Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 94-minute session, Khensur Rinpoche anchors his exposition of emptiness in the image of a rope mistaken for a snake in dim light — a model for how ignorance projects a seemingly independent “I” onto the mere collection of the aggregates. He opens with the awakened heart as the required motivation, walks through the Buddha’s four seals (impermanence, the dissatisfactory nature of contaminated rebirth, selflessness, nirvana as peace), then surveys how Buddhist tenet schools differ in their treatment of selflessness. The session’s core is a careful analysis of how two types of ignorance — grasping at a self of persons and of phenomena — arise sequentially and sustain cyclic rebirth. A magician’s conjured woman provides a second analogy: just as negating “woman” dissolves the attachment, negating the object of ignorance dissolves the grasping at self. Suited to practitioners with some prior philosophical grounding.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 20 LMT 1997 09 23.mp3
UUID: 45a4b979-55ab-483e-8a58-5a941d19a1a8
Teacher: Khensur Rinpoche
Collection: Lojong Mind Training (Khensur Rinpoche)
Date: 1997-09-23
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 93.9 minutes
Words: ~4,931
But it necessarily must arise in dependence upon a positive motivation. And amongst all the possible positive motivations that we could have, there is none which exceeds that of the awakened heart. And how are we to proceed in contemplating the awakened heart? It is necessary that it be preceded by the cultivation of love and compassion. Compassion expressed in the thought, It would be wonderful if myself and all living beings were free of suffering and the causes of suffering.
And love expressed in the thought, It would be wonderful if myself and all sentient beings had happiness in the causes of happiness. With that as a basis we go on to develop the aspiration to lead all of these sentient beings to such a state. Understanding that in fact sentient beings really don’t know how to eliminate their suffering though they wish not their suffering and they really don’t know the methods of bringing real happiness though they wish happiness. Therefore developing the resolve that I myself will lead them to a state where they have complete happiness, where they are totally free from suffering. In order to achieve that state, I must remove all my various faults and bring to consummation all my excellent qualities.
But if we consider the fact that within our mind we have afflictive emotions and those afflictive emotions generate suffering for ourselves and without ridding ourselves of our own suffering first, there is no way that we can help others to rid themselves completely of their suffering. It is by first eliminating our own suffering and by bringing about our own happinesses that we will be able to help others to do the same. Through having experienced the means by which to eliminate our sufferings, we can teach others the method whereby to eliminate their own sufferings. Understanding the way to achieve happiness, we can present to others methods for achieving their own happiness. So, in order to progress through these means of helping ourselves and others, first we have to listen to the Dharma, especially those teachings on the universal vehicle.
Having listened to try to understand the meaning of what is being gotten at, And then having ascertained the meaning, to meditate and to practice it. We begin with preliminary prayers, verses three and then two. The Buddha propounded what is termed the four seals testifying to a Buddhist doctrine. And these four seals are that all compounded phenomena are impermanent. All that is contaminated is dissatisfactory.
All phenomena are selfless and empty and nirvana. That is to say, the state, the passage beyond sorrow is peace. So there are four views being presented, that is, they are being testified to. And these views are to be understood. We are to understand that all compounded phenomena are impermanent, that all that is contaminated is dissatisfactory, and the latter two also.
So these, they are presented four views. And these were testified, let us say, they were asserted by the Buddha. And by testified here, it means that these were asserted and were accepted by the Buddha as being reflected in his doctrine. And therefore they are the criteria of a Buddhist doctrine. They testify that this is in fact in accordance with Buddhist doctrine.
So these four views are reflective, are criteria of Buddhist doctrine. But they should not be accepted simply as that. That there is no authority which is commanding us to accept these four views. They are not to be taken on in a dogmatic fashion. But on the contrary, they should be reflected upon and in terms of their use to ourselves.
Their pragmatic benefit and their validity should be accepted. So the first of these views was that all compounded phenomena are impermanent. What do we mean by compounded phenomena? That is phenomena which are compounded of causes and conditions. The coming together of causes and conditions produces the phenomena.
A cause of itself cannot produce a phenomena. A condition of itself cannot produce a phenomena. It is necessary that there be a coming together of both causes and conditions whereby to bring a phenomena into existence. It is a combination of causes and conditions which produces phenomena. So, compounded phenomena is trying to bring across to us the sense of something being produced through a combination of causes and conditions.
And this can apply to a variety of different things. For example, ourselves as human beings. We arise in dependence upon a union of our parents, our mother and father. Flowers come about through in dependence upon a combination of a seed and soil and water. The trees, crops come about in the same way.
This building, this house, it came about in dependence upon coming together of work persons, cement, wood, etc. Are closed to factory workers, the cloth manufacturers, and cloth itself. So all of these various things are termed compounded phenomena since they arise through a combination of coming together of causes and conditions. Through a combination of cause and condition, a product comes into existence in its first moment, but that only applies to the first moment. In the second moment, begins to deteriorate.
It begins to disintegrate. And if the causes and conditions do not aggregate, come together again, then the causes and conditions which bring forth that phenomena are exhausted, then the phenomena goes out of existence. So even in the second moment, it is transforming into another entity. So, a thing does not remain even for a moment of itself. In this very second moment of its existence, it is already disintegrating.
And both phenomena are characterized by their compounded being arising independent of the cause and conditions, and anything which rises upon cause and conditions necessarily entails a process of disintegration. So this is the meaning of impermanence. It is momentary disintegration. Having come into existence, its existence is not maintained, but the phenomenon immediately begins to disintegrate. This is the characteristic of its impermanence.
So all things are characterized by their arising in dependence upon a compounding of causes and conditions and then their subsequent disintegration. So, this applies to all phenomena, both in gross and subtle ways. Ourselves as humans for example, that we are all born and whatsoever that is born is doomed to decay. That there is nothing that is born which will not die. So, in terms of ourselves as human beings and having taken birth, what is the primary cause of our, behind our taking of birth?
It is karma and afflictive emotions. On the other hand, something inanimate like a flower, it too arise. It too has a cause for its production. The causes are seeds and the various conditions which contribute to its development, the water and soil. And in terms of those causes and conditions, a flower experiences no suffering.
But we, but that which arises in dependence upon, that which is produced in dependence upon karma and afflictive emotions is characterized by the experience of happiness and suffering. And so this applies to all sentient beings. All sentient beings are born through the influence of karma and afflictive emotions. And that which rises in dependence upon karma and afflictive emotions necessarily undergoes experiences of pleasure and pain. So, anything with, so this is a sign.
Pleasure and pain, the experience of pleasure and pain is a sign that that object has been produced under the influence of karma and afflictive emotions. So we have been produced from karma and afflictive emotions. And with regard to karma, there are both skillful karmas, skillful actions, and unskillful karma, unskillful actions. The aggregates which arise through skillful actions, which are the basis of our life, are desirable. They are, we have, for example, a beautiful shape and appearance and they are healthy.
On the basis of these aggregates we can lead a pleasurable life. On the other hand, those who, beings born in negative states of rebirth such as animals, have been born under the influence, again, of karma, but unskillful karma and afflictive emotions, and therefore they have a greater degree of suffering in the course of their lives. So, all compounded phenomena are impermanent. All contaminated, all that is contaminated is dissatisfactory. And here by contaminated it is referring to the afflictive emotions.
Under the influence of afflictive emotions we create actions. Through these actions we go on to take rebirth. Various types of rebirth mainly concerned with, in regard to the human rebirths, animals, and the lower types of rebirths. That since the basic cause which produces these rebirths contaminated, then the type of experience which arises from them is in the nature of suffering. All rebirths which are taken under the control of common afflictive emotions are by nature dissatisfactory.
We can go on to ask the question, well, is possible to not to take rebirth under the control of karma and afflictive emotions? And that brings us to the third of these four seals. If we meditate and cultivate an understanding that all phenomena are empty and selfless, then we will no longer have to take rebirth under the force of karma and afflictive emotions. If we understand well this third seal, that of selflessness, then we will achieve the result, which is fourth seal, that of the pacification of our suffering, that we will attain the peace of liberation. We, through realization of selflessness, we remove the very causes which bring about suffering, karma and the afflictive emotions, and thereby experience peace.
So we can achieve a state of liberation from all suffering. To do so it is necessary that we eliminate the afflictive emotions which generate suffering. That the afflictive emotions are to be abandoned and that which has the power whereby to abandon the afflictive emotions is the wisdom realizing selflessness. Through the wisdom realizing selflessness, can eliminate suffering from the very root and achieve an ultimate happiness. So what are we to do?
It’s necessary that we gain the realization of the view of selflessness. That we must, in order to eliminate suffering, we must eliminate its causes, the karma and afflictive emotions. And in order to do that, we must gain the wisdom which realizes the view of selflessness. So, we have to make effort in gaining an understanding of the view and upon understanding it, meditate upon it. All the various Buddhist tenet systems, so to say the philosophic systems within Buddhism, whether it be the Great Exposition School, the Sūtra School, the Mind Only School, or the Middle Way School all accept the view of selflessness.
But though they are the same in asserting a view of selflessness, are very different in the degree of subtlety presentation of their view of selflessness. The first of these two tenet systems are philosophic schools of Buddhism, that of the great exposition school and Sūtra school. They assert a selflessness of persons. And this selflessness of persons is the lack of being a substantially existent self sufficient self. This presentation of the two lower tenets is very coarse in comparison to the higher tenets.
And by coarse it means that it can be easily understood. Here we said these two tenet systems assert selfless persons, which is the person’s lack of being self sufficient self. The basis of the person are the five aggregates, or skandhas. The aggregate of forms and feelings, perceptions, compositional factors and consciousnesses. The person exists in dependence upon these five aggregates.
Now when we say that a person lacks a substantial existence, self sufficient self, we mean that there is a lack of a person who exists without depending upon these five aggregates. That there is no self sufficient self which does not rely upon these five aggregates for its existence. There is no independent self. There is no self which is independent of these five aggregates. So we have the thought I, I, and we have a thought of my body or my feelings.
So when the I appears to ourselves, to our awareness, that I is dependent upon the aggregates for its existence. That I is labeled to the aggregates. The aggregates are not the person. The person is labeled or designated or imputed to the aggregates. The lower tenet systems do not assert a selflessness of phenomena.
They only assert a selflessness of persons. Whereas the higher tenet systems, those of Mind Only and the Middle Way school, assert both a selflessness of persons and a selflessness of phenomena. Within Mādhyamika or the Middle Way School, there are two levels. And that which is the finest of these two levels is what is termed the Consequentialist Middle Way School. I think if I went through the present teachings of all these various tenets, it would only cause greater confusion for you.
So the Consequentialist Middle Way School asserts both a selflessness of persons and a selflessness of phenomena. So, they assert two types of selflessnesses. Selflessness of persons and selflessness of phenomena. By selfless persons, by persons this means all sentient beings. And it is the being which exists in dependence upon the aggregates of the being.
The being or the person who exists in relying upon, for example, the five aggregates. That is the person. And everything other than that, all phenomena other than persons or beings, we call phenomena. So there is a selfless of persons or beings and all other existences are what we are calling phenomena. So phenomena in persons exist, don’t they?
In terms of persons, the ‘I’ exists, I go, I stay, this ‘I’ exists. So the persons exist. Phenomena exists, the aggregate exists, the various aggregates exist, the eyes exist, the nose exist. So both phenomena and persons exist. So it is necessary that we make a distinction.
First, the distinction that persons exist, but the self of persons does not exist. We have to understand that distinction. And this holds true also for phenomena. Phenomena exists, but the self of phenomena does not exist. So persons exist, but the self of persons do not exist.
What does exist in this regard is a conception grasping at the existence of the self of persons. The self of persons does not exist, but there is a conception which grasps at the existence of the self of persons. And the same holds true for phenomena. Phenomena exists, but the self of phenomena does not exist. With regards to that, there does exist a conception grasping at the existence of the self phenomena.
This conception which grasps at these existences is ignorance. There is ignorance grasping at the self of persons and ignorance grasping at the self of phenomena. Or it can be termed the conception of true existence of persons and phenomena. This conception is the root cause of all afflictive emotions. It is these two conceptions, the conception grasping at the self of person and the conception grasping at the self of phenomena, which are the main cause for rebirth within cyclic existence.
Now of these two conceptions, the first which is generated within our minds is that of the conception grasping at the self of phenomena. in dependence upon grasping at the self of phenomena, we go on to grasp at the self of persons. Due to the force of these two graspings, we go on to generate the various afflictive emotions, emotions such as attachment, hatred, pride, etc. Out of these afflictive emotions we go on to involve ourselves in various actions. We create karma.
Under the force of karma, we go on to take rebirth again and again and again within cyclic existence, continually experiencing suffering. So the afflictive emotions are generated within our own mind. We have to see this for ourselves and how these afflictive emotions bring about our suffering. These bring about our various experiences. We have to examine our own minds and see this for ourselves.
It’s simply not enough simply to know the words that this is the case, but we have to actually see it for ourselves within our own minds since that is where the cause of our suffering resides. So how are we to gain this experience of seeing how the cause of suffering is generated within our own minds? We can take as an example when someone calls our name. Initially rises in our mind the thought, I’m being called. Initially there appears to our awareness the aggregates.
Subsequent to the appearance of the aggregates, the eye which is imputed to those aggregates appears to our awareness. So there is a serial sequence of appearances. First, the appearance of the aggregates to ourselves and then subsequently the appearance of the eye which is imputed or labeled to those aggregates. What is the, why is it there, why is there this serial fashion of appearances to our awareness. First the aggregates and then the I which is imputed to the aggregates.
Why is this order of appearance? What is the reason behind this order of appearance? The I is imputed to the aggregates. The basis of imputation are the aggregates. So, in terms of what appears to our awareness, first there appears to our awareness the basis of imputation and then subsequently the phenomena which is being imputed.
The basis of, first the basis of imputation, the aggregates appears and then subsequent to that the phenomena which is being imputed, that is to say, to the aggregates, that is to say, the eye. So first the basis of imputation appears to our awareness. But that basis of imputation is Then, so initially the basis of the imputation, the aggregates, appears to our awareness. Then due to the force of ignorance, that basis of imputation, the aggregates, is grasped to truly exist, to naturally exist. Subsequent to that, the eye which is imputed to those aggregates appears and is grasped at to naturally exist.
So there is a serial appearance and there is a serial arising of the two types of ignorance. So it is necessary that we make effort in the methods whereby to eliminate these two types of ignorance. It’s necessary order to eliminate these two types of ignorance. We have to understand how they arise. How are they being generated?
What is the way they are holding their object? In order to understand this, we have to understand what exactly, once we understand how these minds are rising, we have to understand what are their objects? What is the main object of these awarenesses? That is, say, ignorance. Without negating the object of ignorance, we cannot negate ignorance.
So we have to understand what is the object which ignorance is grasping at and negate that. Upon negating that, we will negate ignorance itself. By way of analogy, if there were a magician and this magician by the force of his magic was able to conjure up a beautiful person, say a beautiful woman, and most of the people in the audience would not know that this is in fact not a real woman. That they would take this as a real beautiful woman and would go on to develop desirous attachments toward her. So, we’ve generated desirous attachment toward this woman.
And what method can we use to overcome this desirous attachment? So we have to consider this. And what is it that we’re trying to overcome? What is the basis for the arising of this attachment? It is the thought which grasps at this object to be a woman.
Now unless we can overcome this thought with regard to the object as being a woman, it will be very difficult to remove the attachment. But if there is the appearance of an attractive woman and the dependence upon that we grasp at that and we develop attachment. So the way that we can, if we can negate the fact that this woman is in fact not a woman, if we can negate the fact of being a woman by coming to understand that this object is not a woman, then subsequent as a natural outflow of that, the attachment will be removed. If in addition to the woman who was conjured up by the magician, a Buddha were to emanate a woman, then they would appear to ourselves to be exactly alike, to attractive women. But then if the Buddha were to withdraw that emanation and we come to understand that that was in fact not really a woman, then the attachment that we may have generated with regard to that emanated woman would be destroyed.
We could then go on to take that understanding and apply it to the woman conjured by the magician. That is exactly like the woman that was emanated by the Buddha. And in dependence upon the understanding of the one case, we could go on to not grasp at the conjured woman as a real woman and thereby destroy her attachment. So this analogy is made use of in the middle way school. The analogy of the two women, one conjured by a magician, the other emanated by a Buddha.
And the withdrawing of the emanated woman and thereby destruction of the attachment and gaining that understanding that in fact this was not a real woman, using that understanding as an analogy to the appearance of the attractive woman conjured by the magician, we are also able destroy attachment for her. So this is the method that we can make use of in destroying attachment. There is the grasping at the woman. This is attachment. There is a grasping at the object as a woman, and dependence upon that, we generate attachment.
If we can understand that the object is in fact not a woman, then we destroy the attachment. This is analogous to the way that we are seeking to destroy ignorance, which is the basic cause of cyclic existence. Under the influence of ignorance, there is the grasping at the existence of a self, a self of persons and a self of phenomena. In order to remove that ignorance, we must understand that the object of grasping does not exist.
Without understanding that the object of its grasping does not exist, we cannot destroy ignorance. So we have to be able to understand that the object which is being grasped at by ignorance does not exist. So, in order to remove the ignorance which graspseth itself of persons, we must negate the object which is being grasped at. And the object which is being grasped at is the self of persons. So we must be able to refute or negate the self of persons.
In order to negate, to refute the self of persons, we must know what the self of persons is like. That is to say, we must identify that self to be able to recognize it. Just as in the case, if we want to catch a thief, we must know who we’re looking for in order to catch him. Likewise, if we are going to hit the target with an arrow, must be able to identify what it is we are aiming at. So with regard to what is being negated, there are two.
There is self grasping itself. This is what causes us to take rebirth with cyclic existence. This is to be negated. This is the subject. But there is also the object which is to be negated, that which is being grasped at.
So there are two objects of negation. The subject, which is self grasping, and the object which is being grasped at by that self grasping. So in order to identify the object of negation, what method can we make use of? And I think it can be readily understood by using an analogy. In this analogy, there is a coil of striped rope.
And the conditions are such that it’s becoming dark. It’s not clear. And when one over at what was in fact a coil of striped rope, due to this lack of light, there appears to ourselves a snake. There arises in our mind, there is a snake and there is aversion. So there is a grasping at the existence of a snake and a subsequent aversion for that object.
So the basis of imputation or the basis of labeling is a coil of striped rope. There is a basis of imputation and it’s also dark. So there is an added condition. The combination of that condition of darkness and the presence of the basis of imputation, we go on to impute snake. That snake is merely being imputed by the awareness.
It’s merely being designated or labeled. So, the snake is merely being imputed by a mistaken awareness. There is nothing whatsoever from the side of the object which is a snake. Neither the parts of the rope nor the collection of the rope are in any way a snake. The snake is merely being designated or labeled by a mistaken awareness.
So the snake is merely being posited or imputed, merely being labeled by mistaken awareness. Okay. Now that was the analogy. We present it in terms of the context of our discussion. in dependence upon our aggregates, an I appears.
in dependence upon our aggregates, an I appears. When that I appears, do this eye is grasped at as if it did not depend upon the aggregates. It is grasped at as if it were existing completely from its own side. So just as in the case of the snake where there was a mistaken awareness grasping at a snake, likewise there there arises a mistaken awareness which grasps at the eye to exist the way it is now appearing independent of the aggregates. So there is the analogy and then it was the immediate analogy presented in a context of our present discussion.
In the analogy, The basis of imputation is the aggregates. Just as in the analogy, the striped rope was the basis of designation. So in the context, the basis of designation is the aggregates. In the analogy, the basis of designation was a striped rope. In the analogy, there was an added condition of darkness.
In the context, the added condition is the of ignorance. Here the obscuration of ignorance is taken to mean an unknowing with regard to the nature of reality. These two together, by the force of these two together, there is a grasping at an I to exist independent of the aggregates. There arises the thought of an I which is independent, which exists independent. We think I and that I appears to ourselves to exist independent of the aggregates.
Just as in the case of the mistaken awareness in which there appeared to exist a snake, there now appears to, this mistaken awareness to exist an independent I. This mistaken awareness is ignorance grasping at the existence of an independent self or I. So There is the grasping at the appearance of the snake to be merely not labeled. Where there is a rope there appears a snake and moreover there is a grasping at the existence of that snake to be- to- as it being not merely labeled. That it exists from its own side.
The snake appears and moreover there’s a grasping to that appearance of a snake- not the appearance- grasping to that snake to exist from its own side and not to be merely being imputed or being labeled. Likewise, there is the I or the person who arises in dependence upon the collection of the aggregates. The I, the person, appears and is in dependence upon the collection of the aggregates. But then there’s the grasping at that eye to not be merely labeled, but to be existing from its own side, not to depend upon the aggregates, not to be merely labeled but to exist from its own side. Just as in the case of the snake, the snake is being grasped at not to be merely labeled but to appear from its own side.
Here, the eye is being grasped at to be not merely labeled but to exist from its own side. Just as in the case where the snake appeared to not be merely imputed or labeled by the mind, likewise, that the I, which is merely being designated to the aggregates, appears to not be merely labeled by the mind, that the eye is grasped at to intrinsically or inherently exist. So these two modes of grasping are exactly alike. So we should think over carefully this presentation again and again to go through this presentation as a means of identifying the object of negation. Once we identify well the object of negation, we can readily understand its non-existence and we can easily come to an understanding of emptiness.
So we should proceed with analytic reasoning as to the nature of the self. We have to identify this object of negation. You know whether we spend months or years, it’s necessary that we recognize, identify this object which is to be negated. If we identify the object of negation, then the understanding of emptiness comes easily. If we don’t identify the object of negation, then we’re not going to realize emptiness.
So we have to meditate in dependence upon our experience. Okay. So we’ve we’ve run out of time, so we won’t have questions this evening. Like, we if we go a long time, you’ll just get tired. It’s difficult.
Okay. Thank you. Bye. Page ten. And verses eight and nine.