Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Khensur Rinpoche opens this 50-minute Mahāmudrā retreat session with a flower: it exists, yet not from its own side, because it depends on causes, conditions, names, and terms — logic he extends to the self. He recommends meditating on selflessness of persons first, since insight into one base transfers to all others, and gives a sharp analogy for the moment of recognition: reaching into your pocket for a hundred dollars and finding it gone. Rinpoche explains why Mahāmudrā matters — it destroys the root conception of a truly existent self, from which all suffering arises — then corrects a common error: mistaking the mind’s luminous conventional quality for Mahāmudrā itself. He closes by unpacking the term, “the greatest seal, not to be set aside,” grounding the practice in the need to realize emptiness.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 12 MR 1990 04 15.mp3
UUID: 875e689d-3b42-4205-a025-cea2654425dc
Teacher: Khensur Rinpoche
Collection: Mahāmudrā Retreat (Khensur Rinpoche)
Date: 1990-04-15
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 49.8 minutes
Words: ~2,897
We depend on various lines of reasoning. Use the line of reasoning, for example, with respect to the flower. The flower does not inherently exist because it relies for its existence on names, terms, causes, conditions. Because it relies on names, terms, causes, and conditions, it is not inherently existent. It is not independently existent.
When we say independent existent, if something is independent existent, it doesn’t depend upon anything else. It doesn’t rely on anything. Therefore, dependent existence, depending on something else, refutes inherent existence, refutes independent existence. So we can extend this example which taking this flower to all phenomena. Just as in the case of the flower, all phenomena whatsoever are all established in reliance upon something else.
That nothing exists independently of other things. That as in the case the flower relies upon its parts, causes and conditions, names, and terms. Therefore, it is not independently existent because it depends upon other things. And likewise, all phenomena depend upon something other than themselves. Therefore, they are not inherently independently existent.
If we take our own mind it is just like the flower in the sense that it also is not inherently existent. Why? Because it depends relies upon causes and conditions upon names and terms. Therefore since it relies on something other than itself it is not independently existing it is not inherently existing. The the self.
You know, we say I, I. The I exists, as we’ve explained. The I exists by means of being designated in dependence upon aggregates being labeled upon the aggregates the I exist with I drink tea I meditate I go here and there this I exist So there is the I which exists, practices the Dharma, that goes and does these various things. Then when we say I, what is the I that doesn’t exist? When we’re talking about this nonexistent I, we are talking about an I which exists from its own side objectively, just as in the case of the flower.
In general flowers exist. In general the I exist. But the flower existing from its own side independently doesn’t exist. The I existing from its own side objectively from its own side does not exist. The The I which does not exist is an I which does not depend upon the aggregates.
As we said previously, that the I is designated to the five aggregates. There is an I which depends upon the five aggregates. The I which does not in fact exist is the I which exists independently of the five aggregates, does not rely upon the five aggregates, which exists from its own side, which is inherently existing. This I does not exist. So as it says in the Heart Sūtra, says that the five aggregates are empty.
By the five aggregates that we’ve just mentioned the that these do not inherently exist. And here in the Heart of Wisdom Sūtra presents a very condensed abbreviated presentation of emptiness. And as we mentioned, emptiness, there are two types of emptiness. There’s the selflessness of phenomena and the selflessness of persons. And here, in saying that the five aggregates are empty, they are talking about the emptiness in terms of selflessness of phenomena.
This emptiness or the the mudra or chagya of phenomena. So the five aggregates are not inherently existent but also the person or the I, they mean the same here, is designated, labeled to these five aggregates, they also are not inherently existent. And this is the selflessness of persons. This is the second type of Mudra. There is phenomenal selflessness and personal selflessness.
So in our approach by way of meditation on emptiness that we can take two courses. One, the first first is in seeking to gain an understanding of the non inherent existence of the five aggregates. This would be approaching emptiness in terms of the selflessness of phenomena. The other would be to come to an understanding of the non inherent existence of the I which is designated to the aggregates. This would be in terms of the selflessness of persons.
So which way are we to go by means of these two approaches in our meditation on emptiness? We can approach emptiness in terms of the non inherent existence of the aggregates or approach it in seeking to understand the non inherent existence of the I which is designated to the aggregates, either phenomenal selflessness or personal selflessness. And the emptiness in terms of the aggregates or emptiness in terms of the I which is designated to the aggregates, there is no difference with respect to these emptinesses. But in terms of coming to an understanding of these emptinesses, it is said that it is slightly easier to realize emptiness, to ascertain or understand emptiness, if we meditate first on the non inherent existence of the I designated to the aggregates, the selflessness of persons. If we came to a realization of emptiness in terms of the I, the self, then we can easily come to an understanding of emptiness of other phenomena.
Simply all we have to do is turn our attention to other phenomena, examine them, investigate, just reflect on them even a little bit, and we will understand their emptiness. It is said that once we understand emptiness in terms of one base, then we can easily and quickly understand it in terms of any base. All we have to do is investigate even slightly, and we will understand it since are so similar the emptiness are so similar. So in meditating on the non inherent existence of the I or the self, what type of reasoning can we follow? We should think in terms of our own aggregates.
We can take it as a subject our own aggregates as a subject. The I which is designated to our own aggregates as a subject. The I which says I’m going here, I which goes there, which goes here, the I which is designated to the aggregates as the subject. It does not inherently exist. Why?
Because it is dependent upon its basis of imputation, the aggregates. That is, it’s dependent upon its basis of imputation, the aggregates. That is to say, it relies upon the aggregates. That means that it does not exist independently. Why?
Because it depends upon its aggregates for its existence. Therefore, it is not inherently existing. So, you know, we’ve already in a way covered this when we talked about the flower. We said the flower was not inherently existing because why? It depends on something other than itself.
Inherently existent, dependently existent, and inherently existent, independent existent are synonyms here. Why isn’t the flower independently existing? Because it depends on something else. Just like that, just like that example, the I does not exist independently, is not independently existing. Why?
Because, what reason? It relies, it depends upon the aggregates for its existence. And when we come to this determination, the I does not inherently exist, the I does not exist independently, using this reasoning, when this awareness arises in our mind, independently, that there is an absence of independently existence. This absence, there is an emptiness of independently existence. This is emptiness.
And we should abide in meditative equipoise single pointedly pointedly on this emptiness which has arisen at this point. The quality of the meditation at this point, if we give an example, you know, we came from our home to here and in the course of and we left home with a hundred dollars in our pocket. And on the course of coming here it dropped out of our pocket. And then there was a point when we needed that money. So we reached in our pocket for the hundred dollars and it’s empty.
And it’s, ah, what’s happened to my hundred dollars? It’s not there. It’s empty. Likewise, when we look for the when we try to find this non inherently, this inherently or independent existent I, we find its absence. It’s empty.
We then we single pointedly meditate upon that absence absence of that awareness of an emptiness or an absence which arises at that point. So presently presently we’re like that person who left home with the hundred dollars still imagining it’s still in their pocket. Terms of we hold that we are inherently existent, independently existent. But when we go to look for the hundred dollars, we find that it’s absent. And likewise, when we go to look for this inherently existent, independent existent self, using the various reason of dependent arising that the self depends upon the aggregates existing, there will arise the thought of the emptiness of this inherent existence, just like the emptiness of a hundred dollars.
I lost absence of a hundred dollars, absence of this what I thought existed, this inherently existent self. Then we abide in meditative equipoise on that awareness of emptiness which arises at that point. So, now we’re going to meditate. And we’re going to meditate on the I, the Self, and we’re going to meditate that this Self, this I does not inherently exist. It does not independently exist.
And the reason that we’re going to give to establish this because it depends because the I, the Self, depends upon the aggregates. So the I, as a subject, it does not inherently or independently existing. Why? The reason, because it depends upon, relies upon the aggregates for its existence. Did you realize emptiness?
What color is emptiness? Is it red, blue, Yes. Have some questions? Yeah. Yeah?
Just like a question. Yeah, question. So here in in talking about the meditation on emptiness it means reflecting upon, thinking about, using various reasoning, investigating the I and here the I which goes the I which does all these things that I’m just trying to understand that this I does not inherently exist and investigating why it doesn’t inherently exist what does it mean to we’re trying to understand emptiness in terms of the I using various reasonings. This is reflecting, this reasoning, investigating is meditation. If we if for example we were going to meditate on the awakening heart we would we would generate we would generate the the mind mind which thought, May I attain Buddhahood for the sake of all sentient beings in order to separate them from all of their suffering and bring them complete happiness.
That we would seek to generate that thought that that that mind thinking that thought this would be meditation on awakening heart. And if we were to meditate on the on emptiness in terms of the flower, then as we explained previously today, we would would question what does the flower exist from its own side or not? Does it objectively exist or not? Questioning, examining. And why doesn’t it?
If it did exist inherently, if it existed from its own side objectively, then it wouldn’t depend upon causes and conditions. And it does depend on causes and conditions, therefore it’s not independently existing. So, examining in this way, we’re using this type of reasoning. And if we were to extend that just as in a way we meditate on the emptiness of the flower we can we meditate on the emptiness in terms of self or the I questioning whether the I or the self inherently exists that in fact the I or the self does not if it did, inherently exist then it would be independent of causes and conditions, wouldn’t rely on names and terms, but in fact it does depend, the I itself does depend upon causes and conditions, names and terms, and therefore it’s not inherently existent, it’s not independently existing. What is the need for understanding the non-inherent existence of the I? It is by seeing the emptiness of the I we generate Mahāmudrā.
And why do we want to generate Mahāmudrā? It is because Mahāmudrā will destroy the conception of a truly existent self. And this is the root of all our suffering out of the truly existent the conception of truly existent self or grasping at a truly existent self all the various afflictive emotions arise. Out of the force of these afflictive emotions we create karma and thereby experience suffering. By destroying the conception the true existence itself, we destroy the root of suffering and attain the liberation, the happiness of liberation.
And attaining this happiness of liberation we experience only happiness. There is completely no suffering whatsoever in the body and mind. So Rinpoche was referring to previous to the explanation of Mahāmudrā as given by Tsongkhapa, many meditators when they newly came to see the conventional nature of the mind, that is its luminous, clear, vivid quality — it’s almost non-physical, so it’s almost like a vacuum and emptiness. When they came to see this they said, ah, this is emptiness. And they thought they were realizing emptiness but that is to say the ultimate nature of the mind.
But in fact they were only realizing the conventional nature of the mind and many of them made this mistake thinking they had actually attained and understood Mahāmudrā. So a repetition — inferring that all the past great masters previous to Tsongkhapa didn’t understand emptiness — that this was not at all true, that there were many great masters previous to Tsongkhapa such as Padmasambhava, Milarepa, Marpa, great Sakya, Kagyu lamas, they had an unerring correct view of emptiness. They understood, they realized Mahāmudrā. But there came a time in Tibet after long Dharma, in which the doctrine degenerated. During this period there were many mistaken views as to emptiness.
And during this period many meditators made this mistake with the nature of the mind thinking that they had actually realized Mahāmudrā. And mudra — in the word and gesture. There are various ways in which the word mudra is used, many references.
There are the mudras as pointed out in the gestures. There’s also as far as what is called the four seals of Buddhist doctrine. The word seal is being translated, Mudra is being translated as the word seal. For example, all products are impermanent, all contaminated phenomena are dissatisfactory, all phenomena are selfless and empty, and beyond sorrow is peace. These are the four seals of a Buddhist doctrine.
And what the general meaning of the word mudra, or charya, means is that it is something which is improper to be left aside. That is to say, it must be practiced. In the case of these four seals, that if one does not accept these four seals, if one leaves them aside, then one is not a Buddhist. Extending this meaning of improper to leave aside, it must be practiced. We as another type is in terms of secret mantra in which we are it is necessary in various rituals to make various types of offerings, both external and internal offerings.
The internal offering being, for example, a meditative stabilization, whereas the external offering we offer various substances such as the various waters where we recite their names, Aragang, Paladhana, etc. And especially within the action set of tantras, it is said that it is not proper to set aside the hand mudras, gestures, which are to accompany these offerings. If one does not accompany that, in order to have a complete practice one must make these hand gestures in making these offerings. Therefore these are said to be chakyas or that which is not proper to be set aside. They must be practiced.
Varying degrees of chagyas, mudras, and we were explaining this term in various uses, but its general meaning has been put out that which is improper to be set aside but definitely must be practiced. This is the general meaning of Mudra and there are various emphasis placed upon Mudra. Now when we come to the highest, that is Mahāmudrā, the greatest thing which is not to be set aside but definitely to practice. And this is explained in terms of that we don’t want to suffer, that we need happiness. And how, if ever hope to gain a happiness in which there is no suffering, then we have to, it is improper to set aside, we need to realize the exalted wisdom to gain the exalted wisdom realizing emptiness.
The thing that we need most is happiness, and we don’t desire suffering. Therefore, it would be improper to set aside the understanding of emptiness, to develop the exalted wisdom realizing emptiness in order to achieve this in, we must definitely practice it. Therefore, because we must practice it, it’s definitely needed. It would be improper to set it aside. The greatest emphasis placed upon this, since this is what we want most, it is the Mahāmudrā, the greatest seal or mudra.
It is so extremely important and this is why it’s given the name Mahāmudrā because without Mahāmudrā, the exalted wisdom realizing emptiness, there is no way that we can go beyond our suffering and achieve a happiness which is divorced completely from suffering. And this is what we need most. So you’re probably already tired. You’ve been meditating since you got up at five thirty and meditating all day. So the last prayer is just substituting the words: the precious view on emptiness, not yet born, may it arise and grow, etcetera.