Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 44-minute teaching from a 1986 weekend retreat, Khyentse Rinpoche guides practitioners through an inquiry into the nature of mind and awareness, starting with a direct meditation technique: observing a single thought and tracing where it arises, where it dwells, and where it disappears. He then pivots to examine who or what knows these arising and disappearing thoughts, using concrete examples like looking at a flower or shrine to show that the knowing awareness itself is just as difficult to locate as the thought it observes. The session develops into a sustained exploration of emptiness and Buddha-nature using accessible analogies—especially the mirror, which reflects both ugly and beautiful forms without being stained by either—to distinguish between the empty, unchanging essence of mind and the changing reflections that appear within it. Khyentse carefully distinguishes example emptiness, available to practitioners on the path of accumulation and application, from ultimate emptiness realized only on the first bodhisattva stage. He uses a dream metaphor and questions about enlightened perception to help students grasp how the Buddha’s non-dual view transcends past, future, conception, and effort entirely. The teaching closes with a brief bridge into Buddhist logical analysis of characteristics and their role in understanding phenomena. Suitable for serious practitioners already familiar with bodhicitta teachings.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 02 WR.mp3
UUID: 3ccdc88c-ca43-4599-9e56-cf2694258722
Teacher: Khyentse Rinpoche
Collection: Weekend Retreat (Khyentse Rinpoche)
Date: 1986 (exact day not recorded)
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 44.8 minutes
Words: ~4,150
If one single thought arise, then examine where does this thought come from. Where does it stay or where does it abide now? And the moment when you concentrate on the thought, the moment when you ask this question, the thoughts will disappear. The first category of thought will disappear. And when you realize that the first category of thought has disappeared, then concentrate and see where does it disappear, where has it gone?
And when the thought come, who is knowing that thoughts are coming? Who is the knower of this appearance of thought? Who is the knower of this arising of thought, abiding of thought, and disappearing of thought? I think we, yeah, rest of all.
So any questions you have? Do you have any questions about meditation or things which we talk? Who the knower of the thought? Who is there? That I asked you.
Yeah. Well, who? Yeah. Tell me. And who’s what?
This is, well, this is our problem here today. Yeah. Not only that. Not only that. That is already very, very gross. Not only that. When you look at this flower, this shrine, this table, who is the knower of this shrine? Exactly same. But I can say that’s me. Yeah. But which me? You see? One that is here. In this present. Then why you had this trouble of not finding the knower of the thought? Isn’t that also one which is here now? Is it? So who is the one who is the one? Are you sure that that is one, not two? One. One. And who is it? What is it? So which means you are saying that these thoughts are not you. So this me is also your mind. Right? Yours. Right? This me is also yours. Your mind and your name and your I, who is closer to you? My mind. Your mind. But you use more your name and your I, usually. I am something something and my name is something something. Are they same? Your name is given and sort of given by some other person or maybe given by yourself, copied from somebody. I, the concept of I is also habit which you have from the past life. And the word I, which you call yourself, is the influence from others. Everybody calls oneself I, so that’s why you also call yourself I. Now, mind is more deeper. Now, who is this mind? Where is this mind? So that’s why I told you this mind is inherently nonexistent. If you examine or if you look right into this mind, then it is free of any ground or origin. In essence, free of any coming and staying and going. And that is the essence of mind, and that is the shunyata. But still, this is a very intellectual understanding. You haven’t had any experience of this shunyata. Why you don’t have experience? Because you are always covered by your habit of mind. Somewhere existent. Right? Any more question? Yes. But the origin of the mind — the origin of the mind, you — I think we have this language problem here this time again. The second mind comes from the past mind, so that’s why there’s a reincarnation, right? Something like that. Reincarnation. You see, this mind comes from a past life’s mind. But here, what we are talking about is the essence of the mind itself. Essence of the mind itself and nature of the mind. Yeah. This would — this was quite — has to be explained more. Okay. When you talk about — I think we should talk about relative truth and ultimate truth. When you talk about the continuation of mind, we talk about dualistic aspect of the mind, you see? But non-dualistic aspect of the mind, you know, this quotation, maybe you can translate. Jeffrey Hopkins used to say, on the mind there is no mind. Mind is clarity. Do you remember this quotation? Yeah. This is one big quotation that is always used in Buddhism. The mind which we consider right now is dualistic mind, and that is the continuation. Understand? The essence of the mind is emptiness. Nature of the mind is clarity. You see? And these two, emptiness and clarity, is never coming and going and abiding. It is beyond coming and going. That’s why you have to say that if you want to see the wisdom, you have to stop the mind. You have to stop the dualistic mind. Only — yes. Yeah. Yeah. Usual thoughts or usual mind. The essence of the mind is, of course, emptiness. What is the mind in Western definition? Do they usually consider this to the thought? Thought. So past thought is gone. Future thought is not arise. Where is the present thought? This moment thought. You see, even this moment has almost about hundred categories already. Did we — No. I mean, when you talk, for example, in this second, there might be about twenty to thirty thoughts already. The thought which we have — What I’m saying is there’s sort of there’s no wild thinking. Our thoughts are always gone, gone, gone, gone. You understand? There’s not such a thought that sort of stays there, one thought. No. Essence of the mirror is dualism? No. Essence of the mirror is not dualism. Essence of the mirror is just a mirror. Clarity also not dualism. For example, the mirror can have reflection of ugly and beauty at the same time. Right? But that doesn’t mean that mirror is affected by ugly reflection and beauty reflection. Yeah. But you’re saying that the essence of that mind is emptiness. Mhmm. The nature of the mind. The nature of the mind is clarity. And that is actually the same. Yeah. And, like, when we look at the mirror — Mhmm. You know, we’re seeing it, and that’s in the thoughts. Mhmm. But the actual mirror, the essence of the mirror is there, and it has the potential to reflect whatever. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That is the emptiness. Mhmm. Mhmm. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. That’s why we last night discussed that emptiness is — you should, I think, try to — you know, many people think that emptiness is something sort of a void or empty, empty. You see? Once you try to understand that emptiness is something got to do with more potential, you know? Because it’s empty, that’s why it can be everything like that. More like potential? Potential. Exactly like a mirror. Mirror is empty of both bad reflection and good reflection. Yet, they can have good reflection and bad reflection if there is a perceiver of the bad reflection and perceiver of good reflection. But that doesn’t still mean that mirror itself is stained by bad reflection and good reflection. Even though there is a reflection, mirror is still far beyond the bad reflection and good reflection. Mirror is not changed even one minute. So, right now you have this Buddha-nature. Now, this has some debate actually, but anyway, it doesn’t matter. Right now you have Buddha-nature within yourself. After you get enlightenment, you have this Buddha-nature. Buddha-nature is not changed. You understand? The reflection which reflects on the Buddha-nature is changed. By one person, you mean? When — by which can you find — You see, the thing is that we have this example emptiness and absolute emptiness. Example wisdom and absolute wisdom. That is very important to understand. Right now, what we are talking, this emptiness, this wisdom are all example wisdom, example emptiness. It is not the real absolute emptiness and absolute wisdom. The absolute wisdom can be only realized when you reach on the first stage of bodhisattva. You see? So, yeah, the mind is same. If you are talking about one person, yes, mind is the same. This is a thing of your mind, not the second thing? Well, nature or essence of the mind is primordial, primordially pure. You understand? And defilement and this dualistic is temporal. For example, if the sun is behind the cloud, for example, today, then normally we say, Oh, not a sunny day. Today’s cloudy. Yes? But sun is there still behind. And if the clouds go away, we say, ah, there comes the sun. And then we say, sun came just recently. But that is what happens when you get enlightenment. That is what — the sun is always there. Buddha-nature is always there. It is your perception. You see, we perceive like this. That’s why if I ask you a question — Okay. For example, when you get enlightenment — Okay. Maybe we make the question, this question more. For example, if you — you people are dreaming right now, sleeping, dreaming, and then you are dreaming that you are very hungry, but in fact, you are not hungry. And then inside the dream, you are eating something. And inside your dream, you dreamt me. And I ask you a question, are you really hungry? What will you say? In the dream. In the dream. Yeah. I — you dreamt of me asking this dream question. Are you eating and are you hungry? You will say yes. Right? No. That’s why I’m saying that you are totally dreaming. I’m not saying that you are recognizing that you are dreaming. You are totally dreaming. So hungry. No? But we’re hungry. Yeah. And then when you wake up, and then I ask you the question, last night, were you really hungry? Now what will you say? Where were you? I was then. Yeah, but talking about this, you are already woken up. You really eating? Did you really eat a biscuit? No, but I thought I was eating. You thought you were eating, but you were not, actually. If you get a million dollar in the dream, you won’t have it in the morning, right? So now the same thing. Now I ask you, Are you sitting there? Then you will say yes. After you get enlightenment, if I ask you, Were you sitting there on that day in Adelaide? What will you answer? I was then. I was — were then. But — But I’m happy to — Consider very carefully. When you get enlightenment, I’m strictly talking about your view, an enlightened being’s view. So for an enlightened being, do you think there is a phenomena that is something like I was? No. I don’t exist — Yeah. And then there is no past time. So do you think there is I was? So in other words, are you saying that when you get enlightenment, you have never once experienced a life of sentient being? Okay. I’m strictly talking about his own view, an enlightened being’s view. I’m not talking about my view or your view. You see, the Buddha has two views, his own view and our view of Buddha’s view. Our view of Buddha’s view, if we ask — as we talked last night, if a man go and ask, is this water? Then he will say, yes. This is water. And if a fish go and ask, is this home where I can swim? And he will say, yes, this is home. This is where you can swim and sleep. He agrees to everybody. But his view, does he remember? In his view, his enlightened view, Does he remember? What is there to remember? And on the top of that, does he have a remembrance? I don’t think so because he doesn’t have forgetfulness. Oh, yeah, of course, of course. Our view of Buddha’s view, like Śākyamūni, he can tell Ānanda for about thousand years before. I was such and such king. I cut my head and give it to somebody. I take out my — that, of course, Nirmāṇakāya. But I’m talking about his view. Right? In for someone whose view is an enlightened being. So for him. Take the example of last night, somebody walking in the dark room, an ordinary being, and then you are knocked by something. I mean, you just — you’re knocked on something. Before you switch on the light or whatever, you feel it is just you are knocked on something. So there’s only the phenomena of something, but not an identified phenomena. And then when you switch on the light, Ah, this is the table that I have knocked. So you have table. Now on the top of the something, you have this table that knocked you. And if there is an — okay — sublime being, you know, not the best one, some ordinary sublime being — I mean, not ordinary, for someone who is on the path of application. If he walked in and he banged on the table, Ah, there is something, but there’s also my leg. You see? So that’s why there’s a pain. Ordinary beings, we never thought about our leg. We always think that something is there. That’s why I am hurt here. But this sublime being, he thinks there’s something and there’s also my leg, so that’s why there is a pain. But fully realized being, he will never walk, you know. You see? No, he won’t. Because fly means you’ll have to come down. Right? Are you asking strictly about his own view or our view of his view? That’s why then — His. His view. Yes. Then he has no concept of walking, you see. He’s beyond walking. He’s beyond sitting. It’s our view of his view. Now you have to talk about that. His Holiness Dalai Lama. Dalai Lama, a Tibetan monk. You see? All these are your perception. No, that’s easy. You see, Śākyamūni Buddha or Dalai Lama, they are enlightened beings, and they have their own view, and they have our view of their view. See, that’s why this for us to — Us to communicate with them? Not to communicate, but — for me personally, to try and — See the what it is like to have an enlightened mind. To sort of exist without past and without future. For his view, there’s no past and future. There’s no walking and sitting. Because all this is an effort. All this is a conception. All this past and future is an effort, conception, and conception is a suffering. How can an enlightened being have suffering? Past, something gone. It has some suffering there. Future, something not arise, something where you have to expect. And expectation is a suffering. Enlightened being doesn’t have this for his view. That’s why he has omniscience, you see. This is the reason of all-knowing wisdom. All-knowing wisdom is this. For example, if you have a car and if you drive this car, and if you’re somewhere in the road, this car is breakdown. And then you want to repair, but nobody — you don’t know how to repair. And then if you can ask Buddha to help now. Understand? He can repair. Now he can repair because he knows how to repair. Why he knows how to repair? Because he knows what is the reality of the road, what is the reality of the car, what is the reality of the driver, what is the reality of the problem. And the reality of the problem is no problem. Reality of car is no car. Reality of all this is none of your conception. That is what he knows. But in your view, he has repaired. And that is only your conception. Yeah, this man has repaired my car. That’s all. But he never repaired because there’s nothing to be repaired. Reality of repairing is not repairing. There was no problem at all. And that is the unobstructed action of Buddha. Why — it seems that you like your Buddha to be a little bit obstructed. Someone who — it seems that you want to get an enlightenment where they have past, where they have some more expectation. Maybe you like to watch something like a movie, a suspense movie. In the beginning, you watch, oh, what is going on next? What is going on next? You like to have this enjoyment. Right? It seems — But that is because to even comprehend that it is possible to not have a past experience. Of course. For the common being. I’m not saying that we should not have. I’m talking strictly about Buddha’s view. Don’t forget this. So — We have to see this. First, what we have to do is we have to see and we have to realize the example emptiness. And when we fully understand the example emptiness, then we will easily understand the ultimate emptiness, which is beyond emptiness word. Think that way and sometimes I forget that. We have lots of different technique. You can do the meditation on emptiness, but there are even better ones such as you can do the love and compassion meditation. You see, you can do compassion meditation. If you do an equal compassion meditation to all the sentient beings, from that you will understand the emptiness. Like that. Absolute emptiness, then — Okay, maybe we should talk about this a little bit. You see, there are ten stages of bodhisattva. Before ten stages of bodhisattva, there’s two paths: path of accumulation and path of application. And path of accumulation is a bodhisattva who has this wishing enlightenment thought, and on the top of that who practices the engaging enlightenment thought. And their view is, of course, emptiness. They practice compassion, bodhicitta, and six paramitas or ten paramitas. Anyway, those who have the vow of bodhicitta. And this path of accumulation is also subdivided into three categories or three parts. I don’t know how much — where we are. Maybe some of you are already Buddha or something like that. But generally speaking, most of us are very, very beginner of that path of accumulation. And then when you finish your path of accumulation, then you reach the path of application, applying that what you have accumulated. And then this path of application is also divided into four categories: the warmth, summit, patience, and supreme Dharma. And now when one sentient being reaches to this path of application, then most of the bodhisattvas, they are really quite free of the karma which makes you reborn in saṃsāra. But still bodhisattvas, you know, they have wished to be reborn in saṃsāra. You see? They have this compassion to be reborn in saṃsāra. But that is different. For the ordinary beings, whether they wish or not, if there is a karma pushing you or pulling you, then you have to be reborn. But when you reach on the stage of application, then — almost all the bodhisattvas, they don’t go back to saṃsāra. But in certain text, says some very weak bodhisattvas, they also go back to saṃsāra. And then still, you haven’t seen the ultimate truth, you know? You haven’t seen the absolute truth. Still you are on the example truth. Still you are on the example wisdom. Still you have example wisdom, example compassion, example emptiness. All are examples. Example Buddha. Still. Example Buddha is like Buddha Śākyamūni. You see, he’s an example. He’s a manifestation. Doesn’t the word manifestation have some sort of a meaning of fake? Yeah. Manifest. So it has some meaning of fake, not real one. Okay. Anyway, something like that. And then when you reach the first bodhisattva stage, then you see the ultimate wisdom. But still, it’s like during the path of accumulation and application, if you have never seen moon and somebody draw moon — it’s actually similar to this moon and show you, This is the moon. During the path of accumulation and application, you are studying this moon, pictured moon. And then when you reach the first stage of bodhisattva, then you see the real moon. Ah, this is the moon. And then second stage, the moon is bigger. And on the last limit or last sort of end of tenth stage and beginning of path of no-more-learning, then you see the full moon. I like that. But moon itself is not small and big from the beginning, right? Exactly the same. The moon, the ultimate truth is not big and not small. It is your accumulation and it is your — that has only power to see small but not big. This is a little bit confusing. Yeah. Yeah. Right. Right. Mhmm. Mhmm. And when you see a little part of the moon, you saw the moon. When you see a big moon, you saw the moon. And it’s all the moon. Yeah, right. One picture of moon. Yes. The difference — So this, when you are looking to the picture of the moon and when you really see the moon, that is — And after seeing the picture of the moon, and just before you — Right after seeing the new moon, and now this is the border of realization of real moon, right? So exactly the same. After this path of application, those who know only about example emptiness. And then you reach on the first stage, and then there you see the first glimpse of the absolute truth or emptiness. And then this is the border of saṃsāra and ārya. So now this person is surely not going back again, and he is what we call non-samsaric being. After that, there are still samsaric being. It’s like that. What time is it now? Is it time to stop? Again, talking about the mind. For a change, maybe we should talk about something other, bodhicitta or love and compassion. Don’t you think? But I’m also sure that you must have received bodhicitta teachings a lot. So the root of all the phenomena is one’s own mind. And this mind, if unexamined, then this mind rushes after different experience of the past. And if you don’t control this mind, this mind rushes, making different plans and having different expectation. And this mind, if you look right into it, then this mind is free of any ground or origin. In Buddhism, especially in Abhidharma, we have a few different ways of explaining the mind. There’s one root mind, and then there’s lot of attendant mind. The root — one root mind and lot of attendant mind, sort of attendant, thoughts and consciousness and conceptions. Now mind — you see, every single phenomena, they have their own characteristic. Maybe you know this. Sometimes we call — Sometimes for mahayana, we don’t call mahayana. We call characteristic vehicle or characteristic. Cause vehicle. Sometimes we call it cause vehicle or cause school, the school which analyzes characteristic. Now, in Buddhist logic, they believe that every single phenomena has its own characteristic. And in group, it has their own characteristic. For example, as a human being, we all have characteristic of human being. So if you ask, What is the characteristic of human being? Then you say something, One who has understanding, one who has one head, two eyes, and that kind of thing. And then, not only that, you have personal characteristic. You see, among this human being, individually we have our own personal characteristic. So characteristic is most important because when you talk about characteristic and when you think about the characteristic, then you will — Searching the characteristic is one of the best paths to find the fact. The fact. You see, we consider a person that, oh, his character is good. He has a very good characteristic. But that is not the actual characteristic. That is only our imagination. You see? But yet we call it characteristic. Characteristic is something that we imagine most of the time, something that we label. But in Buddhist logic, we have characteristic. A characteristic is something that identifies, a thing that identifies that particular thing. So, for example, what is the characteristic of characteristic? Characteristic of characteristic should be apart from three folds. If you say characteristic of human being is one who has horn and tail, then that is not a good characteristic because it is something not obvious, something that is not agreed by majority of people, and it is not something obvious. So it is just a deceptive phenomenon. And it is not a good characteristic. It’s a wrong characteristic. And if you say characteristic of human being is one who has eye, then this characteristic still doesn’t work because bulls, monkeys, they also have eye. So this characteristic is too much. You see? And then if you say characteristic of human being is one who has a mustache or beard, then that doesn’t apply to