Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. A student’s question about whether we can show respect to an unrecognised emanation body opens this 54-minute Q&A from Geshe Pema Tsering’s Sublime Continuum series and lands on a point he returns to repeatedly: since no one can tell Buddhas from ordinary people — John Howard and George Bush are his examples — universal respect is the only rational policy. The session then covers the three or four bodies of a Buddha, two distinct types of pure lands, and a sharp exchange on “taming,” where Geshe argues that our apparent independence is illusory since negative emotions already control us; genuine freedom grows precisely by having those tamed through the Buddha’s teachings. The session closes on guru devotion in tantra, distinguishing three Tibetan words commonly translated as “devotion” and explaining what it actually takes — the right motivation, sustained visualization, and a desire to fully emulate the teacher — to genuinely receive a tantric initiation. Suited to practitioners with some Mahāyāna background.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 22 2005 08 25 (2) SC.mp3
UUID: 91e22b62-108e-41b4-8436-f04d7eea2eab
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Sublime Continuum (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2005-08-25
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 54.7 minutes
Words: ~4,451
I’m sure he wrote us. We yeah. Sorry. We really do have two weeks because I can’t start the tantra stuff. Well, I’ll have to if Rodrigo’s got the initiations.
Got one. Apparently, I can do the first section anyway if he doesn’t show up and I have to stay. It doesn’t matter. Yes. Yes.
So with the emanation body Mhmm. If we don’t recognize that it’s an emanation body, say, you know, something wrongful happens to us Mhmm. And, you know, we don’t recognize that as an emanation body Mhmm. How can we show respect? No.
He just said, what do I say all the time? Alright. No. He said, this is why I keep saying all the time, whoever it is, be respectful. Whatever they’re doing, be respectful.
He said that there this is this is the reason why we should always be respectful to everyone and always take into consideration that they could be a Buddha. Yeah. Yeah. Is why Geshe-la always says, if John Howard isn’t a Buddha, if George Bush isn’t a Buddha, then what they’ve done is bad. Oh, so he’s always saying this all the time.
If they’re a Buddha, then that’s a different case. But if they’re not a Buddha, but they’re he doesn’t know who’s a Buddha, so you gotta treat everyone with respect. So if you have this idea that you don’t know who’s a Buddha and who’s not a Buddha, it means that you’re nice to everyone. Alright? So if the idea is to try and be as respectful to to as you to everybody, because you don’t know who’s a Buddha and who’s not.
But it was if if if that was a record, it’d be Geshe-la’s favorite. Time already. Yeah. Yeah. Because we’ve gotta stretch it a little bit.
Two weeks, two pages. We’ve got. I’ll survive. Not a problem. That’s a good thing.
Is the Yes. Is the the one of the body approved able to go and come back? Go where? Go to the other world. What other world?
You know, Samsāra. Come back. Go to and come back to the Samsāra or I don’t know. Hera, what are you talking about? Are you talking about Sambhogakāya.
So who okay. Okay. So for starters, all Buddhas always live in pure lands. Yes? Because wherever Buddha is, that is a pure land.
Whether we can perceive them living on a pure land is a different matter. So we may see a Buddha if we had the good fortune to see a Buddha in its Nirmānakāya form, yeah, then we could be standing right next to a Bodhisattva who’s perceived them in who is perceiving them in the Sambhogakāya form. So wherever there’s a Buddha, there’s a pure land. Yes? Whether you have the perception to see that or not is your is is your obscurations.
Yes? So the idea of so it says that where a Buddha attains enlightenment is called the Akanishtha, sorry. Akanishtha Pure Land, non-higher Pure Land. Yeah? And there they manifest with bodhisattvas that they’re teaching.
Yeah? But that is their their natural state, and wherever they go, that pure land is there. So it’s their perception. Okay. So the other thing is that there’s two there’s there’s more than two different types of pure lands.
So usually when you talk about a pure land, you’re talking about the environment of a Buddha. So if Hera was to become a Buddha, yeah, there would be the Hera pure land. Yeah? Wherever Hera went. Yes?
There is also pure lands that you hear about like Sukhāvati and other pure lands. Yeah? Where what pure land in that context means is that beings don’t have anything obstructing their Dharma practice. So they don’t suffer from extreme ignorance and they don’t suffer from obstacles to Dharma practice. So, it’s a pure land in that it’s a perfect place to practice Dharma, but ordinary beings can be born there as well.
But the pure land that we’re talking about with the Sambhogakāya Buddhas is the plane that they the the space that they exist in. Because the the way that a Buddha perceives everything is as a pure land. They see their existence is in a pure land, that’s the way things are for them. Uh-uh. So don’t have to go anywhere.
They’re already in a pure land wherever they go. Realizer solitary realizer, Pratyekabuddha, and a Buddha, a complete Buddha. So what what are you linking them to? So there’s three Buddhas. Yeah?
This is related to the Oh, okay. Okay. I meant to say Tathāgata vehicle, and I said Uh-uh. Yeah. They’re different.
Different. Different. So the the three bodies of a Buddha are what are attained at the end of the Mahāyāna vehicle, and the three vehicles lead to different places. So the the three Buddha’s bodies are related all related to the Mahāyāna vehicle. So there’s three bodies The three bodies are all related to Mahāyāna vehicle.
Not the. Not the Hīnayāna and not the solitary realized not the, sorry, not the hero and solitary realized vehicles. They’re together. Yeah. So there’s actually you can look at it in terms of four bodies usually.
So the emptiness of a Buddha’s body is this or the union body, yeah? And then the mind of a Buddha is the Dharmakāya and that manifests in two different ways depending on how people see it, depending on their level of realization. That is as a enjoyment body or a Sambhoga kaya or a Nirmānakāya, which is also called an emanation body. No. The union body or the Svabhāvikakāya?
Or the they’re calling it here the truth entity body, I think, or something. It’s the emptiness of a Buddha’s body bodies. So the so the there’s a word the word for emanation body in Tibetan is tulku. Yeah? So but it doesn’t necessarily mean all beings who are recognized as Tulkus are Tulkus.
Yeah? But Geshe said hang on. I said said that Geshe said, no. They are Tulkus, but they’re not all Buddhas. So an emanation body is someone who is chosen to emanate.
So someone who is to emanate can either be a Buddha, a Bodhisattva, an arhat, or or some or someone with a it can be an ārya bodhisattva. They don’t even have to be aryas. Okay. From this from this the great stage of the path of accumulation, you can emanate where you want. So anyone from the great stage of the path of accumulation up is said to be able to be a Tulku or a Nirmānakāya, but not the kaya of a Buddha.
Does that make sense? So they can be the emanation body, but not necessarily the emanation body of a Buddha. So the great kind of accumulation? Yes. The great stage, you know, there’s three parts to the path of accumulation.
Yeah. Now he said now he also said that there can be ordinary beings who are But he said he will also say that some people who are recognized are also ordinary beings. So there’s different types of they talk about different types of reincarnation lineages. Uh-huh. Uh-huh.
Uh-huh. So you can be an ordinary being because if you’re someone who has managed to achieve calm abiding and an insight into emptiness, not necessarily a realization of emptiness, but an insight into emptiness, then you can manifest where you want. So you can be someone who has an anuttara path and be a tulku. Uh-huh. Uh-huh.
So you could Oh, so you don’t actually even have to be a Buddhist to be an emanation body because there’s people who can emanate that are are have are lay yogis and stuff as well. Questions that they don’t relate to tonight? We better ask everyone else. I suppose we finished early. Is everyone else cool if she asks obscure questions that relate to nothing else?
Well, could we just follow-up that question? Sure. So does that mean that anyone who is a tulku, it doesn’t mean that they’re on the Mahāyāna path at all, does it? So what are you talking about tulku here? People that are recognized as something?
Well, because I thought toku’s had to be a bit higher up than just having not there’s anything low But hang on. But we’re not — this is what I don’t understand what you mean by Tulku. Do you mean Tulku as in people who are called Rinpoche and get recognized? Or do you mean emanation body, which is what Geshe-la is talking about? The emanation body is people who can emanate.
That’s what it literally means, people who can emanate. Yeah? So, but you’re talking about people who are called Tulku and get called Rinpoche and stuff. He wouldn’t be able to So, I guess I said he wouldn’t be able to say whether people who are called Tulkus and recognised as Tulkus are Tulkus or not. Alright?
That is something that he would he doesn’t the perception to say, because sometimes they even say they recognize someone to fulfill a role because there’s no one else around. Yeah? And some Tulkus are real Tulkus, some of them are Buddhas, and some of them are Bodhisattvas, and some of them just happen to people who got picked. Yeah? But to say who was who is difficult, so it’s good to treat everyone as if they might be a Buddha.
He said that it’s sometimes difficult when you see people who are called a tulku or reincarnation when they’re young, and then they grow up, and they they either disrobe or don’t pretend not to disrobe, but disrobe and do all sorts of crazy stuff that doesn’t make sense. Yeah. So he said there’s so many different things happening. There’s so many different situations that could be happening. It’s very difficult for us to say who is what.
Uh-huh. Uh-huh. Uh-huh. So the Buddha said yes. So the Buddha said Uh-huh.
Okay. So the Buddha said something like and it’s very hard to translate sutras on the spot, so if I make a mess with this, please forgive me, Buddha. He said something like, beings don’t know the limits of other beings, and if you think you do, that’s a cause for faults. Alright? So whether we know how good people are or how bad people are is really a fault in us.
If we think we say, okay, that person is only capable of doing those good things or they’re they’re a good person because I’m saying they’re a good person. So we tend to say, I say that person is like this, and I say that person is like this, but we don’t really have a clue. And if we start thinking, oh, I know, then then that can actually be a cause for fault by us projecting onto them what they should be like. Mhmm. Uh-uh.
Uh-uh. Geshe-la says he has doubts about that as well because he doesn’t know if necessarily passing down all the wealth of a monastery to a reincarnate someone who’s described as being not being helps either, helps the monastery or helps the monks because they’re just as likely as anyone else’s family to run off with the money and give it to other people as well. So he said that he he doesn’t know if it actually really the whole the whole tradition actually helps in that way anyway. Uh-uh. Yeah.
But and he also thinks that some are real like the Dalai Lama, for example. Yeah. Uh-uh. Uh-uh. Uh-uh.
So but he said the the the weird thing is that people say, okay. This person is recognized, therefore, they they are a Rinpoche, just like that. And and and it’s a good idea to try and think of people like that, but it does it’s sometimes very difficult because they do all sorts of strange things. You said in the text, sorry, on the mind reading tangle. So I’ve got this tangle thing.
Tangle also implies whether it be be brotheled or peaceful and imposing of something of some other being’s will Mhmm. With the end result of the first being imposing their will. Mhmm. So you have no the other being having no say whatsoever. You think?
If you tame something if you tame something Uh-huh. You change its original nature, don’t you? Like a bird or wild bird, you maintain that. It’s no longer the the being that flies. Mhmm.
And has its self determination for food. It relies on you for feeding. It relies on you. And, therefore, that bird didn’t ask me. Mhmm.
Uh-huh. Mhmm. Mhmm. Okay. So, Geshe-la said, it depends on the person doing the taming and the way they do the taming.
So, in actual fact, by, being tamed by the Buddha, we don’t lose our independence, we gain it because the feeling that we have independence or we have freedom at the moment is an illusion. Alright? Because we’re under the control of our emotions, our negative emotions. And by taming ourselves, by by being tamed by the Buddha means actually gaining independence or gaining our our self. Alright?
So it it depends on who’s doing the taming. First of whether it’s a positive thing or not. By being tamed by the Buddha, you’re actually developing your nature, developing your independence, which you don’t have at the moment because you’re under the control of negative emotions. Yeah? And it’s also the way that the taming is done.
The Buddha doesn’t tame us by the Buddha doesn’t tame us by forcing us to do things. The Buddha tames us by all different means, and some of those are forceful, and some of those are very passive or very peaceful, yes, but no matter how much force that someone uses with us, if we don’t have the ability to change, to incorporate what the the force that they’re using, then that’s not gonna affect us, alright? So, the the way that the Buddha tames us is by showing us how to control our emotions, by showing us how to control our destructive emotions. So the method that set out for this taming comes down to us. So the person who’s actually the Buddha set out how to how how to tame us, but then it comes down to us whether we are doing it or not.
So this idea of being tamed by the Buddha isn’t that they can take our independence away from us, it’s that they can show us how to truly develop independence. So, if you have someone exerting their will over someone else, this can only actually happen if that person is open to that anyway. But with the idea of having the Buddhas exert their will over us is that we open ourselves up to following the Buddha’s teachings. Yeah. Mhmm.
So Geshe just said, so what in what you’re saying is the the idea of the burden not having independence does happen to us in a way, in that our hatred ceases to have independence, and our lust ceases to have independence, and our ignorance ceases to have independence. And what develops in us, what the independence that develops in us is the one based on wisdom perceiving emptiness and great compassion. Alright? So we do lose our independence in a way, but the independence of those negative states of mind is what gets tamed by following the Buddha’s instructions. Mhmm.
Mhmm. And by by taming by having those tamed by the Buddha’s instructions, putting those into practice, then our other qualities develop. When we’re taming, when we’re we’re taking away the independence independence or the the autonomy of the the negative emotions, then we enable ourselves to develop into a Buddha. So we are trying to tame we’re taming ourselves based on the Buddha’s words. So Geshe said yes, but no, because we are taming ourselves, but the thing that’s taming us is the Buddha’s words.
So in that way, the Buddha is taming us as well. Yeah. Does that make sense? So we’re taming ourselves, but it’s the Buddha’s words that tame us as well. Yeah?
Okay. So the Buddha’s teachings, that if we’re thinking of what’s doing the taming, it’s the Buddha’s words. Yeah. I understand that. Mhmm.
So the Buddha’s words tame our negative emotions. Mhmm. Mhmm. Yeah. They do all sorts of things.
Uh-uh. So they’re trying to get rid of our perception of self, and they’ll do all sorts of things to bring about that realization. So, yeah, whatever it takes for us to get rid of that perception of self, yeah, then they’ll use all sorts of wrathful or peaceful methods methods to do that. So that’s what this is the key to the problems. That’s what they’re trying to tame or get rid of is this perception of self.
Hang on. I can’t say that because Buddha’s act spontaneously. But anyway, So guess I said it’s not as if they think they’re going to go and pick on someone. They’re constantly working in manifold ways for the benefit of all sentient beings to get rid of this. So it’s not like one instance where they do things.
They’re constantly working for all sentient beings to get rid of their ignorance. Mm-mm. Mm-mm. Mm-mm. So sorry.
It’s okay. No. And so if we had the clarity of thought and we weren’t obscured by delusions, we’d be able to see that in front of us. Mhmm. Mhmm.
Mhmm. Mhmm. Because the idea is that Buddhas know all phenomena. Right? So for a Buddha to know all phenomena means their dharmakaya pervades everything.
Yeah? Because their dharmakaya is their mind, it pervades everything. And the Nirmānakāya and the Sambhogakāya manifest on the basis of that knowledge. So they manifest or they form in different ways to to create knowledge and to create inspiration constantly and pervasively. And it’s whether we have the ability to interact with that or not or to open to that or not that that that depends on how how much effect that’s gonna have on us.
Probably. Yes. Yes? Yeah. I think so.
I was reading where it said that you can’t have guru devotion without bodhicitta, And I’m just wondering how the two fit together. Because I’m sure in the in the other path, they have guru devotion. So I’m sure they don’t have bodhicitta. What do you mean by guru devotion? That’s what it said.
That’s what it said? I mean, I have to try and figure out how to translate it. Great. Have guru devotion without bodhicitta. Can you tell me what context it was in?
It was from the. Oh. Oh. I don’t even know how to translate it. Talking about guru devotion to tantric sense of needing to be open to your guru, and then what I understood was saying is you can’t really have it without.
He goes guesses that I don’t even need to translate. You don’t have to worry. She said. I know what that means. So I’m sitting there going, how do I translate that?
Geshe-la’s like, what did she say? What did she say? She’s talking about bodhicitta. What did she say? Okay.
Because I don’t know what context he was talking in and everything, so I don’t know which way to translate it because there’s all different ways of translating it. So is he talking about it in tantra? In tantra. Okay. Okay.
Alright. There’s two words. There’s three words that you could translate devotion as in Tibetan. Yeah? Three words.
One of them is closest to the actual meaning of devotion, which means like samaya. You know what I mean? Because samaya means with vows or with commitment. Yeah? So, Geshe-la said in order to have pure Samaya or good Samaya, you need bodhicitta.
Otherwise, you can’t keep Samaya properly. Right? So in that terms of having commitment to the lama, which is what devotion really means, right, then or wait the word means according to, like, the Oxford dictionary, then then you need bodhicitta for that. There’s another word that’s sometimes translated as devotion, which means to rely on a teacher, to depend on a teacher. So you don’t need bodhicitta to do that.
But but then Geshe said that that could be tricky because it depends in what context they’re talking about it and what level of relying on a teacher they’re talking about. So there’s different different types of teacher, there’s different types of ways of approaching a teacher, there’s different ways of depending on a teacher. So if you’re going to say as a Bodhisattva, yeah, to follow the Bodhisattva path to depend Okay. So guess they said hang on. Let me finish the other one.
There’s another word, which is also sometimes translated as devotion, which is a word that is made up of two syllables in Tibetan. The first word is which is and the second which is Now means to have liking for. So it means this idea of looking at the teacher and saying, I wanna end up like them. The teacher is a Buddha and I wanna end up like them. Yeah?
So it’s having liking for something. And the other syllable, ku, means to have respect. So it’s this idea of liking them but in respectful way. So there’s this interaction that you’re being respectful to them and you wanna end up like them. Yeah?
And so Geshe-la said what he thinks the lama would have been talking about, but he wasn’t sure. Right? Is that that in order to practice Tantra and rely on a Guru in that way, you need to have an initiation and you can’t take an initiation without bodhicitta. Alright. Unless you have bodhicitta to start the initiation.
Okay. So so that is at least uncontrived Oh, no. Sorry. That’s at least contrived bodhicitta. Sorry.
But but it’s not that easy to take initiation. But it’s it’s At least you have to start with contrived bodhicitta and really have that as your motivation for taking initiation. Otherwise, you don’t take the initiation. Alright? So in order to take an initiation from a teacher, you need bodhicitta.
But taking initiation is not easy. And I guess I said that’s why he was saying. So unless you have unless you have at least at least this idea of contrived bodhicitta as your motivation for taking initiation, and a strong mergue which is like this liking and respect for the teacher you’re taking the initiation from. And this word liking means that you want to completely emulate them. You want to be exactly like them.
You don’t take the initiation. Yeah? So that’s so that’s what he thinks he was talking about because he was talk he gave initiations. He was talking in that context. So in order to rely on a teacher on the tantric path, you at least at least need bodhicitta.
He thinks probably, but he don’t think so. And take the initiation. He said he thinks it’d be very it’s very difficult to take an initiation. But he said that he wouldn’t Sorry. I was just saying, again, you’re doing that thing you were talking about before.
I said, but he wouldn’t know whether they’re taking in the initiation or not because even if they may not have a clue about Buddhism, it could be something from the way the teacher’s speaking or some kind of connection from a past life that they have have awoken in the imprints of, and they could could take the initiation. So he wouldn’t know who’s taking it or not, but he said it’s difficult. And but it’s the same thing as Odi was saying before seeing everyone as Buddha, so he would think that they probably did. Mhmm. Uh-huh.
Uh-huh. Because they want So the the idea is that they get the idea or the imprint of taking initiation. So they’re trying to get as many people as possible connected to the dharma. So that they’re not gonna probably take it, but they’ll develop a connection to the dharma. Alright?
So that way that they’re making they’re having an effect on as many people as possible. He thinks so. So so, for example, the Dalai Lama gets the Kālacakra initiation to hundreds of thousands of people, but he also makes them all show up and then teaches Dharma for four days before he gives it. So, not only have the initiation, but they also get the imprint of listening to the Dharma for four days. So, that they they not only have the imprint of taking in of being at the initiation, but they also have imprint of listening to the teaching.
So it’s really positively affecting people and making a connection for, with something that can alleviate their suffering. He said, you know. If you think, did I take that? You didn’t. Okay.
So if you start taking an initiation with the motivation of bodhicitta, and you have a respect that this this liking for and respect for the teacher, you seek to emulate the teacher, you have respect for the teacher. And then you’re able to follow the whole of the visualization process that they go through in the initiation, you’ve taken the initiation. So you shouldn’t have any doubts if you’ve done all of those things that you’ve taken the initiation. But if you haven’t done the visualization, if you haven’t started with the motivation of bodhicitta, and you don’t have that feeling of wanting to emulate the teacher, then you didn’t. So said that you would have taken the bits you were concentrating for and not the bits you weren’t concentrating for.
So if the times when you were distracted went for a whole section and you missed a whole bit, then then you you didn’t take that bit. Uh-oh. Uh-oh. So there’s usually four initiations in an initiation, and sometimes more in a greater initiation. So there’s all different things.
It’s almost like So the the the the big deal the biggest thing to do is pay attention. The the teacher’s supposed to explain it. He they’re saying, I’m doing this. I’m doing that. I’m doing this.
Yeah. Yes. Although, this time I translated, I didn’t understand. I was supposed to be translating. Yeah.
Sorry. I said sorry like a gazillion times. Hey? Mhmm. Are you alright?
Okay. I’m ready. You’re ready. I’ll go out of sleep. I just wanted to go home.
I need to.