right?
Yeah. Okay. Okay. Right. So the way that usually happens is if there’s teachings that are on the the way that it usually happens is that before the teacher gets up from the teaching, do prostrations usually, unless it’s the last teaching and then you don’t.
Alright? If you are going to more than one teaching in a day, then you prostrate before the first teaching of the day and at the end of the last teaching of the day. You don’t do it in the middle bits, in between. If you had a couple in a day. He said it doesn’t matter though.
It’s just like to create merit. So if you don’t if you if you don’t want if there’s no if no one creates merit, then it’s cool. It’s not an insult. Yeah. It’s it’s just a merit thing.
Yeah. I was coming from, it’s due to bit of the bit crossroad rather than the story. Yeah. He said, usually, it happens before the the as as well before the teacher gets up from the throne. He said, unless people get tired, he said, the people get tired prostrating.
So from what would be wrong to Yeah. Guess, listen, sometimes if people have been sitting there for a while, then they they get really tired. Yeah. So that they they forget or they don’t do it, and then that’s cool as well. Yeah.
Yeah. And so the only thing is this, purpose of prostrating is to create merit. So if someone doesn’t do that, you’re not gonna yell at them. It’s not rude, it’s to create merit. [unclear] Mhmm.
That what a person could become depressed and lose their motivation for doing anything. Granted that if you were in a burning house, you’d have a motivation to get out. Yeah. But getting out of Samsāra is a lot more difficult. And therefore, could do given that the situation is a bit more difficult.
After they’ve developed renunciation? Yeah. You develop renunciation in in this thing that everything is in the nature of suffering. Right. Yeah.
Yeah. And knowing how Hang on. The cycle Seeing seeing everything is in the nature of suffering and developing renunciation is not the same thing. The whole of Samsāra is in the nature of suffering. And developing renunciation aren’t the same mind.
No. No. But in order to do that, one has to Develop. Yeah. See all the saṃsāra suffering.
Yeah. Mhmm. And then you wish to get out. Yeah. However, it’s very, very difficult.
So it’s not like getting out of a burning house. In fact, getting out of a burning house would seem much, much easier than getting out of saṃsāra. If you’ve developed renunciation, you think getting out of saṃsāra is difficult. Is that what you’re assuming? No.
No. I was just saying it is difficult. But that that’s assuming that it is difficult once you develop renunciation. Okay. Yeah?
I am assuming that. Yeah. So can I ask that first? Sure. But I need to go on to the other part.
Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Geshe la said that once you’ve developed a mind of renunciation, getting out of saṃsāra is not difficult. It’s not difficult because you’ve seen the qualities of liberation, right?
And because you’ve seen the qualities of liberation, anything you have to do, you do it really happily, and it’s not that much hard work, yes? Because not only haven’t seen not only have you seen the sufferings in Samsāra, you’ve seen the quality of liberation. So it’s the same thing as if we have to work hard in order to get an extraordinary amount of money, yes? We’re not that bothered about it. We just do it.
He said that’s because they don’t understand what they can do with the money. Alright? If they really understood what they could do with this amount of money, then they wouldn’t be bothered. If they’re working for something that they really want. Yeah?
I don’t reckon many people would worry about I think it’s the money thing, right? I don’t think he gets the idea of how rich people are. Anyway, that’s just my little commentary. He said he didn’t think many people wouldn’t would blink at having to work hard for an hour for a thousand dollars. Right?
And I said there was a famous model that says she wasn’t gonna get out of bed for more than ten thousand dollars a day. Yeah? And he said if someone isn’t gonna get out of bed for ten thousand dollars a day, there’s someone who already has enough money and so that’s like saying I don’t have to work towards a liberation because I’m already there. So I said if a really poor person was told to if they worked for now, they get a million dollars. It would be like that.
And he goes, yeah. If they and they said, if they saw the qualities of liberation, then it’s not going be hard work for them. If it’s someone who doesn’t want to work hard to get money, then that’s not the best example. Because the mind the actual mind of liberation is the mind that wants to work the mind of sorry. The mind of renunciation is the mind that wants to work towards liberation.
Yeah. That desires liberation. So it’s working towards something they want. If you can develop renunciation, that’s really good. He said, yeah, if you develop renunciation, it gets easy.
There is a there is a danger of that if they don’t think properly, if they don’t think things through properly. Because just after realizing that there is a suffering of saṃsāra, then they must remind themselves that there is also true happiness. Yeah? So by realizing that saṃsāra is suffering, the next thing they should think is, how do I get out of it? Yeah?
And then start thinking about the qualities of of the qualities of liberation and then work really hard all the time to get out of that situation. Geshe la said, this is this is he said that’s really pretty. This is like this is definitely not attaining attaining liberation because he’s looking at flowers going, oh, that’s really nice. And then he said, okay. That’s the excellent bits of Samsāra.
It’s just so beautiful. Uh-huh. You know, when you can’t just be miserable in the world and not see beauty. Uh-huh. How’s that how can you balance it out for yourself?
Uh-huh. K. Do you balance renunciation with not being miserable all the time? Does renunciation mean not being miserable all the time? Well, it’s just being beauty like.
Yeah. Yeah. And again, like kissing us all. He said, you don’t have to you don’t have to start thinking flowers are ugly or think of it as being suffering and suffering. He just said, if you see anything, we’d make it as an offering.
But think, oh, it’s very beautiful. I offer it to the Three Jewels. He said, yes, if you see the Buddhas and if you see something beautiful enough to the Buddhas, it gives it meaning. On. Which one was that?
Well, if the at this stage that to me, the way I’m sort of seeing it, they’re destroying the seeds and the imprints that cause conceptual thought conception. No. No? It doesn’t say that. Well, that’s the way I’m sort of saying it.
But if you’re destroying things that are causing you to see things incorrectly Yeah. Which is caused by the way you conceptualize You might be right. Therefore, a Buddha would not have Halfway through that, thought, hang on, you’re right. They don’t have conceptual thought. They don’t have yet.
They they perceive everything directly. Directly, so there’s no conception of Okay. The reason that they don’t have conceptual thought is they see they know everything. Alright? And the reason that we have conceptual thought is because we don’t.
Elaine, did you have your hand up?