Audio recorded at Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 48-minute class, Kyabje Rinpoche explores epistemology through the classical lorig framework: how do we know what we know? After reviewing Buddhist foundations—refuge, the four seals, Vaibhāṣika—he distinguishes valid knowledge (fresh and infallible) from non-valid knowledge. Three forms of valid knowledge include direct perception, inference, and subsequent perception, though subsequent perception lacks freshness because it apprehends what is already known. Using sensory examples (eye perceiving a form first versus second moment), he shows why repeated perception is not fresh knowledge. He then examines other non-valid minds—wrong knowledge, doubt, assumption, and inattention—that misapprehend their objects. References to Thursday’s examination indicate this is a formal study curriculum for practitioners already committed to rigorous doctrinal investigation.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 1994-06-30 – 12A – KR.mp3
UUID: df3e24a5-ace3-40cd-b799-c7e3c3ca6e28
Teacher: Kyabje Rinpoche
Collection: Tenets
Date: 1994-06-30
Recorded at: Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide
Words: ~2,668
So it would be good to write this down. What this concerns is it is a citation from lines about mind where generally mind is from one perspective of seven kinds amongst which the three are the mind which perceives things correctly, four don’t see correctly. So this citation concerns that topic and the actual citation starts with the words direct perception, inferential perception, and subsequent perception. So the second part of that citation reads, these three are the knowing mind. So the full quotation goes goes direct perception, inferential Sorry.
Direct knowledge, inferential knowledge, and subsequent Then the other part of that citation goes continues as the others are non knowing mind. What that last bit means is the other four types of mind are the mistaken minds which does not know the objects properly and so they are non knowing minds. There’s no. So is that alright? Mhmm.
Generally in the studies of mind which comes under the classical topic called lorig, awareness and knowing. Under that there are discussed four types of minds and that can be seen as a very wide ranging, all inclusive classification of mind being of seven types because we can say quite surely that there cannot be any type of mind which does not include in these seven types of mind. Yes. So we’ll repeat the lines again. So here to repeat the lines means we will go back the review of the tenets topic so far covered briefly and it will come handy afterward as it becomes clear.
Firstly, in the very beginning we discussed the difference between who is a Buddhist and who is an outsider or a non-Buddhist. The actual literal word for those two actually are insiders and outsiders. So first topic discussed earlier was what is the difference between insiders and outsiders. To interpret insider is a literal term used as those inside the path leading to enlightenment and outside those outside the path. Anyway, so under that topic, we discuss how a Buddhist is called a Buddhist because such person is one who goes for refuge to Three Jewels, Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha.
Why one goes to refuge to the Three Jewels is because presently one has so much and so many fears, sufferings, problems and so forth. Therefore one needs sources through which one would be rescued from these sufferings. The actual means by which one can be rescued from these suffering is Dharma. Therefore that is included in the refuge source or refuge object that it is through practicing and actual reliance on Dharma one becomes rescued. Buddha is the one who shows such Dharma unmistakenly.
Therefore we go for refuge to such enlightened being a Buddha. And then Sangha are the ones who whatever was taught exactly practices that teaching the Dharma. In brief these three are the sources of our refuge because all our mental shortcomings which we need to discard away becomes possible to discard away if we rely on on the Three Jewels and all the excellent qualities of mind which we need to acquire can only be acquired if we rely on the three. And That’s why whoever from the very heart, from the very bottom of the heart goes for refuge to these three thinking, I will only go for refuge to you, the Three Jewels, no one else. In that way, whoever goes for refuge to Three Jewels is called Buddhist, an insider on the path of enlightenment.
The trainings involved in having gone for refuge includes to observe the virtuous actions, the 10 virtuous actions, and to abstain from committing the non virtuous actions based on that to observe a pure morality. That is what is involved. Whoever has gone for refuge, that one must minimally keep up those trainings. Now the next is who is called a proponent of Buddhist tenet? Tenet.
Well, it is a person who basically no doubt has gone for refuge to the Three Jewels. Additionally, the person accepts the four fold view, what are called four seals, that all compounded things are impermanent because they dis integrate moment by moment. Secondly, all contaminated things are bound to be miserable because they are under choiceless control of impure thoughts and karma. Thirdly, that person of a is permanent, single and independent existence therefore selflessness a person. The fourth seal is that one believes that through understanding and practice of the Dharma as interpretable being represented by those above three points that one would be able to achieve nirvana, going beyond sorrow.
So the peacefulness of nirvana. So these four are the four seals. Whoever on top of having gone for refuge accept these four seals as a basic perspective. One practices in accordance to these four things as well explains to others on these. Such person is called a proponent of Buddhist tenet.
One who explains Buddhist tenets. Yep. That’s right. And then the next topic covered in the past was the definition of Vaibhāṣika. The lowest Buddhist tenet.
You would know that because we had that definition as a proponent of Vaibhāṣika who does not accept own cognizer, but accepts external things as actually existing. Or external things as actually truly existing. And then we covered the sub schools of Vaibhāṣika. There are three sub schools of that tenet. Those of the central region, second those of the eastern region, third those of Kashmiri Vaibhāṣika those who came from area called Kashmir.
That does not mean they are followers of Islam although Kashmir was predominantly and still is Islamic country but that doesn’t mean it simply means the specific exponent who came from such area. Now the next topic covered was how in that tenet, the Vaibhāṣika things are explained in the format of the base the base two truths, the path, method and wisdom, result result the body, Buddha body, or state of enlightenment. In the base two truths under that this explains the deceptive truth as something which when destroyed or disintegrated the thought retaining it is lost. The example was a flower or a pot which when destroyed you don’t have the idea of that object anymore. And the example of ultimate truth given was partless particle which cannot be destroyed at all.
The reason why the example flower is a deceptive truth is because when either we destroy the flower or split apart its parts such as when we split or take apart the flower then the thought which earlier was thinking of flower is lost, is no more there. That very shows the deceptiveness of that phenomenon according to this tenet and that it’s was the reason given as it being a deceptive truth phenomenon. Whereas in the case of a partless particle which cannot be split into any parts, cannot be destroyed into pieces, in that case, the mind or the thought thinking about it will not be lost because the very object of such mind or thought cannot be lost. In that way the object is very stable, unchangeable basis and that results in mind, the thought, depending on that object as well becomes unchangeable, unlosable, and that and that is how according to specific exponent, this present tenet, a partless particle is explained to be a ultimate truth phenomena. Then when it comes to what is the path which is of wisdom or which comprise of wisdom and method this tenet explains by wisdom it means realization of selflessness which here means realization of selflessness of person.
And by method it means the renunciation thought or the definite exit thought wishing to free oneself from saṃsāra and to attain liberation. So in that way that covers this tenets explanation about the path being method and wisdom. By practicing such method and wisdom, one overcomes the impure thoughts, the delusions, impure thoughts. And whenever one has completely overcome all impure thoughts that is simultaneous with attaining of liberation. So it is a state of mind having abandoned all impure thoughts.
And that itself is the state of liberation. And as is alive with the body of an ordinary person, it is called the nirvana with remainder or nirvana with residue. The result achieved are two two types: the nirvana with remainder and nirvana without remainder. And in both cases it should be seen as an achievement of accomplishment of having having overcome all impure thoughts, all delusions. In the very in the very beginning when one attains nirvana, one would still be alive in the world with the body of an ordinary person, a body which in the sense aggregates, which has been produced by impure thoughts and aggregates.
So although one has attained the state of having overcome all impure thoughts and in attain liberation, one is still with the residue of an aggregate produced by impure thoughts and karma. Therefore it is called nirvana with remainder and more specifically in scriptural terms it is called when that phrase nirvana with remainder is extended then the phrase becomes nirvana with the remainder of suffering aggregates. Now when a person who has attained nirvana later on dies, then that person is also free of the earlier aggregates So one is free as well of the earlier aggregates produced by impure thoughts and delusions. So there is at the time time of death with such person who has attained nirvana there is only nirvana left and that nirvana becomes the second called the nirvana without residue which when elaborated becomes nirvana without the remainder or without residue of suffering aggregates. So in that way there are those two types of nirvanas beyond sorrow.
So that’s what that word actually means. Sorrow transcended or beyond sorrow. Now when such a person who attains nirvana and for while remains alive but later on of course the aggregates produced by impure thoughts and karma will expire therefore it is a matter of time that the person dies. Now when the time the person dies and the aggregates cease as well then according to the lower vehicle tenets the specific exponents and Sautrantikas. They explain that the person now forever will never be reborn again.
So that’s what they say. And the reason why it is explained that the person now will never take rebirth again is because from one point the causes of rebirth which are impure thoughts and karma, karma in the sense ignorance based actions, these two are already terminated therefore there is no cause for the person to be reborn again. That is from one point. From the second point or second reason is because the person will not take rebirth in the alternative way due to the force of compassion and the force of dedicated prayers for others benefit because the person is what’s called one one who worked for one’s own liberation. There was no compassion, great compassion and so forth.
So that is ruled out that one would not be reborn in the alternative way by the force of compassion and karma. In that way the person doesn’t get reborn and that theory actually explains that the person’s continuity of consciousness has terminated. Therefore, the specific exponents and Sautrantikas explain such person has attained the ultimate goal of hearer’s vehicle. There is no further goal to achieve, also because to that very reason it is asserted that there is no need for that person to enter into a great vehicle, the Mahāyāna path, because the person has attained the ultimate goal. So these two tenets here specifically, specific exponents accept the theory that there are ultimately three goals.
Three ultimate goals. The ultimate goal, the individual realizer’s or solitary realizer’s ultimate goal, and great vehicle’s ultimate goal. Each in respective achievement is the end. There’s no need to go higher and achieve the higher goals. So I although these points have have been covered in the past, there is a special reason for reviewing them tonight.
Yeah. So please don’t please don’t forget them. These points may come in the questionnaire or they may not come in the questionnaire in the next Thursday’s examination. Okay. So tonight we go continue from what was finished earlier.
So interpretive note, highlight all of those mentioned above. And now and now continuing the topic of the context continuation, we amongst amongst the seven types of mind we already finished the first two which includes in what is called called valid knowledge. We finished the direct valid knowledge as well as inferential valid knowledge. The other five of the seven types of minds are non valid knowledge and we shall go through those five. Now in the past regarding the definition of what is valid knowledge it was clear that there the definition was a fresh and infallible knowledge.
That was the definition of valid knowledge. Now regarding the non valid knowledge which are those five remaining mind the definition is exactly opposite to that of the valid knowledge so the opposite would become a knowledge which is not fresh and infallible. So it’s the exact opposite of the previous one, fresh and infallible knowledge. The non valid mind is a mind which is not valid, not correct, and it is exact opposite of valid knowledge. So we got that right with the definition of non valid mind that it is a knowledge which is not fresh and infallible. And that is the exact opposite of valid knowledge mind.
Now earlier in the beginning of the evening class here, we went through the citation, direct knowledge, inferential knowledge, and subsequent perception. These are these three are mind, knowing, object. So we now come to the third type of the mind which knows object, the subsequent perception. The first amongst those five is the subsequent perception. Second is called wrong knowledge.
Which the list of the remaining five. Third is doubt. Fourth is assumption. Fifth is inattentive mind. So these are the five which are non valid minds, subsequent perception, wrong knowledge, doubt, assumption, and inattentive mind or inattentive knowledge.
Inattentive knowledge, inattentive mind, same, whichever. So these are the the or knowledge of knowledge of something something which which was was already already known known earlier. Earlier. What that would mean by way of example, let’s say with flower, if one sees, perceives, knows the flower first time fresh, then that is a valid knowledge. But if one sees, perceives, or knows whichever the flower’s second time after having already seen it or known it earlier.
Then the next time, the second time, knowing of flower is a subsequent perception. It is a knowledge of something already one has known earlier and it is not valid knowledge. The definition of subsequent perception is given as knowledge knowledge of what has been known. Now the meaning of that is as just I had explained that it is knowing something which one has known earlier. Now earlier when we were going through the direct valid knowledge, have gone through, for example in sensory direct valid knowledge we went through the five types of sensory direct valid knowledge.
The sensory direct valid knowledge of eye perceiving form, sensory knowledge of the ears perceiving sound, of the nose perceiving smell, tongue perceiving taste, and body perceiving touch. There we have those five objects of senses being perceived fresh and infallibly becoming the direct valid knowledge of the five senses. Like now keeping that in mind one would then be easy to relate here the example of subsequent perception. When the eye sees the form for the first time then that is the eye perceiving the form first time. That is a valid knowledge.
The second moment of such perception becomes subsequent perception. Similarly the ears are perceiving sound first time is a valid knowledge of ears perceiving sound, the next moment second moment, third moment, so forth becomes non valid in the sense not new or fresh perception but it being already perceived earlier.