Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. “Nobody calls a newborn ‘Pamela’ at birth — grandmothers gather later, assign the name, and from that moment everyone grasps Pamela as if she existed by her own side all along.” In this 99-minute session, Khensur Rinpoche uses that image to anchor a comparison of how four Buddhist philosophical schools understand dependent arising — from things arising through causes and conditions up to the Prāsaṇgika conclusion that phenomena exist only by depending on name, thought, and a basis of labeling. He applies the same logic to the hand, the table, and the “I,” tracing how mistaking nominal existence for inherent existence drives saṃsāra. The session closes by unpacking the Heart Sūtra’s “no form, no sound” — these negate inherent existence, not the things themselves. Suited to practitioners already familiar with emptiness teachings.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 08 HS 2000 11 21.mp3
UUID: e053a98a-9082-4edc-a0e2-52f56c8a41b9
Teacher: Khensur Rinpoche
Collection: Heart Sūtra (Khensur Rinpoche)
Date: 2000-11-21
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 99.0 minutes
Words: ~4,331
And to develop here a special insight by wishing, taking all the responsibility of the motherly sentient beings, thinking that I shall take all the responsibility to bring responsibilities of bringing all this entire sentient beings out of the sufferings and bring them to the state of ultimate happiness. But that purpose, I shall practice and remove all the negativities and attain entire good quality. For that purpose I shall hear first listen to the teaching of essence teaching of Mahāyāna, the emptiness teaching and bring all the hearing into contemplation and meditation. And through this I will overcome from the disturbing emotions and perfect both the purposes of self and others and then then fulfill or help from the. We shall do a short meditation on this motivation.
Anyway, I’ll do my best now. Yeah, in the previous class, the last week’s class, we have set forth the logic or or sign to prove how the phenomena or the five aggregates and the I which was labeled with the five aggregates are selflessness or are not inherently existent. Here the great master Candrakīrti has set forth that there are four schools of tenets in the Buddhist philosophy and the four schools are the particularists or Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntika Sūtra schools, Mind Only school and the Cittamātra school, I’m sorry, the middle way school, Madhyamaka class. So among those, the lower schools assert that the phenomena or they assert there is inherent existence of the phenomena or a person because the reason to prove that is because the I, for example, the I is a dependent arising. Because it is dependent arising, it does exist inherently.
And because of that, because they assert that the I or the phenomena are inherent, assert that they are inherently existent, For that, because of that, by asserting that they type the cyclic existence or saṃsāra typically called the self-grasping attitude. And due to that, the circle and the cyclic existence are in saṃsāra. Whereas the Mādhyamika school and particularly the Prāsaṇgika or the consequentialist school assert that there is no inherent existence of the phenomena because all phenomena are interdependent. So which they prove that because they’re interdependent they don’t exist inherently or don’t exist in their own accord or in their own characteristic. So and because of that they are served in different way.
So now what it means here is that in the last previous class we have explained about how the I and which was labeled towards the five aggregates and the aggregates are not inherently existent or free of inherently existent because the logical proof was because they are interdependent. And so this is how whichever, whether broad, in all the Buddhist schools of tenets, they consider the logic of interdependent or dependent arising is very, very important here. So through the logic of dependent arising, we establish according to the consequentialist school which was set forth to be the utmost schools of the tenets. Dependent arising is the logical proof to logic to prove the I and the aggregates are free of inherent existence. As for the selflessness here, there are two types of selflessness.
The selflessness of the person and the selflessness of phenomena. And which are, in terms of selflessness, there are numbers of selflessness, but it has, there are two, it is divided into two main divisions called the selflessness of the person and the selflessness of phenomena. So selflessness of the person is that the I which was labeled to it, labeled to the five aggregates is the person. And because that I does not exist inherently or are free of inherent existence and so the I, the freedom from inherent existence of that I is the selflessness of the person and the lack of inherent existence of the phenomena of the five aggregates is called the selflessness of phenomena. So these are the two main selflessnesses.
And from the beginningless time, we are very used to the labeled eye which was labeled to a pile of aggregates and because of that holding which is called the grasping attitude of the eye and thinking I is important and which exists so and so. And due to this we cultivate the numbers of attachment, ignorance, anger because of that I. And due to this we accumulate numbers of action through attachment, anger and ignorance and as a result of those actions or karma we circle through the cyclic existence and undergoes through numbers of suffering and which also undergoes through numbers of suffering. So by through the logic of dependent arising we can overcome the root of the cyclic existence which is called the grasping attitude of the I or self. And through that logic we can overcome the disturbing emotions and disturbing emotion attachments and so forth and attain the state of liberation like Arhats, enlightenment, Bodhisattvas and so forth.
And also through the logic of interdependence we realize, we develop or we realize the selflessness of both the phenomena and the person. And last time. Okay. So and now in yeah. We have been explaining through how the bodhisattva with the lower faculty trains in the five paths of Mahāyāna.
And so bodhisattva with the lower faculty, during the path of accumulation they developed an understanding of emptiness through hearing the teaching on emptiness. And after and through and yeah by listening to the teaching of emptiness and through this they do what or they cultivate the wisdom through hearing or wisdom of hearing. And after this, then they cultivate the wisdom derived from concentration or contemplation. And that wisdom is being gained through training or through, gained by, through, gain the understanding of the emptiness or teaching of emptiness through analyzing through reason, which means by training through logic or through logical studies and establishing how things are empty or emptiness through logic or proofs. And the nature of emptiness or emptiness itself exists from the beginningless from the beginning or from the beginningless of the time.
But it is because it is very subtle, we are not able or we don’t understand or we are not able to realize that emptiness it is because we are being obscured by the delusions or disturbing emotions. So, to understand or realize or to realize or understand the emptiness by the ordinary being, How one should realize the emptiness is one should train, realize the emptiness through the logical approach or through analyzing on the subject or through the logical proofs, but from the statements of logical approach. Whenever one’s been able to refute object of negation, and then that is the time or whenever one realized or refuted the object of negation, one understands or one realized. So how to refute the object of negation through training in the logics is that for example like the eye which we have set forth in the earlier classes, which the eye labeled to five aggregates. And in terms, it does exist nominally in terms of nominal, the eye which exists, but we don’t, But because of our ignorance we exaggerate the mode of existence of the nominal I in opposite or in mistaken way and due to this we hold that grasping attitude of an I or self grasping attitude and as a result that self grasping attitude undergoes or or or or develops the attachment and so forth and we suffer.
So, and we exaggerate or overestimate that the eye, the existence of the eye to which the as we said here that I which labels towards the five aggregates does exist in terms of nominal or nominally it does exist but depending on the five aggregates. But we exaggerate on that I thinking or perceive that I which exists by its own without depending on others or five aggregates. And that is the mind which apprehends the existence of the I without depending on five aggregates is the mistaken one and it’s called the mistaken one. And the I which exists without depending on five aggregates is the one which is called object of negation and which we need to refute. So and so which is the which is the object of negation that the the the the the yeah, asserting the existence of the I without depending on the five aggregates is the object of negation.
And so we have to refute that object of negation through the logical, through logic by saying that I does not exist inherently because it is interdependent, because it is interdependent on others or it’s interdependent, their eye comes by depending on the five aggregates. For example, like by depending on the sound of I and the mind which labels that I towards the five aggregates the I has been produced without depending on those the I does not exist by its own. Therefore, because it is dependent arising or the I does not exist inherently. And through this logical approach, whenever one realizes that I does not exist inherently because it is interdependent, and everyone has the proper understanding through this logic, one realizes itself the lacking of inherent existence of the I. So the Buddha Śākyamūni has considered this the logic or the teaching of dependent arising is very, very important and very important because through the basis of the dependent arising he set forth the entire teachings of cause and effect, virtuous and non virtuous actions, liberation, the previous and the later rebirth, so forth.
So because of that, because everything is interdependent, the law of cause and effect and everything comes. If there is not logic or there is not the interdependent, then the law of cause and effect, virtuous and non-virtuous actions, previous and later lives do not exist as well. So therefore, the masters said for if one or you want to know emptiness should first train in the dependent arising. And as for the teaching of dependent arising arising or a dependent relationship, it’s set forth to be in three, the gross one, very subtle and very subtle one, the three. Yeah.
It has been set forth in the three the interdependent relation or dependent arising set forth, subtle, gross, subtle, and very subtle. It is because, example, like here the Tibetan word here ‘te’ which means meat and ‘te’ is depend and ‘ti’ not no. ‘Ten’ No. So the is meat, ‘te’ is rely and den which means the base, right? And some people say that these three are the same.
For example, like saying flower and the methyl. The methyl is the flower in Tibetan language and some people say it is the same, but if one really analyze within it, are slight differences in those words. So, as we said, there are four schools of tenets in the Buddhist philosophy or Buddhist, yeah, in Buddhism. The particularly Sūtra schools, mind only schools and the Chittamatrin and the middle way, the Matini Mika class. So the first three classes as said or interpret or the definition of interdependent is the first one which we said in Tibetan word as we said just before te is meet, te is rely or depend and Ten is base, right?
So they interpret the dependent arising because how they assert the dependent relation or dependent arising is because all these results or effects, the phenomena are produced by the meeting or the gathering of causes and conditions, because they are the product of meeting mixture by meeting the causes and conditions, therefore the dependent arising is the meaning of meeting. This is what the previous classes have. Now explain about the way of interdependent. It is because the the the first three as for the as for phenomena, there are two types of phenomena we call the compounded phenomena and the uncompounded phenomena too. And so the first three classes establishes the interdependence only for the compounded phenomena, not for the, they can’t apply the logic of interdependent or for the uncomplicated phenomena.
So because of that reason, they set forth that the meaning of interdependent is just mere the meeting of causes and conditions. And because of the meeting of causes and conditions, the result of the product has been produced. And this is the definition of interdependent arising. But the dependent arising of the compound phenomena is in itself both the the dependent arising, of course. And for the middle way school, the Mādhyamika Schools.
Within the Mādhyamika School, there are two classes of Mādhyamika School which are called Autonomist and the Consequentialist School. And the Autonomist school of middle way is below the Prāsaṇgika or consequentialist which is set forth to be the utmost schools. And so the meaning of the dependent arising by the autonomy school is the second one which we call the depend or rely, the second word which we set forth. They assert that the meaning of interdependent is because the things exist by depending on the parts or particles or a part. And so therefore their way of asserting, proving the dependent arising becomes a bit subtle, more subtle than the previous classes, the first three classes.
And they by proving the dependent arising or giving meaning of dependent arising by saying that phenomena exist by depending on the parts and the particles and and which which which they captured their their their interdependent captured entire phenomena, both the compounded and the and uncompounded phenomena. And so what it means by saying the phenomena exist by depending on the from the particle or particle which means that for example like this bell, ball of the bell, the saying that it exists because it exists by depending on its part, but saying that because that ball has the direction of the eastern part, say east, west, north, and south, or by saying it has the bottom part and upper part. So because of all that part, by possessing all the parts of parts that ball exists, if it hasn’t got apart it does not exist. So they logically approach it. They are not inherently existent because they are the product by depending on the parts and which logical proof becomes more subtle than the previous one.
So their meaning of interdependent arising is by depending on the parts and like this finger. And because of the finger have the four parts like east, west, north, and south, and the finger has been produced, if there is no east part of the finger, the finger does not exist. So the finger to exist, the finger does exist by depending on its parts and by the gathering of the parts it exists. Without those, the finger does not exist. So the meaning of dependent arising according to the utmost class, the consequentialist school of middle way, the Mādhyamika class.
So their meaning of dependent arising is the last one of the previous which we said like the the base or yeah, base which I said. And their way of establishing this the the the dependent arising is very, very subtle. It’s because they said that how they describe the meaning of dependent arising step. For example, the five aggregates and the eye which was labeled or based on the five aggregates. And in order to produce that eye, it needs to rely or depend on many, depend on others.
For first it has to depend on an I which perceives which helps one to make sound I towards the five aggregates and that the conception or thought which grasps that five aggregates of the I. So by gathering, by depending on the conception or a thought and the word or the sound of the I which was of those two and which labels the I towards the fifth aggregate and through this the existence or the sound or the person, the eye has been produced. So without, which means the main source or the eye which was based on the conception or thought and the sound of the eye which is seen by the eye, through this the eye has been produced without depending on those the eye did not exist which was labeled on the past. So it’s, for example, like a hand or a palm. For example, like from the very beginning somebody labeled a palm or a face hand.
A person labeled the name, the sound hand towards the BAM or the one’s hand. And then the conception arises afterwards, but which grubs, oh, this is the hand. And by depending on the sound of the hand and the grasping of the mind which grabs the hand, the hand is being produced. And how they produce the hand was the sound of hand. That sound was produced by depending on the part, entire part of the hand and by depending on all fingers and so forth.
By depending on the basses, the name the hand has been produced. And if there is no hand on the parts of the hands like, say, fingers and so forth, And in Tibetan word, which means that the person hasn’t got a hand. Because basis of labeling is not present there. So by depends, so the person has, we call the person or the hand does exist within the person because the basis of labeling exists within the person. So which proves that everything exists by depending on the the the basis of imputation.
So, for example, if one wants to cultivate or realize the emptiness of the hand, how one should cultivate the emptiness of the hand is for example, the hand, the existence of the hand without depending on its parts is the object of negation which is called the inherent existence. So in order to prove the hand is not inherently existent or it’s empty of inherent existence, you can prove the logical proof through this way by saying that hand is free of, or the hand is empty of inherent existence because it is dependent arising, it depends on its parts, the sound, the thought which labels the hand towards the hand. And the hand without depending on all those conditions like thought, sound, and so forth, the hand do not produce or can’t, a hand is not produced by itself. Because it depends on all these, the thoughts, name, sound of the hand and so forth, the hand has been produced. Therefore, it is not inherently.
It is empty. And so, see how the I, the table, the hand appears, how hand appears in one’s mind. When you look at your hand and we never thought or one never thinks that the hand is produced by depending on the part of the hand or depending on its fingers and so forth and how it appears to one. Normally, we always perceive the mind sees or the hand appears in our mind the, you know, appears that the hand exists by its own without depending on other, that is called the grasping. So always appears to us the hand exists or by its own side or without depending on others.
And so we perceive that or hold that the existence of the hand without depending on others and that is called the true grasping attitude, which is ignorant and which leads us to circle in the samsaric existence. For example, like I, how I appears within ourselves, within our mind. The I always appear to us that I exist by its own or without depending on other and we grasp that I exist by its own characteristic. And through this, and that is called the grasping of I, inherent existence of the I, is called the self grasping attitude, called the ignorance. And that self grasping ignorance of self grasping attitude obscures us from seeing emptiness and that leads us to circle in the cyclic existence.
Likewise everything is same like the glass or table, or what can we call old examples, the glass table, all these things appear in us, but it appears to us that those things exist by its own without depending on other. For example like a table, that the table has been labeled by seeing the part of the table, the surface, the length of the table, so forth. And by having all this, the part of the table, the table has been labeled to that object and through this the table, the named table has been produced. Without depending on its part the table does not exist. Likewise, for example, like a little baby myself, and from the very beginning that I was born as a baby and at that time everyone says that a child or a baby is being born.
And if the baby exists inherently, then for me I have been a baby and been a monk, etc, and become a Geshe, ex-abbot, and a teacher in Adelaide at Buddha House and so forth. And if the baby exists inherently or without depending on other, then that baby should be called, like Khensur Rinpoche is born, rather than instead of saying the baby or child is born. And so, yeah, so all these things, the baby, the eye, or everything depends on the basis of labeling the fat aggregate. Without depending on those, it does not exist. Like the Pamela line was born.
At the time nobody says Pamela is born. It says a baby was born. And later on a couple of grandmas get together and say, Oh, let’s call this Pamela. And everyone says, oh, Pamela is there. And then it comes, this is Gabe.
The Gabe was labeled and everyone grasped this Gabe and thinking that Gabe exists by its own or without depending on others. In fact, it does depend on the aggregates of Gabe. Yeah, the nonexistence of I without depending on other No, no, no. So existence of the I without depending on other is called the object of negation. And whenever one, so which means the inherent existence of the I is the object of negation which is the one we need to abandon or refute through the logical proof of applying the dependent arising, saying that I does not exist inherently because it is dependent arising and also in the Heart Sūtra text that once you you see all the five aggregates are also empty of inherent existence, so which means that they do not exist inherently and they are empty of inherent existence.
So the inherent existence of the five aggregates is the object of negation. And whenever one refuses that object of negation, the inherent existence of the I, then one realizes the empty of inherent existence of the five aggregates in which is the emptiness one realized. So in Heart Sūtra text, there is no form, no sound, no smell, no taste, and no tactile sensation or texture. It doesn’t mean there is no form, there is no sound. Of course there is sound, there is form and there is smell and taste, beautiful cakes, sweet and sour and so forth.
But what it means is that the inherent existence of a form is not there and inherent existence of sound and so forth is not there. It does not mean they are not there. And during saying that the object of negation, the inherent existence of the form is the object of negation. And so that do not exist because there is emptiness. If the object of negation exists, then there is no emptiness.
So this is how it works. Because there is emptiness, there is no inherent existence of the form because it is the object of negation. So, and also that from the beginning, during the brief explanation of the emptiness, the earlier part of the Heart Sūtra text clearly said that one should see all five aggregates are also empty of inherent existence. That was during the brief explanation. At that statement said that one should see also false phenomena are also empty of inherent existence.
And during the detailed explanation, the text set forth no form, no sound, no taste because empty of inherent existence has been explained in the earlier part of the text. So one should apply those empty of inherent existence on the later part. Like, when when it says the no form, which means that the the form is empty of inherent existence or form is not inherently existent. Okay. I’m gonna try and take a couple of questions.
So here the meaning of the existence which means, for example, a form, the existence of the form, the form exists at this stage by depend so what it means is form is there, for example, the form is there, but but it exists or it stays there by depending on it by depending on the part of the form. And without depending on others, then the form do not exist wherever it is. So this is how it’s called the by depending on others the things do exist or things do stay, for example. Without depending on others, things do not exist. This is the meaning.
So here, and also in other ways, the meaning of existence is also example a glass, the existence of a glass on the table. And at this stage there is glass which does exist on the table right now. But the name the glass which is on the table has been labeled from one’s mind, we should call that object as a glass. And because we labeled the glass to that object, and at this stage the the naming glass, and the object itself, exists on the table. If the glass exists by its own or without depending on others, then glass should always remain on the table without depending on the labeling of the mind, the glass should be always there without projecting that there is a glass or the named glass from the mind.