Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 50-minute commentary on Chapter Nine of Śāntideva’s Guide to the Bodhisattva’s Way of Life, Khensur Rinpoche opens with the child-parent relationship — each exists only relative to the other — to anchor the session’s central argument: all phenomena arise dependently and therefore lack inherent existence. Verses from Nāgārjuna and Je Tsongkhapa establish that grasping dependent arising is the indispensable gateway to realizing emptiness, and a walking-stick analogy makes the logic concrete: contemplating dependence automatically negates the idea that things exist on their own. Rinpoche then traces how four Buddhist tenet schools interpret dependent arising differently, from causal dependence alone up to the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka view that things exist only through conceptual labeling, before closing with how ignorance generates karma and samsaric rebirth. Suited to practitioners with some grounding in Madhyamaka philosophy.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 08 Ch9 Wisdom 1994 11 01.mp3
UUID: 0be21633-ce3c-4a4a-a3a8-6ef225970513
Teacher: Khensur Rinpoche
Collection: Śāntideva Ch9 Wisdom (Khensur Rinpoche)
Date: 1994-11-01
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 50.0 minutes
Words: ~2,536
Unspecified gender, say, in the case of a child, the very fact it to be a child and existing that way and to be called so forth is due to in relation to the parents, father and mother. So the laughter here is more an inner talk between myself. If you will excuse me. So the way I felt So child exist in that way is due to in relation and in relative to both the father and mother. And if there was none in the first place, then the child would not have been.
Similarly, in whatever way of situation between child and parent, be it mother and daughter or father and son, the relative of the two to one another is the way how they exist. That the very fact the child exists and is to be called as child is due to in relative to the parents, and the very fact the parents exist as parent and being called as parents is in relative to the child and children, whatever the case be. Also in this way, similarly, cause and effect are relative to one another. The seed and the fruit are relative to one another, the fire and smoke are relative to one another, low and high are relative to one another, and even the geometrical shape of straight, square, round and so forth are positioned and known in relative to one another. Similarly, all phenomena are in the fashion of relative existence.
And in that way, all phenomena are dependently originated and dependent arising. That the very fact there is a valid knowledge is in relative to the objects of the valid knowledge, and the very fact there is a means is relative to the means product. The means and means product are relative to one another. Similarly sentient beings and Buddhas, or sentient beings and enlightened beings, exist in that fashion relative to one another. So the fashion and the way how everything exists is in the manner of dependent arising due to relative existence and dependently originated.
If that is their way of existence, their mode of existence, then it implies clearly there is not any thing or any phenomena which exists truly. Because precisely such reason, a great teacher, Nāgārjuna, says, Therefore, there is not any phenomena that is not dependent arising, and therefore, there is not any phenomena which is not emptiness. As far as going through the first part goes, later on to be related to the second line, how it means is that there is not any phenomena which does not depend for its existence on its causes, conditions, parts, portions, naming, label, and so forth. If there is no phenomenon that does not depend at all on those factors, it means that all phenomena do actually depend on cause conditions, portion parts and so forth, which then means all phenomena are in the fashion of dependent existence. And if they are dependent or exist, if they are in the fashion of dependent existence, then it means they are dependent, dependently produced, dependently originated.
And that very fact that they are dependently originated, dependently produced means they are empty of, they lack, they lack inherent existence. And if they lack inherent existence, their nature is in the form of emptiness. So that the essence content of that line. Without first getting a grasp of dependent arising nature about things, it is not possible to have a grasp or understanding of emptiness, because the understanding of emptiness is other side of looking at dependent arising nature of things. And if one has not got a clear grasp or understanding of dependent arising, it is extremely difficult to have even a grasp or idea about what emptiness is.
And due to such reason, one really first needs to try all one’s best, firstly to get an awareness in one’s mind and understanding in one’s mind about dependent arising nature of things. The great teacher Je Tsongkhapa therefore says, All the destitution in the universes are produced by ignorance. To overcome it, one needs to realize dependent arising. Therefore, dependent arising has been taught by the enlightened one. The first part of the lines here explains whether it is environmental universes or the resident beings who inhabit the universes, in both cases, whatever shortcomings misery, destitution they are all product of ignorance, not knowing the non true existence nature of things.
Thus, ignorance is the cause of it, therefore one needs to overcome ignorance. And to overcome ignorance, one needs to realize the emptiness nature of things. But it is not possible to have an understanding of emptiness come in one’s mind without firstly having an understanding about dependent arising nature of things. Because of that, the first step is to try all one’s best to have an understanding of dependence arising clearly in one’s mind, and that very understanding automatically will bring about understanding of emptiness. Of course, to realize emptiness, one first needs to have the object of negation clearly negated or what in other words means to have an understanding and realization of emptiness, one first needs to be clear about what is that which is refuted or proven as not existing there at all, the so called object of negation.
But to be able to, in one’s training, to be able to have a clear understanding of what is to be negated, the object of negation, one definitely needs to think so well firstly about dependent nature of things. The reason why that is so is because thinking about dependent arising nature of things is the best means, which brings about the understanding of the object of negation, which brings about the very aspect of what is to be negated. And once one has the object of negation clear in one’s understanding, then the understanding of emptiness very quickly, without much effort, will come about after that. Buddha Śākyamūni in presenting the understanding of non true existence of things, presents the reasoning of dependent arising as the most effective reasoning to come to that understanding. And the reason for that is because when one thinks about dependent because the reason for that is everything exists with dependence on its factors, causes, conditions, so forth.
So everything exists in the form of dependent arising. We can look at specific examples, be it anything, say the flower or any other object or whatever object or reference or analysis one is looking at, that the very thinking or contemplation about how that object exists with dependence on many factors, that itself brings about an understanding really the object exists dependently, that to start with it come into being in that form of existence due to getting of so many factors, causes, conditions so forth. So there is a very clear confirmation in one’s mind that the object does truly, does exist with dependence on others. So in that way it is dependent arising. We have then scene where through thinking about dependent arising we very clearly relate the object in the case as dependent on others.
Now if there is if there is a, in one’s thinking that something exists, dependently, then that automatically means that automatically negates the object being not dependently existing. That automatically stops the object thinking that the object exists independently. And that in brief is what is the object of negation, what is to be refuted about certain, in the analysis, non dependent existence, the independent existence and formation. Now, if that object to be negated, the independent existence is automatically negated, then that is coming very clearly much closer to the actual way how things exist, which is that they don’t truly exist, they don’t inherently exist at all. Buddha Śākyamūni advises in a verse where it goes, Whoever sees dependent arising sees reality whoever sees reality sees Buddhahood or the Buddha, the enlightenment.
Now, clearly, that advice clearly means that whoever through contemplation about the dependent arising nature of things will come to the understanding of dependent nature of things, would come to realize emptiness, which is seeing the reality. If one has seen reality, which is realization of emptiness, then that realization itself is an attribute, a purity, excellent quality upon the mind, looking into the nature of things through which enlightenment or Buddhahood can be attained. So through that way, whoever sees reality sees Buddha. So to come to realization of emptiness, the realization of dependent arising is indispensable and it is most effective. We can relate how that is so by taking an example, by taking an example, say, a very old and feeble person who cannot stand up without relying on a walking stick would be seen.
If that is the case, then it would be understood by everyone that that old, feeble person cannot stand up without relying on walking stick because the very fact the person does have to depend on the walking stick in order to stand up. So if that’s the scene, then we can say that the very fact that we understand the person has to depend on the walking stick to stand up implies very clearly that it automatically brings in our mind that it is not possible for the person to stand up without depending on the walking stick. Would you think is that the case or not? So firstly, if one thinks on the dependant arising nature of things, then one thinks that, and if that thinking goes good, meaning if that reflection on the dependent arising nature of things go well, that will bring the realization that things don’t exist independently. So it automatically will negate the misconception that things independently exist.
If that happens, meaning if one is able to negate the misconception that things don’t, that things exist independently, if one is able to negate them, the realization of emptiness can come about very quickly and very well. It is possible to that way. So we shall stop here for the evening and if you have any questions, we can have some questions. So in the etcetera and so forth, you may include the labeling by concept. Because all phenomena are labeled by concept, meaning concept here means conceptual thought.
So all phenomena are labeled by concept because there is not any phenomena which exist without being labeled by concept. Well, okay. If there’s no questions, that’s fine because it doesn’t have to be all the time that there should be mandatory questions. Without question, what is fine. Without question, one is fine.
And possibly, there was no questions because the explanation went quite clearly. And if there was any doubts and and clarity, they all might have subsided on the spot. No. Besides besides that question format is allowed and can be done only these days in the West. In the traditional Tibetan public teachings, there isn’t any questions raised at all.
That occasion is left for more serious interviews and so forth. Of course, as far as the usage of the words and the general concept goes, dependent arising is commonly accepted by all four Buddhist tenets, all four Buddhist schools of thoughts. But there is a huge difference when it comes to what that dependent arising is to be understood as. For example, the three lower Buddhist tenets specific exponents, discourse groups, and mind only tenets in their case, they present everything dependent arising in the sense that everything depends on their causes and conditions. So that is the limited understanding they have, what is meant by dependent arising.
And this means that in the case of three lower Buddhist tenets, they are not able to present the meaning of dependent arising in relation to parts and portions as well through being labeled by concept. So in their case three lower tenets depend on arising simply means things depend on their causes and conditions. Now higher up, the fourth tenet, it is a system of two levels: the so called autonomous or Svatāntrika, own-reasoner school, or popularly the autonomous school, which is the lower one. In their case, they relate the meaning of dependent arising a bit advanced, where they say things are dependent arising, not only they depend on their causes and conditions for their arising and existence, they as well depend on parts and portions. So they include much deeper meaning of dependent arising by including that things depend on their parts, portions, components, so forth.
But still, the lower of the fourth tenet is not able to present the meaning of dependent arising in terms of being labeled by concept. So it is only the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka, the highest Buddhist tenet, which explains the meaning of dependent arising in its most profound understanding where they explain everything is dependent arising because they exist with dependence on being labeled by concept. So being labeled by concept, not only do they depend on causes, conditions, parts, portions, components, also are dependent arising for their existence due to being labeled by concept. In the case of the highest Buddhist tenet, they even bring about the details about how things exist with dependence on labeling by concept by breaking or classifying the dependence on concept in two ways, where they explain things exist because, on the one hand, being caused, being created or caused by concept. And on the other hand, things exist with dependence on concept because they are labeled by concept.
The way how things exist with dependence on concept is explained in this way, say all things have its own name or label, say, flower, cup, light, table. Now, in their explanation, meaning highest Buddhist tenet explains that the very fact the table is called “table” is called that is the indication that table exists because of being given such label by the concept. Similarly, the flower being called as flower and cup being called as a cup, the very label being given by concept itself is the basis by which the thing is presented or thing is classified as being of that type. So in the similar way, everything has its own name or being labeled by concept. And in that way, everything exists on the basis of having been labeled by concept.
And that’s the way how it is explained, the existence with dependence on concept. The other way of explaining where the concept is explained to be the cause, bringing about things or phenomena, is explained in this way, where firstly, the concept or conceptual thought, which created or which caused everything to come about is due to ignorance. That from ignorance, which is conceptual thought, a concept, there comes about two types of actions, virtuous and non virtuous actions. And out of these two comes about two types of rebirths, and happiness, mundane happiness, and suffering, and so forth. So this is basically talking in terms of sentient beings, that in their case they are out of ignorance being the primary concept, the conceptual thought being the cause, ignorance being the cause brings about the actions, the karma, and which brings about all the resultant rebirths and mundane happiness and the sufferings experienced through that.
Okay.