Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. A live translation struggle opens this 61-minute commentary: Geshe Pema Tsering’s interpreter pauses mid-session to work out why “clear light” and “emptiness” are treated as synonymous in the Sublime Continuum — a genuinely puzzling equivalence that anchors the entire discussion of Buddha nature. The commentary then walks through ten topics the text uses to characterize Buddha nature: its entity (emptiness itself), its role as both cause and result, the intentional activity of meditating on it, who possesses it (all sentient beings, not Buddhas), the three vehicles as its arena of engagement, temporal divisions, its all-pervading reach, immutability, and indivisibility. The session closes with three classical similes — water freed from pollutants, gold from tarnish, sky from clouds — illustrating why mental obscurations are adventitious and can ultimately be removed.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 11 2005 07 14 SC.mp3
UUID: 8dcd5a63-f93e-4894-ab50-79c5e015f097
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Sublime Continuum (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2005-07-14
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 61.6 minutes
Words: ~4,528
So please check your motivation. We’re looking at Buddha nature tonight, so please make sure that you are approaching these teachings in order to develop understanding, in order to then be able to put that understanding into practice, to awaken the Buddha nature, traversing the paths, attain Buddhahood, and lead all sentient beings to enlightenment. I was. Uh-huh. Uh-huh.
Uh-huh. Uh-huh. Mhmm. How goes I’m I’m sorry. I understood what he said, and then I thought about how I translated it, and I was struggling.
Because, there’s this one word, which in Tibetan is is translated many ways in English. Here, translated as what is it translated as? Clear light. Clear light of mind. It’s also translated as luminosity.
It’s also translated as, clarity, luminous clarity, many different things. None of which seem to mean the same thing as myself. So that’s why I was struggling with figuring out how to translate it, so I asked Kesley if he could explain it some more. Alright. So what we’re trying to understand when we’re trying to because we’re looking at Buddha nature.
Yeah? And the key to understanding Buddha nature is coming to understand what the nature of the mind is. Alright? And the word that they use to describe the nature of the mind is this, Which here I think they’ve translated as the clear light of mind, clear light nature of mind. Nature of the mind being clear light or In a way, it kind of works, but what makes it difficult is that if you try and say that clear light is synonymous with emptiness, it doesn’t seem to make much sense.
But saying it is just synonymous with emptiness makes sense. So that’s why I was struggling with how to translate it. So it’s saying the nature of the the nature of the mind is clear light and the nature of the mind is emptiness. Therefore, the emptiness and clear light are synonymous, are the same thing. Now, to me in English, that doesn’t make sense.
So Geshe-la explained that when you’re talking about clear, what that means is free from. Alright? If something’s clear, it means that we don’t have anything obstructing it. And here what we’re talking about it being free from is adventitious, I think that’s how you say it, adventitious stains and adventitious obscurations. So because the obscurations that we have, because the afflictive stains that we have in our mind stream are adventitious and they can be cleared, then the nature of the mind is that clarity that exists when you’ve been able to clear them.
And the reason that they’re able to be cleared is that the mind is empty. It’s not a solid entity that exists in a certain way. So when they talk about the clear aspect of the clear light nature of minds, it means clear as in not obstructed. So emptiness isn’t obstructed. Emptiness is the lack of something, the lack of obstruction, the lack of inherent existence, and that clarity or that clearness is synonymous with emptiness in this way.
Yeah? And in the same way as when you have the light aspect means that there is a knowing there. Yeah? So, in this way then, the light nature of mind is synonymous with the emptiness of mind. Although, because of that idea of it being clear of obstructions and light in that perception is enabled without those obstructions.
But we’re not talking about any kind of emptiness here being, luminous. We’re talking about the subtlest levels of mind’s emptiness is the Buddha nature. There is, the, empty nature of phenomena isn’t necessarily luminous and clear. It’s that when you’re talking about the subtle nature of mind, because the mind’s nature is clear and knowing, the emptiness of the mind is said to be luminous emptiness. Emptiness of the subtlest levels of mind is what our Buddha nature is.
And this is described by the Buddha as being or the clear light nature of mind. And that’s our Buddha nature. So the way that we, the sublime continuum explains this is described in the next two topics, which are on page one of the translation if you have it. Topic two a it says two a two, and then in two a two, there is a two a two a and a two a two b. Right?
We’re starting to look at the extensive explanation for the Buddha nature being the clear light aspect or the clear light nature of mind. This clear light nature of mind or Buddha nature is demonstrated is Sorry. It’s explained through two topics. The first one being demonstrating the clear nature of mind by way of ten topics. And the second one being establishing that obscurations are adventitious by way of nine similes and nine meanings.
The ten topics that we’re going to look at are described in a verse from the Sublime Continuum that comes in a little while and talks about the entity, the causes, the results, activities, and so forth of the subtlest levels of mind. Establishing that obscurations are adventitious by way of nine similes and nine meanings describes the use of analogies or similes to show us how the obscurations, the mental afflictions that we have are not actually the nature of the mind. That they exist in the mind, but they’re not its true nature. They’re not its the way that it abides the the way that it abides ultimately, and therefore, can be removed. Yep?
Mhmm. Yes. And I did mean to say ultimately in the in the usual technical sense there. Mhmm. Mhmm.
So the first of these topics demonstrate the topic that’s called demonstrating the clear light nature of mind by way of ten topics is a extrapolation extrapolation of a quote from the Buddha in which he said, Monks, mind does not exist in mind. The nature of mind is clear light. When he said mind does not exist in mind, what he means is that mind doesn’t exist the way that it appears to us as existing. Saying mind doesn’t exist in mind means mind, the the experience we have of mind doesn’t exist the way that it appears to us as existing. So, if we try and find the mind mind that we experience, we can’t find it.
And that lack of existing the way that it appears to us as existing is is clarity, is the is the is the clearing of that deluded perception. The mind doesn’t exist the way that we experience it as existing, way that we perceive it as existing, whether it appears to us as existing. It exists in a it exists as a conventional entity that is ultimately empty, and its ultimate emptiness is its clear light nature. Okay. So, Geshe-la said, and if I didn’t say this before, I’m sorry.
I was just trying to make it clear in my head. He said that, the clear light is synonymous with emptiness. So that means that the emptiness of a table is also clear light. Right? In that it is clear, of inherent existence and the light means that it can be known.
Yeah? So the clear the the the emptiness of a table isn’t the clear light nature of mind, but it is still said to be clear light. Alright? So you can still describe any you can describe any type of emptiness as being clear light. We’re not talk We’re not talking about any type of emptiness here because we’re talking about the Buddha nature and the Buddha nature is only the clear light nature of mind.
Yeah? But you you can say that emptiness and clear light are synonymous, even though that doesn’t sound like it makes any sense in English, does it? Does that mean clear light? Does that mean that comes through the filter the terms terms of the obscurations or whatever it the clouds or whatever it is, being inherent existence. Right?
It doesn’t exist the way that it appears to us at all. So in that way, it’s said to be clear light. Alright? So clear light doesn’t have any substantial existence. Doesn’t have any substantial existence.
Does that make sense? Clear light. Light doesn’t have any substantial existence. Mhmm. Mhmm.
Okay. So sunlight, for example, yeah, gets rid of ignorance. It gets rid of, darkness or or shade. Yeah? It it it makes it disappear.
Right? But we can’t actually it’s not it’s sunlight itself isn’t a solid object. It it it is it it makes something disappear. It it destroys its opponent. Yeah?
But it doesn’t exist as a solid entity. Yeah? So, in in a similar way, the emptiness of something, yeah, is the opposite of its inherent existence. Yeah? Of its its solid existence.
So the lack of that solid existence is said to be Because the solid existence and the grasping of solid existence is ignorance. So, getting rid of that duality, getting rid of that grasping is then, is is what you’re left with is clear light. Does that make sense? Yes. Yeah.
Yeah. It is. It’s it’s an allegorical way of saying it. It’s like the the sunlight destroys it destroys darkness. Right?
And emptiness, the existence of emptiness means that inherent existence doesn’t exist. But there’s a lot of obscurations in attachment that comes with the idea of of inherent existence. So, having the lack of that is said to be like clarity. Yeah. The lack of that solid existence is clarity.
Yeah. Is a is a and the reason that they use this word, clear light is because it’s not obstructed. It’s obstructed. There’s nothing stopping it. There’s no, there’s no solid entity that can, that can obstruct, this way of being.
Yeah? There is no inherent thing that can be taken away from it. Alright? So because there’s no obstruction, so like a Light isn’t obstructing. Yeah?
But it gets rid of darkness and it’s not obstructing. It gets rid of darkness and what’s the other one? Okay. So so the other thing is that there’s there’s no obstruction and there’s no obscurations with it. It clears away things.
There’s no kind of shades that that it will stop. So, when you have light, you don’t have shadow. Right? And when you have, like, a clear light, you don’t have, adventitious stains because it’s there’s there is just clarity and or there’s nothing obscuring the light. Does that make sense?
So that’s that they call it they call they call emptiness clear light in some instances. Okay. So the sublime continuum describes this state, this clear light nature of mind, by using ten topics. The ten topics are quoted or come from, sorry, the passage in the sublime continuum, the next passage, which says, entity, causes, results, activities, possession, engagement, likewise temporal, all pervading character, eternally immutable, and indivisibility of qualities are to be understood as the intended meaning meaning of the ultimate sphere. The ultimate sphere is talking about the clear light nature of mind in this instance.
This means that the element of the Buddha, which is another way of saying the Buddha nature or the Buddha potential, and it’s also called the Sugata essence or the Sugatagarba or the essence of the Buddha’s, is settled by way of ten topics. Topics are the ones we just went through there in the first. The first of which is the entity. Looking at the topic of the entity of entity of Buddha nature. Alright?
Or the entity of the ultimate sphere. The entity of the ultimate sphere is basically emptiness. The the non affirming negative, the lack of inherent existence. This one. Okay.
So the entity is emptiness. Uh-huh. Okay. Okay. The next thing that we look at then is causes and is the causes.
Cause. Causes. Cause. Okay. So in this instance then, the Buddha nature acts as a cause.
And generally, permanent phenomena don’t act as causes. So it’s actually quite strange and unusual that a that a permanent phenomena, being the clear light nature of the mind, the emptiness of the mind, actually acts as a cause. Now, the way that it acts as a cause is when the adventitious stains are removed from the mind and Buddhahood is attained, then the clear light nature of the mind, the emptiness of the mind is the cause for the development of the dharmakaya. It’s the cause for the development. Sorry.
This Yeah? Alright. It acts as a cause for the which is the union of all of them. So in in this instance, it acts as a cause, but it acts as a cause in a unique way. It’s not in the same way that causes act when they are a result of a they act as a cause for a karmic result because I’m not talking about a karmic result here.
We’re talking about that which, is established or that which is revealed, once the stains that are adventitious and not its actual nature are removed. Right? So it’s a cause, but it’s not a cause in the normal sense. It’s a cause in that it is what becomes the Svabhavakaya or the nature body or the entity body of Buddhahood. But it’s not a cause in that it creates a karmic result.
Does that make sense? What are the three Buddha’s bodies? Four Buddha’s bodies. Five. Four Buddha’s bodies.
There’s three Buddha’s bodies sometimes, four, sometimes five, sometimes. And they change with the fives. Okay. Yeah. It’s it’s generally described as being the body of unity or the the way that all the other three bodies come together.
So Geshe-la said, says here it’s given a slightly different gloss in that it’s said to be the emptiness of the Dharmakāya. The emptiness of the emptiness of the dharmakaya. But the fact that there is an emptiness of the dharmakaya means that you have the ability to have all three bodies not be separate. So that’s why it’s also called the unity body. Does that make sense?
The fact that it’s empty, that the Buddha’s bodies are empty means that the Nirmānakāya and the Sambhogakāya and the Dharmakāya aren’t separate. Yeah. If they weren’t empty, they would be separate. But because they’re empty, they’re not separate. They will be.
Yeah. And so that that union is the fourth body of a Buddha. It creates a a another four Body. Body. Yeah.
The emptiness of the Buddha’s bodies. Oh, yeah. And it’s called the. Mhmm. Okay.
Now the next thing it was the next thing is that that it acts as a result, the topic of being a result as well. Now, Geshe-la said to remember that when we talk about it being an entity, we’re talking about the topic of it being an entity, the topic of it being a cause, and the topic of it being a result. That gives us a little bit more flexibility to talk about these things in different ways. Usually, you don’t talk about permanent things. You don’t talk about permanent phenomena as being a cause.
You don’t talk about permanent phenomena as being a result. But when you’re talking about the topic of these things, yeah, you can talk about them in this way, right? And especially when we’re talking about Buddha nature. So again, because Buddha nature is a When we’re talking about the permanent aspect, Buddha nature is permanent, we don’t usually refer to permanent objects as being result. But in this instance, because every time you get rid of an obscuration, an adventitious obscuration, the clarity of the clear light nature of mind becomes more pronounced, it means that it becomes more like its true self, and that means that the clear light nature of mind is a result as well.
It’s always a result of the abandoning of an obscuration. The clear light nature of mind becomes clearer and clearer and subtler and subtler once the obscurations have gone. They aren’t its natural state, but are they can envelop the clear light nature of mind, if that makes sense. Is that yeah. Envelop.
Yeah. That’s the best way. Mhmm. I don’t know about you guys, but I can’t breathe, I’m killing the incense. No.
No. No. The these incense is going It’s obvious that I’m not a goddess, because if I was I was a goddess, I’d be enjoying the incense. He still doesn’t think I’m a very good object for offerings. Yeah.
Yeah. That’s good because Geshe-la just spelled it wrong, so it makes me feel bad because my spelling is rubbish. Okay. Dear. Oh, yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. Uh-uh. Okay. Mhmm.
Mhmm. So the next thing that we look at then is the activities involved involved with the the Buddha nature. So these activities that we’re talking about are the act the activities that are activities is what I was about to say. So the the word that it actually uses in in the in the root text that they’ve translated as activities is the word that’s usually translated as karma. Action.
Action. Yeah. But so or action or karma. Yeah. But then Geshe-la said that word activities no.
That word no. It’s karma or act act action refers to activities. Does that make sense? So I can’t say activities, which means activities. Yes.
But there’s a difference Well, in Tibetan, there’s a difference because it means actions that are purposely done. Yeah? Because there’s always activity. There’s always karma. Yeah?
But then there’s certain things that you engage in activities with. Do you know what I mean? Like, the activities of a bodhisattva or something like that. So so there’s a there’s a there’s an extra syllable that’s added to the word that’s usually translated as karma, to make it much more act active, conscious. Yeah.
I was yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Intentional. That’s what I was looking for.
Intentional. Okay. So that’s why it’s translated as activities. And that specific activities that we’re talking about here is meditating on the clear light nature of the mind. Alright?
Through meditating on the clear light nature of mind, we’re able to remove all obscurations, develop all positive qualities, and become Buddhas. The activity of the Buddha nature, if you like, is to be ripened, to be developed until it’s it it manifests in its clear light form. Mhmm. Okay. The next thing is possession.
So that talks about who has it. Alright? The who has the Buddha nature? Well, Buddhas don’t have Buddha nature. Nope.
No more. Because they’re Buddhas, so they don’t have Buddha nature. And non-sentient objects don’t have Buddha nature. So all sentient beings, are the beings are are other beings. All sentient beings are the phenomena that have Buddha nature.
This one. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Engagement.
The engagement is the three vehicles. Now the vehicle of a hearer, the vehicle of a solitary realizer, and the vehicle of a Bodhisattva. Mhmm. By engaging in these vehicles, one develops the Buddha nature. Mhmm.
Alright. The next thing that we have is temporal temporal divisions. So ultimately or really, there are no divisions in the Buddha nature. The Buddha nature, it can’t be divided. But temporarily, in the way that in the when we define it by the way that it exists in certain beings’ continuums at specific times, it can be divided, but it’s only a very kind of, yeah, temporal temporary way of dividing them.
So then, if we talk If we’re dividing the Buddha nature temporarily like that, we divide it into the Buddha nature of hearers, solitary realizers, and bodhisattvas, Buddha nature that has been chopped, and the Buddha nature of beings who haven’t entered the path but have dispositions in that direction. What do you call it? They said it in the yeah. Obtained. Okay.
So the next thing is it is all pervading. That means that it pervades all sentient beings. There’s no sentient being that you can say doesn’t have the Buddha nature. humans have it. Hell beings have it.
Animals have it. All beings have it. So that’s what it means by all pervading. Buddha is not a sentient being. There’s this word there’s this word that is usually translated as a person, but that doesn’t really get it across because we usually think of persons as being humans, don’t we?
But they they picked that word, I don’t know why, to get across the idea of being, I guess, a being perhaps. So, if we think about all beings, there’s two types of beings, Buddhas and sentient beings. Buddha is a being isn’t that just the Yeah. It’s a hard one because it’s very specific word in Tibetan, and it doesn’t translate. Okay.
So Buddhas have minds, and usually that’s what we cause we work with as a definition of a sentient being, is being with a mind. Right? Being with sentience. But, when we’re using the term, it’s translated as sentient being. So, I guess when we’re using the term sentient being, it’s defined as being a being with obscurations.
Obscurations problems. No. Okay. There’s two different types of obscure obscurations. Obscuration is something that obstructs your understanding.
So sentient beings have obstructions of afflicted state of of emotions or negative emotions, and they also obstructions to knowledge. So there’s things that stop them knowing things, and there’s things that are emotional states that stop them from reaching their potential as well, from re from stop them from getting out of saṃsāra. Yeah? I think the Sanskrit word for the first one is klesha. Yeah?
And the other one is jneyavarana. So that you have klesha and and now I can’t there’s no but klesha we have klesha’s obstructions. Okay. No. It’s a bee it is a body and it is being, but because it’s not a being who possesses a polluted or an obstructed mind, it’s it isn’t a sentient being as by the definition that we’re working with with for a sentient being is, which is a being with obstructions.
It’s best not to think about the etymology of the expression sentient beings when you’re thinking about what sentient beings mean. The definition of a sentient being is one who has obstructions, mental obstructions. Right? Either to knowledge or from destructive emotions. Even though the etymology of the word sentient of the phrase, I should say, in English, sentient being would suggest that a being with a mind is a sentient being, it’s not what it means.
Okay. So Geshe-la said it you could the etymology means the meaning of the different parts of the word or the different word words. Yeah? And he said this word, which is quite literally translated sentient beings or beings with sentience. Yeah?
You could think of it as being short for beings with afflicted sentience, and then it works it fits with the definition of a sentient being. Right? But if you just think of it as being beings with sentience, it doesn’t work. You have to think of it as being beings with afflicted sentience. Not this one.
They better than this one. Yeah. Yeah. Mind. Alright.
So the next one is it’s immutability. Now immutability means it doesn’t change. Alright? Because it’s permanent, it doesn’t change. There’s no, process happening with it.
It doesn’t change. There’s no process. Which will also leads on to the next thing, which is it’s inseparability. If something is permanent, it doesn’t change. You can’t separate it out into different time frames or different what’s the word they call?
What’s the word they use? I can’t remember. Different periods or different time frames. I keep thinking of artists when they go, that was their such and such. But, yeah, I think that’s their period, but there’s another word that is anyway, all the different you can’t chop it up into different sections because there is nothing to say, this then it was this, then it was that.
When it’s not changing, you can’t differentiate it out. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm. Mhmm.
So that’s the the nine is it nine or ten? The ten different the ten different topics by which we can approach the clear light nature of mind, the Buddha nature. The next thing that we need to look at is why we would want to do that. The reason that it’s given for why we would want to come to an understanding of the clear light nature of mind, the Buddha nature, is so that we can come to understand that the adventitious stains in our continuum are just that, adventitious, and they can be removed. So that we can develop an understanding that all of our afflicted states, all of our obscurations to liberation and obscurations to omniscience are removable, are not the actual nature of our mind.
Is not its afflicted, obscurations, and in that our the nature of our mind, sorry, is not its afflicted obscurations, and in that our mind is able to be freed from them, it is said to be similar to a few things. Things. There’s a few similarities that are given here. The first is is that water can be freed from its pollutants. The second is that gold can be freed from tarnish.
Is that true? Do you or would you just say yucky bits? Because tarnish, doesn’t tarnish go on the outside? Okay, Geshe said, yeah. That’s why they said that that true gold doesn’t have tarnish.
And but yeah. Anyway. But I said in water, you can have pollutants in there. I said, you can have real pollutants in real water. Right?
And Geshe-la said, guesses said yes. That’s why they said hang on. We haven’t got to the bit where they say it yet. So I’ll get to that and then so gold’s nature doesn’t have tarnish in it, and the sky’s nature doesn’t have clouds in it. And so when you have water that’s free from pollutants, in the same way that you can free water from pollutants, and the Geshe-la said this, in the same way that you can free free gold from the pollutants that would cause us tarnish, and the same way that you can that the clouds can disappear from the sky, then the adventitious stains in our, on our Buddha nature can also be done away with, and our clear light nature of mind can shine through.
Yes. Everybody says something like, if you have too many pollutants in water, it stops being water. Oh, yeah. Okay. Guess who thinks there’s a way that you can get the water out of tea so the water still exists in the tea.
Mhmm. Okay. So this is why in the sublime continuum, it says where is it that it says it? Oh, yeah. Like the precious, the sky, and water.
So the precious here refers to gold. I think we’ve got, like, about four or five extra minutes for questions because we’re about to start a whole new section. So