Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. A translation puzzle opens this 41-minute Q&A session: Geshe Pema Tsering questions whether the term usually rendered as “faith” really means faith at all, working through its definition as a liking-mind directed toward objects genuinely capable of bringing happiness. He distinguishes the three types — clear, definite, and believing faith — with a deliberately absurd example: you cannot have faith in apples, only desire for them; the same mental process aimed at liberation becomes faith. Audience questions then shift to Chenrezig’s thousand arms as a symbol of compassion, two forms of ethical self-awareness (internal conscience versus concern about others’ judgment), and whether a Mañjuśrī image is an object of faith or craving. Conversational and accessible, it suits practitioners with some Lamrim background.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 16 SoP 1994 03 28.mp3
UUID: 024919e4-79c7-477e-9a7f-5e0416aa3d12
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Stages of the Path (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 1994-03-28
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 40.7 minutes
Words: ~3,366
Sorry. It’s just that you’ve heard something translated a certain way for a long time, and I guess it gives you the definition, and it’s like, now what do I say? It doesn’t make any sense. Alright. So this thing that’s usually translated as faith, which I’m not sure is faith anymore, so that’s the first one of these seven different qualities of āryas.
Now, this thing that’s translated as faith, right, is said to be a mind that is a liking mind or a happy mind. Now that’s his definition. When we talk about happy mind, there can be things that we’re happy about that we’re striving towards which aren’t necessarily faith, right? So it’s not any type of happy mind or any type of liking mind. It’s a mind that likes something that is actually worthy of being liked.
So it depends on the base or that is like on the object that we’re focusing on, whether what it is that we have is faith or craving. It’s not on the actual mind, but it’s on the thing that we’re craving towards or ggrasping at. So that means that if we have an intense craving or an intense we really, really like an intense liking for meat or we have an intense liking for apples, right, that’s not faith in apples. That’s desire or that’s grasping. If on the other hand we have an intense liking towards liberation or Buddhahood, then that’s faith.
Okay? Does that make sense? So it’s not on the mind itself, it’s on the object of the mind, the thing that the mind is focusing on, whether it becomes grasping or faith. Now when we talk about faith there’s three different types of faith. There’s one that’s called definite faith that is believing it’s a certain definite way.
There’s what’s called believing faith that is hoping or believing that it’s a certain way. And then there’s what’s called clear faith which is knowing that things are a certain way. Right? Now the faith that the Aryas have, the faith that these realized beings have is the knowing faith, knowing that things are or clear faith, knowing that things are a certain way. So knowing things are a certain way, then they strive towards this liberation or if we’re going to try and be Mahāyāna practitioners towards Buddhahood.
So it’s this clear liking. So it’s liking and knowing what you like and seeing it clearly is the type of faith that the aryas have. So this is the this is the first of the seven different jewels that we need to try and develop or practice. Okay. So if we’re gonna If we were actually developing faith in apples though, the way that these three different types of faith would come about would be that first of all, because we understand or we know that apples taste good, they smell good, and they make us feel good when we eat them, then we would have this idea of, yeah, I really like apples and I know why I like apples.
Right? And that’s called clear faith. Yeah? If after that we then thought, I’m gonna go and buy myself an apple. I’m definitely gonna do it.
I’ve got the money. It can come about. I know where to get the apple. The man’s gonna give it to me if I give him the money. Right?
That kind of process. That’s then that’s what’s called a definite faith. Yeah, or something that’s definitely going to come about. Then believing faith is that we believe that the result of us giving the money is going to be that we get the apple. So it’s not this definite idea of it coming about, but it’s a belief that that’s the way that it is.
Right? So if we if we had faith in getting an apple, then that’s how that would come about. But we’re trying to have faith in getting liberation or getting full enlightenment. But us striving for an apple in this way isn’t exactly called faith. That is because the object that we are striving towards isn’t something that can actually give us true happiness.
It’s something that is going to cause us sorrow. And the mind that we have that turns towards apple or grasps after apple is a craving mind. It’s not one that it’s looking for enlightenment or liberation. So although the process may be similar because the apple itself isn’t something that can give us happiness, it is in fact an instance of the suffering of an instance of the truth of suffering because we have a mind that’s grasping towards it, then we our our thought process in this way around apples isn’t faith, it’s grasping or desire. Now, if we transform the thing that we’re focusing on, however, and we focus on liberation or we focus on the the Three Jewels or we focus on achieving enlightenment, then because the thing that we’re striving towards is actually something that can give us happiness, then that process ceases to be one of desire and grasping and becomes one of faith and aspiration.
So this means then if we have this idea, if we have this idea that we know what liberation is, we know how important it is, we know how it’s going to make us happy, then that is clear faith in liberation. If then based on that we understand that if we do such and such a practice, we do this, if we get rid of this and if we practice this, we’re going to achieve that liberation, then that’s like definitive or definite faith. Yeah. And our belief that that process is taking place, belief that we are able to to bring this about is said to be believing faith. So the apple is just an example.
It doesn’t work. We can’t have faith in apples. It’s a contradiction in terms. We can only have desire for apples and faith in liberation and Buddhahood and the Three Jewels and things like that. Oh, yeah.
Those are So we can stop there. Otherwise, you guys are gonna get too hungry, sir. Nick? A chocolate statue of Buddha. Right?
Desire for chocolate. Depends on whether you like chocolate or not, doesn’t it? Chocolate He doesn’t think it’ll make any difference because when you’re focusing on an object trying to develop calm abiding or śamatha, then you’re not focusing on the qualities of that object. Your mind is only allowed to focus on one object. Yeah?
On one on one aspect. So you can’t be thinking about you you wouldn’t be thinking about the sweetness of the chocolate, how the chocolate tastes, how it feels in your mouth, what it is that or even wanting chocolate. You’re not allowed to think about any of those things if you’re developing calm abiding. You’re only seeing that the thing you’re focusing on is that is in actual fact Buddha. So what it’s made of doesn’t make any difference.
You’re focusing on an object that is made from sorry. You’re focusing on an object that is in essence the Buddha. You’re thinking about the qualities of Buddha. And then when you’re focused on that, then your mind isn’t allowed to to move on to anything else. And not the characteristics of chocolate or wanting chocolate or desire or anything.
You’re single pointedly focusing on one object. Okay. So the idea is that you develop the same liking for Buddha as you have for chocolate. Right? But lucky liking chocolate doesn’t help you any.
Yeah. If you like Buddha, then that then then that helps you because you have a focus on what you’re striving towards. Yeah? Yeah. But liking chocolate is desire which causes suffering or is a craving which causes suffering.
So you can’t mix it up? Excuse me. Yeah. Yes. How many of it?
Eleven? Eleven? It’s assumed that if something has a face, it has an it has a head. Right? So, but the reason that they say the face is because that’s what you’re focusing most on the meditation, but the head comes along with it.
Okay. So the reason that sometimes Chenrezig is is pictured with having thousand arms is because Chenrezig made a vow or Avalokiteśvara made a vow that that he would not achieve enlightenment until all sentient beings were out of saṃsāra, right? And from that intense vow comes his intense compassion or his intense love for all sentient beings. He’s working for all of their or he or she is working for all of their benefits, right? So through that action, it said that their body that from the power of their body from the power of their wish, their body split into all these different parts so they could be a benefit to sentient beings.
Hence the thousand arms. So the way that it works is like as an example or as an illustration of compassion. So the reason in some portraits why Chenrezig has a thousand arms is because it’s an illustration of their compassion. Right? Now whether they have a thousand arms or four arms, it doesn’t make any difference in terms of that compassion.
It’s only that the thousand arms represents that compassion. So that acts as a trigger for focusing on that compassion. So whether it’s there or not doesn’t actually affect the compassion. It’s just a trigger to help the mind focus. Attributes.
Yeah. But the reason that there’s all these different types of arms is because of what people are able to visualize. Right? So some people are able to visualize two arms. Some people are able to visualize seven.
Some people are able to visualize a thousand, and others are able to visualize more. Yeah? So the different traditions and the different, illustrations are to give different people with different abilities a chance to do the meditation. So it there there’s it depends on what the meditator is able to to focus on. Yeah?
Yeah. Okay. Yeah. It’s just the it’s just the word conscience. I’m trying to it’s a very it’s a difficult word because it has a concept of a have a god in it in the word conscience.
There’s a god idea of god. So do you mean conscientiousness? Because conscious has the idea of, like, a and and and knowing of what’s right and wrong from it. Awareness of doing something wrong. Yeah.
So awareness is something different. So that’s awareness. Is that what you mean? Sorry. It’s just I was thinking, how do I differentiate conscious from embarrassment or shame or whatever it is in Tibetan?
And It’s like, Okay. So what what we’re talking about here is there’s two different types of two different types of awareness. Right? The first one, which is is don’t know. It’s easy.
You pick one. Right? It can either be shame, embarrassment, conscience, whatever you wanna call it. But, basically, it is the ability, yeah, to differentiate between whether an action is going to have a positive effect or a negative effect. So a self ability, like, we’re a self knowing.
So to watch our own minds to see whether what we’re doing is going to be positive or negative. Right? And in colloquial Tibetan, it’s it’s like embarrassment. It’s the same word as they use for embarrassment. Yeah?
Like, oh, I’m so embarrassed. I can’t do that. Yeah? It’s the same word. Right?
Does that make sense? And then there’s this other thing, right, which is sometimes translated as shame, sometimes translated as conscientiousness, yeah, which is this idea that other people are watching what I’m doing, yeah, so they will be able to tell that I’m doing something negative that’s going to be harmful, or they’ll be able to tell that I’m doing something positive that’s going to be helpful. So through the combination of those two, then you’re able to focus on what is going to be a positive action and negative action performing positive actions and refraining from negative actions. Uh-huh. It’s it’s a it’s an external it’s an external thing.
It’s worrying about what people think of you. Okay. So it is, for example, if you’re going to kill a sheep, right, now if you stop yourself from killing the sheep because you have an understanding that killing sheep is bad and it’s gonna create a negative outcome, yeah, then that’s this first one, which is shame, right? Or no, no, embarrassed. Which one?
Embarrassment, all right? Okay. You stop yourself. And then the second one, which is like shame or is when someone may see you kill the sheep and then say it’s not very good to kill a sheep so other people won’t judge your actions you stop from doing something negative. So the first one is you’re looking at yourself saying that’s I’m not going to do that because that’s negative.
The second one is other people may look at you and say that’s negative. So through both of those then you’re able to stop performing negative actions. Now karma is not just an external matter or an internal matter. Whatever compounded phenomenon there are come about through phenomena. So that includes all of our experiences, all of our form, all of the aggregates are said to be karma.
So it’s external and internal. Yeah. So, yeah. Yeah. So, Geshe la said that you’re enjoying it, but you have to remind yourself that this isn’t true happiness.
This isn’t gonna last very long. It’s the suffering of change, yeah. So you’re enjoying it but you’re aware that it’s not true happiness, that it’s not a reason to experience true happiness. And he said it’s pretty easy because you just have to look at your clock, at your watch, right? If you just keep looking at your watch and then you think, oh, this isn’t gonna last more than two hours.
This happiness isn’t gonna last more than two hours, then it’s a really easy way to remember that it isn’t true happiness and it is, in fact, the suffering of change. So anytime that you’re you’re thinking that this is true happiness, he said, just take a look at the watch. You know, what time is it? What time will it finish? And how much have we got left of this happiness?
Because I was saying that I think that it might be a problem with Justin, with your question, that that this we have this idea of if everybody says it’s alright, doesn’t necessarily make it alright. Yeah? And and so he and I said, so what if some we have a lot of things like people would say drinking alcohol is good. There’s a lot of pressure in our culture to drink alcohol, but that doesn’t make it good. And he said, so what you have is shameless people, people with no embarrassment or no shame, telling acting in a way there.
So when you’re looking towards external judgment about whether an action is positive or not and in order to stop you performing an action, then don’t refer to shameless people. Alright? And so every time that you find someone who’s gonna say drinking’s good, you’ll find someone who has the clarity to perceive the negative things from drinking, like how it wastes money, how it destroys your body and so forth, right? So you’re focusing for this external pressure, like the external shame, yeah, on people that have self shame. Does that make sense?
Okay. So if you thought, Geshe la, I’m gonna have a drink. Right? And you know what would Geshe la think? And you thought that, then you stopped doing it, then that’s shame.
The personal one. Right? Embarrass well, it’s so bizarre. But okay. I’m just gonna pick embarrassment for that one.
That’s embarrassment. I’m not gonna do it because what would Geshe-la think? Right? And if you if you thought that if Geshe-la was actually there, yeah, and you thought, oh, no. He will see me having a drink.
Then that is the second one which we’ll call shame. So the first one’s embarrassment, that one’s shame. If it’s an external if it’s reliant on an external object, it’s the second one. It’s reliant on yourself, it’s the first one. But both of them come from the point of view is whatever stops you doing something that the Buddha told you not to do.
Right. The other people would say something there. Okay. This isn’t something we’re talking about. He said for exactly the same reasons that we wouldn’t do it.
We’re not just talking about ordinary. He said it’s not just it’s not just Ārya beings that have this ability or this this this idea of not doing things because of what other people will think. Alright? We also have it, but aryas would have it as well. Of course, they would think, I’m not doing something in case they someone I I won’t do this in case they will think something negative from that.
Of course, that they would think that. Okay. So anyway, Ramsay just pulled the name out of the hat of this guy that went around drinking a lot and sleeping around a lot and everything and was a bit of a sidhe figure. Anyway, I said, what about that guy? And Geshe la said, he wasn’t it comes down to motivation.
If you’re doing something in order to stop other people experiencing suffering, then it’s a positive motivation. If you’re doing something in order to in order for your own benefit, then it’s a negative motivation. So Drukpa Kunley would have still had this conscientiousness about what other people would think because he was constantly focusing on what other people would think. Right? So he was constantly trying to help other beings.
So if you’re constantly trying to help other beings, you’re only going to do things that will bring about understanding in them, not things that will confuse Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. What is it that I said that, and he said ask if they have more questions. What is it that makes a Mañjuśrī an object of faith?
Is that is that Are you talking about basically sambhogakaya forms? Just say that object up there, that of Mañjuśrī, that Mhmm. Mañjuśrī. Is it and not an object of craving or rasping. Is it because, like, his qualities are infinite?
Okay. So the idea of this picture or this image is that when you think it when you see this image, then you are reminded of or inspired by Mañjuśrī. And so therefore, this becomes an object of faith because it’s an image for which you can be you can have understanding of or reminding of the qualities of Mañjuśrī. And because the qualities of Mañjuśrī are something that is that it that brings about qualities in ourselves and not suffering, then it’s an object of faith as opposed to an object of desire. So it’s not just refuge, but anything.
Anytime that you see an image like this, it’s supposed to remind you of refugees, supposed to remind you of the qualities of Mañjuśrī and so forth. So through that reminding of the qualities, the the faith in those qualities is there. This one. He wants to know if that’s okay. Yeah.
What what are you talking about? The what what would count? Okay. Okay. Yeah.
Sure. Sure. Sure. Uh-huh. Uh-huh.
Yeah. He said it’s fine if you visualize the four-arm Chenrezig. Okay. No. Sorry.
I got that wrong. What you said was if you did the four arm Chenrezig Sadhana and then told them that you’re doing Manis, then that’s the same Mani. So he doesn’t see why that would be. But you should do whatever the sadhana says in terms of visualization. But if you can’t do that visualization and you do the other visualization, then you said the Manis are the same.
It’s the same deity. So he doesn’t see why the the Manis wouldn’t count. If you do that, he thinks that’s okay.