Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. A flower growing from seed, soil, and water cannot exist independently — and this observation becomes, in Khensur Rinpoche’s hands, the central argument for understanding emptiness. This 97-minute session at Buddha House opens with Śāntideva’s verse on the preciousness of human life and the cultivation of love and compassion, then builds into a sustained unpacking of dependent arising as the “king of reasons” for establishing emptiness and steering between the extremes of eternalism and nihilism. A Q&A sharpens the argument considerably: whether the first moment of perception grasps true existence, whether labeling a flower “table” affects its existence, and — most pointedly — whether stealing to feed a child or killing out of compassion can yield positive karma. Rinpoche closes by situating the view within the four Buddhist tenet schools and the Middle Way assertion that nothing exists from its own side.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 23 LMT 1997 10 14.mp3
UUID: 79c9597d-a290-46f9-b04d-03db1c662ef0
Teacher: Khensur Rinpoche
Collection: Lojong Mind Training (Khensur Rinpoche)
Date: 1997-10-14
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 97.1 minutes
Words: ~4,876
So we’ll begin by adjusting our motivation and developing as our intention for listening to this present teaching of the Dharma that of the awakened heart. Quoting from a verse by Śāntideva, where he tries to emphasize the preciousness of our human life. And why is our human life so very valuable? It’s because instinctively, as sentient beings, we wish to achieve happiness and to be rid of our suffering. And as human beings we have the capacity through our discriminating intelligence and the ability to apply that intelligence to actually abandon our suffering and to achieve that happiness that we instinctively wish for.
But on the contrary, being such as an animal are obscured with regard to their ability to abandon the causes of suffering and to achieve the causes of happiness. In contrast, we as human beings are able to implement the causes for achieving happiness, can rid ourselves of the causes which bring ourselves suffering. That is to say, we can apply ourselves to the vast practice of what is to be adopted and what is to be rejected, that we have the discriminating intelligence and we are able to make that effort to achieve these ends. And this is something very peculiar to the human beings. Because we all possess discriminating intelligence, we are able to identify what are the causes of happiness and to recognize what are the causes of suffering.
And therefore, in implementing a practice of what is to be adopted and what is to be rejected, we can remove from the root the causes of our suffering and achieve ultimate This process mainly depends upon our individual minds. in dependence upon cultivating healthy states of mind, these will be expressed in a healthy manner in terms of our physical and verbal conduct. And thereby we will achieve happiness. But on the other hand, if we cultivate negative states of mind, then this will be expressed in negative ways of acting and speaking, which act as the cause for future sufferings. So when we talk about healthy states of mind and unhealthy and negative states of mind, that which is the most healthy is that of a kind heart.
That is to say, a beneficial intention, an altruism which wishes to benefit others. And the opposite of that is a harmful intent, the thought to bring harm to others. So altruism is expressed in our attitude both toward others, both in terms of our love and compassion for them. Seeing other beings troubled by suffering and understanding that this suffering has a cause, developing first the thought it would be wonderful if they were free from suffering and the causes of suffering. May they be free from suffering and those causes of suffering.
I will free them from those suffer their suffering and the causes of suffering. That is to say, we develop compassion. And with regard to happiness, in general we all experience some types of happy feelings, whether physical or mental. But here we are talking about something more than just that. These happiness that we generally experience are passing.
They’re ephemeral. Here we’re talking about a stable happiness, the happiness of liberation, and developing the attitude which wishes, thinking, Wouldn’t it be wonderful if all sentient beings had happiness and the causes of happiness? May they have that happiness and the causes of happiness. I will lead them to that happiness and the causes which bring it about, And that is the to cultivate the attitude of love toward them. And amongst all the positive states of mind, that which is supreme is the kind hearted attitude of the awakened heart.
But it is necessary that as a prerequisite to the development of the kind hearted attitude of the awakened heart that we develop love and compassion. And as we’ve mentioned, compassion expressed in the thoughts: It would be wonderful if myself and all living beings were free of suffering and the causes of suffering. May they be free of suffering and the causes of suffering, that I will lead them to that state. And love, may myself and all living beings it would be wonderful of myself and all living beings that happiness. May they have happiness and the causes of happiness.
I will lead them to that state. And then with development of love and compassion as the prerequisite, going on to the firm resolution that I will lead them to that state and in order to achieve that state I aspire to the state whereby I have removed all my various faults and brought to consummation all my excellent qualities. That aspiration to achieve that state whereby one is empowered to lead all sentient beings to a state of freedom from suffering and where they have consummate happiness is the awakened heart. And this is the supreme of kind hearted attitude. Whatever we do accompanied with this kind hearted attitude of the awakened heart brings about immeasurable creative potential.
Even to give a morsel of food to a sentient being with an attitude creates a creative potential equal to all of space. That whatever we do, if it’s accompanied with this kind hearted attitude, whether it be meditating, whether but even in terms of activities of sleeping or going or eating, we are continually accumulating skillful actions. Therefore, it would be extremely beneficial if you were to adjust your motivation such that you were going to listen to this present teaching of the universal vehicle Dharma and especially this teaching on mind training and especially that of the teaching on emptiness. With such a motivation and having listened to this teaching that you are going to go on to reflect upon it and meditate and put it into a vast practice for the benefit of all sentient beings. Yeah.
Quoting from the Entering Into the Middle Way by Candrakīrti, where he says, By virtue of the reasoning that things arise dependent upon each other, it is impossible to impute the conception of production from self, other, and so forth. Therefore, by using the reason of dependent arising, the net of all wrong views is severed. So there are a multitude, a variety of external things. There are flowers.
There are trees. And likewise, in terms of internal things, that is internal to the continuum of sentient beings. There is the body, the five aggregates, mind, consciousness. Here things means functional things. And from where do all of these functional things arise?
They all arise dependent upon causes and conditions. So all of these multitude of things are results, and all results arise in reliance upon causes. They come into existence in relying upon their individual causes. That none of these things are self existent. They are not self powered.
That is, they do not exist independent of the causes which have brought them into existence. Upon the aggregation, the coming together of various causes, a result comes into existence. Depending upon the quality of the causes, there will be a concordant result. If the causes are positive, they have positive type of results. If the negative types of causes, they have negative type of result.
So the important point here is that no things exist independent of the causes upon which they rely. Their very existence is intimately dependent upon these causes. All of these things arise dependent upon causes and conditions. Therefore they are not self powered. They do not exist independently.
They are not independent existences. That they all rely upon causal conditions. None of these things lack the quality of relying. They are all reliant. Therefore, they do not exist independently.
So external and internal functional things necessarily rely upon causes and conditions that bring them into existence, that none of them exist independently. There are none which do not rely upon causes and conditions. But though this is the case, still there is a conception which grasps that in fact they do exist independently. This is the conception of true existence. It is the ignorance which causes to continue to circle within cyclic existence.
It is the root of all suffering. It is a mistaken awareness. It is just this very awareness which is to be eliminated since it is it is a distorted, distorted awareness, a wrong And moreover, it is what brings us all our suffering. It is how are we to eliminate this conception of true existence. One of the most powerful methods is to gain an understanding of dependent arising, understanding that all phenomena whatsoever are dependent arising.
In the case of functional things, that they all depend for their existence on causes and conditions, and that they also depend upon their parts, and moreover, they depend upon imputation. Therefore, all things come into existence in reliance upon something other than themselves. If we understand well this fact of dependency, then we can eliminate the conception of true existence. When Buddha Śākyamūni Buddha taught the doctrine of emptiness, he taught the most powerful reason of dependent arising. He used the reasoning that all phenomena whatsoever are dependent arising, and therefore they are empty of independent existence.
This is the most valuable of reasons, the most powerful reasons. It is likened to the king of reasons in proving emptiness. Just as in the case of human beings, previously in India, the most powerful individual amongst them was the king. Likewise, the most powerful reasoning amongst those which establish emptiness is that of dependent arising. And dependent arising, it is the reason of dependent arising that Buddha Śākyamūni Buddha used in establishing emptiness.
So what is the valid reasoning which establishes in what way reasoning? In what way is dependent arise and used as a valid reason? We can take it as a basis for illustration the flower. We’re trying to establish emptiness in terms of the flower. So we begin with the flower, and we state that the flower does not truly exist.
Why does it not truly exist? Because it is dependent arising. Because it is dependent arising, it cannot truly exist. An analogy which we can make use of is the reflection of our face in a mirror. When we look in when we look into a mirror, we we see what appears to ourselves is our face.
So we have to understand how we apply the reason of dependent arising to the flower. If the flower is, in fact, a dependent arising, then it cut it cannot be naturally existent. It cannot be self defining. It cannot be truly existent. How do we apply the reason of dependent arising to the flower?
Now, when we look at the flower, the flower appears very boldly to ourselves. And is it established the way it is appearing? We have to ask the question, the does the existence of the flower depend does it rely upon anything outside of itself? Or is it established in dependence upon other things? Does the flower exist in reliance or not in reliance?
In independence or So when we go on to apply reason, we can readily understand that the flower arises in dependence upon causes and conditions. For example, it relies upon a seed, soil, fertilizer, water. When all of these causes and conditions come together, then the flower grows. If we didn’t have a seed, the flower would not grow. If there were no soil, the flower would not grow.
If there were no water, the flower would not grow. So its existence relies on the coming together of many causes and conditions. Out of this coming together of cause and condition, the flower gradually grows. So the flower arises in dependence upon causes and conditions. And by cause, we mean mainly the seed.
And by conditions such as soil and water, in dependence upon both of these, then the flower grows. If there were not present these causes and conditions, then the flower would not grow. So I think we can really understand how the existence of the flower depends upon these causes and conditions. So since the flower exists in dependence upon causes and conditions, it cannot exist without relying upon those conditions. It does not exist independent of those causes and conditions.
When we speak of natural existence or independent existence or true existence, we’re talking about a type of existence where the object does not rely upon anything outside of itself, where it does not rely upon causes and conditions. It exists independent of causes and conditions, independent of everything else. It is established by its very own side. Now why is it that something cannot in fact exist that way? Because we can apply the reason that it is dependent, it is dependent upon causes and conditions for existence.
There is nothing, there is no thing, functional thing, which is not reliant, which is independent of its causes and conditions, bring it into existence. Therefore, in reliance upon this reasoning, our dependent arising, we can understand that nothing inherently exists, that nothing intrinsically exists, that nothing independently exists. And it is by means of this reasoning that we establish emptiness. So it’s a this is a really tremendously precious reasoning for establishing emptiness. Why is it such a precious line of reasoning for establishing emptiness?
In our meditation on emptiness, in cultivating is understanding, we must avoid two extremes. We don’t, on the contrary, if do avoid these two extremes, we will not achieve liberation from cyclic existence. Moreover, we will fall to one of these two extremes. So it is by means of this reasoning that we take a centrist position, that we take a middle way between the two possible extremes to which we could fall. Just like in traveling a road, we avoid the two extremes whereby we could fall to either side and travel down the middle way.
Likewise, here we are trying to avoid the two extremes of eternalism and annihilationism. So this, what we’re describing here is the middle way. In Sanskrit, it is termed Mādhyamika, or in Tibetan, Uma. It means the middle way. It is the middle way between the two extremes of annihilationism or eternalism, or that is to say the doctrines of eternalism or nihilism.
So in traveling a road, it’s necessary that we stay to the middle. If we venture to the extreme of either of the two sides, there’s a danger of falling off. So the two extremes that we’re seeking to avoid by taking a central way is the middle way, are the two extremes of permanence and annihilation. Permanence and annihilation. So there are these two extremes, the extremes of permanence and annihilation.
And what are the faults if we were to fall to either of these two extremes? With regard to the first, the extreme of permanence, here we are conceiving what is in fact not true existence to truly exist. And by persisting in our conception of true existence, we will continue to circle within cyclic existence and we will continue to suffer. If we were to fall to the extreme of annihilation, then we would go on to not take rebirth in a positive migration, but on the contrary, we would go on to take rebirth in an unfortunate existence. So there is the great danger that we could fall to these two extremes and experience all the accompanying problems associated with them.
But we can avoid these extremes by taking the middle way and thereby abandon our suffering, achieve a consummate happiness. We can achieve liberation and Buddhahood. So we can proceed by applying the reason of dependent arising to the flower, for example? We take the flower as a subject, that it does not inherently exist. And what reason so not to inherently exist is the proposition.
That the flower does not inherently exist is the thesis that we’re trying to establish. And what reason do we get for establishing that thesis? That it is a dependent arising. And it is this very reason, a dependent arising, which establishes that thesis as being correct, and it’s this which is able to eliminate our misconception with regard to that thesis that the flower inherently exists. So the reasoning of dependent arising refutes the extreme avoids the extreme of annihilation.
It is the reason of dependent arising by means of which we avoid the extreme of annihilation. And how is that? The very words dependent arising, they expressed the idea that things, both external and internal, arise in dependence. They arise as dependent arising events. They rely upon what are those events?
Which they depend for their existence, in which they rely upon for their existence? Causes and conditions. So that they relatively exist. What is the relationship between these things? It is their dependence upon causes and conditions for their existence.
So they have relative existence. If you accept that things have relative existence, that they arise dependent upon causes and conditions, then you will be practicing in accordance with the law of cause and effect. And when one’s practice is supported by the law of cause and effect, then you can be assured that your practice will be taking you in the direction of liberation, that there is no danger of falling to the extreme of annihilationism where the law of cause and effect does not exist, and therefore that there is the danger of falling into unfortunate rebirth. How is it that we go on to take an unfortunate rebirth? If someone even if there is no one who has the power to direct our future rebirth that is to say, someone who simply commands, you will take a positive rebirth, you will take a negative rebirth, There’s no one who has that power to to bring that about.
Some people go on to take a positive rebirth, some go on to take a negative rebirth. How does that come about? Why are there these differences amongst people in the rebirths that they go on to take? It is dependent upon the implementation of the law of cause and effect in their life. If they do not understand and do not practice the law of cause and effect in terms of their conduct, then they will go on to take a negative rebirth.
But on the contrary, if one practices in accordance with the law of cause and effect, then one will go on to take a positive rebirth. There is no one who can send us to a negative state or to a positive state. But it is the law of cause and effect which has that power. Quoting from a verse by Śāntideva, where he explains that even if all the beings in the universe were to rise up against ourselves as our enemies. That if all of the humans, all of the celestial beings were to look upon us, look upon, for example, myself, Khensur Rinpoche, as being a tremendously terrible person and want to take us and tie us and drag us into hell.
They simply do not have the power to do that. But it is our own actions which can send us there. So it is only our skillful actions and our unskillful actions which have the power to send us to these types of rebirth. Nothing other than those skillful and unskillful actions has such a power. So it is dependent arising which is able to avoid the extreme of annihilation.
And here, by annihilation, we mean that cause and effect are not valid, that cause and effect and their results do not exist. This is what we mean by annihilation. And if by understanding dependent arising and thereby avoiding the extreme annihilation, we go on to understand the validity of actions as causes and the results. And independent of all that, we implement positive ways of conduct, we avoid negative, and thereby we abandon negative states of rebirth. So it is by means of the reason of dependent arising that we avoid the extreme of annihilation, but we also necessarily must avoid the extreme of permanence.
We permanence means is synonymous with the of permanence is the conception of permanence is synonymous here with the conception of inherent existence. And if we were to take as how does the reason of dependent arising avoid that extreme? If we take as, again, the thesis, the flower does not inherently exist. The flower does not inherently exist. When establish that reason, that thesis, using the reason of dependent arising, we refute the ignorance which conceives that the flower inherently exists.
By realizing that the flower does not exist in dependence upon the reason arising, we directly refute the ignorance which conceives of the flower to inherently exist or to truly exist. Refuting that ignorance is to say that we eliminate that ignorance. If we eliminate that ignorance, then we will cease suffering within cyclic existence. We will achieve liberation. So if we make use of this valid line of reasoning and apply it in our meditation on emptiness, we can apply it to this line of reasoning to the flower, And then out of that, we will realize the emptiness of the flower.
And moreover, in reliance upon this valid line of reasoning, we will avoid the two extremes and abide in the middle way. So we can extend this reason to all phenomena. Just like the flower, we can take as our subject I, as we’ve explained previously. I as a subject do not inherently exist and the reason that it establishes that is because I am the dependent arising. We can apply that to the body.
The body is the subject. It does not inherently exist because of being a dependent arising. The table does not inherently exist because of being a dependent arising. We can go on to establish this in regard to all phenomena, that they do not inherently exist because they are dependent arising. That if we proceed in this fashion, then establishing ourselves in the middle way, avoiding these two extremes, refuting inherent existence, then we can go on to achieve liberation and omniscience.
So why is the body dependent arising? Mainly it arises in dependence upon the karma and afflictive emotions, but also it depends for its existence on sperm and ovum of our parents. And when these gather together, accumulate, come into existence, our body comes into existence. That is to say, the collecting of causes and conditions. Then when we were young, our mother fed us food, she gave us milk, and we gradually grew and we now have come to the body we have present.
The The view and conduct as set out in Buddhism arises in dependence upon its basic assertion of dependent arising. That all of the various vehicles of Buddhism, whether it be the individual vehicle or the universal vehicle or the vehicle of secret mantra, all have as their fundamental assertion the view of dependent arising. So we don’t have time to go in this. But it is a point that needs to be made clear that perhaps one of the fundamental differences between that of Buddhism and non-Buddhist traditions is just this, the assertion of dependent arising. In the West, they don’t assert dependent arising.
So this is a hindrance to the to gaining an insight into the view of emptiness. Yeah. That is that is your. Yeah. Okay.
Oh, yeah. So we won’t go any further in that. So we’ll stop there. Do you have any questions? In.
So, like the eye consciousness, first moment? Any consciousness. Like, if the first moment of perception is valid, not conception, of perception is valid, does it contain the wrong consciousness that views the flower as inherently existent? So the first moment perception of the flower in the case of an ordinary person is always accompanied with the grasping of true existence of the flower. Isn’t the first moment of perception said to So the first moment of the perception of a flower is valid, that is is a valid cognition.
inherent existence, an inherent existence flower appears to it, but it does not grasp at that inherent existence. It is nominally correct. It is mistaken with regard to the appearance. So if that mistaken ness in regard to the appearance, does the label, the common label of flower come into play here at all? I have to come back to that bit.
Does the label flower bear is that a cause or a condition? Is the label flower a condition of the existence? Of the flower? Anything but flower in this case. Does the label is is is the common label a a condition of its existence or just for ide language identification?
Is the label is the label flower necessary for the existence of the flower? Well, that’s part of it. Is that label necessarily a condition or a cause of the flower? So it’s necessary. So if a mistaken consciousness apprehends something Yes, yes, yes, yes.
So it can be it’s mistaken, but it’s it’s valid. Yes. But if if if a mistaken consciousness apprehends an object an object and mistakenly labels the object, does it affect the object’s existence? Because he or she fully believes that this object, this flower is actually a table, fully believes that the the label table fits flower. So is the flowers of existence affected by a mistaken label which arises from a mistaken consciousness, is it still merely existing as a flower?
In general in general, its existence or for that person? Which one? Both. So for it, for the, for the person who is labeling a flower a table, the flower does not exist. But in general, the flower exists.
For the person who’s labeling the flower a table, that it appears the table exists. So how does a label become a condition for it’s You don’t can be known. You you you you you you can repair. So it’s a condition. West, so called theistic tradition, we tend to to have our cake and eat it because we say there is an objective reality and the subject a subjective reality.
And the idea of the objective reality is is the thing that really exists, however, impermanent. And the idea of a subject of reality is this the thing that exists for me. Now when we talk, as you have talked, about impermanence and emptiness in particular, are we talking about my subjective or our subjective reality, or are we talking about the objective reality? It’s neither. Existence without a label.
In other words, it exists what it doesn’t matter what form or label we put to it. It has an objective existence like that object on the end of the table. That I think is the nominal existence which is the objective. The subjective is our labelling of it and making it exist for us in the form we see it. And I think that’s what’s made by he means by subjective.
And if I don’t see that, then by really I can Well exist. He’s He said neither. He said neither. He said Well, I think it it has an objective existence. So it has an existence.
It has an existence apart from its labeling. Yes. So, there exists these various assertions, as you’ve just stated. The lower tenet systems, the lower philosophic systems of Buddhism would also assert that things exist from their own side. But here we’re talking about the final view.
The ultimate assertion of Buddhism is that nothing exists from its own side. Everything is dependent upon the process of labeling. So there are four philosophic systems or tenets within Buddhism. There’s the great exposition school, the sūtra school, the mind only school, and the middle way school. And here we’re presenting the view that we’re presenting is according with the middle way school and according to their assertion that nothing exists from its own side, everything is dependent upon labeling.
There are some I mean, it’s it’s one thing to say a barley seed results in a barley plant, but it’s another thing to For example, can you how how is it that happiness comes from a skillful action? A mother might steal bread to feed her child. So that the killing of those passengers by the previous incarnation of the Buddha was not unskilled for action? He killed them out of compassion. Killed them out of compassion.
And you’re saying that’s skill that’s unskillful, but the result is happening. So the the result is not happiness. The the result of that stealing was not the giving of the food to the child is not the result of that stealing. The result of the stealing is the taking rebirth in hell. That’s all.
No. And So the intention the the intention behind the stealing was negative. The intention of stealing was negative. So if one were to rejoice in having done the action, then it would actually increase the force of the action. On the other hand, if one regrets the action, then that would decrease the force of the action, the negativity of the action.