Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this nearly two-hour session, a student’s question about whether viruses and bacteria count as sentient beings leads Geshe Pema Tsering to observe that teacher and questioner have killed each other as mosquitoes innumerable times in past lives — a moment that lightens otherwise demanding material. The core commentary works through two verses from Nāgārjuna’s Letter to a Friend on the emptiness of the five aggregates, using a four-point analysis: form is not the self, the self neither possesses nor abides in form, and form does not abide in the self. He applies the same reasoning to each remaining aggregate in turn, then explains that all aggregates arise from ignorance, craving, and karma — not from time, nature, or a creator god — and closes with the point that only the bare I, not even consciousness, transmigrates between lives. For students already following the series.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 11 2009 06 28 GPT – letter to a friend 28-06-09.mp3
UUID: bca6678a-edfc-42d3-8a76-dff2780c7709
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Letter to Friend – mulitple years (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2009-06-28
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 112.4 minutes
Words: ~8,114
So Geshe is starting us off to give rise to a good motivation and with the understanding that our actions, the the strength, the power of our actions depend entirely on our on the quality of our motivations, then we need to take this opportunity to give rise to the best possible motivation. And there is no better motivation than motivation of the mind of enlightenment. So what is what is the mind of enlightenment? The mind of enlightenment is composed of two aspirations. So there is one, the aspiration for the welfare of others.
There’s the aspiration that wishes to establish all of the sentient beings without exception in the state of enlightenment. And the second aspiration, aspiration that determines that may I myself accomplish that. And in order to be able to accomplish that, may I then attain enlightenment myself so that I will be able to accomplish that. And this then is is these then are the two aspirations, the aspiration for the welfare of others and the aspiration for one’s own welfare that make up the mind of enlightenment. And at first, we might think I’m not I’m not ever gonna be able produce such such a state of mind.
And Geshe-la then saying, explaining to us is this is how we we would all think at first, and we think like that because we have no familiarity with it whatsoever. But we have really no reason to think that because it it will certainly come. It has come for many beings already. For all those beings who have fully developed the mind of enlightenment, there was a point in in time when they did not know the mind of enlightenment as well, just like we don’t know this like, do not have any familiarity with it also. So if we if we train our minds, if we habituate ourselves, if we familiarize ourselves with the mind of enlightenment within one year, two years, three years, eventually, in the necessary amount of time having gone through, we will be able to develop a noncontrived, fully developed mind of enlightenment.
Geshe-la is saying, so right now, we without making any efforts, we have a state of mind. We have a general frame of mind, which is concerned solely with one’s own happiness, with one’s own profit and welfare, and it has total disregard for the welfare of others. Right? Without making any effort, this state of mind is is like is is second nature in us. And if if if whatever happens to another being, if another being is suffering or not, you know, we are we are not affected at all.
We have no concern for it at all. And and we have this present state of mind as it is right now just by the mere force of a habituation because we are familiar with it with this with these states of minds since, what we say in Buddhism, since time immemorial, since beginningless time. So if we have habituated ourselves with this state of mind, then we can certainly habituate ourselves with a different state of mind. So this so we we are habituated with these states of mind. Nonetheless, these states of mind, they are erroneous.
They are they are distorted state of minds. They are wrong. So now the mind of enlightenment, something like the mind of enlightenment is a correct is is in accord with the facts. It’s in accord with reality. Geshe-la explains, the mind of enlightenment is a mind that acknowledges has has acknowledged within the greater preciousness of all sentient beings as opposed to oneself alone.
So who is kinder? I myself alone or all other sentient beings? And, obviously, the answer to that is all other sentient beings. Geshe-la explains that the I when we’re speaking to I myself, I, this I is actually the enemy. It’s actually the source of every suffering that we have.
This I is the one that holds on to all these pleasures and comforts that we experience in this present life that are in reality suffering. They are in the nature of suffering, and it holds on to it, and it makes us suffer. So so all other sentient beings are much more precious, valuable, and and and kind, infinitely more kind than the I myself. So we need then to familiarize ourselves with this correct mind, the mind of enlightenment. And in this way, we need to give rise.
We need to you know, we take the opportunity now again to produce this thought in our mind. So I must establish all sentient beings in the state of enlightenment, which is endowed with every happiness. In order to accomplish that, in order to be able to accomplish the enlightenment of all beings, I myself must attain enlightenment. So in order to attain enlightenment, I’m going to accomplish cause of enlightenment. So I’m going to now today, I’m going to listen to these teachings and then train accordingly so that I can attain this goal.
And this then is what we call a good motivation. So if you can produce this this thought feeling in your heart, we start with the preliminary prayers. We start with the Heart Sūtra. Thus, here one time, the Bhagavan was dwelling on Vulture Peak mountain in Rajagriha together with community of monks and a great community of bodhisattvas. At that time, the Bhagavan was absorbed in the concentration the categories of phenomena called profound perception.
Also at that time, the bodhisattva, mahasattva, Ārya Avalokiteśvara looked upon the very practice of the profound perfection of wisdom. And Ārya Avalokiteśvara Mahāsattva said this to the venerable Śāriputra. Śāriputra, any son of the lineage or daughter of the lineage who wishes to practice the activity of the profound perfection of wisdom should look upon it like this, correctly and repeatedly beholding the five aggregates as empty of inherent nature. Form is empty. Emptiness is form.
Emptiness is not other than form. Form is also not other than emptiness. In the same way, feeling discrimination, compositional factors, and consciousness are empty. All phenomena are emptiness without characteristic, unproduced, unceased, stainless, not without stain, not deficient, not fulfilled. Śāriputra, therefore, in emptiness, there is no form, no feeling, no discrimination, no compositional factors, no consciousness, no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind, no visual form, no sound, no odor, no taste, no object of touch, and no phenomenon.
There is no eye element and so on up to and including no mind element and no mental conscious element. There is no ignorance, no extinction of ignorance, and so on up to and including no aging and death and no extinction of aging and death. Similarly, there is no suffering, origination, cessation, and path. There is no exalted wisdom, no attainment, and also no no attainment. Śāriputra, therefore, because there is no attainment, bodhisattvas rely on and dwell in the perfection of wisdom, the mind without obscuration and without fear.
Having completely passed beyond error, they reached the endpoint of nirvana. All the Buddhas who dwell in the three times also manifested completely awakened to unsurpassable, perfect, complete enlightenment in reliance on the perfection of wisdom. Therefore, the mantra of the perfection of wisdom, the mantra of great knowledge, the unsurpassed mantra, the mantra equal to the unequal. The mantra that already pacifies all suffering should be known as truth, it is not false. The mantra of the perfection of wisdom is declared.
Śāriputra, the bodhisattva mahasattva should train in the profound perfection of wisdom like that. Then the Bhagavan rose from that concentration and commended the bodhisattva mahasattva Ārya Avalokiteśvara saying, Well said. Well said. It is like that. It is like that.
One should practice the profound, perfection of wisdom just as you have indicated even the retinue rejoiced. Bhagavan have thus spoken, the Venerable Śāriputra, the Bodhisattva Mahāsattva Ārya Avalokiteśvara, those surrounding their entirety along with the world of gods, humans, asuras, and Gandharvas, were of rejoicing, highly praised that’s spoken by the Bhagavan. So we move on to the dispelling of hindrances. I and also around the sentient beings go for refuge to the Buddha, go for refuge to the Dharma, go for refuge to the Sangha. We prostrate to the great mother Prajñāpāramitā, surrounded by all the children, by the assemblies of Buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions.
By depending on my prostrations to all of you, may these words of truth be actualized. In the past, the king Indra dispelled the maras by reflecting on the profound meaning of the wisdom gone beyond and reciting the profound words in daily recitation. In that same way, I also reflect on the profound meaning of the and recite the profound words in daily recitation. May all diseases, spiritual possessions, bad conditions, all the negative directions that what happens due to past, calm, and immediate conditions, may all of this be dispelled, may become nonexistent, may be pacified. Do you do the prayer, please?
So we approach the next topic of this commentary on the letter to a friend from Nāgārjuna. And the next topic is an explanation of how to familiarize oneself with the correct view that is from beyond this world. And Geshe-la was explaining again this is the view of emptiness. So, again, how to familiarize oneself with the view of emptiness? Is going through the first two lines of, the root verse, which says that form is not the self, thus the Buddha spoke.
Also, form does not because also the self does not have a form or is not a possessor of form, and and and the self also does not abide within form. And Geshe-la was pointing out to us the Heart Sūtra that we just read before we started the teachings where it says, you know, there is no form, no feeling, no discrimination, no odor, no sound, and so forth. And form is emptiness, emptiness is form and so on. So all these are teachings on emptiness and again this is the same same thing also teachings on emptiness. And, again, Geshe-la was going through detailed analysis of the the Tibetan sentence.
And the Tibetan says, again, the self, which again is referring to the person to oneself, is not does not possess form. And Geshe la is then further explaining that also in a in a bit of a deeper sense, the same in the same topic is makes reference to the fact that the self does not have an inherent existence. It does not exist inherently. It does not exist truly. It also points out to that.
Goes on to explain and the next the next clause is saying and the self also does not abide in form And Geshe-la was explaining, conventionally, it does abide in form, but there is no inherent existent form. There’s no inherent existent body in which there abides an inherent existent self. And while form and while form dwells not in self, that that’s the concluding clause of that reasoning. So, again, form is not the self. The self does not have form nor dwell in form while form dwells not in self.
Then, thus, you must see the four remaining aggregates are empty too. You must see the form remaining aggregates. So you have the aggregate of form, and you have feeling discrimination, compositional factors, consciousness. The four remaining aggregates. And in this way, you apply the same reasoning, the same principle with each of the four aggregates.
And then you come to understand, as Geshe-la was explaining, that each and every one of the aggregates lacks inherent existence, is empty of inherent existence. Starts with the next verse. Again, the aggregates are not a simple whim. So, again, Geshe-la is pointing out, the aggregates are not just something that pops up out of one’s, whims. It is it is the product of of a very complex combination of, very specific, common both causes and conditions that are similar to itself.
That’s one specific, very technical term. Some causes that are specific to itself. And then also so the aggregates are not a simple whim. From neither time nor nature do they come, and Geshe-la was explaining. So, again, they don’t come when a particular season arrives.
They don’t the the aggregate doesn’t come about in dependence on time. They don’t come about by some force of nature. They come about, again, by very specific causal combination of a very complex combination, very specific causal conditions. Causing causes, many of which causes are of causes of similar type of of a similar lineage to itself. And then as the text is saying, it it it does not come from nature or does not come another way to translate that expression that was translated as nature is is does not arise inherently and also does not come by itself.
So the aggregates will not come by them do not come about by themselves. And Geshe-la was explaining, if if because if they had any inherent existence or if they had any existence from their own side, then they wouldn’t change ever. They will never change. They will always remain the same. And then also, we are told so they they do not come from a god.
And then the expression here is which is one particular, very powerful god. So, again, it doesn’t it’s not originates it does not originates by the force, by the power of this god. It does not originate it does not come about, again, without cause. So their source you you ought to know is ignorance. From from karmic deeds and craving have they come.
So, again, they come about from contaminated actions, contaminated karma. They come about from craving. It comes about from ignorance. So all all forms, all aggregates, all beings within saṃsāra came about due to ignorance, craving, and contaminated actions. So the whole point of that second verse is telling us that the aggregates of samsaric phenomena in general, it is not the case that they are not uncaused.
They all arise, come about, come into existence, the in dependence on causes and conditions. So the text is telling us, this causes specific causes and conditions that refer to ignorance, craving, contaminated actions, very specific causing conditions. And
You know, it does not exhaust it does not they do not come into existence by the force, by the power of a god. They do not come to into existence inherently in any way. If there was the case that they would, you know, originate by the force of by the power of a god or they exist inherently, again, conditions. It will mean that they will not change then. It would be unchanged, immutable.
So that’s not the case. And Geshe-la was just saying now now this is something which is a very difficult. It’s a very difficult topic, and he’s wondering if you are understanding anything at all. So, again, this is a very difficult topic. This is the one very extraordinary teaching, uncommon teaching of Buddhism that other religions do not have.
And it is very difficult it’s a it demands a lot of reasoning, a lot of study. It demands a lot of time, a lot of familiarity in order to be able to start gaining a glimpse of it. So it is not with one lecture that we we’re gonna gain an understanding of it. English. Again, this is not a difficult sorry.
This is not an easy subject. It it is a subject in which we are investigating the way of existence of of, you know, phenomena and then all sorts of phenomena. We’re talking about the existence phenomena, nonexistence phenomena, animate phenomena, inanimate phenomena. And we’re talking about all we we we we go on examining all different sorts of phenomena, categories of phenomena, and and investigating in which way they exist. And and this is what this subject is about, investigating the ultimate nature of phenomena.
You want to say so the aggregates just to briefly explain, the aggregates are, you know, form. It start with the we have the five aggregates. Geshe-la was explaining. So when when we when we’re talking about emptiness, when we’re talking about the ultimate existence, ultimate way of existence of phenomena, we’re talking about different basis for this investigation, for this analysis. So one one of these basis is the five aggregates, and the other one is is the self.
So as for the five aggregates, we have as we have seen in the in the in the previous verse, the aggregate of form. The aggregate of form is the first one of one of it’s one of the five aggregates, which is then it’s the physical body that you have composed of flesh, bones, blood, and and and all everything that makes up your physical body. Then you have feelings, discriminations, composition of factors, and consciousness. Those are the five aggregates. Now of all these Can you explain each of those?
A sec. Wait a sec. Composition of factors and consciousness. Those are the last two. And Geshe-la was explaining so when we investigate when we are investigating the ultimate way of existence of phenomena or of of the self in Buddhism, we’re talking about selflessness of phenomena and the selflessness of the person.
In this text, we we hear again the form is not the self. The self does not possess form. The the self does not abide in form. Now, conventionally, it does abide within form, we say. But there is no inherent existent form, and there is no inherent existent self.
At the time of death, the form and the self, they separate. Again, the aggregates are the base upon which we impute the self. And Geshe-la was explaining, so when we when we look at the self and we do not find anything that exists in the way that appears to exist, realize that there is no inherently existent self. And the same applies for the aggregates. When we look at each one of the aggregates in detail with a specific analysis then we realize they do not exist in the way that they appear to exist and we realize that they also lack the aggregates themselves lack inherent existence and these two make up for the selflessness of the emptiness of phenomena and the emptiness of the self, the selflessness of phenomena, the selflessness of the self of the person.
So the five aggregates, what are each one of the five aggregates? So the the aggregate of form as we have already posited is the physical body itself. You know, the one thing that we most easily associate with ourselves, when we we call when our names are called and then, you know, we usually think of the body, you know, who am I and all that. We’re usually pointing out to the body and all that. Then we have the next aggregate, which is the aggregate of feelings.
It is technically said to be a mental factor. So it is it is and it is it is it makes up all those things. In general we have a division of three types of feelings, painful feelings, pleasurable feelings, and neutral feelings, which are neither painful nor pleasurable. So anything in in in this this sliding scale of pain and pleasure that you can think of. It makes up feelings.
Then you have the next aggregate, which is the aggregate of discrimination. It’s another mental factor, which is a quality of the mind that discerns and distinguishes certain more details and qualities of the each objects of apprehension. Then the last of the five aggregates is consciousness, which is also referred to as main mind, the is the is the the one thing that apprehends the the general entity of the object that is being related to. Whilst discernment is discerning this specific details of that object, the main mind is apprehending the just the general entity or, you know, the the object at large without paying attention to details. And then you have the fourth aggregate, which is called a compositional factors.
Compositional factors are anything which is not any of the other four aggregates. That’s what it is. Anything which is form, which is not feeling, which is not discrimination, which is not consciousness. Any such things will fall under the category of compositional factors. You could have some mental factors, you could have words, sounds, and whatnot.
So then these are the five aggregates. Okay. Okay. Okay. So Geshe started to go through the commentary to those two verses.
Okay? So we have from one sūtra, we have it said again that, how do say, the form form is not the self. And so and so the Buddha has said. And on the Buddha has said. So we examine them in more detail.
The commentary is examining them in more detail. So, again, if form and the self, they are not inherently one. They are not one. If they were one if they were one and the same, right, if the form and the self were one and the same, then the self would actually be many because there are many forms. There are many parts.
There are many forms. So if if the if the self and the form and the body were one and the same, then you would have many So, again, if if the self and and the form, which is the case in this case is the body we’re talking about form talking about the body if they were one thing and the same thing then it will have to be one thing you have to be one thing without parts all right But the body has parts. We have fingers and hands and arms and legs and feet and and and neck and head and whatnot. And if if the if the body and the self are one in this way, then you end up with many selves. And then and then the next two two clauses are approaching it.
It’s approaching the same problem, okay, from slightly different angles. And, again, the so the the self and the form also do not possess possess the same nature, they’re of the same entity. And again the same problem would arise here, you would end up with many selves if they were of the same entity. And again the next one is saying the self does not inherently abide within form. Again, the same problem arise here arises here too.
And then so so, again, the the reasoning the the next few clauses go on like this. So, again, the the self does not inherently abide within the physical body. The self does not inherently possess a physical body. Another way to say that the body the form does not inherently abide within the self, but it actually means the self does not inherently possess. Physical body.
And Geshe-la was stopping there and saying, look. Conventionally, yes, the self does abide within form. Just not inherently. And, again, the self does possess a form, but not inherently. Conventionally, for all conventional purposes, it it it is the case.
And, again, we we also have seen the last one of the last clauses here. We also see bodies forms without a self, which which are born and then then disintegrate. So those are seen also. And Geshe-la was pointing out so, again, just to point out that the the the body, the physical form, and the self are not one and the same thing. So we have all these different approaches, all these different angles that we at which we look at it, including the fact that we’ve seen bodies without a self, which are separate corpses.
We have seen corpses, which which also have come into existence and have gone out of the world. They have disintegrated. And so we can see how they are not one in the same, how the body itself, the form itself does not exist inherently. Again, it changes. And how they are not one with the self.
They’re not the same thing as the self is. Alright? And then so, again, this is the analysis of the first one of those two verses. So, again, the and then the same way, again, we look at feelings and so forth of all the remaining four aggregates. We look at them, and we see that their entity, their nature, and that of the self.
It it’s empty of of self. And and we see that in which way it is empty of self based on the scriptures and based on reasoning, we can realize that their entity and their nature lacks a self. And then, again, so we if we were to apply the same reasoning to each one of the four remaining, we were to apply that to feelings. We would also see again, the self does have feelings. Nonetheless, there are no it does not have inherent existing feelings.
It and it’s having feelings is not inherent existence, and itself is not inherent existence. The self is not inherent existence. The feelings that it has are not inherent existence. Its possession of of those feelings is not inherent existent. And, again, the same applies for discrimination.
Geshe-la was pointing out to the paintings that we have here, and we can discriminate different colors, you know, red, white, green, and whatnot. And this is then the the the aggregate of discrimination. Right? It’s discriminating all the details and the colors and these shapes and whatnot. And Geshe-la was going to say again that self does have discrimination.
It possesses discrimination, but not inherent existence. It is not inherent. It’s it’s merely imputed. It it has only conventional existence. And the same for consciousness at large, the five the fifth of the five aggregates consciousness at large, which apprehends the general entity of this painting.
You know? And discrimination is apprehending the very details, the minor details, and the colors and so forth. The general entity of of the consciousness is then apprehending the general entity of this painting. And, again, you know, the self has consciousness and and all that. Nonetheless, again, it’s not inherent existence.
It’s it’s merely merely imputed. It only has conventional existence. Geshe-la again goes through briefly again saying again the self does possess discrimination. The self does possess consciousness. Nonetheless, those are not inherently existent.
The discrimination is not inherently existent. The consciousness is not inherently existent. And the self itself is not inherently existent. And, again and in this way, we we realize this too selflessness selflessnesses. We talk about the lack of self, the lack of self of the person and the lack of self of phenomena, the lack of inherent existence person and the lack of inherent existence phenomena.
Excellent. Because we’ve got a complex question. No. Let’s see if I can address that. Excuse me. So, look, I’m I’m let’s see what we can do. Okay?
So Geshe-la was saying, yes. We human beings are really, you know, important and impressive and special in in in all these many ways. And and as it is and we are capable of doing so many things. We are so capable of doing so many things, and and and and still we are experiencing so much suffering as it is. And then and then so and then there are inanimate objects.
You know, there’s stones and and and whatnot. They they do not have all these things that we have, the aggregates and the sense powers and so forth. And then we have insects. And as for insects and other animals, again, there many insects that do have all these aggregates that we have. They have form and they have all the five senses and they have feelings like we do and they have discrimination and they have consciousness and so forth.
They can seek their food. They can build their abodes and whatnot. And there are also insects and animals that do not have all of these five sense powers that we enjoy. There are some that cannot see and and some that cannot hear and whatnot. What they what they do not have that we do have is intelligence or a discriminating awareness.
What we refer to as in in the word in Tibetan is usually translated as wisdom. We can translate it as intelligence. This is something that is exclusive to human beings. We have this capacity to reason that animals and insects do not have. Now the now the the animals and the insects, they do experience happiness and suffering.
They do experience pleasure and pain. If they do not if they do not have this experience of happiness and and pain, if they do not have the five sense powers or or any sense power at all, then they would be just like stones and dead wood. Again, they would have no feelings, and their condition wouldn’t change their happiness and their suffering. Whatever their condition might be, wouldn’t be affected by us. But our actions towards those beings, those living beings, those living creatures is is said to be either beneficial or harmful.
It depends on it depends on the fact that if you harm them, they do suffer. We can discern that. And if you help them in some way, they they do benefit, and we can we can understand that. And then so and so and and amongst living creatures, there is no living creature that does not have, for example, consciousness, the aggregate of consciousness. So we might have living creatures, living beings that do not have some of the other aggregates, might not have even the aggregate of form.
So we have beings in the formless realms of existence, which we we human beings cannot see, but we have all sorts of of beings that do have consciousness. They do not have form, but they do have consciousness. And the and then but the whole point of and this is in trying to really address what what what the I think your your question lies. The the whole point is that all of this that we have been talking about does not exist inherently. The point is how it exists.
Yes. We are human beings and we are special and whatnot. But how is it that we exist? That’s the point. And that’s what we’re investigating here.
We don’t exist in the way that we appear to exist. We don’t exist in the way that we think that we exist. We don’t exist inherently. If we were to exist in the way that we appear to exist, if we if we were to exist in the way that we think we do exist, if we were to exist inherently, then we wouldn’t change. Nothing could affect us.
Nothing could affect the way we feel and so on. And that’s the whole point. That’s what we are really dealing with here. How is it that we exist? Yes.
We exist and the animals and everything else. How? How is it? What is what is the way that we exist? We exist but not inherently.
That’s that’s the whole thing. And and and, again, to put it in a nutshell, because it’s a very extensive topic, Geshe-la was gonna say, to put it in a nutshell, the way that we exist, the way that we come into existence is interdependently. Depend in dependence on another. in dependence on others. And then Geshe-la was saying in dependence on in dependence on many causes and conditions.
That’s how everything that we see comes into existence. Everything that we see and that that we experience comes into existence in dependence on many causes and conditions. So again, all the the aggregates, the sense powers, the the person, the self, human beings, animals, insects, all of this, they do exist. Yes. They exist interdependently.
They exist, again, not inherently. They exist they they all of this come into existence. Everything that we experience for our five senses, including the five senses themselves, comes into existence in dependence on many causes and conditions. Again, Geshe-la’s pointing out to his body and saying, you have you have this this this body here. You have this collection of five aggregates here.
Again, now this body does not exist inherently. It has no independent existence from its own side. There’s nothing there’s nothing that exists. No. There’s no existence phenomena that does not did not come about in dependence or does not come about in dependence on cause and conditions.
And Geshe-la was pointing out to his body. This body here does not exist independently. It it, again, it does not has it does not have inherent existence. It it it came about by the union of the egg and the sperm of his father and his mother. It came about in dependence on cause and conditions.
And then it it it goes further. Again, all these five aggregates are getting Geshe-la is pointing to referring to his five aggregates. And saying, again, these five aggregates really have an incalculable amount of an innumerable amount of cause and conditions. Really, it’s it’s incalculable. It’s it’s innumerable.
Now we have we have coarse causing conditions that we can see. Again, we have the sperm and the egg and and and whatnot. So we have all these coarse causing conditions that we can understand, but there are very many subtle causing conditions. They are they are nearly infinite, you could say. They are really innumerable.
And you have amongst them, you have craving. You have ignorance. You have contaminated karma actions and so forth. You have so many causes and conditions for just this five aggregates, and we shall again refer to his collection of five aggregates. So we so, again, of of the this is something which is very difficult.
It’s a very difficult subject. And, again, as we have so very many causes that brought about about this human body. So, again, of from amongst the very many causes because the human body, the human experience, the human realm in general is regarded as a happy realm of existence, then we can can infer from that that some of the main causes that brought about this human body were virtuous actions. Then karma, again, the subject of karma is another subject which is very complicated and very difficult to understand. But we understand that virtuous karma, good karma, has propelled us into this human existence.
And, again, all these discomforts and the displeasures and the pains that we experience in this life, again, they are all caused by negativities, by negative actions, non virtuous actions that have been performed previously, accumulated previous in previous lifetimes and whatnot. So, again, a very many complex array of cause and conditions that brought about all these experiences that we have here. And, again, so we we have been born this body. These aggregates have come about, have come into existence. And, again, we have to tend for it.
We have to nurture it. We have to look after it so that we remain united with it. We remain we still can live with it. As we have to eat well, we have to, you know, exercise, we have to wash, and we have to care for our bodies. Because if we don’t look after it, if we don’t nurture it, if we don’t treat it well and all that, we just we won’t be able to stay around with it.
We have to separate from it. And all these all these activities that we engage in, all these actions we engage in in order to, you know, preserve the body and maintain our our life. Again, all of this the word in Tibetan is le. All these are actions, and action is what karma means. karma literally means actions.
So all this is karma. All this is actions. So all all this this is the coarse form of of of of karma, the one that we can understand very easily. So all this is karma. So we can see how the body comes into existence, stays into existence, all in dependence on karma, on causes and conditions, on actions, on all sorts of different causes and conditions.
So every compounded every compounded phenomena there is has a has a rising in dependence on on karma, on actions, on the complexity of cause and conditions. And then and then to maybe to to help understand, at least to help understand me understand, if if if the body were inherently existent in the way that we think it is, then we wouldn’t need to to feed it. We wouldn’t need to wash it. We wouldn’t need to to do anything about it because it wouldn’t change. It wouldn’t need maintenance.
Wouldn’t that be great? So, again, you know, I guess I’m gonna say that that would be that would be great because you wouldn’t wouldn’t need to do anything. It would just keep on existing by itself. I I will say the way but the way we see it, the way we think it exists is as if it existed from its own side independently and inherently. We do not really see how it is that it exists.
We do not really see it as existing in dependence on many cause and conditions. So in in most in most Buddhist so in most Buddhist schools of only thing that goes from life to life is consciousness, the fifth aggregate, the aggregate of consciousness. Everything else stays behind. For the Mādhyamika Prāsaṇgika, Not even consciousness goes from life to life. The only thing that goes from life to life is the I, the first person pronoun.
So only the I got. So, again, the I the I is the one thing that transmigrates from life to life. And if it arrives if it lands on a cat’s body, then it will think, you know, I’m a cat. If if it lands on a human’s body, then you’ll think, you know, I am a human being. And if it lands in a god’s body or goddess’s body, thinks I’m a god.
I’m a goddess’s. Or if it lands in a dog’s body, it thinks I’m a dog. Inherently. Yeah. When when do they stop being sentient?
Is that what? Alright. Alright. Alright. Alright.
Yes. No. Yep. Yep. So when when this distinction between a sentient being and something that is not a sentient being.
Again, the the word in Tibetan is a mind possessor, somebody who possesses mind or possesses consciousness. When we talk about sentient beings, we’re translating that’s the usual translation of this Tibetan expression that the Tibetan expression literally means mind possessor or consciousness possessor. So the distinction is made if the being has consciousness or not. If something has consciousness, then it is a sentient being. If it doesn’t have consciousnesses, then it is not a sentient being.
Now in the you gave an illustration. You talk about the flowers. Right? So so I brought this I brought the illustration in. So, you know, there are people who say that flowers and trees, that they that they do have consciousness, that they do have feelings and and and all that.
And they say that for various reasons. They say, you know, some plants if you touch them they close, you know, some flowers if you treat them well they will bloom better than if you don’t treat them well and whatnot. They there are people give all sorts of different reasonings for their for what they are saying, for their assertions. But in in Buddhist in within the Buddhist teachings, we don’t posit something like flowers and and grass and trees and plants in general. We don’t posit them as having consciousness.
We don’t posit them as having feelings, so they don’t feel pain and pleasure and whatnot and that’s that sort of is a demarcation I don’t know. Let see. When talking about viruses and bacterias and amoebas, we got a problem because mosquitoes. Yeah. Sorry.
Mosquitoes. That’s good. They know they are there. Yes. Mosquito.
Mosquito. Mosquito. Mosquito. So mosquitoes, for example, they they yes. They they have consciousness.
They do have a self and and all that. So mosquitoes yes. As insects as insects do in Buddhism, insects are posited as having consciousness. I tend to take it that it does not extend below insects. You might might put it that way.
I just say because amoebas and viruses and bacterias and all that. I mean, at the time of the Buddha, they didn’t have microscopes and all that. They didn’t even knew that these things existed, so there was no talk about that. You know? I don’t even know the term in Tibetan.
Let’s not even go there because I don’t want to leave it out. I don’t know how to say it. I don’t know how to say it in Tibetan. There’s no way I can go there. Virus, bacteria.
Okay. So he’s saying that those are sentient beings. They are. They are Geshe-la is saying that they are, you know, viruses and bacteria and whatnot. They are sentient beings.
I know. I know. I know. TB. TB.
Oh TB. Yes TB. Yes. Yeah. So again, Geshe-la was pointing out talking about TB.
Right? Tuberculosis. Yeah. Yeah. I know.
I know. Geshe-la was talking about tuberculosis. And what is it? It’s a bacteria. And, again, that by bacteria that is transmitted through the air.
And, again, Geshe-la was saying that is a sentient being. So so in in in our western in western science, we make this distinction. We say, again, these viruses and bacteria and amoebas are less developed or evolved in trees and plants and so on. But in in Buddhism, in terms of there being a sentient being or not, we say we say that again excuse me. All these the animals, the insects, and this virus, and bacterias, and whatnot, they all fall under the same one category, which we we we call in the in in the Buddhist category of animal, the animal realm, the Buddhist animal realm.
And then and they are not in in terms of the distinction between being a sentient being or not or their state of existence, they are all in the same pot. So in the so humans are better than animals and insects and viruses and all that. We are better off than they are. They are in a suffering realm of existence. Now and and the and the plants and the trees and whatnot, they are non-sentient.
They don’t have consciousness. And that’s how the distinction is made in Buddhism. Is that right? They don’t have self consciousness. They don’t have consciousness at all.
No. No consciousness. That’s what the Buddha say. We we are drawing the line of if something has consciousness or not. And once a virus and bacteria, I don’t know if they have one cell or not, but if they have consciousness, are sentient beings.
If they don’t have consciousness, are not sentient beings. And and in plants, in Buddhist cosmology, ontology and whatnot plants do not have consciousness so anything that belongs to the plant realm does not have consciousness not a sentient being and anything that belongs to the animal realm all the way down to viruses and bacterias and that has consciousness is a sentient being. That’s how we draw the line. Pointing out for them. And and Geshe is saying, no.
There are many people who say, you know, that flowers and plants, they do have consciousness because they do have they seem to react. And Geshe-la was then pointing out to to flowers that react so obviously to the presence of the sun. And when the sun is not is absent, they are sort of down, literally. And when the sun comes around, they they sort of look up to the sun. And when the sun goes down, they look down again.
And, you know, people say that that is a sign of their being consciousness or or whatnot. People say different people will say different things, basically. What the Buddhists say? The Buddhists say no consciousness. Yeah.
Yeah. So One feels the sun coming up for instance. Yeah. But then we Buddhist say flowers don’t have consciousness. Don’t have that feeling.
So, again, you can see also it’s just the action of that movement of the pliancy is just a reaction of a chemical process that is going on by the heat of the sun touching the plant and starting a chemical process. That’s all there is to it. You know, you have scientists who say that too, who explain it just that way. So it so you have different people saying different things. Yes.
Very good. So, yes, we we also depend on many, chemical processes like that. Nonetheless, we depend on much more also. The the complexity of our makeup is much, much greater than the plants. And we our makeup also depends on what we refer to as as karma, as white and black karma, know, virtuous and non virtuous karma.
Whilst the the the makeup of the plant, does not depend on white and black karma and all that. So there’s much more to the human condition than the plant. Oh, yes. Absolutely. It is genuine.
It is very difficult. Mosquito. And Geshe-la wasn’t saying that. It’s just that he cut me short and was just saying, look. You have been born as a mosquito already many times.
How did I make it this far? They did. There’s a complexity of karma is only fully enlightened Buddha can understand. We cannot understand. But, Geshe-la was saying you have been born as a mosquito many times.
We have all been born as a mosquito very many times. And Geshe-la was saying to you, he he has killed you as a mosquito many times, and and you have killed him as a mosquito also many times. What? It probably will go on some next Sunday, we continue. And, Geshe-la, I just point out, this is something that we don’t understand.
It is really difficult to to comprehend this because we have been taking births, as we say in Buddhism, since time immemorial, since beginning less time, for a very long time, so taking birth. And and Geshe-la was so we and we don’t comprehend that. So because we do not comprehend the fact that we have been born innumerable amount of times, it is hard to comprehend the fact that we also have been born as a mosquito very many times and as anything else, everything else, very many times. Now that’s very, very hard. It’s a very difficult topic, and it takes time to come to get to get one’s head around it.
It takes a lot of time. Everything else. There’s everything in between. No. No.
No. Everything’s included. Every living creature. And, Geshe-la was saying because if if if one is to seriously look into it, one will not be able to find a point in time where one can say, oh, this is the beginning of me or I. This is when I first when I was first born in cyclic existence.
There no point in time. We cannot find such a point in time. As as far back as one may go, we will not be able to find. And that’s why we we refer to it as beginningless time because we cannot find a point in time where we can say this is the beginning. And and because it’s hard to comprehend that, then it’s hard to get our head around the fact that, again, since we have been such a long time back, we have been born as all different sorts of sentient beings, each one of them very many times.
Geshe-la was saying, actually, innumerable times. Each we have been born as each one different sentient being innumerable times. And that’s that’s how Buddhist see it. Alright? For today, shall we call it will you do the dedication, please?