Lam Rim — 2012-04-06

Lam Rim (Khensur Rinpoche)

Lam Rim — 2012-04-06

Play Episode Pause Episode

1x

00:00 /

RSS Feed

Share

Link

Embed

<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="LAY9tO4fYB"><a href="https://askbuddhism.com/teaching/lam-rim-2012-04-06-2/">Lam Rim — 2012-04-06</a></blockquote><iframe sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" src="https://askbuddhism.com/teaching/lam-rim-2012-04-06-2/embed/#?secret=LAY9tO4fYB" width="500" height="350" title="&#8220;Lam Rim — 2012-04-06&#8221; &#8212; AskBuddhism" data-secret="LAY9tO4fYB" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" class="wp-embedded-content"></iframe><script> /*! This file is auto-generated */ !function(d,l){"use strict";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&"undefined"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),c=new RegExp("^https?:$","i"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display="none";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):"link"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute("src")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener("message",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute("data-secret"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+="#?secret="+t,e.setAttribute("data-secret",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:"ready",secret:t},"*")},!1)))}(window,document); //# sourceURL=https://askbuddhism.com/wp-includes/js/wp-embed.min.js </script>

Audio recorded at Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.

About this talk. In this 86-minute teaching, Kyabje Rinpoche examines the first limb of dependent origination — ignorance, the fundamental confusion underlying all suffering. He defines ignorance as a mistaken consciousness apprehending a self as inherently existing and independent of body and mind. Through concrete examples — the Dalai Lama’s identity, mirror reflections, a house pinnacle mistaken for a person — Rinpoche demonstrates how we project and impute “I” onto the aggregates. He contrasts the Buddhist view, in which a person is merely a nominal designation, with non-Buddhist positions positing a permanent, independent self. Ignorance emerges as a neutral mental state abandoned through repeated meditation, present in ordinary beings but absent in enlightened beings who have directly perceived selflessness. Throughout, Rinpoche emphasizes patient, gentle reflection rather than forceful intensity, stressing the long view of practice.

So at present, after a general presentation of dependent arising, Geshe-la, as mentioned this morning, will start presenting each of the 12 limbs in succession, starting with the first limb of the thoroughly afflicted cycle of dependent arisings, the limb of ignorance. The definition of ignorance is given on page three of your handout on definitions. And Geshe-la will do his best to explain the broad outlines of ignorance. It will not be possible to enter into a large number of details. From his side, the Geshe-la will try to explain this clearly.

From our side, he would like us to concentrate. His mind is happy to cover this, and he hopes ours is too. So we should endeavor to study and practice in keeping with the way in which the five first groups of disciples of the Buddha in the first teachings of the first turning of the wheel of the law, which the Buddha gave after attaining full enlightenment behaved. In other words, we should accept to start from the very beginning with a full realization that some topics will be difficult for us. We will not realize them at once and that we have to go over them again and again.

Topics like these are not easy and, Well, it is true that it is necessary for us to implant karmic imprints within our minds to realize them. Nonetheless, it is important to for us to start in a gradual way. Gradual here refers to training initially in the shared or the common path. As is said, bless me to engage in the mantra vehicle under the guidance of a wise captain after having trained in the shared path. The shared path here refers to that Sūtrayāna which is rooted in the training in definite emergence, bodhicitta, and the view realizing emptiness.

There are two ways to enter into tantra. The work the first is a more forceful approach, where one practices immediately tantra with the three principles of the ground of the path in the background. This is not our approach here because we will all be exhausted in the process. Instead, we will proceed in a relaxed and quiet manner, training initially in the three principles of the path in the Pāramitāyāna and then moving up to tantra. And the foundation of the three principles of the path is definite emergence or renunciation on which the totality of the Buddhist path is grounded.

Definite emergence itself arises from meditation on death and impermanence. Hence, when the Buddha initially taught the first turning of the wheel of the law, he taught the four noble truths. The first noble truth of which the noble truth of suffering is actually rooted in death and impermanence. For the teaching of the four noble truths is actually rooted in the presentation of impermanence, hence of death and impermanence. This in turn opens a door to an understanding of suffering and thereby leads to an understanding of selflessness.

And it is certain in our cases that we all practice an ethic which is an abandonment of the 10 non virtues. Therefore, we are able to realize that aspiration for betterment in future lives, in this very life. If we are able to realize it, we should train in it, and training in it, wish for higher rebirths in future lives. Now there is a multiplicity of higher rebirths. We should wish specifically for a higher rebirth which enables us to practice the Buddhist teachings.

Prayers which are made at the last moment of one’s life at the time of death are particularly powerful in this respect, and we are able to make these. And if we look at our own predicament, we are as Geshe-la explained this morning, disintegrating instant by instant. We ourselves have no control over this process. This process actually originated in the deeds of a previous person in a previous life. This instant by instant disintegration of our aggregates actually, is experienced by us as suffering.

This is the first noble truth, the noble truth of suffering. If we actually in turn examine what we as persons, as beings are impelled by in this life, we can see that we are impelled or controlled by our minds. Our minds in turn are controlled by karma and affliction, karma and klesha. This leads us to the second noble truth, the noble truth of origination. We can see that karma and klesha are at the origin of suffering.

And if we raise a question what the origin of karma and klesha is, we can see karma and klesha come from beginningless ignorance. For this reason, ignorance is posited as the first of the 12 links. And in turn, what does this ignorance arise from? This ignorance arises from the innate sense of an inherently existing self. If we then raise the question how this is to be understood, it is beautifully summarized by Candrakīrti in his entry in the Middle Way’s homage in which he pays homage to great compassion.

There is great danger if we do not pay careful attention to this presentation of beginningless ignorance that we will not be able to understand. Knows from his own experience that when he was attending, classes with, our teacher, because of the heat in India, the students would doze off. And Khensur Rinpoche had a very long switch and he would reach in the class and tap on the shoulder of the student who was dozing off, would wake up with a startle. For us, what this means is that from the very beginning, have to concentrate on these teachings. Otherwise, if we lose track at the beginning, it will be very hard to connect later on.

So it happens frequently with the great teachers in the monasteries. They have some eight classes a day that the students in the front row fall asleep in a state of meditative equipoise and stay in that state when the class changes. And when the new class comes in, suddenly terrified, they jolt up and bolt outside. So, well, these monks are monks of tremendous faith, great waves of faith. Sometimes the mental capacities are not up to par with the type of intellectual effort called for.

So what is this innate, what is this beginningless ignorance? This beginningless ignorance within the context of the 12 links is the innate apprehension at a self. Actually, there is a slight difference between them, but for the time being we will say it’s the innate apprehension of a self. This is the root of suffering in the self same way as those who accept the existence of a god acknowledge that suffering is allotted by the deity. So this ignorance is a consciousness.

It is a mistaken consciousness, a wrong consciousness. As a consciousness, it necessarily has an object, a referent object. What is the referent object of this consciousness? It is the I. This is the position of Candrakīrti and all of the great scholars of ancient India.

As is said in Candrakīrti’s Madhyamakāvatāra, under the power of the afflictions and so forth. Here, consciousness is under the power of the afflictions and thereby, the view of the composite, the erroneous view of the composite arises fostering ignorance. So in Tibetan, we have two different terms in this context. We have a da, which is translated generally as the self or I in classical Tibetan, and na, which is translated by I in English. It is this I and its actual mode of existence which has to be clearly identified.

So when we say, I rise, I sleep, I meditate, the question is, what is this I? Then in this context, one has to speak from experience and based on Geshe-la’s own experience of the process of imputation of an I or of a self. There are two means of examining this process. The first is by examining it with reference to oneself. The second is by examining it with reference to another person.

We shall at present examine it with with reference to another person. In this case, His Holiness the Dalai Lama. When we impute a self or an I on the basis of the aggregates of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, on the basis of what is that I or that self, the designation Dalai Lama imputed? It is imputed from our standpoint merely on the basis of the appearance of an image of the body of the Dalai Lama to the conceptual mind which thinks His Holiness the Dalai Lama. There is no other base for this imputation.

And therefore, as you said in Śāntideva’s Bodhicaryāvatāra, an erroneous appearance, an erroneous appearance based on the body dawns. Geshe-la finds this verse extraordinarily helpful to understand what is happening. We can see that based on the appearance of the image of the body of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to the mind, the self, the I of His Holiness the Dalai Lama is imputed by an exterior observer. Mhmm. Number.

For instance, if we look at our own reflection in a mirror, it is clear that we can fix any blemishes on our face, dependent on this reflection in the mirror. The reflection in the mirror, therefore, is functional. However, if we ask the question, is this reflection in the mirror my actual face? The answer is obviously no. Based on this example, we can understand the process of imputation.

When we impute the, name, His Holiness the Dalai Lama on the basis of the five aggregates of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, but specifically on the basis of the appearance of the form aggregate to our minds, is it the case that those aggregates are His Holiness the Dalai Lama? No. Definitely not. What actually are we referring to? We are referring to a mere imputation which actually can function as a person which is effective.

Therefore, when we speak of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, we are referring exclusively to a mere nominal imputation on the basis of the aggregates of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, which appear to us. If we ask whether this mere nominal imputation, in other words, His Holiness the Dalai Lama is established on the basis of the aggregates, the answer is no. It is merely imputed or projected from our own side. To give another example, if we take the pinnacle, actually, it’s a sort of a the top ball you find on some houses in Tibet, the pinnacle of a house. Seen from a distance, one might think it is a human being.

And from the side of the mind observing the pinnacle on the roof of a house, impute, this is a human being standing on the roof. Now, this imputation, this is a human being, actually is not established on the basis of the pinnacle on the roof, but from the standpoint of the mind imputing this on the pinnacle on top of the roof. If we ask whether the pinnacle on top of the roof is actually a human being or not, what criterion are we to adopt? The criterion is whether or not this pinnacle on top of the roof can perform the functions of a human being. Now the imputation of a human being on the pinnacle on top of the roof cannot perform the functions of a human being.

Therefore, this is not a valid imputation. So when Geshe Jampa Gyaltsen practices introspection, he can clearly see that there is a sense of an I within himself. This sense of an I rests on what? This sense of an I rests on the composite of Geshe Jampa Gyaltsen’s body and mind. Now if one analyzes the valid mode of existence of this I, one can see that this body and mind of Geshe Jampa Gyaltsen have a factor of appearance.

This factor or this component of appearance, which appears to the mind, is the basis on which the I, in other words, is designated or imputed. For this reason, it is said in Candrakīrti’s, Madhyamakāvatāra engaging in the Madhyamaka that it is critical to understand clearly the true mode of existence of the person which is both the accumulator of karma and the experience of the maturation of this karma. In the non-Buddhist systems of tenets, the person which is posited as the experience of karma and as the accumulative karma and the experience of the maturation, of karma is a person which is permanent one and autonomous. And this is for two reasons. First, it is in keeping with the systems of tenets of the non-Buddhist schools.

Secondly, it is in accordance with one’s own inner experience, with the experience of the practitioners of these schools. For instance, if one were to take my own example, when people see me from the outside, Geshe-la says, what exactly appears to their mind when they reflect on me? What appears to their mind when they reflect on me and think I, the translator is something which is actually separate from my aggregates. For this reason, it is said in Tsongkhapa’s Essence of Eloquence, his Legs Bshad Nyingpo, the non-Buddhist referring to the Indian non-Buddhist, through understanding mistakenly the existence of a person apart from the aggregates, and then the text moves onwards. This through understanding mistakenly the existence of a person apart from the aggregates refers to the core assertion of the non-Buddhist schools of tenets, which is the existence of a permanent one and autonomous person separate from the five aggregates.

This is a person which is both the accumulator of karma and the experience of the maturation of karma. This is not the Buddhist position. The Buddhist position is that the person is none other than an imputation on the basis of the five aggregates and there is no person apart from, these five aggregates. This is something Geshe-la feels which is accessible to experience. If we take the various experiences we encounter, for instance, I see, I have a headache, I hear, I feel in every single case.

The I in this context is posited on the basis of the form aggregate. However, if we think I remember, I recollect, then it is probably posited on the basis of the mental aggregate. And therefore it is said from the schools downwards, it can be asserted that excluding other substances, consciousness alone remains as a foundation of the person. Therefore, one must assert that a person is a being which is merely imputed on on the basis of the aggregates. So let us reflect for several minutes on whether the assertions of the non-Buddhist schools of tenets, which is the existence of an accumulator of karma and an experience of the maturation of karma, which is a person which is permanent one and autonomous are valid or not.

Or whether instead the Buddhist assertion of a person which is a mere outer nominal imputation on the basis of any of the five aggregates is substantiated. So let us please reflect on this for a couple of minutes and actually do reflect and not fall asleep. If you don’t think about it, you will fall asleep. A couple of minutes. Are you tired?

This is difficult, but it is something we should put effort effort in again and again. And when we gain some experience in this, we will start wondering whether perhaps the I, the self, is related to the aggregates. Then obviously, if it is related to the aggregates, this completely excludes the view that the I exists separately and independently of the aggregates. If one believes that the I exists separately and independently of the aggregates, one is not a Buddhist by tenet anymore. Now once one actually gets some sort of a sense that perhaps the I is related to the aggregates, one has a doubt that this is possible, then one is moving in the direction of selflessness.

And it is the reason it is because the I’s status is so important that the various Buddhist schools of tenet, the Vaibhāṣika, the Sautratika, the Cittamātra, Svatāntrika, and Prāsaṇgika Mādhyamika, all have their own specific position on the meaning of selflessness. Now these are topics which Geshe-la has studied for many years, but he will not be able to explain them in detail here. And here we are positing the viewpoint of the Svatāntrika Madhyamaka School for which a person which is the controller over the five aggregates, which are its basis of imputation and are what is controlled and which is different from the five aggregates, which are its basis of imputation and is what is controlled, is a mistaken object. It is a non existent object. And from the standpoint of the Svatāntrika Madhyamaka School, the non substantial existence of such a person is none other than the subtle selflessness of persons.

Therefore, there exists no autonomous person, which is the controlling entity of the controlled entity, which are its basis of imputation, the five aggregates apart from that basis of imputation which are the five aggregates. Such a controlling, such an autonomous person which is a controlling entity existing apart from its basis of imputation is a wrong object. Therefore, the mind whose mode of apprehension it is, is actually a wrong mind. This is what is referred to as the innate ignorance which apprehends a self. And this mind, ignorance, which apprehends a mistaken object is therefore a mistaken mind.

Beginningless ignorance from within the 12 limbs, 12 limbs of dependent arising is defined on page three of your handout as a mental factor ignorant regarding suchness, which has become the motivation of impelling karma, which is subsumed within one series of dependent arising with itself. Now, when we say that ignorance is a mental factor, ignorance within the 12 links, 12 limbs of dependent arising is a mental factor ignorant regarding suchness. The suchness which is referred to here is the selflessness of persons. Any deed which is motivated by such an ignorance, whether it be a virtuous or a non virtuous deed incurs the accumulation of karma. .

Are you tired? I’m tired. For Geshe-la, it’s difficult to posit the difference between the self and the self which is refuted within the context of the apprehension of a self. For you, he can’t say. This one, this one.

All right. Thank you. So Geshe-la has already explained the wrong mind, which is ignorance, and when beginningless ignorance arises within the context of the 12 links, and it is ignorant regarding suchness, and has become the motivation of an impelling karma, then this is said to be ignorance, beginningless ignorance, which is ignorance within the 12 links or the 12 limbs. So if we now try to, identify the characteristics, of ignorance from within the 12 links of dependent origination or dependent arising, this ignorance from within the threefold division of virtuous, non virtuous and neutral states of mind is not a virtuous state of mind. It is probably not a non virtuous state of mind.

It probably is according to the text, a neutral state of mind. Then from within the two objects of abandonment, it is actually an object of abandonment through meditation, not an object of abandonment through seeing. Within the five aggregates, the form feeling recognition, compositional and consciousness aggregate, it is the fourth aggregate. It is subsumed within the aggregate of compositional factors. And finally, the most difficult question within whose continuum is such an ignorance present.

Such an ignorance is definitely absent. Ignorance from within the 12 limbs of the dependent arising is definitely absent within the continuum of an ārya being. But it is present within that of an ordinary being. Now what is the difference between an ārya being and an ordinary being? An ārya being is a being who has had direct experience, in other words, who has seen directly as if one were to see with one’s own eyes, the subtle selflessness of persons.

An ordinary being is a being who has not had such an experience. Now why is beginningless ignorance from within the 12 links of the dependent arising absent within the continuum of an Ārya being? It is because, to take an example of an Ārya being, a hearer, Ārya being, an Ārya Śrāvaka, in other words, who is on the path of seeing or meditation, does indeed experience the appearance of an autonomous person which is the controlling entity of the aggregates which are its basis of designation and which are controlled by it, but it does not engage, it does not apprehend the person in this way. Therefore, even though the person appears as autonomous to the mind of Ārya Śrāvaka, it does not engage into it.

Now in whose minds is this beginningless ignorance within the 12 limbs present in the minds of ordinary beings as Geshe-la himself who do not have this experience and whose minds are totally controlled by the appearance of the person as an autonomous entity. This is heavy stuff, isn’t it? Any karma which is accumulated under the influence of such a mistaken mind is contaminated karma, and whether it leads to worldly happiness or unhappiness, they are ultimately of the nature of suffering since since they are rooted in a wrong mind. So, Geshe-la will stop here. The presentation of beginningless ignorance from within the 12 limbs of dependent arising.

He would ask you to reflect upon it and we will talk about it again tomorrow. This is the most difficult topic in Buddhist teachings. And while it is true that we should practice everything we study, Geshe-la would like that you not, be too hard upon yourselves and don’t put too much pressure upon yourself. Again and again, reflect on these topics and understanding will dawn quietly. It is said that there are some really good practitioners who think about this so forcefully that they can’t even handle eating lunch or supper.

It is said that there are practitioners like that, but please be relaxed in your practice. However, reflecting in this way is a real benefit. We shall take only one question. Pamela? Precisely, it is an object of abandonment through meditation because it is abandoned through the nine stages of the path of meditation.

Where through repeated meditation, the force of the appearance of the person as an autonomous entity separate from its basis of designation dwindles as the karmic imprints which give rise to this weaken in the same way as a seed cast in fire is eventually burned. Are you tired? Little bit. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. That’s wrong. Oh, good. Good. So, please don’t be, troubled by, this topic.

The most important thing is your health, your bodies. Therefore, don’t let it affect your health, but again and again become familiar with this until your understanding increases. We should have the long view and not think that we will realize definite emergence bodhicitta and the view of emptiness in this life in the same same way as Buddha Śākyamūni did not attain full enlightenment in one life, but trained over countless eons to reach the point where he could manifest full enlightenment for the sake of sentient beings. Why is that kind of maybe we will stop here for today. Yeah.

Alright. Let’s see. His stuff..