Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. A burning incense stick whirled in the dark, appearing as a complete ring of fire — one of four vivid examples Khensur Rinpoche uses in this 51-minute talk to classify the causes of perceptual error. He completes the prior session’s analysis of non-conceptual mistaken consciousness: errors rooted in the sense faculty (cataracts producing two moons), in the environment (a moving car making trees seem to move), in the object itself (the spinning incense), and in a preceding mental state (rage turning everything red). Rinpoche then opens the topic of inferential cognition with a threefold classification of phenomena — obvious, slightly hidden, and extremely hidden — explaining what each requires: direct perception, reasoned inference, or reliance on the Buddha’s verified speech. Part of a longer series on Buddhist epistemology, this session rewards listeners already familiar with the framework’s basic terms.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 09 AK 1988-10-27.mp3
UUID: e7894601-e935-412b-9c03-63f5340924ae
Teacher: Khensur Rinpoche
Collection: Awareness and Knowledge 1988-1989 (Khensur Rinpoche)
Date: 1988-10-27
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 51.6 minutes
Words: ~2,638
Sir. The last session we were discussing the facsimiles of a direct cognizer. And there were six conceptual and one non conceptual direct cognizer, facsimiles of direct cognizers. Therefore, tonight, we finished the first, the six conceptual direct cognizers. And tonight we’ll begin the session with a discussion of the non conceptual direct facsimile of a direct cognizer.
So when we talk about a conceptual consciousness, we’re talking about a thought consciousness. And the meaning of a conceptual consciousness is a determinative knower, which apprehends the suitability to associate a meaning generality and a verbal generality. A determinative knower which apprehends the suitability to associate a meaning generality and a term generality. Term generality rather than verbal. Term generality.
So, with respect to the object of a conceptual consciousness, that is a thought consciousness, there are three types of objects. There’s the appearing object. There’s appearing object, the object of apprehension, and the permanent object. The permanent phenomenon. These are, all these three are mutually inclusive.
That is to say, they’re, a word similar is synonymous, but it’s, the word synonymous is not quite right, but mutually inclusive is what I would like to say. Then there we can talk about a further three objects of of conception. Further three objects of conception. There is the determinative object, the determinative object, the object of engagement, the object of engagement, and the object of the mode of apprehension, the object of the mode of apprehension. So these three, again, are mutually inclusive, Or in some respects synonymous, mutually inclusive.
For example, the conception apprehending the flower. The conception apprehending the flower. Its determinative object is the flower. Its object of engagement is the flower. And its object, which is the mode of apprehension, is the flower.
So that’s therefore, we call this mutually these three are mutually inclusive. Then with respect to the the conception apprehending the flower, what is the appearing object? The appearing object is the appearance of the appearance of flower. The appearance of the appearance of a flower. The appearing object is that there appears the appearance of a flower.
There appears the appearance of a flower. So the appearance of the appearance of a flower is the appearing is the appearing object. And this is also the apprehended object. And it is also a permanent phenomena. Because the appearance, the, this appearance of an appear, the appearing of an appearance of a flower is not a flower.
It’s merely the appearance of a flower. It’s a permanent phenomenon. It’s a factor which is not a flower but appears to be a flower. It’s the appearance of a flower that’s not actually a flower. It’s a permanent phenomenon.
So, with respect to conceptual consciousness, there are factually concordant and factually non concordant. That is conceptual consciousness which are correct and those which are wrong consciousnesses. Conceptual consciousness. Factually concordant and factually non concordant. Non concordant.
For example, you know, thinking, oh, that’s a that’s a nice flower. But thinking, oh, that’s a nice flower. This is, you know, the the flowers are nice, so we can say that this is a factually concordant conceptual consciousness. Conceptual conscious thinking that the flower is impermanent. The concept apprehending the flower is impermanent.
The flower is in fact impermanent, therefore this is a factually concordant consciousness. But if we were to conceive of the flower as being permanent, since the flower is not actually permanent, it’s impermanent, the conceptual consciousness apprehending the flower as permanent would be a wrong consciousness. It would be a non factually discordant or a non concordant consciousness. So such a type of consciousness as the conceptual consciousness thinking that the flower is impermanent, are such types of consciousness are to be developed. Whereas the wrong types of consciousness, such as consciousness, thought consciousness, thinking that the flower is permanent, these are eventually to be eliminated.
So, what is the essential difference between a conceptual consciousness and a non conceptual consciousness? And we said that conceptual consciousness is those types which apprehend the suitability to associate meaning generalities and term generalities. And so the non conceptual consciousness would be the consciousness which apprehend the non suitability. So a non conceptual consciousness would be one that does not apprehend the suitability to associate meaning generalities and term generalities. There’s not, would be a consciousness which does not apprehend the suitability.
And just as if there were concordant and discordant, factually concordant and discordant conceptual consciousness, there are factually concordant and discordant non conceptual consciousnesses. Consciousness which apprehends the flower is a factually concordant non conceptual consciousness. So we’re now we’re going to discuss this last of these facsimiles of a direct perceiver. That is the non conceptual facsimile of a direct perceiver. So, you know, as we said, was, there was this, there was one one type of non conceptual facsimile of a direct perceiver, and these can be divided up into four.
Okay. Okay. So when we talk about this non conceptual facsimile of a direct perceiver, we’re talking about a mistake in consciousness. There are four ways, four different causes for this mistaken consciousnesses. So we’re talking about the type of mistake, the types of causes which bring about these mistaken consciousnesses.
So there are four as to respect to the different types of causes bringing about these mistaken consciousnesses. So, these mistaken causes, in other words. The causes which bring about these mistaken consciousnesses. Now the first is that the cause existing within the base. Existing within the base.
Existing within the basis. The cause existing within the basis. The cause of error existing within the basis. Yeah. The cause of mistake existing within the basis.
The second is the cause of the error or mistake existing within the place. Existing within the place. The third is the cause of error existing within the object, existing within the object. And the fourth is the cause of error existing within the immediately preceding condition, within the immediately preceding condition. So examples of the cause of the error existing with or abiding in the basis are for example, someone with, I think it’s cataracts or something like that.
Some defect of the cornea where they see two moons, where there’s only one moon. Or someone who has jaundice and they see, they look at a white piece of paper and they see that it’s yellow. So these are cases of the cause of error existing within the basis. So, even though there’s only one moon, two moons appear. And this is because there’s a fault within the eye sense faculty.
And this is the basis. There’s a fault in in the The cause of the error exists within the basis. And here the the basis is the eye sense faculty. So there’s a fault in the eye sense faculty. Then the second is the cause of error existing in a place.
An example of this would be when we’re riding in a car and it appears that the trees are moving. Even though it’s us who are moving, it appears to our eye consciousness that the trees are moving. The trees aren’t actually moving. It’s us who are moving. This is said, this appearance to the eye consciousness of the trees moving is an example of a cause of error abiding in the place, existing within, at the place.
So the third was the cause of error abiding within the object. An example of this would be the, the, the, the. Oh, okay. That would be the example of, you know, if you took a stick of incense and you burned the end of it and it was dark and you whirled it around very quickly, to the eye consciousness it would look like a complete circle. It would look like a complete circle of glowing fire.
Whereas in fact, complete circle of glowing fire, the complete circle of fire doesn’t exist. So there’s the, due to its whirling very quickly, the cause of error is said to appear as a complete circle, is mistaken as to it being a complete circle, and that the cause of this error exists within the object itself. That is this whirling, glowing incense. Then the fourth is the cause of error residing, abiding, existing within the immediately preceding condition. An example of this would be that when someone gets extremely angry, really angry, that this will act as a condition or a cause due to which they will, their eye consciousness will see red, where actually red doesn’t exist.
They’ll see everything as being red. So, this anger acts as the immediately preceding condition, bringing about the, acting as a cause of error for this mistaken eye consciousness seeing red. Therefore, it’s said that the cause of error abides in the immediately preceding condition. So all these are, these four non conceptual mistaken consciousnesses. They’re wrong consciousnesses and these are the types of consciousness which serve no use to us.
They actually have no good qualities about them. So the previous types of consciousness that we’ve spoken of, for example, the sense direct perceivers, mental direct perceivers, yogic direct perceivers. These are types of consciousness which are to be cultivated and which are developed. Whereas these facsimiles of direct perceivers, whether conceptual or non conceptual are types of conscious which we are eventually seeking to abandon completely. By studying the mind, that is in this case knowledge, awareness and knowledge, we can begin to understand what types of consciousness are wrong consciousness, what types of consciousness are correct, what types should be cultivated, and what types are to be rejected.
So, we had an overall division of these seven types of consciousnesses into prime cognizers and non prime cognizers. And prime cognizers was further divided into direct prime cognizers, inferential prime cognizers. So we’ve completed direct prime cognizers. Now we’re going to begin discussion of inferential prime cognizers. So direct prime cognizers and inferential prime cognizers are cause and effect.
In dependence upon developing direct prime cognizers, we go on to develop inferential prime cognizers. So these both direct and inferential prime cognizers are correct, are correct consciousnesses. They’re not in any way wrong. So, you know, if we talk about phenomena in general, we can talk about three types of phenomena, which are the objects of these of direct prime cognizers and inferential prime cognizers. So, in general, we can talk about all phenomena being classified into three types.
The first type is from the point of view of ordinary people. The first type is called the manifest, manifest phenomena. Sometimes, I think maybe obvious phenomena, manifest phenomena. Manifest or obvious phenomena. This is the type of objects which we can see quite readily with our eye, with our sense faculties, for example.
And just looking around at all the various objects, things that we don’t need to think about in order to realize them, in order to understand them. We can just, they’re very obvious to us. We can see them with our sense faculties. Then the second type are called slightly hidden phenomena. Slightly hidden phenomena.
So for these are types of phenomena for which for an ordinary being, he has to think about. He has to, in order to realize them, in order to understand them, he has to, for she, has to depend upon a correct sign or a correct reason. Has to think about them using reasoning. Depending upon a correct reason, then they can understand a slightly hidden phenomena, an ordinary person. Then there’s a third type of phenomena which is, so that was slightly hidden.
There’s a third type of phenomena which is called extremely hidden phenomena, extremely hidden phenomena, or very hidden phenomena. And these are types of phenomena which in order to understand, to realize, we have to rely on a scriptural reference from the teachings of the Buddha. In reliance upon these on a scriptural reference, then we can come to realize an extremely hidden phenomenon. So all the various types of variety of phenomena which we can readily realize, understand without relying on any types of reasoning, without thinking about the objects. Can we can merely look at the flower and we see the flower.
We understand the flower. We don’t have to actually think about the flower to understand it. We don’t have to use any reasoning, any signs in order to understand the flower. So all these things, the vase, the paper, the house, stones, but these are all examples of obvious phenomena. This is the type of called obvious or manifest phenomena.
I use the word So such types of phenomena can be realized by a direct perceiver, a direct prime cognizer, a direct prime cognizer. So in order to realize these phenomena, we don’t have to make use of an inferential prime cognizer. We don’t need an inferential prime cognizer. And on the other hand, in order to understand such phenomena as the impermanence of the flower or that the, the, selflessness of the flower or just in general such phenomena as liberation, the existence of liberation, or realize the four noble truths, the truth of suffering, true origins, to understand, to realize past and future lives. It’s necessary to rely on reasoning.
It’s necessary to depend on thinking. We have to present in dependence upon a sign, a reason. We can understand these. Therefore, these are called slightly hidden phenomena. Also, you know, the Three Jewels, three supreme rarities, Buddha, Dharma and Sangha jewels.
Order to realize those, it’s necessary to rely on reasoning, on a reason or its sign. Therefore, they’re called slightly hidden phenomena. Then the third type of phenomena that is extremely hidden phenomena. These are phenomena which are extremely difficult to understand. For example, an example of an extremely hidden phenomenon would be that when the Buddha said that in dependence upon generosity, one attains resources or or wealth, we can say.
And in dependence upon ethics, one attains a happy migration. Such phenomena, that is to say, in dependence upon ethics, example, you attain a happy migration. In order to realize that is, that is a extremely hidden phenomena. That relationship is an extremely hidden phenomena. So, you know, we say that, for example, through generosity, through giving, you know, that is non miserliness.
Giving such things as food, money, etcetera. And dependence upon those in the future, we’re going to get back various resources. We’re going to get various objects of use, resources, wealth. We cannot use just any type of sign or in dependence upon any type of reasoning in order to come to understand it. We have to actually rely on the quotation by the Buddha.
The actual speech of the Buddha, which is said to be incontrovertible. And reliance upon conviction in the in in the incontrovertible quality of the Buddha’s speech, then we can come to realize an extremely hidden phenomena. So another example is, for example, the practice of ethics whereby we abandon the ten non virtues. The Buddha said that by abandoning ten non virtues in a future life that you will take rebirth as a human or God. That is you will take rebirth in happy migration.
We can only come to actually realize that in dependence upon having conviction in the inter, in controvertible quality of the Buddhist speech. And, but even this, these words, this, this scriptural quotation, which is made use of, is, must be, must be a pure scriptural quotation purified by the three analyses. Let me do that again. It’s a scriptural, it’s established as a pure scriptural quotation because it’s able to bear a threefold analysis. It is a pure scriptural quotation because it’s able to bear a threefold analysis.