Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. The central image in this 90-minute session is of a person rope-bound, trapped in an iron net, thrown into a river at the confluence of four fierce currents in total darkness — Geshe Pema Tsering uses this analogy to map the five features of samsaric existence: powerless birth, aging, sickness, and death; bondage to karma; self-grasping as the root of affliction; ignorance; and endless uninterrupted suffering. After a brief recap of why bodhicitta is required for Buddhahood, the session turns to how great compassion arises — and why contemplating saṃsāra alone is not enough, since compassion still varies by relationship. Equanimity — dissolving attachment to friends, indifference to strangers, and aversion to enemies — is presented as the essential prerequisite. A Q&A closes with questions on killing in self-defense, stealing to prevent starvation, and helping beings living under oppression.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 06 Three Principle Aspects.mp3
UUID: 839b761f-213b-47a2-9134-2156d746e440
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: The three principal aspects of the Path (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2002 (exact day not recorded)
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 90.0 minutes
Words: ~7,574
Last week, we left off speaking about bodhicitta, and the point in the text where we can place ourselves is on the sixth verse, which reads, renunciation, though, can never bring the total bliss of matchless Buddhahood unless it is bound by the purest wish. And so the wise seek the high wish for enlightenment. In past weeks, we were able to complete the the commentary on renunciation. Correct? And in looking so then in speaking about this topic then, we saw that we continue on speaking about bodhicitta.
Excuse me. And we saw that merely by generating renunciation in one’s continuum is not enough to for to act as a cause to attain Buddhahood or the highest or most excellent type of bliss. In order to attain Buddhahood, it is necessary for one to generate bodhicitta in one’s continuum. Correct? Is last week, spoke about the reasons why it is necessary to generate bodhicitta in order to attain Buddhahood.
Correct? Yeah. Do you remember? Why? Okay.
Okay. Having attained Buddhahood, then only then can one experience the most excellent of blisses. Even if one has attained mere liberation, although one might experience an unchanging type of bliss, although one might experience only bliss with a type of bliss which is not at all sullied by suffering, that bliss which you experience is not the most excellent of all types of blisses. Why is that? Because in having attained liberation, you have not brought you have not brought to completion your own well-being.
Even though you might be experiencing some type of bliss, yeah, you are still bound by ignorance or more particularly, excuse me, the imprints of ignorance, the imprints of grasping a true existence. So because you although you may not be obstructed or deceived by or mistaken in regards to the way in which things exist, because you have yet to abandon the imprints of ignorance, then you are still deceived or fooled by appearances. So for that reason, you have not brought to its utmost extent your own well-being. Furthermore, if you would like to establish others in a state similar to that of yourself, you do not have the capacity to do so. And therefore, the bliss which is experienced in liberation is an unchanging type of bliss, which is devoid of suffering, yet is not the utmost bliss which one can experience because one is still deceived by appearances and does not have the capacity to establish others in a similar state.
So then we see quite clearly in the text, it it indicating that without bodhicitta, it isn’t one’s practice will not act as the cause for the most excellent type of bliss. Here, the most excellent type of bliss is a euphemism for Buddhist for Buddhahood. Without bodhicitta, one cannot attain Buddhahood. Thus, we see quite clearly that a distinction is being made between the bliss which exists in the continuum of an arhat, that is one who has attained liberation, and the bliss which exists in the continuum of a Buddha, one who has attained Buddhahood. It’s important to know then that there is such a distinction being made.
One is an unchanging bliss devoid of suffering. The other is, of course, unchanging and devoid of suffering, but it is more sublime. It is higher than that type of bliss just mentioned. The text then goes on to speak about what the what the wise do once they have understood that this point. The wise, someone who a discriminating person then would not be content by merely attaining liberation, but understanding that that is not the ultimate achievement then they continue to work once they have liberation in order to generate bodhicitta so that their practice may act as a cause for Buddhahood and the most excellent of blisses.
This is what Geshe-la has just said today and in proceeding, we sought to suffice for the explanation of this sixth verse because the sixth verse is really speaking about the reasons why one must generate bodhicitta. And, hopefully, we’re all quite clear on that. So we move on to the seventh and eighth verse, which read, they’re swept along by the four fierce river currents, chained up tight in past deeds, are difficult to undo, stuffed in a steel cage of grasping at the self, completely smothered in pitch pitch black ignorance. In a beginningless round, they’re born, and in their births are tortured by their sufferings without a break. Think about how your mothers feel.
Think of what’s happening to them. Try to develop this highest wish. And these and these two verses then we see we deal with what one has to do if one is to actually generate bodhicitta. If one wants to generate bodhicitta, one must have the causes for bodhicitta, which are found in great compassion and great loving kindness. How is it that one can give rise to great compassion and great loving kindness?
By contemplating the the state of existence which all mother sentient beings exist in. And thus, the text reads that all mother sentient beings are tormented by suffering without remittance, that they are swept along by four fierce river currents and thus experiencing suffering. By contemplating the suffering which our mother sentient beings undergo, one may give rise to great compassion, great loving kindness, the causes for bodhicitta. Okay? So the state of existence which mother sentient beings exist in can be characterized by four, five, or even six features.
Now if we were to describe this the state of existence or saṃsāra in in accord with this text, then we would we would use a particular analogy, and that is an analogy of somebody who is bound by ropes, someone whose limbs, both arms and legs, are bound by ropes, who is put into or trapped within an iron net, put into a river at night, and sent down, to an area in which there are no people. They would, of course, be unable to free themselves because first of all, their limbs are all bound by ropes, and they’re within an iron net. And they after all, it’s night. It’s completely blackout, and there’s nobody around. They probably bump into all sorts of and experience all sorts of suffering.
Like, this this this the different elements that such a person experiences in that in that case is analogous to the state in which sentient beings exist within saṃsāra. Okay. So we’ve mentioned the four, five, or six analogy or four, five, or six features may characterize the state of existence of saṃsāra beings. Correct? Well, the first of these is illustrated in the in the in this analogy by the fact that the river which one is placed in is a place where there’s a confluence of four major streams.
So what are the four major streams in the analogy? Well, on one hand, one could say that they are desire, wrong view, conditioned existence, and ignorance. But one can also speak about the four rivers being powerless birth, taking taking birth, death, illness, and aging in a powerless way. Or to say that in perhaps a more accurate way too, the four rivers illustrate the fact that all beings within saṃsāra experience birth, death, illness, and aging in a powerless way. So these are like the four rivers, which would carry somebody down the stream.
Okay. Mhmm. These four currents or four rivers are is the first feature which characterizes existence within saṃsāra. Mhmm. Powerless birth, death, aging, and illness.
The second feature is that is that just as this person in the analogy has their limbs bound by ropes, then we sentient beings are bound to this body, these aggregates by karma. We have taken rebirth in these aggregates due to due to the power of, for instance, karma, and thus we are bound to this body. This is the second feature of samsaric existence. So this second feature is illustrated by the second line in which it mentions being chained up tight in past deeds, which are hard to undo. Past deeds, of course, refers it could also be translated as karma.
How then the third feature of some of this of the analogy is that the person is trapped within a iron net. Correct? Now the iron net is analogous to grasping at the self. It we are trapped within the confines of an iron net that is the iron net of grasping at the self. Of course, the other afflictions come into play here.
Attachment, pride, jealousy, anger, these also play a role in in binding us. Yet the root of these afflictions and the root of the karma which we accumulate is, of course, grasping at the self. And thus, it is said to be, it is like the shell which we are confined within. Thus, it is like a steel net. That the person Mhmm.
The person in the analogy has been thrown into this river at night when it is completely dark is analogous to the fact that we are completely smothered by the darkness or blackness of ignorance that is not understanding. The less one understands, of course, the greater one’s ignorance, then the less one’s wisdom. Whereas the greater one’s wisdom increases, then the more the things which one does not understand and one is ignorant in regards to decreases. Stands to reason. That’s quite obvious.
In any case, we then here, not understanding or not knowing, being ignorant about things refers to being ignorant in regard being ignorant about in regards to the methods which will allow us to become free from this state of saṃsāra. So the darkness of the person in the river is analogous to the darkness which we the the ignorance we have about the way to become free. And the fact that this person who has been tossed into the river in this state is constantly experiencing suffering, be they be it come from this fact that they are bound or the fact that they are pumping into rocks and cold and so forth is analogous to the fact that we within saṃsāra are constantly tormented, tormented without remittance or without break from one of the three sufferings. The three sufferings being manifest suffering, suffering of change, and all pervasive suffering. It’s certainly possible that we will there will be a time for us in which we do not experience manifest suffering.
But even if we don’t experience manifest suffering, as long as we are within saṃsāra, we are still subject to either the suffering of changeability or all pervasive suffering. So just as we within saṃsāra are constantly tormented by one of the three sufferings, someone in who is tossed into a in a into a river in this state would also constantly experience suffering. Okay? So how many features is that? How many features of saṃsāra can we say there are?
Where we have the the four the four fierce currents or the four fierce rivers. That’s one. There’s a but there’s actually about one per line. Geshe-la says, well, perhaps we shouldn’t phrase it as being the first feature of saṃsāra as being the the four great currents or rivers. Perhaps we should speak about it in terms of the four the four states of of the four powerless states which all sentient beings experience, birth, death, aging, and illness.
Language Mhmm. So powerless birth, death, aging, and illness is the first. The second feature of being the fact that we are bound by karma. In fact, we can we can say that we are bound by karma and the afflictions because, certainly, the more coarse levels of the afflictions come into come into play when we speak about being bound to the state which we are in. Anger, attachment, pride, and jealousy all contribute just as as karma does to this state of being bound.
Okay? This second. The third feature of saṃsāra can be described as grasping at the self because grasping at the self lies at the root of both karma and the afflictions. Now here, grasping at the self does not refer only to being deluded about the nature of the self, but actually, it refers to wrongly grasping at the nature of the self self. So if one wrongly grasp at the nature of the self, thinking for instance that it is truly existing or existing from its own side.
That is what is being spoken about when we say grasping at the self as the root of karma and the afflictions. This is the third feature of saṃsāra. Understand? Although we when we become angry with someone, of course, there is the manifest feeling of anger. Yet if we were to trace where that anger comes from to a to a more a deeper level, we would find that at root there is this incorrect incorrect grasping at the ultimate nature of that the the self.
For in in this case, we might refer to incorrectly grasping or wrongly grasping, excuse me, at the ultimate nature of that other person’s self. Not just not not just being ignorant of the the way in which they ultimately exist, but actually wrongly grasping at their ultimate nature and serves as the basis for the arising of anger, attachment, pride, or jealousy. And because it we have this wrong grasping lying at the root of the generation for all the afflictions, we speak about this third feature as being grasping at the self. Mhmm. So the worst aspect of this is that we are we actually wrongly grasp at our own ultimate mode of existence as well.
We actually wrongly grasp at our own ultimate nature. So this acting as the root then gives rise to other instances of wrongly grasping, such as wrongly grasping at the nature of others as well. Mhmm. Okay? Fourth feature is that of ignorance or being deluded about things.
And in fact, ignorance or the state of being deluded about things can said to be limitless. We are we are ignorant of any number of things. For instance, we are ignorant or deluded about the way in which anger, attachment, pride, and jealousy give us suffering. We are deluded about the way in which loving kindness and compassion, for instance, give us happiness. We are deluded in regards to the methods which will lead to liberation.
And we are deluded in regards to what we should ought to be distinguishing as right or good and what we should be distinguishing as bad. And thus, we can say that the fourth feature, which is of ignorance, is nearly limitless because we are ignorant or deluded in regards to any number of things. Mhmm. The fifth feature would be that of endlessness. This refers to the fact that conditioned existence seems to be without beginning and without end.
If we were to try and trace back the beginning of this state of conditioned existence or saṃsāra, it would be almost as if we could not put our point our finger and say that’s when it began. And if we look forward thinking, when is it that I will attain liberation? When will I finally be free of suffering? It almost as if you can’t see an end, and thus the fifth feature is that of the the feature of being of saṃsāra seeming to be endless. So the the text next speaks about being tortured by the by suffering without a break.
That is to say that there that there that we uninterruptedly experience at least one of the three types of suffering. Now this can actually be considered can be considered together with the previous feature, which was that of endless ness. Because just as we when we look forward to think, when is the time that I’m going to be free of suffering? Or when is the time in which this began? And we see no end.
And similarly, the fact that we experience these sufferings without beginning or end, in a in without interruption, more particularly, indicates that beginning with or the endlessness and the continuity of suffering count as one feature. So if one were to count these two as one, we would have five features, endlessness and on and the fact the endlessness of suffering and the uninterrupted aspect of suffering being counted as one. Yeah. Is it clear? Mhmm.
And thus, we can speak about the five or if we were to split up these last two, six features of saṃsāra. So so here we are, you know, trapped in an existence with these five features of saṃsāra. Yeah. It’s quite enjoyable, isn’t it? So what do you think?
Would we would you, yeah, feel compassion for somebody who has been whose limbs have been tied with rope, who’s been trapped within the confines of a steel net or an excuse me, an iron net, who’s been thrown into a point in the river where there’s the confluence of four strong currents, who’s been sent down in the middle of the night in a place where there are no people and is constantly being tormented by suffering and bumping into rocks and so on and so forth, do you think you’d have compassion for that person? Do you think that you would maybe if you knew that such a person were experiencing this type of suffering that you might give rise to the thought, ah, you know, some unbearable type of feeling that, ah, I have to do something to help them. Now what can I do to help this person undergoing this type of suffering? The compassion would arise if you knew somebody was going through this. Yeah.
No. It’s something we could have compassion for. Excuse me. Go ahead and finish in the next room if you’d like. Yeah.
I mean, sure. We would generate compassion for them. Yeah. But okay. What about this if this person was somebody who was always having at you?
What if this was someone who’s always doing negative things and always saying bad things or stealing or, you know, perform committing all sorts of negativities? Yeah? You think maybe that the compassion we generate would be a little bit less than if it were someone else? Yeah. So whereas if the person who was bound and thrown into the river and so on and so forth were somebody that you didn’t know, you know, somebody who never done anything positive or negative against you, you probably the compassion you feel for them would be a little bit greater than the compassion you might feel for somebody who is always trying to cause you harm.
Yeah. Probably the case. Yeah. Now what if that person were thrown into the river were someone you loved, someone who you were very close with, a very good friend, someone who you had a very good relationship with? Then, yeah, you would probably not be able to sleep, just being tormented by the thought, what can I do to help this person?
Yeah? And why would I sleep at this moment when I can do when I need to do something to help this person get out of the river, get out of this this situation that they’re in? And when you think about this, it’s quite clear that the compassion we might generate for a person in this in this situation, yeah, could be of three different types, yeah, depending on the type of relationship we have with that person. So just as just as if you were just as hearing about people who are in this type of situation is a way to generate compassion, then contemplating the five features would characterize some saric existence as a way to generate compassion. But we see actually the compassion which is generated may be of three different degrees.
Some might be quite strong, others less strong, and others even less strong than that. Yet there still might be some compassion there. Because there is these three different degrees of compassion, it’s an indication that the compassion which we might generate is not that great compassion which is necessary to generate bodhicitta. Okay. Contemplating the characteristics of samsaric existence is a way to generate compassion, but we need to do something more to generate a type of compassion which is equally extendable to all.
So just you know, in fact, we need to we need to do something so that the compassion which we generate is as strong as that which we would generate excuse me. The compassion we generate for all beings is of the same strength we would generate for somebody who we feel very drawn to, someone who is very close to our heart. Because if we do not see all beings as being if we do not feel drawn to all beings or if we do not feel close in our heart to all beings, then there is going to be a difference in the strength of the compassion which we generate for them even if we’re contemplating the suffering which they experience. Thus, it it’s quite clear then that in order to generate pure compassion, in order to generate the great compassion which we seek, it is necessary first to cultivate a sense of equanimity to can to cultivate an attitude in which we can in which we can view those whom we are typically very close with, those whom we are typically indifferent towards, and those who might actually be objects of our anger, some people whom we dislike in an equal way.
Thus, first, we need to establish some type of equality or equanimity within our mind, and only then can we go on to generate a pure type, a a perfect type of compassion for for all beings. Thus, if thus, at the process of cultivating equanimity is an essential prerequisite for the development of great compassion. First, we must cultivate sense of equanimity towards all three beings, and then by and then by continuing the meditation by contemplating or by coming to see that all beings have acted as our mother and recalling their kindness and seeking to repay that all beings fall into three basic categories, you know, friends, enemies, and strangers. Now as all as all beings can can basically be said to be of one of these types in terms of the relationship we have towards them, then we towards some beings we generate attachment, towards some we generate anger, towards some we feel indifferent towards. Meditations and teachings upon equanimity then seek to eliminate the generation of attachment, anger, and indifference towards these different types of beings.
The mind which feels drawn towards beings can act as that as an agent for inducing great great loving kindness and great compassion, but it’s not necessarily the case. Because, for instance, we have we possess minds which feel drawn to our loved ones and people whom we are close to, don’t we? Yet, because the the love we feel or the affection we feel towards towards loved ones and close ones are is typically combined with or or or sullied by attachment, that that mind which is feeling drawn towards those beings is not capable of generating pure loving kindness or pure compassion. It is imbued with attachment, and thus, in cultivating equanimity, we are trying to separate the pure the more pure aspects of of our, of affection towards them from the from the attachment we feel towards them. Oh, in doing so then, one can follow one of two methods.
One can either meditate upon your your loved one or ex excuse me. One can select someone whom one feels close to, and you you notice that if you do so, then a sense of, of feeling drawn to them arises, but also a sense of attachment arises. So you can focus upon them at one that this one person, or you can focus upon that person along with an enemy and a stranger all at once. Either way is acceptable. In fact, there are two traditions of doing so.
One can meditate upon friend, enemy, stranger at once or focus on, first of all, someone you are close to, and then move on to his an enemy and a stranger in a sequential manner. Okay? So if you were to then select a person who represents for you someone of this category, love friends and loved ones, you notice that when you focus upon them, some affection arises for them, but also some attachment arises for them. At that point, you have to look into why do you feel this way towards this person. Whatever arises, why does that arise when you think about that person?
You come to see that you we have the thought or the feeling that this person does things which benefit me, that this person gives me happiness, this person makes me happy. We have to look more closely it. Mhmm. So in fact, Geshe-la points out there are many reasons why we might feel this way towards this person who represents our loved ones or our friends or something. Yeah.
But if we were really, the the core reason that if we were to say in brief, why do we feel this way towards that person? Because we feel that this person makes us happy. But we need to look more closely at this. Is it the fact that this person is making us happy, or is it the type of relationship which I have with this person which makes me happy? When you do this investigation then, perhaps you come to see that actually it’s not the person that makes me happy because if the relationship between the two of us were to take a turn for the worse, then we wouldn’t feel that same type of happiness, would it?
So it’s not that person which is giving making us happy, but rather the type of relationship which we have which is per with the person which is making us happy. This clear, isn’t it? In fact, if you had this this is quite clear, isn’t it? That if you there if you were to have a bad relationship with this person, you that they you would think that they were making you suffer. Right?
Or you would think you would be made to suffer. Correct? Really, the actually, the relationship is important. The person isn’t. In the text then, there are many contemplations which are introduced at this point, which which if the one practices or one one does, then one is encouraged to see that it’s not actually the case that this person always makes us happy, but in fact there are many instances in which they also might make us suffer as well.
So it’s only actually attachment which obstructs us from seeing that the relationship with this person is not all that it appears, that it is not the fact that this person is always making us happy. We are just obscured from seeing the suffering which we experience in dependence upon them by the attachment. So the text encourages us to think about, for instance, in past lives that person might have done something which led to our suffering or even in an earlier part of this very lifetime, that same person might have done something and that led to our experience of suffering. Or if our relationship were to sour and something, you know, something negative were to happen between us, then we would experience some suffering. Or if another person were to try and cause harm to that person and that person were in the unharmed or, you know, killed or something like that, then we would certainly experience suffering.
So it’s not necessarily the case that that person is all that this person is someone who is always giving us happiness. In fact, far from it. It’s merely our attachment which makes us which which obstructs us from seeing that this is the case. Mhmm. It’s thinking in this way, then we or excuse me.
So we must arrest attachment by thinking in this way. Mhmm. Okay? So it’s these people whom we’re attached to that we generate the greatest compassion towards. And and to and with without giving up the compassion we feel towards them by contemplating in this way which was just described, then we try to arrest the attachment towards them and recognize the reality of the situation.
And then we turn our attention to contemplating someone whom we feel perhaps indifferent towards. Why do we feel indifferent towards particular people? We don’t think that they’re important. We think that perhaps they’re insignificant. We think that there’s no particular relationship which we have with them, or we don’t recognize the relationship which we have with them.
Geshe-la says this. In fact, there are many, many small creatures which fall into this category. Mosquitoes, the things which come out in summer, he says, and and it the things which come out in full force in summer, mosquitoes, ants, cockroaches, and mice. We think that these are small insignificant things which have no relation to me and they’re not very important, so after all, then we thus feel indifferent towards them and we don’t give much thought to their plight or how we treat them. But it, you know, in fact, it’s the relationship with between us which which care which which shapes the way we feel towards them.
Just as we saw with the people whom we are attached to, because we have a positive relationship with that person, because we feel that that person make make me happy and we generate attachment towards them and that person becomes significant to us because of their relationship to us. Well, the same any one of these small creatures could also become quite significant to us. I mean, people do keep mice as pets, don’t they? And if mice become sick and they they make sure that they get the shots which they need, they’ll take them to the vet. In fact, people go to great lengths to look after a small mouse.
So it’s certainly the it’s it’s quite obvious to us that if our relationship with a particular being were to change, then all of a sudden, they’re no longer an insignificant, unimportant thing, but rather something which we hold quite dear. Yeah. Geshe-la has never seen anybody that that really holds holds cockroaches too dear to themselves, but certainly, he’s seen people who who who feel so feel in that feel that way towards mice. And as for the those those people who fall into the category of enemies, there’s really no need to speak in great deal about this. I mean, it’s it’s quite clear how we generate anger towards people whom we dislike, and and that and that it’s quite clear also that if our relationship with them were to improve and we would also have a good relationship with them, then they would no longer be someone who we consider our enemies, but rather they would become a close friend or someone whom we are close to.
So and this way then, we, we must meditate upon the on the beings who fall on all all three types of beings coming to see that actually if our relationship with them changes, then whether or not initially there was someone whom we could care less about, someone whom if they were hurt or helped we wouldn’t care either way. And if we develop a positive relationship with them then all of a sudden that person who we are previously indifferent towards becomes of the same status or standing as a person whom we are very close with. Same with the enemies. If the relationship changes, that we feel the same way towards them as we did towards someone who is who is a friend a friend of ours from a long time ago. And we need to recognize that the sentient beings are by in term are by nature the same.
It is rather it is the relationships which we have with them which determine the way we feel towards them, which determine whether we generate attachment, indifference, or anger towards them. We also need to recognize that not only do we need to bring our own well-being, excuse me, not only do we need to, develop our own well-being to its utmost extent, but also, we must develop a capacity to effortlessly and spontaneously accomplish the well-being of others. And the only way in which one purse in in which we can do this is by generating great loving kindness and great compassion. In order to generate great kindness, great loving kindness, and great compassion, we must feel drawn towards all sentient beings. In order to do so, first, we must eliminate the attachment, anger, and indifference we feel towards all.
And thus, we must cultivate these attitudes towards towards all beings in this way. Okay. Perhaps we’re suspicious of the teachings which are given thinking that, yeah, I mean, I can do all that I you know, I can try, you know, very hard from my own side to cultivate this type of equanimity toward and sense of concern for all other beings. But if from their side, they’re not going if they don’t reciprocate my feelings, then this, you know, this positive relationship we speak about is just not gonna come about, you know. Mean after all, you know, regardless of how I feel from my side, it when we actually meet meet the people, yeah, is it really possible that we that all such relationships are gonna be so such such hot, happy, positive relationships?
Well, whether or not that’s the case, it doesn’t negate the the importance of engaging in these contemplations and cultivating these attitudes and cultivating these attitudes because really what we’re speaking about here is training the mind. And in training the mind, we are trying to rid ourselves of this sense of closeness and distance towards other sentient beings. So from our own side, we train our minds and engage in these in these contemplations So that we may we may feel from our own side loving kindness and compassion towards all sentient beings. And then even if we encounter somebody who is who for for instance is taking a has a very nasty approach to us or is doing doing something which might even cause us harm. And from our side, we do not lose our loving kindness and compassion for them regardless of what’s what’s occurring, actually between the two of us as individuals.
So we’re speaking about cultivating things on a mental level and doing all that we can from our own side, and that is the most important thing. Whether or not things are go then that by doing so by doing this is excuse me. Whether or not the these cultivations lead to all of one’s excuse me. Yeah. The fact that that all of our encounters might not be encounters which are entirely positive and does not negate the importance of still doing so.
Okay. Mhmm. So the first step in doing this is to cultivate or meditate upon equanimity. We know the way to do so, don’t we? Do you have any questions?
So what can you do? You have to steal something to eat. And the first one is they said a liberation. The soul, we see everybody have their own soul. A soul?
Yeah. So that’s everybody have their consciousness or whatever. Mhmm. So how can the liberation The first the first the first two are quite clear. Yeah.
Two of the principal teachings of Buddhism is not to kill and not to steal. These two are the vows which one takes, the vows of approaching virtue. So if one is a Buddhist, assumedly, what does one do if one finds oneself in a situation where it’s kill or be killed? For instance, being a soldier on a battlefield. If you don’t kill them, then they’re gonna kill you.
How should a Buddhist react in that situation? And secondly, if you have a child who is dying of hunger, unless you steal food say, for instance, the only way to get food to for this child to to survive is to steal food. What does a Buddhist do in that situation? And then the third one has to do with So we then the third question being that we have there are all sorts of well, torrents. There are all sorts of difficulties which we face, and sometimes even negativities being directed towards us.
How can we generate compassion towards them? Yeah. How can we overcome? How can we liberate? Just say for example, if we are we are here, more freedom, but somewhere else is not freedom at all.
Maybe overcome by the to rest by other forces very strong. Yeah. Yeah. Uh-huh. So how can say another country or something.
How can we liberate, for instance, somebody in another country who’s Oh, so just say the South, not the country, but the human being. Okay. How can we liberate other other other beings when they are bound by whatever types of lack of freedom it is. Well, Geshe-la says, because because if you’ve taken the analogy of of a soldier, then Geshe-la is going to answer the question in regards to that. First of all, within Buddhism, there is no army.
I mean, there are no soldiers. Yeah. So if Buddhism Buddhism Buddhism guess I wanted to make a distinction between Buddhism and Buddhist. Buddhism being, of course, the teachings. Right?
Buddhist being people who yeah. I mean, any people who follow those teachings, for instance. Yeah. Within the Buddhadharma, within the teachings of the Buddha, we can say, or for a person who is really practicing those teachings, then there there is no talk of soldiers, and there is no talk of armies. The the the talk of army and soldiers only comes in comes in the context of mundane things.
Like, it that’s that has to do with the world, whereas Dharma does not necessarily have to do with the world in that same way. So the reason Geshe-la makes this distinction is because if you were to ask about Tibetans, for instance, Tibetans are Buddhist. Yeah. Tibet did did traditionally Tibetans have an army? Answer is yes.
They did. But in any case, if we wanna speak about the teachings of Buddhism, and one there’s no need to speak about an army because within within the Buddhist teachings, yeah, there is no such I mean, anyway, the yeah. There’s no talk of army in the Buddhist teachings. So in the second instance of having a child being on verge of starvation, then Geshe-la says you ought to beg food. Mhmm.
Mhmm. For the third question about how we can help liberate other beings who might not enjoy the same types of freedoms as as we may, there might be things we can do for them to help them along, and there might not be. For if you have a person who is totally averse to spiritual or religious teachings, somebody who doesn’t, yeah, doesn’t care for them or it might even feel hostile towards religious teachings, then perhaps there’s nothing you can do for them except for to pray for them or to or to try and do something so that the causes for their for their openness to religious or spiritual teachings come to fruition. So that then a door, in a sense, is opened for them begin to learn the way to become liberated. Whether or not a being enjoys the opportunity to pursue or to pursue liberation has to do with that own that individual being’s karma.
I mean, if the opportunity to attain liberation were something which could be handed out, then the Buddhas would already have handed it out to all beings, but that is not the case. Whether or not one has this opportunity, whether whether we speak about the opportunity being open to or being willing to pursue the things which might lead to that occurrence has to do with an individual’s karma. We can’t necessarily do anything to change that that past karma. Otherwise, the Buddhas would have done it. To return to the second question, someone who is really practicing Buddhism in a pure way.
Someone who is really practicing Buddhism in a pure way, then we’ll view stealing as a a greater negativity than or a great it will view stealing food to sustain themselves in a time of starvation as being something as being a great a greater undesirable thing than actually dying of that hunger. You know, we’re speaking about someone who’s really practicing Buddhism purely. For them, they recognize that to steal another to steal from another, even if it’s to sustain oneself in a time of starvation or or something like that, is still a negativity. A heavy in fact, it can even be a very heavy heavy negativity, and as such, only increase and lead to suffering in the future. For them, they recognize that if they die of hunger now or if they die of some other cause later, the fact that they have to die is the same.
They realize that that there’s no way they can avoid dying, and so and they will they will face up to that situation and and accept that perhaps it is that they must die of hunger at that moment. So put quite simply, you know, someone who is practicing Buddhism purely will not steal just to sustain themselves. Rather, they will opt for they will opt to accept accept their death rather than do something negative. Yeah. So although the question was originally phrased in terms of stealing food for a child, yeah, when then the act of stealing is still a negativity, and it’s says that, I mean, yeah, if one is truly giving rise to a pure pure intention or pure motivation, then they’re probably gonna see see trying to beg food as as as the best option.
I mean, if they’re if they’re giving rise to the the intention to steal, then that’s probably an that’s probably right there an indication that they they don’t have that that super pure intention, which Yeah. The mind which seeks to steal or intends to steal is not a good one. Yeah. With the pleasures of saṃsāra, you said Mhmm. So now that within within saṃsāra, then all of our bliss or happiness is sullied by suffering.
But is it possible to attain or excuse me, is it possible to experience happiness which is not sullied by suffering before attaining nirvana, for instance, or liberation, liberation being the same thing. Well, are certainly instances in which one might might might experience states which are free of the feeling of suffering. For for instance, just when one is just about to attain the path of seeing in which one is will come to abandon suffering the causes of suffering and so forth. Yet despite the fact that one is free of the feeling of suffering, one will not be free from at that at that stage, least, one is not free from the fact that one is still bound by karma and the afflictions. It’s all pervasive type.
Okay. Mhmm. Last week, Geshe-la talked Geshe-la said that without bodhicitta, one cannot attain Buddhahood. And thus, the thrust of last week’s teachings were the reasons why one must generate bodhicitta. Yeah?
Now this is important we understand this because you should be examined on it. Mhmm. Today, the thrust of the teaching was on the five or six features of saṃsāra. Yeah? Mhmm.
All sentient beings within saṃsāra then are trapped within this in this situation in which they they have these five or six features. As that is the case, then we must cultivate compassion for all beings within saṃsāra. Okay? And then Geshe-la went on to say that in order to generate pure or a perfect or this great type of compassion, it is necessary that one cultivates equanimity. Now hopefully if you were to listen again to the tape then you would you would understand that the reason why it’s necessary to cultivate equanimity before one generates great compassion is due to the fact that one needs to arrest feelings of attachment we feel towards loved ones, aversion or aggression we feel towards those we dislike, and indifference we feel towards strangers or people whom we have no particular relationship with.
If we are having arrested these attitudes then we establish a sense of equality or equanimity amongst all sentient beings, which then serves as the basis for the generation of a mind in which we feel drawn to those beings. And having having in having generated a mind which feels drawn to those beings, only then can we give rise to great compassion. Okay? Oh, yeah. You know my job, Geshe-la.
So please don’t forget.