Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. A live terminology debate — whether to say “definition” or “object defined” — opens this 44-minute session from Geshe Pema Tsering’s Seventy Topics series. He then works through the four types of yogic equipoise that see definitions and defined phenomena as equally empty of true existence, illustrating with divisions of form and the three kinds of feeling. The session’s main technical content is the sixteen moments of forbearance and knowledge on the Mahāyāna path of seeing, mapped against the four noble truths and against desire-realm versus higher-realm objects. A Q&A closes on whether a Hīnayāna or Mahāyāna path is determined by the practitioner’s motivation — specifically the presence of bodhicitta — rather than by the content of the realisation itself. Suited to practitioners with grounding in Tibetan Buddhist philosophy.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 06 ST7 2003 08 07.mp3
UUID: de5d4aeb-954c-4fa7-83c5-0f598dd02bc8
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Seventy Topics (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2003-08-07
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 44.7 minutes
Words: ~3,308
Yeah. That was in the Tibetan. Okay. Okay. So that makes sense.
Called it definition more object defined. Yeah. Object defined is much better. Thank you. It doesn’t sound like a plan.
Right now, this okay. So the equality of application. Alright? So this is this yogic equipoise, equality of application, which does not misconceive the definitions and the thing defined the the the the thing defined to be truly existent. Alright?
So that that’s what this we’re referring to here. Now what this is talking about is, for example, definition of form is suitable to be form, and the actual thing defined is form itself. Alright? So it’s not but it’s not just with relation to form objects here. We also can have mental minds or mental yeah.
Yeah. Anything that if if that’s one of the consciousnesses or any of the mental factors can be included within this as well. So you can say, for example, the definition of feeling is there’s three different types of feeling. So if it’s pleasant feeling, the definition of pleasant feeling is pleasantness. The definition of suffering feeling is misery.
And the definition of equanimous feeling is lacking either suffering or pleasantness. Alright? So in all of those cases, the description of the things is the definition. Yeah? And the actual thing itself, like the mind, the feeling, the mental factor, sorry, the mental factor or the form or whatever it is as a phenomenon is the thing being defined.
Now it’s looking at both of these and seeing them to be not separate in that they are both empty. Alright. Yeah? Okay. So this and so forth is pretty big and so forth because it includes all other phenomena.
So it’s all of existence included within the and so forth. So usually when they say forms and so forth, they you’re referring to the five sense fields or sense fields. So you have things like form, sound, smell, taste and tactile objects. This is also including consciousnesses and mental factors within the so forth. So it’s so broad that it includes all phenomena.
So you’re talking about the talking about the forms themselves or the entity of the the forms or or the entity of all phenomena not being truly existent, and then we’re talking about the definitions and the things that are being defined as being not truly existent. And then there’s number three. Okay. So I don’t know if you guys collected topics, but in that, there is two things that are considered to be form. Alright?
There’s form as in the sphere of the eye consciousness, and there’s form as in all phenomenon that are that are tangible, that are matter matter. That’s the same word in Tibetan. So but it’s not Maybe it’s that. So there’s form as in physical form as in the eye consciousness’s sphere, and there’s form as in all things which aren’t aren’t nonexistent and aren’t negations and so forth. Yeah?
And and aren’t permanent concepts. Alright okay yeah so matter yeah so this is not just referring to the form it’s also referring to all matter and when it says and so forth then it takes into account all consciousnesses and stuff so when it says here equality of application or this yoga, which is not misconceiving the divisions, it’s talking about the different divisions of form into the the five this five sense spheres or the things that are included within the five sense spheres. Then it’s talking about the five objects of consciousness themselves as the the the like the eye itself, the the organ not the organ itself, but the thing in it. What’s it called? The uncommon governing factor.
That’s it? Is that going help any? Okay. The uncommon governing factor that is in the eye consciousness that enables us to be able to see, it’s very subtle matter. Yeah?
It’s those and the one in the ears and so forth. Those that group. And then it’s including all the consciousnesses that are associated with those. Then it’s also including any of the different levels of consciousness. Whether it’s yogic or whatever.
So basically, I guess, as I said, there’s so many divisions that if I started saying then we would never finish. So there’s a just know all of these divisions are also seem to be the this is this yoga or this practice that these do includes seeing all these divisions as also being not truly existent, that they have a practice which stops them from seeing all these things as being truly existent, all the different divisions as well. Yep. Mhmm. Okay.
The last one. Okay. So so the last division is the meditate or the equipoise yoga, which is seeing that objects and the object possesses are not truly existent. Yeah? So objects in this case is the things we were talking about before, the things that are in the spheres of the five senses.
So therefore we have form, sound, taste, etcetera. Then we have the object possesses, the consciousnesses which see these things, hear these things, smell these things, taste these things, etcetera. Now the the other thing is, though, that minds can be objects and subjects. They can be objects and object possessors. So for example, we have this idea of feeling, yeah?
We have a feeling that we think, oh, that’s really good. I’m really happy with that. Right? But then we have another mind that can observe that mind. Yeah?
We have another consciousness or we have another thought that can observe that mind and say, oh, that’s a feeling of happiness. So in that case, that mental factor of feeling that is experiencing happiness is at once a subject and an object. Yeah? It is. So once once you start doing this, it covers everything.
Once once you start having this idea of one thing going into another, it covers everything as well. You can everything every all phenomena can be covered within the the spheres of object and object possessor as well. So seeing that all these things from that point of view as well are not truly existent. So then there’s a quote from the the Ornament of Clear Realization.
It says not misconceiving forms and so forth. The equality of those is four types. So the equanimity of those is four types, you could say as well. The boundary is that it exists from the Mahāyāna path of accumulation to the end of the continuum of sentient being. Right.
Sorry. Now okay. Now the next one just so we got that sorted out. The next one is the Mahāyāna path of seeing, and if you’re wondering why the Mahāyāna path of seeing is being used in accordance with things that are in general Hīnayāna paths and seems to have absolutely no relation to it, then the reason is that in in every one of the different chapters, every one of the different categories within the seventy topics, there’s a description of the Mahāyāna path of seeing because all of this relates to the understanding of emptiness, and that is seen directly on the path of seeing. So with all the different chapters, whether it’s the exalted knower or the knower of bases, complete aspects application, peak of application, momentary application resultant truth body, in all of these there’s a different idea of what the path of seeing is and what that comes about, why that what the focus is for that.
Alright. So although the knowers of bases are actually Hīnayāna minds, in relation to this description of bases — the knower of bases — there is also a description of the Mahāyāna path of seeing, and specifically, when you’re looking at it from the practices involved in the knower of bases. Alright. Now the so that was was what it means when it says definition of Mahāyāna path of seeing explicitly indicated in this context. Or another way you could say that would be, a Mahāyāna path of seeing as it would relate to, the knower of bases.
This one. Oh, yeah. Okay. So the definition of this Mahāyāna path of seeing in relation to or indicated in the indicated in a category of a knower of bases is a Mahāyāna clear realiser of the truth. Now, I’m let me just start off with.
A Mahāyāna clear realiser of the truth is the general definition for the path of seeing. Whether it’s and if it’s not the Mahāyāna path of seeing, then you say a clear realiser of the truth. Alright? So a Mahāyāna clear realiser of truth is the definition in general of the path of seeing. The next bit, it says that directly realises the freedom from elaboration that is explicitly indicated in this context.
Now, the freedom from elaboration means that it doesn’t grasp its true existence. Right? So it’s it doesn’t the elaboration in this case is a word meaning conceptualization or a thought. There is no grasping at this existence through conceptualisation or some kind of chat, I guess, in the mind. So it’s free from that.
So this is talking about it with regards to what has been indicated in this context, I e, the the knower of bases. So what is explicitly indicated in this context means, yeah, with regards to the understanding of knower of bases. Okay. So the the divisions for this is that there is a sixteen moments of knowledge and forbearance on the Mahāyāna path of seeing. Okay.
Right. Now on this Mahāyāna path of seeing, there are sixteen moments. Within these sixteen moments, four relate to each of the four noble truths. So the first noble truth is the truth of suffering. So we have related to this first noble truth, the truth of suffering, a forbearance of Dharma knowledge, a Dharma knowledge, a forbearance of subsequent knowledge and a subsequent knowledge. now the way that it works is because the first noble truth the truth is suffering is something to be abandoned then as part of the non interrupted path, on the non interrupted path, which is relating to the truth of suffering, we have the, forbearance of Dharma knowledge.
Hang on. I got them down in Tibet, and I knew this was gonna be hard. Right. Okay. The forbearance of Dharma knowledge, which is relate is the, non interrupted path as it relates to abandoning the, things that need to be abandoned with relation to the first noble truth with regards to the desire realm.
Right? That’s the first one. The second one, Dharma knowledge. No. Forbearance of Is it?
Cut it in your dog. That’s just typical. They’ve changed the order in English just to do my head in a little bit more. Alright. Okay.
The then the next one, the forbearance of subsequent knowledge, yeah, is the, the, the abandonment, the, noninterrupted path as it relates to that which needs to be abandoned in relation to the first noble truth and the higher realms, that is the form and formless realm. Right? Then He’s like, do you understand? I was like, wow. Okay.
So the sixteen moments. Right? You go, get rid of Yeah. Okay. Okay.
So you got four moments, right, with relation to the truth of suffering. Yeah? Four moments with relation to the first noble truth of suffering. First of all, you have the forbearance, which is the uninterrupted path, gets rid of everything that’s related to the desire realms. Then you have the next moment which is the is no.
That’s what I’ve done right there. At the same time, have an uninterrupted path which has which is called a subsequent forbearance, which gets rid of that which is related to the higher realms. Yeah? The the things to be abandoned with relations to the higher realms and the first noble truth. Then you have these two uninterrupted paths.
On the first uninterrupted path is the understanding or the the the gotten riddance of, the abandonment of, that which is related to the the desire realm and then abandoning abandoned it’s like after you’ve abandoned it, yeah, of that which is related to the higher realm. So you’re basically getting rid of stuff and then being rid of it with relation to the desire realms and the higher realms. Did did you understand? You can’t shortcut with Geshe la. So I said because I said, okay.
The first one, forbearance of Dharma knowledge. So that’s a noninterrupted path, and it’s about the, desire realm. He goes, no. Can’t say that. It’s the antidote to the desire realm.
Alright? So the first one, the forbearance of Dharma knowledge, uninterrupted path, is antidote to the desire realm. Right? The second one, Dharma knowledge, is an uninterrupted path, which is an antidote to the higher realms. Right?
The third one, the forbearance of subsequent knowledge is the abandonment of that. Once the once the antidote is applied, it’s the actual abandonment as it relates to the desire realm, and the subsequent knowledge is the actual abandonment after the antidote has been applied, which relies which relates to the higher So he said it’s actually pretty easy. There’s two things you need to get rid of. There’s two things to be abandoned with relation with regards to suffering. Right?
There’s you need to abandon, the instance of suffering in the desire realms and the instance of suffering in the higher realms. Right? So that’s the first two we’re talking about here. Then you have to once you’ve applied the antidote, you actually have the abandonment. Right?
So the first one, you’re applying the antidote. Second one, you have the abandonment, and that is, the forbearance of subsequent knowledge and the subsequent knowledge itself. Oh, no. That’s that’s my no. I just said it wrong.
It’s the it’s the dharma knowledge and the subsequent knowledge. Because why did they do that? What are they trying to do to me? It’s me personally. Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No. Sorry.
They usually put forbearance of Dharma knowledge in, then forbearance of subsequent knowledge, then Dharma knowledge, and then subsequent knowledge. Right? And they would just mix them up. Okay. So then it’s the same for the the other thing that needs to be abandoned within the Four Noble Truths that is the truth of the origin of suffering.
So what we have in this case is first of all the forbearance of dharma knowledge, which is the antidote to the truth of origin of suffering as regards to the desire realms, and then we have forbearance of subsequent knowledge, which is the antidote to the higher realms with regards to the origin of suffering. Then we have the Dharma knowledge, which is the actual abandonment with regards to the desire realm, and then the subsequent knowledge, which is the actual abandonment with regards to the higher realms. So it works with the the truth of the origin of suffering as well. Seeing the emptiness directly. So the boundaries of this is that it only exists on the Mahāyāna path of seeing.
So now we’ve arrived at chapter four. Yeah. Did you did you understand? If if you write it down well, it does for me. If I write it down, it makes sense, but not yeah.
They’ve just put it in a different order. Yeah. Sorry. Is. I’ve got a question that came from Uh-huh.
Mhmm. Okay. Or have we missed on this? Right. Okay.
So whether something is a Hīnayāna or a mahianna practice depends on whether the person that’s doing it has bodhicitta or not or whether that’s a goal. Okay so the solitary realisers understand the non duality of things and that’s the final thing that they realise on that path as a solitary realiser so it’s their arhatship, right it’s the end of the path of solitary realizer now the Chittamatrans present this non duality as the final Buddhahood yeah and their description of what the solitary realizers do is different so from the Chittamatrans point of view that is the final word on emptiness alright so once you understand that you’re a Buddha they say that so therefore from their point of view from the Cittamātra point of view it is a Mahāyāna path, yeah, and it’s the final path. It’s the final understanding from the Cittamātra point of view. Now the description of the the solitary realizers you’re working with isn’t a Cittamātra one. The the description of solitary realizers that you’re working with isn’t the Cittamātra one.
It’s the Autonomy school one. Yeah? And in the Autonomous school, the the lack of as recognizing the emptiness of subject and object, yeah, is the gross form of understanding emptiness. In the autonomous school which is the one that this text is written in here they say there’s two different ways of understanding emptiness. The gross form is understanding the lack of duality and the subtle form is understanding not inherently existent.
Whether those people who are autonomous that have that understanding of bodhicitta or not determines whether it’s in Mahāyāna mind or not but the different descriptions of this not understand are not differentiating between subject and object are different depending on which school you’re arguing from. So in terms of the solitary realizer’s path or the solitary realizer’s vehicle — the solitary realizer’s vehicle is a Hīnayāna vehicle. Yeah? Or rather it’s a middling vehicle because the understanding of emptiness is finer than that of those on the hearer’s path. So in what way is the difference between the way they understand the non-duality of subject and object? Okay.
So in terms of that mind itself, there is no difference. In terms of the path of the people that have that realisation, there’s a difference. So if someone is whether you define something as being a hearer’s path, a solitary realiser’s path or a Mahāyāna path depends on the motivation of the person doing it. So if someone has bodhicitta and they accept the Cittamātra position then they’re practising on the Mahāyāna path. If they are working towards the understanding of a solitary realizer’s realisation, then that’s a Hīnayāna path.
So the presentation, the philosophical presentation and the path are a different thing, but the actual realisation itself is exactly the same. Is it possible the realization is qualified by bodhicitta and not on the other? Okay. The the the power of the realizations is different because if someone has bodhicitta in their mind stream, then anything that they do or anything that they experience is much more powerful. Right?
It’s much has is a much more forceful thing, but the actual realization itself is exactly the same. Yeah. Inherent existence? Okay. Now all of these all of these sixteen moments refer to seeing emptiness directly.
Alright? So you’re seeing the emptiness of that which is to be abandoned, I. E. The first two of the noble truths, truth of suffering and the truth of the origin of suffering. And you’re seeing the emptiness of what is to be practiced or what is to be taken up, that is the truth of cessation and the truth of the path.
So it’s all talking about all of their emptiness, seeing the emptiness of these. Right? Now the two forbearances is when the antidote to seeing things as being truly existent is applied. So the antidote to seeing things as being truly existent is the mind realizing emptiness, not just any old mind realizing emptiness, but mind realizing emptiness directly. Yeah?
And that’s what’s called the, noninterrupted no. Yeah. Noninterrupted path. Right? And so that’s the the meditative equipoise.
Once that’s realized, then we have the, Dharma knowledge and the subsequent knowledge. Yeah?