Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. “The jewel in the ground” anchors this 62-minute commentary as Geshe Pema Tsering works through three consecutive metaphors for a Buddha’s bodies from the Sublime Continuum: the nature body as a precious gem already in the earth — uncreated, naturally present, fulfilling beings’ wishes without needing to be made; the enjoyment body as a universal emperor teaching Mahāyāna freely to realized bodhisattvas in their own pure domain; and the emanation body as gold shaped into whatever form each being needs, peaceful or wrathful. He then addresses a potential contradiction students may encounter: if the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras teach that all phenomena are like dreams, how can Buddha nature be said to exist? Maitreya’s preemptive answer is that Buddha nature is conventionally real, not inherently real, and was taught precisely to remedy five faults including feelings of inadequacy and nihilism. Suited to practitioners with some grounding in Mahāyāna doctrine.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 23 2005 08 25 SC.mp3
UUID: 5bde2dbe-3606-4e4a-9920-0ea71408400f
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Sublime Continuum (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2005-08-25
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 61.8 minutes
Words: ~4,746
I was just having a discussion with anyway because Okay. Before I yeah. Before that, though, I have to say you said to say this first, to make sure that you have the right motivation for listening to the teachings. And it’s a really good idea if you’re listening to a teaching on Buddha nature, to think that by listening to that teaching, you will be able to awaken the Buddha nature and by putting the teachings into practice to be able to develop it. And, by awakening and developing the Buddha nature, become a Buddha who can go on to awaken and develop the Buddha nature in other beings’ continuums, and therefore lead them all to Buddhahood which is the extinction of suffering.
So, have that idea as being your motivation for listening to this teaching, and please try and think of it strongly so that it’s like a strong strong reason or that you’re strongly motivated to listen to a teaching on Buddha nature for that reason. And the other thing we’re I was just talking to Geshe-la about is that I’ve we’ve got not much left of this teaching, and I’ve got three weeks left. So we’re going to do it in a relaxed way because and we may still finish it next week. So what we’ll do in the last week, we’ve still yeah. So think about that.
Alright. So the bit we’re up to is down the bottom of page twelve on the in the translation. And it says, the nature body is likened to a Buddha image fashioned from precious metals because just as that image is not incidentally newly created and fulfills the hopes of migrators, likewise the nature truth body is not newly created by causes and conditions and serves to fulfil the hopes of migrators. So what this is talking about is dharmakaya of a Buddha, or the truth body of a Buddha, isn’t something that comes about because of causes and conditions. It’s something that exists naturally because it’s permanent.
It’s the lack of obstruction and the clarity, the clarity and the luminosity. So, in the same way that a that metal that you find in the ground isn’t something that you craft. Metal or it’s not actually metal. Guess they said the same thing, he said metal. No, not actually metal.
Like if you found a jewel in the ground, right? The jewel in the ground is a jewel, yeah? It’s not as if you have to create the jewel, it just is a jewel and then you can take that jewel and use it to benefit yourself, alright? So, in the same way, wisdom body is something that is naturally present. This luminous clarity is something that’s naturally present.
It’s not something that needs to be crafted. It’s not something that comes into being based on causes and conditions. So, the same way, if you find a jewel in the ground, you don’t make it, it just happens to be there, then the wisdom body is said to be something that is just there. It’s not something that’s crafted, it’s not something that exists adventitiously based on causes and conditions. And in the same way as a jewel can be used to fulfill the hopes and the wishes of sentient beings, then the wisdom body or the truth body has the ability to fulfill the hopes and wishes of sentient beings.
And when it says to fulfill hopes and wishes of sentient beings, what it’s talking about is it gives sentient beings the ability to become Buddhas. Alright? So, a jewel in the ground exists that way. We find it and we can use it to fulfill our wishes and the this the the truth body, the nature body is something that exists that way, and it’s something that we can use to fulfill our wishes of becoming a Buddha. Okay.
So what we’re talking about here is the emptiness of the bodies of a Buddha, the bodies of a Buddha. And so, a Buddha is said to have a truth body which is the dharmakaya, their mind, and emanation body and an enjoyment body. And this truth nature body, in this instance, is talking about the emptiness of all of those bodies. Right? The emptiness of the dharmakaya, the sambhoga kaya and the nirmana kaya.
So, in that it is emptiness and it has the same nature, then it’s what binds all of the bodies or it makes the body similar in that they’re all empty. So, the root text, the Sublime Continuum says then of this emptiness of a Buddha’s bodies, the beautiful nature body, which is this emptiness, is known to be like a precious image because it is uncreated by nature and is a source of precious qualities. So, the beautiful nature body, the beaut so it’s saying the emptiness of the Buddha’s bodies is said is said to be beautiful and in in it is beautiful in that it enables things to be done. It enables great works to be done, and it is said to be like a precious image. Says, a precious image because it is uncreated by nature.
So it’s referring to the preciousness of the image. So an image is preciousness. Precious image is preciousness. Does that make sense? As opposed to the image itself that is uncreated by nature.
Alright? So it’s basically saying this word that they’ve translated as precious is is actually, yeah, which means, like, it it it has two meanings. Obviously, means precious, but it also means jewels. Alright? So jewels are said to be precious in that they they’re precious.
Precious. Does that make sense? So it’s describing something by using an adjective as opposed to a noun. Yes? So it’s saying the precious things as in jewels.
Yes? So it’s saying here that you can use a jewel to create a Buddha image, but what we’re talking about here is the preciousness of that image. And the preciousness of that image, what would depending on what you use it for is always there. You know, you can use it for one thing or you can use it for another thing, but the preciousness of the image doesn’t leave because it’s in the nature of that object. Yes?
So this is what the metaphor for the Buddha nature is being based on, is this idea that the preciousness of something that’s a jewel or the preciousness of something that’s precious doesn’t change. So the the unchanging nature, the uncreated unchanging nature, the emptiness of the Buddha’s bodies acts as the source of the other things. Alright? So in the same way that a jewel or something that’s precious can be transformed into a Buddha’s image. Yeah?
So the preciousness is still there, but it can be transformed into these other things. So likewise, the emptiness of a Buddha’s dharmakaya, sambhogakaya, and nirmanakaya can be transformed into these bodies. Okay. There’s a word in Tibetan, yes, which is Rinpoche. Yeah?
And if you’re gonna translate Rinpoche into English, you would either say it could be Oh. Okay. It’d either be precious or it would be jewel. There’d be two words. Sometimes when you translate it, you’d say precious.
Yeah? Like, if you were going to say, you know, these rinpochees, what their name means, you’d say such and such precious. Yes? And if it was another instance, you say, okay, that’s a rinpoche, and you point it at a stone, you would say that’s a jewel in English. So there’s two words coming from one word in Tibetan.
Yeah? It covers the same ground in Tibetan. So in this instance, Geshe-la said they’re talking about rinpoches in inverted commas, which are things like diamonds. Diamond is a rinpoche because it’s precious. Yes?
And so is gold, and so is other objects like that. Yeah? So they’re talking so here they’ve translated as precious, but that can be confusing because he’s talking about things that are precious by their nature. Okay? Nothing to do with the guys behind me in the photos.
No. It’s not talking about them. No. So the the reason that the Tibetan lamas or gurus get called is that they are said to be precious in that they fulfill the wishes of beings in the same way the gold does. So it’s a term that shows what those beings do.
Yes? And it’s it’s said that they’re like gold or they’re like diamonds or they’re like precious jewels in that they have inherent qualities and they benefit beings. Okay? Okay. So the second body of a Buddha we’re looking at by way of metaphor is the enjoyment body.
Now the enjoyment body is to be like a universal emperor or a Chakravartin because a universal emperor enjoys his samsaric domain or he enjoys the places he rules over. So, there’s a play on words here, the enjoyment body that enjoys. Did you get that? Okay. Because it’s much clearer in Tibetan.
So it’s called the, it’s likened to a a as an emperor because if someone’s ruling everywhere, they get to enjoy themselves in a place that they rule. Yes? And what the Sambhogakāya or the enjoyment body does is it manifests in order to teach Mahāyāna Dharma. Okay? So, in the space of the Mahāyāna Dharma then, it thoroughly enjoys itself.
The Buddhas are enjoying themselves in that stage. So, the enjoyment body is likened to a samsaric an emperor who is enjoying his kingdom. Right? Because they manifest in the sphere of the Mahāyāna to expound the Mahāyāna. Does that make sense?
It doesn’t. Is that okay? Okay? Okay. The this sphere idea, I mean, it’s the space where the Dharma is taught the Mahāyāna Dharma is taught exclusively.
So, the Sambhoga Khaya or the enjoyment body only manifests to teach realized bodhisattvas. So, in a space where you have a Sambhogakāya teaching the realized bodhisattvas, that space is said to be the sphere of it, but it isn’t like a technical term. It’s just a space where it happens. So the metaphor is supposed to be that a Chakravartin or a wheel turning king is someone who has complete control over their domain. So they can have whatever they want from the domain.
They can all of the jewels they want, all of the enjoyment they want is theirs for the taking. And, they’re not encumbered by regulations, by, a lack of ability and a lack of power and so on. And this is the same sort of principle that happens when a Buddha is manifesting as an enjoyment body to teach highly realized Bodhisattvas because there is a free flow of ideas, it’s not they can manifest any way they want because the Bodhisattvas have the karma to see them in that way. So, can they manifest with all different jewels and in all different shapes and and everything because the the pure view of them realized Bodhisattvas enables them to do that. Alright.
So, and then I said to Geshe that sounds easy, you know, because they they they can do what they want and, obviously, from what he was saying, obviously, it would be easier to teach Ārya Bodhisattvas than us. Geshe-la said that’s not true. He said that they may be better students than we would be, but they also have to understand a lot more than we do. So they’re being led through very complicated levels of meditation and into very subtle understandings and they have to put in an awful lot of effort in order to develop the realizations that they do. So, although things are manifested in this, in this much more subtle way, in this purer way of the Sambhogakāya teaching them teaching the realized bodhisattvas, there’s still a lot of work that’s going on there.
Right, so this is why the root text says: Because of possessing dominion over the great Dharma, the complete enjoyment body is likened to a universal emperor. So they’re manifesting to teach the great Dharma in complete control to people who understand it. And in this way, they’re supposed to be they’re like a universal emperor who is in complete control over a great kingdom. Alright. Yes.
Okay. The next thing that we’re up to is the emanation body or the of a Buddha. Now, this Nirmānakāya is said to be like gold that has been transformed into different things. Because in the same way we were talking before about that you can have a precious thing that can be manifested as Buddha image, but the preciousness remains the same. Well, wisdom of a Buddha is here is likened to gold, but it takes on the shape on it on any diff on many different shapes in order to help sentient beings.
So, the wisdom of a Buddha is said to be like base gold and the the form that it takes on. Can get gold comes in all sorts of different shapes and sizes. So, to extend this metaphor then, the form that this takes on is like the emanation bodies of a Buddha because a Buddha will emanate as anything that’s going to help beings, that’s going to lead them to enlightenment. So, base is like the the the the the similar metaphor to the other one in that you have something that is spontaneously spontaneously exists as is there it exists preciously. Right?
It’s something that you don’t create preciously. It exists already preciously. Yeah? But, beforehand, were focusing on that preciousness itself and in this instance we’re talking about what form that preciousness takes. Right?
So, the preciousness itself is said to be like the wisdom of a Buddha and the forms it takes are the emanation bodies that the Buddha brings forth in order to help sentient beings. Is that sort of the Buddhist body which manifests depending on the the people? So it is this the word that they’ve used here that I perhaps shouldn’t have translated as sentient beings beings, the Buddha manifests in different ways. That’s called Nirmānakāya. Yes.
So the Buddha Śākyamūni is a Nirmānakāya, but what’s called a supreme Nirmānakāya. Supreme Nirmānakāya. So that’s a supreme Nirmānakāya, but there’s all sorts of Nirmanakayas or emanation bodies. Do you mean time as in Well, forcefully time.
Peace pacify. Alright. No. Hang on. Finishing your question.
Okay. So, I guess, I said the Buddhas will do whatever it takes to tame us. So that means that that sometimes they might fire us up and sometimes they’ll try and work with our minds, depending on which one’s gonna work. So sometimes they’ll manifest as things that are quite wrathful and difficult and sometimes they’ll manifest as, very peaceful things that will calm us down. It depends on whatever is the best for our mind stream, what the what’s going to benefit us the most.
So we can’t say that they would do it in one way and not in another way. Alright? So there’s sometimes this idea of pacification and sometimes this idea of control. It depends on what is best for us at that time. Okay.
So this is why then, because this is the nature of the emanations of a Buddha, the emanation bodies of a Buddha, this is why the Sublime Continuum says, because of being in the nature of an image, the emanation body is likened to a golden form. There’s there’s just a couple of things that may be a little lost in translation. Now, the first is that the word that they’ve used for image is also sometimes translated as reflection. So, I double checked with Geshe-la, and he said, it is for example the word you would use to talk about the reflection of a moon on the lake. And this, implies what the Buddha images are like.
They’re reflections of the Buddha. They’re said to be reflections of the Buddha or, something that is is like the Buddha, so we should treat them as that way, as that as something that that that is an image of the Buddha. So that’s what when they say image here, that’s what they’re talking about, something that is a direct reflection of the Buddha. So and and when they say the emanation body is likened to a golden form, something and that means something formed by gold. Alright?
So this links back to that idea of gold being crafted into different things. So the gold is always of one substance, but it can be crafted into different things. And the emanation bodies of a Buddha are like that. They’re always they’re by their nature, the wisdom of a Buddha, but they’re crafted into different things. Okay.
Alright. So the next part of the text is actually Maitreya answering what could become a problem for people, foreseeing what could be a problem for people where they could think that there was a contradiction between what he was saying here and what the Buddha said in the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras. So it says, in this and that Sūtra, it is taught that all objects of knowledge are in always empty like clouds, dreams, and delusions. Why again here do the speak of the existence of a Buddha essence in sentient beings? So, that’s saying, if in the if in the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras, it keeps saying nothing exists, everything’s like a dream, everything’s an illusion, everything’s, is is merely labeled, then how can the sublime continuum talk about a Buddha essence existing within all sentient beings?
Is this that is contradiction? Is it contradiction? So Geshe-la says he doesn’t know of many people that have actually argued this, and have actually argued this contradiction. But what Maitreya is addressing here is what could become a problem for people if they, didn’t know how to, reconcile these two ideas, if they had no, way of understanding how the idea of things being like an illusion could fit together with the idea that beings have Buddha nature. And so this is what could be an argument against his presentation and he answers it in the next section.
Mhmm. Yeah. He said, did I translate that well? Oh, yeah. Yeah.
Hey? Uh-uh. He said said if you understood what I saying, it doesn’t matter. Uh-huh. Uh-huh.
So he said that it’s it had didn’t have a major argument because about it because said, okay, if anyone throws this at you, here’s your answer. You know, he already had a sort of he already thought that this this may happen, that people could think that they they could doubt could arise in people’s minds if they can if they put those two ideas together and thought, well, that doesn’t make sense. How can we all have Buddha nature? How can all of these similes and metaphors for that which is obscured and that which isn’t obscured actually work if nothing exists, if everything’s like a dream. So he foresaw that or he understood that this could be a problem and answered it by in the next section by explaining how these two things don’t be contradictory.
And by explaining how these two things don’t need to be contradictory, then he, stopped people from finding them contradictory. So there’s no point arguing something that’s already been answered. So he said if if this if we hadn’t got to that point, could some of you have come to this if you’d studied, say, Okay. So because so for example, the Heart Sūtra, we were just reading how nothing exists, so there is no form and everything. And then we get to this section where it’s saying, you have this nature, you have this Buddha nature.
So if you’d read those two together, wouldn’t he say, wouldn’t some of you have come up with the idea that it was contradictory? You wouldn’t you have thought, how does that work? I thought I didn’t exist. He said, no. It isn’t.
Uh-huh. Uh-huh. Guess I said there’s just things that look contradictory, but they usually have answers. Sorry. And here is the answer to this one.
Alright. So the sublime continuum says in response, inadequacy, contempt for lesser beings, conceiving the unreal, deprecating reality, excessive self attachment. To those with these five faults it was taught for the purpose of abandoning them. So, what this is talking about is that this describes why the idea of the Buddha nature is taught. Buddha nature wasn’t taught to establish doctrine, it was taught in order to help.
Yes? And the same reason that the emptiness wasn’t taught to establish establish doctrine, it was taught in order to help. So, this really needs to be understood if we’re approaching the Buddha’s teachings. They weren’t taught in order to establish a certain set of rules and everything. They were taught to help people get out of saṃsāra.
So, the sublime continuum was taught remedy feelings of inadequacy people may have. So if they thought they were incapable of becoming a Buddha, for example, then people would be taught the concept of the Buddha nature. If they had contempt for beings who had a lowliest than them, then they would be taught the Buddha nature because it says that all beings have the Buddha nature. If they, if they thought of things as being, if they were being nihilistic and thought nothing existed at all in any way, shape, or form, then they would be taught in Buddha nature. If they were taught, what’s what is deprecating reality?
Conceiving the unreal. I miss conceiving the unreal. Oops. Yeah. Sorry.
So conceiving the unreal, yeah, is not understanding that things don’t inherently exist. And then, Okay. So what apprehending the unreal means is that the Buddha nature is taught to be existent, it’s taught to be conventionally existent, but it’s never taught to be inherently existent. So in the way that it’s taught, it’s said to be an antidote to those who perceive things as being inherently existent. But it’s also said to be an antidote to nihilism.
So if beings have a conception that things don’t exist at all, then teaching the Buddha nature can benefit those. It also helps to alleviate beings who are overly attached to themselves by pointing out that everybody else has the same cause for Buddhahood as they do. Right. Right. So, if we think about this from this way and we think about the idea that the Buddha nature is taught to relieve these ideas or to stop people from falling into these faults.
And the perfection of wisdom sutras were taught in order to make people understand about emptiness, what was described in the previous verse that things are like clouds, like dreams, like illusions, they don’t inherently exist, then we don’t actually need to see a contradiction between these things because there’s no reason that the Buddha nature needs to inherently existent because it’s taught to be conventionally real, but not inherently or truly real or ultimately real, only as it exists as a convention. And in some instances, we’ve been taught it as a synonym of emptiness some parts of it. So so these things don’t have to be contradictory, and if we learn to if we begin to understand why they were taught and how they work together, then we can stop seeing that they are contradictory. Anyway, language is tricky. So here Okay.
So Geshe-la said I said what they said in the in in the commentary, and he said, it doesn’t say that. Oh, in the translation, said, it doesn’t say that. Okay. Because Tibetan, it actually says there is is no pervasion of this prasangik as opposed to a prasanga. So a prasanga is a person, a prasanga is a theory.
Yeah. Putting forward an idea or a theory. Yeah. Oh, no. Sorry.
It’s not. Get it right, Ruth. It’s showing the the the result of someone else’s theory. Right? And he said there is no there is no pervasion of the results of the theory that were presented in the previous verse.
That’s what yes. As opposed to saying there is no pervasion for Prasangikas. Right? It’s like saying this, that that theory’s that theory’s no. The result of the premise, not that that theory’s consequence, think consequence as inconsequentialist.
That theory’s consequence consequence doesn’t pervade. Right? Now the reason that this theory’s consequence doesn’t pervade, the theory we’re talking about is that in one it’s saying that things exist and the other one, it’s saying they’re like a dream. Yes? And it’s the it says the reason that this theory’s consequence doesn’t pervade is because you can be existent, but still be like a dream.
Yeah? So the Buddha nature that exists in the continuum of sentient beings exists, but the way it exists is like a dream, like an illusion, or like a cloud as is described in the Heart Sūtra. Alright. So he says, did they say Prasangikas so it makes it sounds like one of the the schools? And I said, yes.
And he said, well, that’s not right. That’s not good. That’s not right. Because Prasangikas don’t actually say. Alright.
So what it’s talking about here is the theory that Alright. So, it’s saying that the what the theory that they’ve put forward is there exists a it follows that it follows that what is said in the Tathāgata Essence Sūtra, there exists a Buddha essence in the continuum of sentient beings is not acceptable, that’s the theory, and the prasanga is actually because in the perfection of wisdom it says all phenomena are empty of true existence like a dream, like an illusion, and so forth. Alright? So the bit after because is actually what you call a prasanga or a consequence terms of logic. Yes?
And this and then in response says that that consequence doesn’t follow or doesn’t pervade because you can be existent and still be like a dream. That’s a retort to to the argument. So to so to say for there is no pervasion is wrong. For this consequence, there is no pervasion. But Geshe-la seemed got upset because he was saying they were saying it sounds like they’re saying the Prasangikas are saying this when they definitely wouldn’t.
Well, not upset, but he’s forceful. Had a pervasion, it would mean that the teachings of the sublime continuum contradict the teachings of the perfection of wisdom. But as this isn’t the case because you can say something exists but it doesn’t have to exist inherently, then this, consequence doesn’t pervade. So that’s why they’re saying This this this this reasoning doesn’t follow. Okay.
No. It’s okay. The guest said, that’s not that’s he said, that’s dodgy. And he no. First of he said, the person who wrote that must poor things they probably hadn’t studied tenets.
And I said, guess that. It was Jamgon Kongtrul. I’d hope he would have studied tenants. And he said, well, if it’s Jamgön Kongtrül, should have known better. That’s completely dodgy and completely wrong.
And I said, do you know him? And he said, yes. And I said, well, next time meeting, goes, I’ll tell him. And then I tell him when he comes out of the tree. But I said, he’s probably rushed because he’s getting to the end.
He’s probably having to do it in a hurry. No. No. Even if he’d said but, yeah, but it sounds strange. But even then, to eat you’d think he’d say for this consequence.
Yeah. Oh, typo error. I I said that’s why I reckon it was too he had to do it in a hurry because I know what people like with translations. Would be my theory. That’s my Call my The consequences of which mean you have to do things too quickly.
If you got a date, you can translate a sūtra. Sure. Alright. Yeah. So he’d reached a new section.
He goes, okay. Let’s do the next section. I say, well, it’s fourteen past, and usually stop at fifteen past, and we’ve only got this little bit left in two weeks. So Oh. Yeah.
Yeah. See a new section. Hey? Yeah. And then we find ourselves in two weeks with nothing to do.
Okay. You guys have lots of quest