Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Dharmakīrti’s deceptively simple claim — that two types of knowable objects necessitate two types of prime cognizers — opens this 54-minute introduction to Khensur Rinpoche’s “Awareness and Knowledge” series. He distinguishes specifically characterized phenomena (arising from causes and conditions) from generally characterized phenomena, mapping these onto direct perceivers and inferential cognizers. The Sanskrit term pramāna receives careful unpacking: its two possible etymologies and how the four Buddhist tenet schools divide on their interpretation. Everyday examples ground the abstractions — smoke inferring fire, a reddening face signalling anger. The session then introduces the sevenfold classification of awareness: direct perception, inference, subsequent cognition, correct assumption, and appearance without ascertainment. Suited to practitioners ready for systematic Buddhist epistemology.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 03 AK 1988-10-06.mp3
UUID: d0709d59-17f4-4bf3-8b31-37a1685ef5e7
Teacher: Khensur Rinpoche
Collection: Awareness and Knowledge 1988-1989 (Khensur Rinpoche)
Date: 1988-10-06
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 54.6 minutes
Words: ~2,513
Yes. So to begin with, Rinpoche is going to explain a few words of the refuge verse that we just recited, the very first verse. So for those who include themselves amongst the Buddhists, the source of refuge is the Sangye. We recite the word Sangye, which is the jewel of the Buddha. Then Chu is the jewel of the Dharma.
And Chog here refers to the jewel of the supreme community, the spiritual community. Then the second, the last two lines of this four line verse, Dagi Jinso, etc. In order to be able to listen, in order to create the necessary merit to which we’re trying to motivate ourselves to achieve Buddhahood for the sake of all sentient beings, then we must develop the motivation of listening to the teaching in order to benefit others. And likewise on the part of the teacher he is going to motivate himself to give the teaching in order to create the merit in order to benefit others. Therefore, this last two lines of this four line verse, we are setting our motivation, not only just in general, but specifically in this instance, that we are going to listen to the teaching in order to create the merit whereby we can attain Buddhahood for the benefit of others.
And the teacher from his side is creating the motivation where he’s going to give the teaching in order to create merit in order to attain Buddhahood for the sake of others. So we should try to set our motivation that for the sake of all sentient beings in order to attain perfect enlightenment I’m going to listen to this teaching. So the glorious to begin with our discussion of awareness and knowledge, we’re going to take up the two types of prime cognitions. There are prime cognizers and non prime cognizers. This is set forth by the glorious Dharmakīrti where he says that their number is definite as being two.
First, we’re going to discuss prime cognizers and non prime cognizers. So in this verse by the glorious Dharmakīrti, it begins with, Since there are two types of objects of knowledge, there must be two types of prime cognizers. And what are the two types knowables or objects of knowledge? There are specifically characterized phenomena and generally characterized phenomena. Those objects which arise in dependence upon causes and conditions are specifically characterized phenomena whereas those phenomena which do not rise in dependence upon causes and conditions are generally characterized phenomena.
So there’s a difference between these two types of objects or knowledge. Those phenomena which arise dependent upon causes and conditions are specifically called specifically characterized phenomena. And those phenomena which do not arise dependent upon causes and conditions are referred to as generally characterized phenomena. So how does this tie in with this discussion of the two types of prime cognizers? Those prime cognizers which have as their appearing objects specifically characterized phenomena are direct perceivers.
Those prime cognizers which have as their appearing objects generally characterized phenomena are inference. So both of these two types of consciousness are both prime cognizers. One is a direct prime cognizer and the other is an inferential prime cognizer. So in the Sanskrit language, the word we’re translating as prime cognizer is pramāna. So now in, so we’re going to discuss the etymology of this word, Pramāna.
In the, this word is taken into the Tibetan language, the first of these two syllables, and can mean either first or mainly. They can have these two different meanings. Wish he doesn’t know what it means in English. So this then the second of these two syllables, means to comprehend or to realize. So when we combine the two syllables in these two different possible ways of taking, in this case the word, the etymology of the word, the Sanskrit, we get two different meanings, two possible meanings of this term.
And one of them would be that which comprehends an object initially, that which comprehends an object initially or firstly initially. And the second would be that comprehends with regard to its main object. That which comprehends its main object. That which comprehends its main object. So there’s these two.
That which comprehends an object initially and that which comprehends its main object. There are two possible ways we can take the meaning of this. So within the philosophic system of Buddhism, there are four tenets, four systems of philosophy. The exposition, the great exposition school, the sūtra school, the mind only school, and the middle way school. And the way they interpret which of these two etymologies that they accept is different amongst these four different schools.
Amongst these four schools, the highest most school, the Middle Way School has two further divisions. The Autonomy Middle Way School and the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school. Autonomy middle way school and Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school. Now, so they form higher and higher level.
The Autonomy Middle Way School down, that would include all the bottom three tenets, the first three tenets that I named. The first half of the middle way school, which is the Autonomy middle way school, they and all the lower tenets, the rest of the three tenets, they etymologize the pra to mean first and therefore the prime cognizer is that which comprehends its object initially, realizes initially, is an initial realizer. Whereas the topmost school, that is the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school, etymologizes, The term to mean main and therefore they take the meaning of the word prime cognizer to mean a realizer real the realizer of the main object. The realizer or the comprehender of the main object. And within the within our discussion, we are going to be taking the meaning in accordance with the three lower tenet schools.
That is the Great Exposition School, the Sūtra School, and the Mind Only School. Therefore, we posit the definition of prime cognizer as a new incontrovertible knower. A new incontrovertible knower is the definition of prime cognizer. So this definition is the combination of three different terms, three different ideas. So we have to understand what each of these are that is new, incontrovertible, and knower.
By new we mean first. Therefore by new realizer, first realizer, initial realizer. By incontrovertible, we mean that which realizes its object, that which comprehends its object. For the Great Exposition School, the lowest of the four tenet schools, they would find it sufficient to give us the definition of prime cognizer, new incontrovertible, new incontrovertible. For them that’s sufficient definition of prime cognizer.
For our purposes that is not a sufficient definition. We have to add the third term that is knower. This is in the Great Exposition School, they regard the I itself as new and incontrovertible, whereas in the Sūtra School, the school that we’ll be following, the I is simply form. It is not consciousness. In order to be a prime cognizer, the cognizer must be a consciousness.
Therefore, it’s necessary to add the third term that is a knower. So we said that there are two types of prime cognizer. There’s direct prime cognizer and inferential prime cognizer. What do we mean by a direct prime cognizer? That is a cognizer which newly realizes its object without depending upon a reason.
A cognizer which newly realizes its object without depending upon reason is a direct prime cognizer. We can all understand, we can all see the flower with our eye consciousness. We don’t have to, in order to cognize the, to realize the flower, we don’t have to rely on reasoning. Therefore, this is a prime cognizer, a newly realized object without depending upon reasoning, this eye consciousness perceiving the flower. The second type of prime cognizer, the inferential prime cognizer is a cognizer which newly again realizes its object in dependence upon a reason.
So, Rinpoche was referring to a verse by the Buddha and I was trying to translate it, but I’m just going to exemplify it by way of explaining it and then perhaps I’ll understand what it means. The first Buddha is referring to an inferential prime cognizer. And the situation could arise where you see you’re at a very vast distance from something happening. Something’s going on in the far distance. And you’re wondering in that place, in that far distant place, is there a fire in that place?
And you’re thinking about it, you’re wondering about whether there’s a fire there, but you’re not sure. And someone comes along and says, Well look, can see the smoke up in the sky. And the dependence upon seeing, being able to see the smoke and dependence on using that as a reason, we can establish through inference that there must be fire at that place because smoke is an effect or result of fire. Therefore by seeing the result of something we can know that the cause exists at that same place. So this is established through inference of establishing a prime cognizer.
So this is just a simple example. It’s difficult to understand inferential prime cognizer, and we’ll go into it later and explain it more thoroughly, but this is just to give you a taste of what it’s about. So another simple example is that you’re talking with someone and all of once he gets very red in the face, his face becomes very red. And you can take that as a sign and dependence upon that sign you can come to the inferential understanding, Uh-oh, he’s getting angry. And you can actually have a prime cognizer inference a prime cognizer that this person is getting angry by the reason that he’s getting red in the face.
For example, in this situation where I was talking with someone and they start getting very red in the face in dependence upon that reason, their redness in their face, we develop fear. Now the fear arises from our having developed an inferential cognizer that this person is getting angry, taking as our reason their redness of their face. And another simple example is that we see someone, we’re talking with someone and they begin to cry. And in dependence upon that we become sad. This sadness that arises in this is we develop an inferential prime cognizer, in dependence upon the sign or the reason, or more properly the sign, the tears coming from their eye.
In dependence upon that, we take that as a sign and we develop sadness ourselves simply in dependence upon that sign of the tears. So, when we’re wondering about something and in dependence upon a reason, can come to a realization or a comprehension and that that cognizer is an inferential prime cognizer, an inferential cognizer. So these two prime cognizers, direct prime cognizer and inferential prime cognizer, they don’t exist outside of persons. They exist within people themselves. Now, we don’t have to know what, that is to say, these arise in our own minds, in people.
You know, we are constantly giving rise to direct prime cognizers and inferential prime cognizers even though we don’t know what a direct prime cognizer and an inferential prime cognizer are. We don’t have to know what they are in order for them to actually develop within our mind. Just as a small child, if he doesn’t he has a nose, but if he’s never told what a nose is, he may not know its name, but still he has a nose. So all of the excellent qualities, the beneficial qualities arise in dependence upon these two prime cognizers, the direct prime cognizer and inferential prime cognizer. Therefore, understanding this, then we should appreciate the study of how these two prime cognizers actually develop, how they operate since all our good qualities, all our beneficial qualities arise in dependence upon them.
So you should think well about this about the prime cognizers. And we’ll set aside a part of each evening for questions and answers. That way we can clear up any doubts you might have about the subject. So within this definition of prime cognizer, there was new and then incontrovertible. It’s difficult to understand the meaning of incontrovertible.
So there are many objects to which this term incontrovertible is applied to. For example, Buddha is referred to as incontrovertible and also his speech. But here, in discussion of prime cognizer, when we refer to incontrovertible, we mean that the object is realized exactly as exists. When we refer to the Buddha as being incontrovertible, we mean that he’s not mistaken in his teachings with respect to what is to be abandoned and what is to be practiced. Also this term incontrovertible is applied to the law of cause and effect from the point of view that in dependence upon skillful causes, happiness only arises.
Unhappiness does not arise. And from destructive causes, only the result of unhappiness arises. Happiness never arises. So from this point of view, it’s also incontrovertible. So the first division of awareness and knowledge is into a division by way of seven.
A division of seven. And the first of these seven is direct perceiver, direct perceivers. So when we say direct perceiver, we mean that whatever the object is, it appears exactly Whatever is the nature of the object appears exactly as it exists. This is what we mean by direct perceiver. To the perceiver, whatever is the nature of that object appears exactly the way it exists.
Whereas on the other hand, with an inferential prime cognizer, the nature of the object does not appear directly, but we have to understand the object in dependence upon a reason. So we’re going through these seven types of awarenesses, consciousnesses. So the first was direct perceiver, then inferential cognizer, and the third is subsequent cognition. Subsequent cognition is the cognizer which arises subsequent to the initial prime cognizer. That is when the prime cognition, the initial, the first cognizer has faded.
The second moment of knowing that object is referred to as a subsequent cognizer, a subsequent cognition. Then the second the fourth is correct assumption. Correct assumption. Is a knower, we’re just giving rough meanings here. We’ll go into these later in more detail.
A knower which examines an object thoroughly and without relying upon either experience or reasoning thinks, oh, it is this way, and develops a conviction with regard to its understanding. This is very rough, okay. It is a conviction arising upon thoroughly examining an object without depending upon either experience or reasoning and coming to the thinking that, Oh, it’s this way, is the correct assumption. It does not realize its object. It not comprehend its object.
Then the fifth consciousness is appearance without ascertainment. Appearance without ascertainment. And this is the case where an object appears to the consciousness, but the consciousness does not ascertain the nature of the object. A particular object appears to the mind, but that mind does not ascertain, does not comprehend the nature of that object. And the sixth is doubt.