Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Khensur Rinpoche opens this 102-minute commentary with an image that anchors the session: realizing emptiness is like shooting an arrow — and without first identifying the target, the object of negation, no reasoning can land. The main subject is dependent arising, which Rinpoche calls the “king of reasonings” for establishing that phenomena have no independent existence. Two examples ground the argument: a flower that had no name until someone assigned one, and Paul Keating who became “Paul Keating” only when named as an infant — both showing that things exist through name and conceptual labeling alone. Śāntideva’s magician’s-illusion verse ties the analysis together: just as illusory horses depend on spell and substance to appear, ordinary phenomena depend on causes and conditions to appear as independently existing. A closing Q&A addresses whether labeling continues during direct realization, and describes the intense bliss that realization brings.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 10 Ch9 Wisdom 1994 11 15.mp3
UUID: b84d5815-d64a-4e20-89cd-c2e266133397
Teacher: Khensur Rinpoche
Collection: Śāntideva Ch9 Wisdom (Khensur Rinpoche)
Date: 1994-11-15
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 102.0 minutes
Words: ~6,018
Firstly, we shall meditate for a few minutes on kind thought, where we shall meditate on the precious mind of enlightenment. I myself alone am prepared to take the sole responsibility towards working to remove the sufferings and the causes of sufferings with all sentient beings and to bring them happiness and the causes of happiness. In this way, firstly, we shall try to meditate to bring the determination of the mind in that way, where we would include meditation on compassion, loving kindness, as well universal responsibility. In order to remove the sufferings of all sentient beings and to bring happiness to them, one needs to be able to know each and every inclination, mental disposition and the mental liking of each of the sentient beings, and then accordingly, in accordance with their various needs, be able to give guidance by giving unmistaken instructions, Dharma teachings, and that would be the appropriate, most meaningful way to help others. The guidance which one would give to others should not be something which would bring current and temporary benefit and nothing which lasts longer than that.
Instead, the advice, the guidance which one would give to others which is of most meaningful kind only where through those guidance others can receive permanent happiness and their welfare would be accomplished once and for all. But to be able to give such perfect guidance to others, firstly, one from one’s own side has to be freed of all problems and shortcomings, that one from one side has to be free of sufferings and that would be the way. And having been freed of all problems, one needs to acquire all excellent qualities of mind. From that way, it is possible to give perfect guidance to all beings. Therefore, in order to bring happiness to all beings after having freedom of all sufferings, one here needs to make the determination to, at any rate, attain the state of enlightenment, freed of all mental shortcomings and complete with all perfections of mind.
In other words, to attain Buddhahood. When one has the determination, then that is what is so greatly admired as the precious bodhicitta, the precious mind of enlightenment. For oneself to be freed of all mental shortcomings and to acquire all perfections of mind, one needs to understand and actualize the entire qualities of mind called the paths. To be able to do that then here it becomes relevant for us to adjust our motive thinking that I will here take all my interest in learning, reflecting and meditation on the present topic of the teaching, the wisdom, emptiness aspect of the Mahāyāna or the great vehicle path towards enlightenment. Śāntideva here at this point in the ninth chapter, says the truth of the ignorant ones is no different to illusion.
So that’s the part where we are. And in brief, what happened so far in the Tuesday evening part we covered was, in order to establish selflessness of phenomena, there are three major reasonings. The first one was the reasoning on negating or disproving the birth of a product through four extremes. And then the second reasoning is the reasoning of dependent arising. And third one, which is yet to come up and not spelled out, will be the reasoning negating absolute existence and absolute nonexistence.
At any rate, we probably had enough discussed about the first reasoning, the way how through that reasoning the production of a product through four extremes are disproved. Therefore, let’s this evening go to the second reasoning, which is the king of reasoning called reasoning of dependent arising. Śāntideva, the author of the present teachings, in accordance with the Prāsaṇgika middle way tenets perspective, the highest Buddhist tenets or perspectives explains that there is not any phenomena which exist inherently, independently, truly, by its own characteristics. And this very assertion is backed by the reasoning by saying by looking that if a phenomenon does exist inherently or truly, then it should exist truly from the point of its cause, then there is a truly existent cause. But the very fact that there is no inherently existing cause producing any phenomena that’s one way of establishing phenomena don’t exist inherently.
And that is the first reasoning, looking at the cause. The other way is if a phenomenon does exist truly or inherently, then it should exist so from its own entity, by the very nature of the phenomenon being inherently existing. But this is found to be not so when analyzed from the reasoning of dependent arising, which is therefore the second reasoning comes about. Or a phenomena, if it exists truly or inherently, then it should exist so by way of an inherently existing product produced, but that is not found to be so when analyzed by the third type of reasoning, specifically looking at the non inherent existence of a resultant phenomena.
So in this way it comes to the conclusion that there is not any phenomena which exists inherently, either from the point of view of its cause or from the point of view of its entity or nature or from the point of view of its result. Therefore, the apparent inherent existence about a phenomena is completely or absolutely disproved in that way. And this way becomes the conclusive assertion in the highest Madhyamaka tenet that there is not any phenomena which exists inherently. Well, our discussion on emptiness has been going on for last many months. After all, of all those months, many months of discussion, what is the full need of emptiness and discussion and looking about it?
As an answer to that, well, we all need to be freed from the cycle, to be freed from miserable mundane existence. We need to attain liberation. To be able to do that, we need to overcome all impure thoughts, inclusive from their root cause, the ignorance. To be able to do that, we need to realize emptiness. To be able to realize emptiness, we need to know about it.
And having known about it, then at the final step of our actual involvement with emptiness should boil down to the essence that we need to meditate on emptiness. On the practice of emptiness, whether it is called as practice on emptiness, or more appropriately as practice of the view, it entirely involves doing actual meditation upon the topic and that would be the meaning. The way how we go about with the actual meditation, to start with, our body posture should be in the right posture, having the seven features of Buddha Vairochana, the Buddha of physical purity, and then the actual meditation needs to be done employing the functioning of our mind or doing the actual meditation. It looks like there was a rumor around the places, meaning around some Dharma institutions or teaching institutions, meaning Dharma centers, where after many sessions of teachings, a person at the end comes up with the question, what is the actual thing to practice? And if it does happen like that, then that indicates things are not perfect, not being understood well, it’s not going that well.
All the practices, put into their essence summary, is actually going through when we have teaching sessions. In other words, sessions actually involve the teacher explaining the essence of all the practices. The meaning of meditation in its actual sense means familiarization. This means whatever excellent attribute of mind one is going attempting to actualize one repeatedly, think about it, reflect on it, and by that way one attempts to familiarize with that excellent attribute. This applies to just about any proper meditation teachings.
Here the topic of meditation is emptiness, the reality nature of things as emptiness. And the actual way to meditate on emptiness is to employ mind doing profound contemplation on emptiness. But that does not mean one just remains in meditative posture, thinking about nothing at all. If that happens where one is not thinking anything at all, then that is not even a meditation at all. It does not even become a meditation.
Emptiness in its actual sense means the very negation of that which is to be negated. The very negation of that which is to be negated, this means whatever is negated, or that absence of what is negated after its negation, the absence of it is the emptiness. This can be, in other words, the emptiness about that which is to be negated, the lack of existence from the part of that which is to be negated. So that is emptiness. So firstly, one needs to know what is that which is to be negated, in popular translations so called as the object of negation, but literally more like that which is to be negated.
So one has to know firstly what that is which is to be negated, the object of negation. Well, that is the existence, the apparent existence of the phenomena from its own characteristics. The apparent existence of a phenomena from its own characteristics. So firstly one needs to let that appear well in one’s mind by way of reflecting, contemplating on it. And when that very well appears in one’s mind, the apparent existence of a phenomena from its own characteristic, then one checks, analyzes whether such existence about the phenomena is there to be found or not.
And when one through that finds that that is not to be found at all, and by that way when one negates, disproves that existence from its own characteristic about phenomena, that is the emptiness and that’s when one is coming to have an idea and understanding about what emptiness is. As regards that which is to be negated or what it actually is, well, to look at it firstly, any phenomena exist by depending on its name and concept, that there is firstly the naming of the phenomena, and the phenomena has name, and the name is a sound. Name is in the form or aspect of a sound. And when a phenomena is being called by way of its name, then that is the sound, and there is a thought which follows that naming, the sound, and that thought is called concept. If we look at this point by way of more relatable example.
Let’s look at an object, let’s say a flower. Firstly, the flower being called as a flower, the name that it is a sound. So it is the name part about flower. So when there is name given to the object as a flower, then behind that name is the thought thinking that is flower. So that following thought behind the name is the concept which thinks and labels that object is flower.
So in that case, that’s how it exists. Now, the very existence of flower is something where it depends on its name and the concept labeling it. So there is not any independent existence about the flower not depending on name and the concept labeling it. That is how in actual fact it stands. But let’s suppose if the flower does exist from its own side independently, not depending at all on its name, flower and the concept of labeling it as a flower, that if there is any existence about flower in dependence upon its side, then that is exactly what is called the existence of the phenomena flower from its own characteristics, by its own feature, by its own distinctness.
So the word, scriptural word is the existence by its own characteristic. So if there is that, that is what is meant by that which is to be negated. This is what is to be disproved about flower, the independent existence. In the case of the phenomena or the object flower, there definitely was an initial person who labels the name flower to the object flower. This is very true that there definitely would have been a person who comes up with the thought that this object needs to be called as a flower and then actually gives the name, the label flower.
That would have been the definite case if we look at it in its process of label, we can say firstly, of course, there would have been a sprout germinating from its seed and then there comes about the growth of the stem, and then the beautiful petals, some yellow colored, some red colored, and then the actual blossoming of the flower on the top. And then there comes about someone who thinks that this very object with such beautiful features and so forth should be labeled and given the name as flower. And then the name flower is given. If flower does exist without being given the name flower, then from the very start, already before its germination into full blossom flower, the thing would have been called flower. It would have to be called flower.
But that’s not the case. Instead, someone afterwards comes up with the idea that this very component of a beautiful stem, petals and so forth must be given a name, flower, and label the name flower is given, and then someone else hears about it and they call it flower, someone else hears about it, then it came to be called flower. Then later on through the process of time everyone start to call the object as flower. In the beginning when there was no name and the concept thinking that it should be given the name flower at that time there wasn’t the flower meaning as flower. And therefore depending on name and being labeled by concept the flower came into existence.
This applies the same to any other phenomena. For example, in Australia, there is Paul Keating. Now, in the beginning, when the person Paul Keating was named as a child, just infant, there was no such name given as Paul Keating, and no one relates to the being as Paul Keating. But later on, the father or mother, whoever gave the name, called the child Paul Keating, and then all other people come to follow that name. And then all around the country, people call Paul Keating Paul Keating, and then it goes beyond this country.
Across the border, people call the person Paul Keating. Exactly that is how all phenomena depend on being given name and label and it applies to all, to the table, cup, book, light, room to all of them. And even in my speaking third person, translating in Rinpoche’s case, Rinpoche being called Rinpoche was the name given that already in the beginning was not as Khensur Rinpoche, but it was a name or title later on given and then came to exist as Khensur Rinpoche. So similarly, in your cases, you would all have a name and being related within that form of existence. And this wasn’t in the very beginning when you were just born infant.
It only came into being subsequent to being given the names, whatever you are called. Similarly, cat, dog, all these come into being depending on the name. Also, the very fact they depend for their existence on name and concept labeling it indicates that they don’t have independent existence, that they do depend on their name and concept labeling that. If they don’t exist with dependence on their name and concept labeling the name, then in the case of flower, from the very beginning, before the name flower was given to the object, already the initial people prior to the label given already should have gotten the idea whenever they saw the component of the stalk, leaves and the petals, that they would have the idea thinking, Oh, that is a flower.
But in fact, that would not have been the case at that time. Jetsün Tsongkhapa, the great fourteenth century teacher, advises if one understands well the manner how phenomena exist being given name and labeled by concept, their lack of existence from their part would come into one’s understanding quite well. That is the advice. Accordingly, firstly, if we make attempt in trying to get a good idea about the manner how phenomena are given name and then labeled by concept and name, then this would give us this would make us come to the understanding that the phenomena does not exist from its side. So that itself means that we have a good idea about that which is to be disproved, that which is to be negated, because that which is to be negated, in essence, means the apparent independent existence from the part of the phenomena.
So once one comes to that, then that is a good step forward towards understanding of the view. Śāntideva, the author of the present teachings, therefore says, without coming in contact with the object of label, one will not come to understand the lack of existence from the part of the object. What this means is firstly, within our mundane mind state we have ignorance, which is of two aspects: the grasping at person as existing truly. So grasping at person, grasping at the true existence of person and grasping at true existence of phenomena, or in other words, grasping mistakenly that phenomena exist truly. Out of this, so there are the two fold aspects of our ignorance.
Out of ignorance one fabricates about nature of phenomena, labeling or thinking, labeling and thinking that phenomena exist from their part truly, inherently, or in other words, that phenomena exist from their own characteristic, which in actual fact is not what phenomena exist or things exist that way, they don’t exist that way. So this very fabrication from the part of the ignorance towards phenomena as existing from their side is the object of label what in the previous lines called the object of label. Ignorance, the grasping at true existence fabricates in that way about phenomena that it fabricates the phenomena. It fabricates phenomena existing from their own side, although in actual fact phenomena or things don’t exist from their side. Now in one’s understanding of that which is to be negated and therefore coming to understand the view, the reality, one firstly has to realize that there is this labeling, the fabrication about phenomena from the part of ignorance.
And then with one portion of one’s meditative mind during analysis session, that other portion, one portion of one’s meditative mind has to do the checking, the analysis, whether as ignorance has fabricated and projected about phenomena, is that actually to be found in the nature of phenomena or not? So in that way the other portion of one’s mind needs to do the analysis, checking whether phenomena actually do exist from their part or not, or contrary or in accordance with ignorance. In this way the other portion of mind which does the analysis has to check whether as ignorance that grasps at true existence fabricates and projects, is that actually to be found or not? And one needs to put on suppositional basis, even suppose things do exist from their part as projected by ignorance, what are the implications? Are or not.
So in this way, that very contemplation in this way about this topic really are in essence the actual meditation on emptiness. Without coming to an idea about the apparent existence from the part of phenomena, which becomes without coming to the understanding about that which is to be negated, there is no way one would come to realize emptiness. So one firstly, towards the step to realize emptiness, one needs to have clear idea or understanding about what is actually to be disproved, what is that which is to be negated, to be proven. If one fails to have that part, then it would be like what are examples such as one trying to shoot an arrow without firstly seeing the target, one trying to wage war without firstly identifying who the enemy or enemies are. In the case of the first example, if one has not seen the target in the first place, then no matter one makes a big gesture about being so hyped up without shooting the arrow, one would not hit the target because one would not be able to identify where the target is.
One has not done that. Similarly, as regards to the second example, if one has not first identified who the enemies are, one might end up going all sorts of directions, but not being able to actually combat the enemy and not be able to have a successful waging of war. That’s in classical period of the examples. So the target here is that which is to be negated. That is the target, the object of disproving, the object of negation.
Then if that is the target, then which is the arrow? Well, in accordance with the perfect teaching by Buddha Śākyamūni presenting the reasoning of dependent arising, there is this format of reasoning, say, in the case of sprout. It goes, let sprout be the investigative referent. It is not inherently existing because it is dependent arising. In other words, because it is a dependent originated phenomena.
So that very reasoning itself is the arrow to shoot at the target, the reasoning. The person shooting the arrow in this case is the person doing the meditation on emptiness. By applying the reasoning which is like a sharp pointed arrow, one would eventually come to actually make a strike at the target, which in the present meaning case is to disprove that which is to be disproven, that which is to be negated. If that happens, then in the case of example, it would have been like where the sharp accuracy of the shoot of the arrow hits the target, and the target is bombarded or collapsed, whatever the case be that it has made to that. Similarly here, by applying the reasoning, one then would strike the target, one would come to disprove the apparent existence from the part of the phenomena from its own side.
And then the object of negation or that which is to be negated actually gets negated, one understands emptiness. By applying the reasoning which can be seen as shooting the arrow when one is able to have the wisdom decisively coming to understand that the apparent existence from the part of the phenomena is not to be found. In other words, that which is to be negated does not exist. It is not there at all. When that comes about meaning when one has that wisdom realizing that which is to be negated is not there, then that in meaning is what is called realization of emptiness.
To hit the target in its proper context, for example, one needs an arrow. Here the arrow is the reasoning proving lack of true existence about phenomena. That is the arrow. Without an arrow, one would have nothing to hit at the target. Similarly, if one has not got good idea about the reasoning, then one will not come to understand what is that which is to be negated.
In that case it becomes that without the arrow one has not made to the target. Regarding the reasonings to prove emptiness about phenomena, there are many reasonings. Amongst all the many reasonings, one which is considered the best, the sublime, most effective is the reasoning of dependent arising, which literally is the reasoning of dependent origination, dependent arising. And it is given the metaphor as the king like reasoning, which in its case, in the past in society, king is considered by everyone as the topmost. So in that context, this reasoning as well at that time is given the metaphor as the king like.
Amongst the many reasonings to prove selflessness or non true existence, Buddha Śākyamūni has advised that the reasoning of dependent arising is like the king, the foremost reasoning, and all other reasonings are like its entourage which are already in meaning included in that reasoning. The great fourteenth century master teacher therefore says in his Praise to Dependent Origination. Therefore, he says in his Praise to Dependent Origination taught by the Buddha that the matchless reasoning of the essence of Buddha’s teaching as taught is the reasoning of dependent arising. Accordingly, what that means is Buddha Śākyamūni has taught many reasonings of all. The most matchless one which surpasses all other reasonings is the reasoning of dependent arising, which proves the very essence of the teachings of the Buddha.
Therefore, even in such writings and teachings, we find reference admiring the dependent arising reasoning as the matchless one. Therefore, Śāntideva appropriately says the line which quoted at the beginning of the evening, The truth of the ignorant ones is no different to illusion. What that means is the mundane beings who have not realized view and who are in that sense ignorant, they fabricate phenomena as truly existent, although they are not truly existent, and that is their truth. But that is no different to the illusions produced by a magician who through in classical periods a magician would do that who through a certain spell charming trick of a tree or a pebble of a rock or stone would transform out of them to a spectator, illusion of horse or ox or elephant. So there is no difference between the two.
That is the remark made here. What that example means is in the classical period, a magician would charm some mantras, a formula, and then would charm the basis it could be a piece of a tree or a small pebble, a piece of a stone and then would throw it in the arena of the show before the spectators. And then the eyes of the spectators get tainted by this spell charm, and to the spectators therefore they appear transformed out of these bases transformed horses, elephants, and so forth. They do appear as such to the spectators, and spectators as well cling on to the grasping that there really are horses and elephants existing there. Like that example, in our case we have in our mind, within our self, our continuum, or within our continuum, in other words, in our mind stream, we have grasping that phenomena truly exist, or literally called grasping at true existence.
Out of that true existence we project, fabricate that phenomena exist from their own part. Phenomena apparently does seem to appear existing from their own part. So there is, from our part, both the appearance of the phenomena as existing from their part or from our side, the clinging that phenomena do exist from their side. In the case of the spectators, there do appear to their side horses and elephants, but in actual fact there really are no horses and elephants existing by their own characteristics. In other words, in actual fact there are no horses and elephants actually existing there.
Although, to repeat back, backwards, that is how to spectators how it appears, and that appearance is caused by the spell charm made on the basis of the illusion, the pieces of tree and the pebbles. Similarly, in our case as a mundane being, to our mind phenomena or things do appear as if they exist from their own characteristics, from their own side, and from our side as well we cling on to that. It is so much that the very moment that phenomena or things appear, they do appear to our mind as if they exist from their own side, and we do cling on to that. But likewise, in the actual fact, there is not a single phenomena to be found existing from their own side. To put it very precisely, we can even say that there is not even a particle about any phenomena or thing which exist from their own side truly, there isn’t at all.
In the case of magical illusion, the spectacle of horses and elephants appearing comes about depending on many causes and conditions, the magician’s spell charm being charmed upon the substances, and then the substances gathered there, meaning being present there, the piece of a tree or a pebble. And then when these are gathered, then the spectacle, the illusion appears. Now if the illusion, the horses and the elephants do exist from their own side independently, or truly, inherently then it would mean that they don’t have to depend at all on the magician’s spell and the gathering of the substance, the base of the substance basis of the spell charm, that from their side, there should be an actual horse or an elephant actually appearing as if we normally in conventional actually existing horse or elephant would exist, that it should be there, conventionally existing. But that is not how it is, that the illusory horses and elephants appear in that way and exist so. They do depend upon those factors. In the same way any object, say table or ourselves or any other object or phenomena, they do appear to us as existing from their own side, as well from our part we cling on to the misconception that they do exist from their own side independently or truly.
But as regards their actual fact, how they appear so is dependent on so many factors gathering together, becoming the causes and conditions upon which the whole appearance of those phenomena, even as truly existing, happens. To start with, in our mind, as an ordinary being in our mind, there is grasping at true existence as well as the imprint of grasping at true existence. When these are present, along with that, when the external object appears, then combination of these factors give rise to the appearance of the external phenomena as truly existing from their own side. That is this can be put in more detailed way that it is due to the cup and the table and so forth, any other objects being present there along with there being ignorance, grasping at true existence as well as the imprint of ignorance, the imprint of grasping at true existence. When these are gathered, then there does appear these objects or these phenomena as existing by their own characteristic, existing from their own side.
So in this way, even their apparent existence as from their own side, for that to appear to our mind as well is dependent on so many factors, conditions, and so forth. So they are dependently arising, dependently originated phenomena. And this is what at this point in the ninth chapter, the author, the teacher then explains it is similar to the case of a magician’s illusory spectacle. The illusory horses and elephants do appear as existing from their side as well there is clinging from the part of the spectators. Similarly, in our case things do appear as existing from their side as well we, from our part, we do have clinging that is so.
But yet all these in the respective case arises with dependence on causes and factors gathering together, but without dependence on their causes and factors that would not appear or come into being so. This very then is the essence of the present analysis that because in these ways they depend on causes and conditions, they are non independent. They are not independently existing phenomena, that they are dependently originated phenomena. We shall stop here for this evening. And as regards this present reasoning, the reasoning of dependent origination, we shall go through it more in future Tuesday evening sessions.
And to put the translation third person, Rinpoche would like therefore to continuously explain about this supreme reasoning, reasoning on dependent arising. And the reason why I would like to continue explaining about it because this reasoning is extremely precious in the sense, through it one can come to so much of understanding regarding the reality, the way things exist. So in that way, we will continue it in next Tuesday evenings and so forth. One needs a good wisdom as well good memory, mindfulness. Whatever is gone over, one needs to retain them, not forget them.
And then in next part, meaning additional instructions and insight one gains, one takes them as additional instruction on top of what one has not forgotten and retain it as well. Then progress will come about. It would be like the example if one is to build a house, firstly one needs to have a good foundational base, and upon that one has to stack all the necessary cornerstone and base, and then the wall and then the house becomes good. So in this way, it would be very, very good if one goes about in that way. As regards the learning part and taking interest in the instruction by way of hearing and so forth are very important, where our mind, which does the learning part, is like the field.
And the instructions and the insight we gather are like the seed being planted onto the field of mind. And as the seed, its nurturing and so forth, gets more and more looked after, then there will be very good germination of spark of realizations on the view and its understanding. Without sowing the seed, there will be no sprout germinating. Okay. So if there are any questions, we shall have few minutes.
It’s a bit late. Now, first of all, one has to identify well what the ‘I’ is, and then one makes the analysis whether the ‘I’ exists from its own characteristic or not. And when one finds that the ‘I’ does not exist from its own characteristics or in other words, does not exist from its own side then one is getting to a point where the arrow is making to the target. When one is directly realizing emptiness during that session, while mind is on direct realization, then there would be no labeling because subsided. But, obviously, before going into a session, one would have the notion things are labeled and including emptiness itself, but not during the actual session when the mind is meditating on emptiness.
During that time, the person doesn’t have to label it as emptiness. Of course, generally, phenomena are all labeled by their name. But interpretively, that’s why there is emptiness of emptiness. It doesn’t exist in Yes. It wouldn’t be very enjoyable.
It’s like someone who on drugs gets spaced out. It’s so much enjoyable, seriously, that out of so immense joyfulness, enjoyableness that there is spontaneous shedding of tears from the eyes and the hair of the body rising upwards. In our general case, some people, they are so happy even if you console them, they still keep crying. Coming to actual serious point, definitely there is immense bliss in the mind. Already before going into the attempt to realize emptiness, one would have trained so much on altruism, wanting to remove the sufferings of sentient beings and bring them happiness.
And if that was already what has proceeded, then at the time when one realized emptiness, one gets the notion, awareness, that now I have got the means by which I can actually do that. So out of such realization or awareness, recognition, one really feels so much joyfulness in the mind. For example, if we have very important project to accomplish, and if the project is as well so huge that it requires so much time and effort, hard work, so forth, and in the actual accomplishing of the project one really puts so much effort, then if it comes to a point one has one day accomplished successfully the project, we can then imagine how a person would feel so much joyfulness. Now that, when compared to the joyfulness, well, in the case of emptiness realization, it might be said there is hundreds, thousand times more joyfulness in it compared to that. One would gain greater faith in the teachings than Dharma.
One would have greater diligence towards the teaching and more conviction in the teachings. Okay, thank you.