Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Khensur Rinpoche opens this 55-minute session with a striking image: the unguarded mind resembles a crazy elephant — a runaway body can end only one life, but an uncontrolled mind generates suffering across many lifetimes. He then works through Buddhist epistemology of perception, distinguishing three types of sense consciousness: the prime direct cognizer (the very first moment of contact with an object), the subsequent cognizer (every moment after), and appearances without ascertainment (when attention is absorbed elsewhere and the object goes unrecognized). He explains the three conditions required for any consciousness to arise — observed object, empowering faculty, and immediately preceding consciousness — illustrated by seeing a Buddha image and hearing the word “Buddha.” A closing Q&A includes a student’s candid question about why such technical terms are needed rather than simpler words like “remember,” prompting Rinpoche to clarify that subsequent cognizers can be non-conceptual whereas memories cannot. Suited to students with some exposure to Buddhist philosophy of mind.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 06 AK 1988-10-13.mp3
UUID: b1723b1f-74e2-4201-a630-de136d7fbc05
Teacher: Khensur Rinpoche
Collection: Awareness and Knowledge 1988-1989 (Khensur Rinpoche)
Date: 1988-10-13
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 55.7 minutes
Words: ~2,601
So with respect to all these various sense consciousness, there are negative states of sense consciousness, positive states of the sense consciousnesses, and neutral states of the sense consciousness. For example, if we would look at the image of a Buddha, the eye consciousness would be generated in a positive state. If we were to look at someone and in dependence upon that, we develop aversion, that we see this person as an enemy, then the eye consciousness would be in a negative state. On the other hand, if we just, the various objects that we see in which we remain indifferent, then the eye consciousness remains in a neutral state. So one way we can begin to reduce attachment and anger in our lives is by examining our mind and coming to understand what objects arouse anger, what objects arouse attachment.
And when we come in contact with these, when we see that these objects are coming into our awareness, then we simply do not look at them. We do not pay attention to them. So it’s difficult for us to come to understand our mind. We can’t see our mind, we can’t grab hold of it with our hand, for example. So we have to actually reflect upon its nature and we have to examine it.
And in the course of our day, have to begin to analyze, you know, what is it up to? What’s it doing? What state is it in? What direction is it going to? Is it going in a constructive direction or is it going into a destructive direction?
That is to say we have to begin to guard our mind. If we allow it to go in any direction it wishes, and if it goes toward the direction of attachment or anger, then this is going to bring us only unhappiness. But on the other hand, if we begin to control our mind and maintain it and guard it, then in a positive state, in constructive state, we’re going to experience happiness. So it said that the mind is just like a crazy elephant. A crazy elephant, it can only destroy our body.
And that’s the worst it can do. It can only cause us to lose this life. But the mind can, through the development of the various afflictive emotions, can cause us not only suffering in this life, but also in future lives. Is the mind which is able to bring about the various extremely negative states in future lives. So yeah.
So with respect to eye sense consciousness, for example, there are the eye prime direct perceivers. There are three types. Eye prime direct perceivers. With respect to eye sense consciousness, there are direct perceivers, subsequent cognizers, and the appearances of which there is no ascertainment. Consciousness to which there are appearances, but no ascertainment.
So there are these three types of eye sense consciousnesses. Eye sense consciousness, there are three. There are direct perceiver, subsequent cognizers, and those to which an object appears and is not ascertained. So when we say the the eye sense consciousness, was a prime direct cognizer. A prime direct cognizer.
I might have confused you. I said there were three. I said direct perceiver. So, if we say a prime direct perceiver, or prime direct cognizer. Okay.
Eye consciousness, is a prime direct perceiver. A prime direct perceiver. A prime direct cognizer, I call it. Prime direct cognizer. That’s the first.
I just, I said direct perceiver. I’m refining that and saying, prime direct cognizer. An example would be someone who just came to Buddha House for the first time, and having never been here before, and the very first moment that they saw this image of Buddha, the eye consciousness which arose, that very first moment of eye consciousness would be an eye sense prime direct cognizer. That very first moment of seeing the image of Buddha. So then, as he continues to see the image, you know, whether after that very first moment of having seen it, the subsequent time that he sees the image, whether it’s fifteen minutes or half an hour, those are eye consciousness which are subsequent cognitions.
So just any time after that first moment in this continuity of seeing the image, these moments of eye consciousness are subsequent cognitions. It’s called subsequent cognition because having first, after the first moment, then all the following moments, whether it’s the second moment, following in the continuity of seeing the image, are subsequent to this first moment. Therefore, they’re called subsequent cognitions. Then the third type was, I sense consciousness to which an object appears and is not ascertained. This would be, for example, having once, you know, the person has seen the image of the Buddha.
And while he’s still looking in that direction, but he’s listening very intently to the teaching at the words which are being said, his mind is completely involved in listening to the teaching. And though the image of the Buddha is still appearing to his eye consciousness, it is not ascertained. It is not realized. Therefore, this would be an eye consciousness which to which an object appears, but is not ascertained. So these are, you know, this occurs quite often in various types of consciousness where objects appear to us, but we don’t understand them, we don’t realize them.
So all the various five sense consciousness that we’ve discussed, these three divisions can be applied to the, for example, the ear sense consciousness. We can apply the ear prime direct cognizer, the subsequent cognizer, the appearance but non ascertainment. And this would go also to the nose, the tongue, the body. For example, with regard to the ear sense consciousness, someone who hadn’t come to a teaching before, the very first moment that they listened to the teaching, that ear consciousness which arises is that very first moment of the ear conscious directly perceiving the sound of the teaching is a ear prime direct cognizer. Then subsequent to that, the various moments will be the subsequent cognizers.
And then the sound of the teaching is appearing to his ear consciousness, but he’s looking at a beautiful girl sitting next to him, for example. He’s very involved in that person. And though the sound is arising and it’s appearing to his consciousness, he’s not ascertaining it. This would be a, to the object to which there is appearance but no ascertainment. So for a, for a conscious, consciousness to arise, there must be an aggregation of three conditions.
There must be a coming together of three conditions. And if we take, as an example, the eye consciousness which sees the flower. The eye consciousness which sees the flower. There must be three conditions present for it to actually be generated. There must be the observed object condition, the observed object condition.
There must be the empowering condition, And there must be the immediately preceding condition, the immediately preceding condition. With regard to this example of the eye consciousness perceiving the flower, The observed object condition is the flower itself. The empowering condition is the eye sense power. The eye sense power. And the immediately preceding condition is the consciousness which was just prior, the consciousness which just preceded the arising of this eye consciousness perceiving the flower.
So when these three conditions aggregate, an eye consciousness perceiving a flower is generated, is developed. So these three conditions apply to all five of sense consciousnesses. The aggregation of the observed object condition, the empowering condition, and the immediately preceding condition, all apply likewise. So we have fifteen minutes remaining, in which we would like to know if you have any answers. If have any questions, if you have any questions or doubts that you want to raise by raising, by raising answer, raising doubts and questions, you come to understand the subject much better.
If you have some, yes. If we take another example, the eye consciousness which apprehends gold. The eye consciousness which apprehends gold. And this rises upon the aggregation of three conditions. If we take the, that we’re going to look at the image of the Buddha.
The object condition, the observed object condition is gold of the image of the Buddha. The empowering condition is the eye sense faculty. And the immediately preceding condition is the knower or the consciousness, the awareness, which immediately preceded this arising of this eye sense consciousness apprehending gold. So upon the aggregation, the coming together of these three conditions, there arises this specific eye sense consciousness perceiving gold, apprehending gold. I say the word Buddha.
And then ear consciousness understands something. It understands the sound Buddha. And this ear consciousness perceiving the sound Buddha arose in dependence upon three conditions. The three conditions were the sound Buddha, the actual sound, Buddha. The empowering condition, that is the ear sense faculty.
And the immediately preceding consciousness prior to the arising of ear consciousness. When they come together, then there’s the ear consciousness which apprehends the sound Buddha. Yeah. So this is a good, what do you say, qualm to present. If you generate attachment or aversion to that object, this is creating a negative state of mind.
But if you could look at that object and not generate them and use it as an object of mind training, then this is, of course, is best. Why the difference between a prime cognizer and a subsequent cognizer. So in the case of prime cognizer, when we discussed the etymology, we said the term, it comes from pramāna. And pra means first or new. And that means the very first time that we realize the object is a prime cognizer.
Whereas with regard to subsequent cognizer, we’re realizing something which has already been realized, It’s no longer a new or the first moment of cognizing the object. We’re realizing something which we’ve already realized. So it’s past the first moment. So if we investigate the etymology of the word subsequent cognizer, by subsequent we mean that we’re, by subsequent cognizer, we’re going to cognize something again, which is through the power of a previous prime cognition. We’re going to, we’re going to cognize, we’re going to realize, we’re going to realize an object, not newly, but through the power of having realized it previously.
It’s subsequent We realize an object again through the power of having realized it previously. Yeah. This material is quite new to me, but so I just have a few doubts as to why are such complicated terminologies used for some very, very simple things. Like, you know, when you say subsequent co cognition, for me it would be easy to say, I remember. I remembered it.
Know? I knew it from before. And I’m just wondering what is the usefulness of these quite complicated terms? And I’m taking just us from a complete unknowing point of view. So we’ll take that as an example, okay?
Subsequent cognizer and memory, what is the difference? Yeah, you know how they’re such complicated terms for some very simple things. So if we take, applying to this one specific example that you brought up, a memory is always a conceptual consciousness, whereas a subsequent cognition doesn’t necessarily have to be a conceptual consciousness. So our words say recognize, in fact, is closer because we recognize something that we always see. But that also can be conceptual.
I mean, recognize, recognize, recognize. Yeah, recognize, subsequent cognize. Recognize. Yeah, you could recognize. I I accept it all if it’s useful, know, sort of towards another end.
Know the language is technical. Yeah, yeah. It reminds me of trying to learn, you know, concepts through very complicated terminology. So in the case, you know, the one example that you brought up, memory, you know, when we say, oh, yesterday I did this, I did that. These are always conceptual consciousness, whereas subsequent cognizers can be both conceptual and non conceptual.
So there, there’s a difference. You wouldn’t be able to substitute one term for the other. Yeah, I know it’s difficult. You think it’s difficult for you? Yeah.
So depends upon the involvement in the object, not the deficiency of consciousness. We can have both an ear consciousness hearing an object and an eye consciousness seeing an object at the same time. But in the case of appearing with no ascertainment, for example, the eye consciousness is so involved in its object that, it no longer is realizing whatever is appearing to its eye consciousness. It’s because of its extreme involvement in one particular object, not because of any deficiency of consciousness. So it depends upon the degree of of intensity in which the mental consciousness becomes involved is induced to involvement in the object.
Because if we’re listening intently to a sound and the mental consciousness is drawn towards that sound, then it is drawn away from the eye consciousness, for example. In the case where we see a person, we’re looking very intently at a person, then the eye consciousness is drawn away from the ear consciousness and is drawn toward the, to the eye consciousness, and we no longer hear the sound that would appears to our ear consciousness, to that it appears to our that it appears to us. Dharmakīrti talks about this subject. He talks about when we are listening to a beautiful sound, to beautiful speech, then the mental consciousness is drawn toward that object, to this beautiful speech. And an object may appear to the eye, but it is not ascertained.
This is because there is a degeneration. We talked about the three conditions necessary for a consciousness to arise. The immediately preceding condition is not present. That is the consciousness just prior to the arise, or in this case of the eye consciousness, would not be present. Therefore, all three conditions necessary aren’t present, and an eye consciousness would not arise because the mental conscious has been drawn to be associated as the immediate preceding condition to listening to this beautiful sound.
It’s been drawn away and it can no longer act as act as a condition for generating an eye consciousness. And therefore, the eye consciousness does not arise. Yes. And then the last part of the question was? What was it one or is it many?
So, this idea was presented by the various non-Buddhist schools that there is only one consciousness and this consciousness is as if, you know, the giving, with the example that was given, a person residing in a room and he can look out the door, he can look out the various windows to the east west and perceive the various sights and sounds. Depending on which door looks out of. And so they said, well you know by the eye looking out the eye door or the ear door, it perceives all the very different sense objects. Well, this were actually so, if there were only one consciousness, then the eye consciousness, for example, should be able to smell odors. The eye consciousness should be able to taste taste since there’s only one consciousness.
So this is the type of reasoning which they use to establish that, in fact, there are many different types of consciousness, not just one consciousness. So for example, if you were to hold your nose, you should be able to smell whether this odor was pleasant or unpleasant. Can you do that? So whatever consciousness it was, it should be able to know all the various sense objects.