Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 53-minute talk, Khensur Rinpoche completes the taxonomy of direct perceivers by presenting yogic direct perceivers as the culminating type — a non-conceptual cognition produced from the union of calm abiding and special insight, capable of realizing subtle impermanence and selflessness and of eliminating all afflictive emotions. He then introduces facsimile direct perceivers, walking through six conceptual varieties identified by Dharmakīrti: mistaken conception (grasping the rose, or oneself, as permanent), conventional consciousness, inferential conception, conception from inference, memory, and wishing. A closing Q&A turns on a student’s question about whether the object or the consciousness is the illusion; Rinpoche answers through the time-gap between cause and effect, illustrating with smoke and fire and the eye consciousness perceiving a flower. Suited to students following the series from the beginning.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 08 AK 1988-10-20.mp3
UUID: 633e96fe-5420-4975-90b2-b5a994bfca4d
Teacher: Khensur Rinpoche
Collection: Awareness and Knowledge 1988-1989 (Khensur Rinpoche)
Date: 1988-10-20
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 53.2 minutes
Words: ~1,992
So this, you know, we have to make, try to develop this yogic direct perceiver in our own minds, in our own continuums. And to the to go about doing this, we first we have to develop a union of calm abiding and special insight, Vipassana. But before we can develop Vipassana, we must develop calm abiding. Before we develop calm abiding, then we must go to the extensive text explaining, example, the four noble truths as set forth by the Buddha at Varanasi where the various truths such as the true sufferings, true causes, true cessations, and true paths, In dependence upon the wisdom arising from hearing and the wisdom arising from reflecting, then we will eventually develop calm abiding and then go on to develop special insight, then we unite these two and we develop a yogic direct perceiver. So it’s a yogic direct perceiver is a non conceptual, non mistaken, exalted knower in the continuum of a superior that is produced from a meditative stabilization, that is produced from a meditative stabilization which is a union of calm abiding and special insight which has become its own uncommon empowering condition.
It is a non conceptual, non mistaken exalted knower in the continuum of a superior that is produced from a meditative stabilization, which is a union of calm abiding and special insight and which has become its own uncommon empowering condition. So if we were to divide it by way of its entity, yogic direct perceivers, There are yogi direct perceivers which are prime cognizers and which are subsequent cognizers. There are no yogi direct perceivers to which an object appears and is not ascertained. So yogi, Dharmakīrti says about yogic direct perceivers that because of their great intelligence, what, whatever they see is ascertained. Therefore, is no yogic direct perceiver with which an object appears and is not ascertained.
So if we were to posit by way of the types of beings in which such a direct perceiver exists, there are the hearer superiors, solitary realizer superiors, and bodhisattva superiors. That is the the three the practitioners of the three vehicles, the superiors of the three vehicles. So what are the objects of realization of a yogic direct perceiver? For example, a yogic direct perceiver, realizes subtle impermanence. It realizes the subtle, the coarse and subtle selflessness of persons and the coarse and subtle selflessness of phenomena.
So because of its qualities and its strength, if we habituate our minds, let us say if we meditate, cultivate a yogic direct perceiver, then we can eliminate all the afflictive emotions, such as, anger, hatred, attachment, etcetera, by the power of such a yogic direct perceiver. So through its power, we can abandon, we can rid ourselves of all suffering and attain the states of, liberation of, superiors of Buddhas. So we’ve gone through the direct perceivers, that is sense direct perceivers, mental direct perceivers, self knowing direct perceivers and yogic direct perceivers. So these four can be divided between the two sense consciousnesses and mental consciousness. Mental direct perceiver, self knowing direct perceiver, and yogic direct perceiver are all these three are mental consciousnesses.
Are mental consciousnesses. Sense direct perceivers are sense consciousnesses. So, we’ve explained that direct perceivers are non mistaken consciousnesses. This is true from the point of view of the Sūtra School. For the mind only school and the middle way school, a direct perceiver is not necessarily non mistaken.
So in the Mind Only school and the middle way school, for example taking the eye consciousness, it it is a direct perceiver, but it is mistaken. Therefore, direct perceiver and mistaken consciousness for the Mind Only school and the middle way school are not mutually exclusive. But for all of these schools, direct perceiver must be free of conceptuality. This is true for all of the schools. So this, what we’ve talked about thus far are fully qualified qualified direct perceivers.
Now there is a type of direct perceiver which is called a facsimile of a direct perceiver. It is not a fully qualified direct perceiver. It’s like a direct perceiver, but it’s not fully qualified direct perceiver. So a facsimile of a direct perceiver is one to which, is one which is mistaken with respect to its appearing object. It’s not an actual direct perceiver, not a fully qualified direct perceiver.
It is mistaken. It’s mistaken with respect to its appearing object. So according to Dharmakīrti, there are six types of conceptual facsimiles of direct perceivers, conceptual, and there is one type of non conceptual. Six types of conceptual and one type non conceptual. So the first is mistaken conception.
Mistaken conception. So an example of a mistaken conception is though the rose is actually impermanent, that is to say it’s arising and disintegrating momentarily, a conception which which, apprehends the rose as being permanent. A conception which apprehends the the rose as permanent is a wrong consciousness. It’s mistaken concept. It’s a mistaken conception.
All the various phenomena in this room are impermanent. If we were to think, oh, these things aren’t impermanent, they’re they’re really permanent. This type of, you know, it would be an inverted type of consciousness. These would all be mistaken con conceptions. So, you know, we’re we’re all impermanent, but, you know, we think we think of ourselves as we don’t think of ourselves as being impermanent, but in fact as permanent in a sense that we think of ourselves that I’m the same person that I was this morning and I will be and we apprehend we grasp to ourselves as being the same person that we will be tomorrow that this we grasp to this permanency as to what we were this morning, now, and we will be tomorrow.
This is a mistaken consciousness, mistaken conception. So the second is a conventional consciousness, a conventional consciousness. This would be for example, the inferential prime cognizer apprehending the impermanence of the rose. An inferential prime cognizer apprehending the impermanence of the rose. So this prime cognizer, this, inferential prime cognizer apprehending the the impermanence of the rose.
It is a, why is it, a conventional consciousness? It is, it is not able to apprehend the complete character of the rose. It is not able to apprehend the specifically characterized rose that is all its various qualities. What it the this inference apprehends a mixture of the rose and a generic, a meaning generality or a, generic image, mental image of the rose. It mixes together its a mental, its idea, a mental image, meaning generality of the rose with the rose itself.
Therefore, this prevents it from knowing all the complete details, all the character of the rose. Therefore, it’s called a conventional consciousness. So the, the next is inferential conception. Inferential conception. This would be for the the realizer, the the conception realizing the impermanence of sound, which is generated in dependence upon realizing that sound is a product and whatever is a product is impermanent.
And from this taking as its cause, generating inference that sound is impermanent. So it’s a it’s a real a realizer of that sound is impermanent, has as its cause. The due to due to the reasons that sound is a product and anything which is a product is impermanent. It is an inferential conception. So the the fourth is it the fourth?
One, two. The fourth is a conception arising from inference. Conception conception arising from inference. This would simply be the second moment of an inference realizing the impermanence of sound. The second moment, that is the subsequent cognizer of an inference, is a conception arising from inference.
And then the fifth is memory So memory is simply, you know, what what has, recalling that which has occurred in the past. And you know, that you can, think back to various activities. You went to school, you studied this, you played these games, and you’re able to recall those. This is simply a memory conception. And the sixth is wishing conception.
Wishing conception. And these are conceptions relating to the future. You know, thinking, about intention to be happy in the future, wishing to be happy, become an expert, wishing to, become a great meditator, and finally wishing to become, having the intention to become a Buddha. These are all wishing conceptions. Something some intention or directing one’s thoughts towards something to happen in the future.
So we, you know, we can know So we all we all know these quite readily, you know, they for example, thinking about what happened in the past, the various events, the various activities that we did in the past, memory conception and wishing conception with the intention to let something come about in the future wishing for something in the future thinking directing one’s thoughts about some future event some these wishing conceptions. So that that’s the six conceptual facsimiles of direct perceivers. And the non conceptual one, we’ll hold off, till later. So we just have a little bit of time left to have some questions. We have some questions.
So which is the illusion? The object or the consciousness? The object is the illusion because of this time difference. The object is the illusion because of the time difference. The object is the perceived object.
Perceived object. So So in general, whenever at the time of the of the effect, the cause is nonexistent. This is generally true. For example, when when we perceive smoke, the fire has has already ceased. That the the fire which was the cause of that smoke has already ceased.
But we, in general, we can infer the existence of fire from its effect, that is smoke. If we take the example of an eye consciousness perceiving a flower, you know, the flower acts as the observed objective condition. That is, it is the cause giving rise to an effect that is the eye consciousness perceiving the flower. Now, at the time, therefore we can say that the eye consciousness perceives the flower it’s quite valid. Even though at the time of the arising of the eye consciousness perceiving the flower, the objective observed objective condition which was the cause of that eye consciousness is nonexistent.
Another moment of the of the flower has come into existence. That that, observed object condition has ceased to exist. But it’s still it’s it’s still a valid cognition. There’s no there’s no reason why we can’t say it’s a prime cognition of that particular moment which acted as its cause. Can you condense what you just said?
Give me the essence of There are no mind moments. Is that what you’re essentially saying? There are no mind moments? There’s there’s not there’s no such thing as one single mind moment. So, you know, for example, we can have a continuum of of an eye consciousness perceiving a flower.
Now there were the there is a first moment to that continuum. That is one, that is a, that is one moment of an eye consciousness. So we’ve, you know, we’ve talked about the fact that the first moment of an eye consciousness is a prime cognizer. And then the second moment and then on moments after that are subsequent cognizers. So everything has parts.
For example, the physical matter has directional parts, nor North Northern direction, Southern direction, etcetera. The consciousness doesn’t have does not have directional parts, but it has temporal parts. That is it has previous and later moments. So the the the present moment is that which comes between the the the previous and the and the future moments. It’s the present moment.
So does Buddhist consciousness exist in the present moment? So our our consciousness is present, Buddhist consciousness is present. The future present moment. The future present moment. I don’t know if I could translate that.
Maybe we’ll come back to that later.