Audio recorded at Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 93-minute session, Kyabje Rinpoche teaches how to recognize mistaken minds through the concrete example of eating momos. He begins by establishing ethics as the foundation for all qualities, contrasting secular motivation (fear of punishment) with Buddhist motivation rooted in karma and compassion. He then focuses on studying Lorik (Buddhist epistemology) to differentiate correct minds, which perceive reality as it is, from mistaken minds like desire. He illustrates through momos: eating ten satisfies hunger and correctly perceives the body’s need, but eating the eleventh is pure craving that contradicts reality. Why continue eating when there is no need? Desire has taken over. He connects this to Dharmakīrti’s teaching that all afflictions arise from desire, and stresses that eradicating them requires not occasional reflection but continuous contemplation. Q&A covers pratimoksha vows, bodhisattva commitment, and recognizing when desire takes control. For practitioners familiar with Buddhist philosophy.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 2014-03-11 – KR.mp3
UUID: 3ffee23a-e14a-4e59-9d20-45db79ecee46
Teacher: Kyabje Rinpoche
Collection: Nature of Mind
Date: 2014-03-11
Recorded at: Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide
Words: ~3,618
So if you could generate the motivation as usual. As Ārya Nāgārjuna says in the letter to a friend, sometimes called the letter to King Gautamiputra, the Suhṛllekha, the just as a field is the foundation for all crops, likewise ethics is the foundation for all qualities. It is indeed from ethics that all qualities arise. There are multiple types of ethics. Mundane ethics or secular ethics and religious ethics.
In the Buddhist context, ethics is subdivided into three. The first subdivision is the ethics of individual liberation, pratimoksha ethics. This is probably similar to the secular ethics. The meaning of this quote is that the earth is the foundation for all beings, whether it refers to animate beings such as animals and so forth, or inanimate entities such as plants and so forth. Likewise, ethics is the foundation for all qualities.
What in this context is meant by the law. The law basically guarantees or ensures that heinous non virtuous deeds of body and of speech are punished, specifically deeds such as murder, theft, adultery, or for that matter, particularly heavy lies would fall under the scope of the law. Then I am not a legal expert, so I should perhaps not engage further in this topic. But I would point out that when one gets up in the morning, it is extremely important to at least generate the non religious motivation which thinks, I shall not engage in anything illegal forbidden by the law today. Well in general, the motivation not to engage in harmful deeds out of fear of the law, and therefore to abstain from illegal actions out of fear of punishment by the state is an average motivation, it certainly cannot be said to be a vast motivation, and cannot compare with the motivation which thinks, I shall not, for instance, kill this person because I can fully understand the hardship his family, his relatives would experience, and so forth.
Then countries such as Australia and other countries such as China have elaborate legal systems, which in general is an excellent thing. In particular, in a country such as this one, you have a legal system which is ensconced in a democratic society, which is excellent. However, from the standpoint of dharma, one’s motivation for abstaining from such deeds is the realization that they will give rise to powerful harmful effects in future lives. Therefore, even though from the standpoint of behavior, the behavior of someone abstaining from illegal deeds and that of someone abstaining from non virtuous deeds might seem to be similar in many cases, the motivation is somewhat different. Most of us probably have some type of vow of individual liberation of Patimoksha ethics, and many of us have Bodhisattva and Tantric vows.
Then, should one protect these thinking, if I don’t, I myself will experience suffering in the future, this is a somewhat more narrow minded viewpoint than should one protect these vows thinking, if I don’t, my deeds will harm others. Well, there is a broad compatibility between the illegal deeds one must abstain from, from the standpoint of the laws of the land and the non virtuous deeds one should abstain from, non virtuous deeds of body and mind from the standpoint of Buddhist secular ethics. Things change considerably when we address the issue of mental ethics. I think probably mental ethics is far removed from the realm of the law. I don’t know of laws which rule mental behavior.
However, this falls fully in the realm of Buddhist ethics, And Buddhist ethics entails training one’s mind to abstain from non virtuous mental deeds. This is something both Buddhist and non-Buddhist practitioners know, mental deeds such as anger, envy, competitiveness and so forth. Specifically, countering the afflictions which give rise to inappropriate mental acts begins in the context of the Buddhist Dharma with the ethics of a bodhisattva. This is important to understand the rationale for studying knowledge and awareness or Lorik on Tuesdays. It is through studying Lorik that we are able to differentiate between those worthy states of mind, those authentic states of mind which are to be cultivated, and those mistaken states of mind to be abandoned.
And therefore, it is critically important for us to differentiate carefully between minds and that which is the basis for the mind, in other words persons, to be able to understand that they turn away from each other, that they are of different natures. Likewise, it is important for us to understand that the person is of a different nature from minds and mental factors. This is not an easy topic for us to understand. Otherwise, if we were to think for instance that the deed of killing another human being is for instance of the same nature as anger, or if we were to think that a person is of the same nature as anger or as desire, considerable difficulties would ensue. For instance, should a person be of one nature with anger, then this person would always and permanently be angry.
This person would never smile nor laugh. From morning to evening, even while asleep, this person would be angry. Now obviously, we don’t know anyone of that nature. The same would be true if a person were of the same nature as desire and so forth. So these are topics we should investigate carefully.
Last time, I briefly introduced the topic of non associated compositional phenomena, but did not explain it in sufficient detail. We will start a bit higher with the issue of impermanent phenomena. Impermanent phenomena, things, composite phenomena and fabricated phenomena are all synonymous. Impermanent phenomena or composite phenomena are subdivided into three, matter, consciousness and non associated compositional phenomena. The third category, non associated compositional phenomena, are compositional phenomena which are neither matter nor consciousness.
This is why they are said to be non associated. They are not associated to matter or consciousness. And then through this study of mind and mental factors, we will be able to differentiate between authentic and inauthentic, appropriate and inappropriate states of mind. As far as the inappropriate or harmful states of mind are concerned, these include afflictions such as anger or competitiveness. Or envy for that matter.
Then, to really be able to eradicate these afflictions, we must reflect over and again on their thoughts. Not reflect on their thoughts occasionally and then pass on to something else. It’ll be very difficult to eradicate them in this way. We should reflect on the faults of anger continuously and then it is possible to dispel it. So reflecting over and again continuously on the faults of anger, we will no longer fall under the sway, under the power of anger.
In the same way as an insect for instance, will never venture intentionally into a fire, understanding fully that if it does so, it will be burnt and incinerated. Likewise, from our own side, understanding fully the thoughts of anger, we will never fall under its control or its power. As Dharmakīrti says in the Pramānavārttika, all afflictions arise from the view of the transitory composite. This in turn arises from ignorance which gives rise to desire. It is then in turn from desire that other afflictions such as anger and so forth arise.
And therefore, this is a stanza which should be meditated upon. It should not just be uttered and then set aside without further ado. It should be thought upon because it’s a very profound, literally a heavy stanza. And in turn, after repeated reflection, hopefully we can gain experience of the meaning of the stanza of Pramānavārttika. Its meaning in a nutshell is that all the afflictions ultimately derive from desire.
This is something we should investigate for ourselves. Is it true that anger derives from desire? Is it true that envy derives from desire? Is it true that competitiveness derives from desire? The study of Lorik and Mind and Mental Factors will lead us to the point where we can differentiate between correct and mistaken minds.
The foremost of the correct minds is the category of valid cognizers or Pramanas. In the context of mistaken minds, foremost mind to counter is desire, and the means to counter desire is through training in contentment. What is meant by contentment is to have few desires, and this is something which is emphasized from the very beginning of the Buddhist scriptures. Then, to understand clearly this distinction between correct states of mind, the foremost of which are valid cognizers and incorrect states of mind, we shall take some examples. A correct state of mind would for instance be contentment.
The opposite of contentment would be desire. Let us take the example of a meal, and the foremost of all Tibetan dishes, as you all know, are the famous Momos. Then, let us assume you are moderately hungry, you should be able to polish off 10 Momos. At this point, your stomach is full. If you eat an eleventh Momo, the eating of that eleventh Momo is in contradistinction with reality, with the reality of your stomach being full, isn’t it?
And therefore, if I take my own case, 10 Momo’s are sufficient to fill me up. And therefore, if I eat up to 10 Momo’s, I can say that the state of mind which fosters eating the Momos is a correct state of mind. It could even be said if I stop at the tenth Momo to be an incontrovertible state of mind, it would qualify as a valid cognizer. At the point of the tenth Momo, one’s stomach is full, and therefore, if one eats eleven, fifteen or 20 Momos, one is acting in discordance, in contradiction with reality, since one’s stomach is full, one does not need to eat anymore. So why does one eat more when in reality there is no need to eat more?
One eats more under the sway of desire, of craving for Momos. Then, clearly Momos are delicious. So, at first this is a very pleasant experience. After this difficulties arise, after an hour or so, you can neither stand nor lie, you cannot walk, you’re constipated, you go to the toilet nothing comes out, then if you continue to behave in this way, you become a fatty. Yeah.
Australia, So, Geshe-la says that his experience of bowel movement in Australia and India has been very different. In Australia, things tend to go out rather quickly. But in India it is more of a slow process. So you can see from this example that when one eats in surfeit, when one eats too much, one does so under the power of craving, and this in turn leads to hardship. Then I saw on television that some people first eat too much, and then they have to go to the gym and sweat it out for hours.
And this is really hard. In my own case, shortly after arriving, I thought to put on a lot of weight, and I had to change my diet and focus more on vegetables. I suspect sugar is the cause. And therefore, we can see that if we fall under this way of craving, we shall experience hardship and we should avoid it. It is therefore important for us to understand this distinction between correct and mistaken minds.
And with our example of contentment versus desire, contentment is a correct state of mind because it its assessment of the status of reality is correct, its object is correct. On the other hand, desire is a mistaken state of mind because its assessment of reality is false. And therefore, we should try to avoid falling under the sway of mistaken states of mind and instead fall under the influence of correct states of mind, foremost of which are valid cognizers, which in the Sautrāntika system are defined as new and incontrovertible minds. So if we analyze the terms of the definition, a new and incontrovertible cognizer, What is the meaning of the term incontrovertible? Incontrovertible means that this cognizer engages its object correctly and not only this, but it engages its object in a way which is of benefit to the being concerned.
We shall stop here for today. If you have good questions, please ask them. Yes, there is a difference. Pratimoksha in Sanskrit means individual liberation, this refers to the vows. Is actually the state of liberation, nirvana.
The etymology for individual liberation, pratimoksha is as follows, Through individually oneself engaging in this ethics, oneself attains liberation. Oh, sorry. Could Geshe-la, please thought could he clarify? I thought I heard that he said that mental ethics really begins with the ethics of a bodhisattva. Did I hear that correctly?
It’s not an easy topic. The 18 root vows and the 46 branch vows of the Bodhisattva vows are something I would like to explain in the future if there is time. Basis of my question couldn’t I mean, if you’re if there is an equation of the 10 non virtuous actions and ethics, then mental ethics, irrespective of wrong views because that’s a true school. Ill will and covetousness, surely those are also in the Your doubt is a good one. Basically, in the context of the Prātimokṣa vows, the vows of individual liberation, the foremost object of abandonment are the non virtues of body and of speech.
And the mental non virtues, which are indeed mentioned within the 10 non virtuous deeds, such as covetousness, ill will and wrong views, are subsidiary or ancillary objects of abandon. They are not abandoned for their own sake, they are abandoned in the process of reducing the power of physical and mental non virtues. Thank you Geshe-la. I was wondering if you could give us a little bit of an overview of what you might be teaching in the next month so that we can read the appropriate material. As I understand it, we have this very wonderful translation here, Elias, probably we haven’t got past the first line.
I have read Mind in Tibetan Buddhism, but it doesn’t seem to be following exactly the way that Geshe-la is presenting. So I’m just wondering if you can give us an overview of what subjects we should read up on or what particular topics. What would be very good would be if you could read Elias’s translation of awareness and knowledge, it’s only the translation of our own system. And if it is possible for you to memorize the definitions, if you’re able to do that and to reflect on their meaning, is very good. And then the first volume of what is known as Dura, which is an introduction to Buddhist logic, is translated in English by Dan Perdue, Debate in Tibetan Buddhism.
If you could just read the second chapter of each section, which is known as our own system. It’s a presentation of the Sautrāntika view. Not the first section, which is on debates, nor the last section, which is refuting objections. Just the second section of each chapter. One is fear of the consequences of that in future lives and the second one was not wishing to harm them to do harm to others and one was greater than the other but I was unsure which was the more virtuous.
So if I understand your question correctly, what you were asking is whether it is true that when one for instance abstains from killing an insect or an animal out of fear of the law or out of fear of karmic consequences for oneself in future lives, this is smaller deed than if one abstains from killing an animal out of compassion. This is indeed the case, and it is perhaps related to the difference between the lower and the greater vehicle. The practice of the lower vehicle is largely rooted in self-cherishing. This is not the case for the practice of the greater vehicle which is broader. So for instance, if one thinks that not only will such a deed cause hardship to oneself, but it will cause great suffering to others, this is a somewhat broader viewpoint than if one merely very narrowly focuses on oneself and thinks, ah, in the future, I will experience hardship as a result of this non virtue.
Now this is akin to the difference between the great vehicle and the lesser vehicle. I’m just trying to get a bit more of a bearing on the this tenth and eleventh Momo. Momo. I’m trying to understand what it is that has converted this absence of contentment when I should feel that there but I have had an excellent sufficiency after ten. That I can then see, at least I can perceive in my mind that I’ve now moved from simply satisfying some ordinary filling of my stomach and have now moved from that into craving, or desire or a mistaken view.
It would be useful to be able to think, well, I’ve now reached that point. What is it that’s happening in my mind at that moment that’s changed the dominant purpose? From the point of the tenth Momo onwards to the eleventh, twelfth, twentieth Momo, the rationale for ingesting Momos is none other than craving. In other words, the absence of satisfaction which arises from a lust for the taste of the momos. Yes, there is craving at the moment of ingestion of the first Momo, but it is not extremely coarse craving.
Then at the time of ingestion of the first Momo, perhaps we ourselves have not fallen completely under the power of desire and craving. We can control our desire and craving because desire and craving are weaker. Another question. Have you, Mindhu? Mindhu?
No? Maybe none. Is aversion strictly the inversion of desire? Is fear like a a perversion or an inversion of desire? Because if it’s all desire, where does aversion fit in?
Is that just strictly frustrated desire or just not wanting because of wanting to protect the self or how does that work? So, if we refer back to the stanza of Pramāna Vartika, which says that all afflictions arise from the view of the transitory composite, this in turn arises from ignorance giving rise to desire. It is implicitly asserted that desire gives rise to all afflictions. How does desire give rise to anger? Well, desire can have multiple objects.
One can desire a body, a name, a reputation, wealth. It is frustrated desire which gives rise to anger. For instance, if someone slaps one, tremendous anger immediately arises and one’s face flushes. Why is this the case? It starts out with great attachment and identification to one’s own face.
For instance, if Geshe-la gives me a resounding slap, does Pamela get angry? No. I’m not sure I like the direction. It is in relation with one’s own aggregates. Yes.
Would fear also work in the same way? There’s it is said that the the fear of falling is intrinsic to all human beings and probably of certain animals that if you have the fear of you have a sensation of falling, you immediately wanna stop it. Is that because of the desire for existence? So I will answer your question next time. I must think about it.
Your first doubt was a good one regarding the 10 non virtuous deeds and the three mental non virtuous deeds not being the principal object of abandonment at the level of the practice of the vows of individual liberation. Now generally speaking, when one is dealing with non virtuous mental factors, one cannot observe change over short periods of time. It’s a bit like a fruit tree, you don’t really observe changes over a couple days, it’s over months and years that you do observe changes. It’s the same thing with the mind. Lily.
Lily, please close, please. It’s regarding the incontrovertible state of mind. I take myself as the example. Say if I’m hungry as in my body needs nutriment, so far as I understand it Geshe-la is saying that’s a correct state of mind because my body needs nutrients, so it’s correct for me to eat. Now regarding my mind, my mind is not happy, it’s not satisfied so my mind wants to partake of sense pleasures.
So why is it an incorrect state of mind for my mind to want to partake of sense pleasures and why is it a correct state of mind that my body to partake of nutriment? I I have sort of interpreted your question in Buddhist terminology. And Geshe-la says, your doubt is a a good one. I will answer it with Pamela’s doubt regarding fear next time. The origin of fear is probably self-cherishing.
self-cherishing? Oh, yeah. Alright. We should dedicate our prayers mentally tonight to the swift discovery of the reincarnation of the holy teacher, Khensur Rinpoche, to his returning rapidly to Sera Je Monastery and undertaking up correctly the full courses of study. Since we ourselves have a close connection with Rinpoche, these prayers will have some effect.
Just a couple of quick announcements. This Sunday is the day of miracles. There will be a Puja with Geshe-la at 05:00. Sunday, Sunday, the day of miracles. Yes.
That’s yes, the forty nine days. There was a Puja today. Going to arrange some kind of ceremony when he gets back. So he said to hold off until he returns. And speaking of Tenzin, he was due to return this weekend but he has been delayed so he won’t be returning this weekend.
Not quite sure when, hopefully not too long.
Key terms in this teaching
- individual liberation
- The liberation from cyclic existence achieved by a hearer (shravaka) or solitary realizer (pratyekabuddha), as compared with the full enlightenment of a buddha sought in the Mahayana. LYWA
- mental factors chaita (Skt); sem jung (Tib)
- Literally arising from the mind, a mental factor is a cognition that apprehends an attribute of its object and accompanies any principal consciousness that is concordant with it. LYWA
- pratimoksha vows pratimokshasamvara (Skt); so thar gyi dompa (Tib)
- The various levels of individual liberation vows for lay and ordained, including the five lay vows, and the novice vows and full ordination that monks and nuns take. LYWA
- puja chö pa (Tib)
- Literally, offering; a religious ceremony, usually used to describe an offering ceremony such as the Offering to the Spiritual Master (Guru Puja). LYWA
- Sautrantika do de pa (Tib)
- The Sutra school, one of the two main Hinayana (Lesser Vehicle) philosophical schools. The Sutra school accepts both self-knowers and external objects. LYWA
- self-cherishing dag che par dzin pa (Tib)
- The self-centered attitude of considering one’s own happiness to be more important than that of others. LYWA
- tantric vows sang ngag kyi dom pa (Tib)
- Vows taken by tantric practitioners. LYWA
- virtuous mental factors kushala-chaitta (Skt); ge wä sem jung (Tib)
- One of the six groups of mental factors, the virtuous mental factors are positive qualities of the mind that counteract the non-virtuous mental factors - the root delusions and secondary delusions. LYWA
Definitions adapted from the Lama Yeshe Wisdom Archive glossary, as taught in the Gelug tradition.