Audio recorded at Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 42-minute teaching on Buddhist philosophical tenets, Kyabje Rinpoche addresses the Mind-Only school’s understanding of consciousness and perception. He first clarifies the six sensory consciousnesses—eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mental—then presents the core doctrine: consciousness and its perceived objects, though appearing separate, are of one nature. He develops this through the Buddhist theory of karmic imprints, showing how actions and perceptions leave traces on consciousness that shape experience. Using concrete examples—viewing a Buddha image, anger, pride, and the ten unwholesome actions—he explains how imprints accumulate as virtuous or non-virtuous, and how they produce both individual perceptions and shared, collective experience. Intended for students already studying Buddhist philosophical systems.
flags: []
File metadata (for organising)
File: 1994-09-22 – 20A – KR.mp3
UUID: dd3eeff8-199e-40e4-82b7-b9e8cb52e2e7
Teacher: Kyabje Rinpoche
Collection: Tenets
Date: 1994-09-22
Recorded at: Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide
Words: ~2,935
Three words used to mention mind. Mind, mental entity, and consciousness. These three, no matter used differently, mean the same thing. They that they refer to the mind mind only. So So in yeah.
They they only refer to the mind. Now as regards what are different types of minds there are, well, popularly or in general, we are quite comfortable that we generally come across six types of consciousnesses, six types of mind. The six sensory consciousnesses, eye consciousness, ear consciousness, nose, of tongue, of body physical, and of mind or mental consciousness. And then in the case of mind only tenet, those who accept there are eight groups of consciousnesses, they bring two additional consciousnesses, the omnibasis consciousness and afflictive mental consciousness. So there are those eight in the case of those accept eight, the additional two.
Well, with regards to the eye consciousness, what object it perceives? Well, it perceives colors, white, red, blue, yellow, and all all other secondary colors out of that. As well, eye consciousness perceives shapes such as round shape, square shape, and so forth. So in essence, the object of eye consciousness are colors and shape. Now what mind only tenets says is generally the eye consciousness and the object being perceived by eye consciousness are separate but they are not of separate entity or of separate nature because it is maintained by mind only that the two are of one entity and therefore they are not of separate entity even though generally the two are separate.
Ear consciousness has its has its object, melodious sound, non melodious sound, sound produced by humans or humans and sound produced by beings or animals and so forth as well it has as its object sound which are produced without an agent or being behind such as sound of the river and river waterfalls and so forth. Similarly, there are whole range of many other types of sounds which are object of the ear consciousness. Similarly, with the nose consciousness, it has its object sweet fragrance which can be which can be something put together by agent humans and so forth. And then there can be object of here, nose consciousness fragrances which are naturally there in their respective fragrance orders so forth. So they are they are object.
And likewise with tongue consciousness, they are delicious and non delicious object which are the object of the tongue consciousness. And as far as the body or physical consciousness goes, there can be smooth surface which are its object, rough surface, heavy and light heavy or light objects which are the objects of the body consciousness. So in this way, each of the so in this present case, the first five are listed. So in each of these sense consciousnesses, they have their own objects of perception and whatever their object may be, although the object and the consciousness perceiving it are separate, but mind only maintains that although they are separate, their nature or entity is of one. And now with regards to the mental consciousness, its objects are of two types, concept and conceptual thought and non conceptual thought.
As far as non conceptual thought goes, it is such as the clairvoyance of knowing others mind, or in other words, clairvoyance of reading others mind, as well as clear the yogic direct perceptions. So these are the, what’s called non conceptual objects of mental consciousness, in which case, although the two are separate, but they are of one entity. And as far as conceptual thought, which are the object of mental consciousness, so well, they they are separate and it’s not necessary to be of one entity because conceptual thought by definition or by by definition in nature is is a is a understanding or an understanding or a knowledge of something along with the blend of the time and the place of that object being perceived and pulled about. Oh, as far as examples, say, the eye consciousness and object being perceived by eye consciousness being explained by mind only tenet as of one entity or of one nature, it would be asked what are the proofs or the reasoning to establish that. And regarding the reasoning, the mind only explains that firstly there is an imprint on the consciousness part of the imprint so one part of the imprint awakes or arises in the aspect of the eye consciousness and the other half or the other part of the imprint imprint arises or manifest as the object being perceived by that eye consciousness.
So it is the same imprint which being split into two parts. One manifesting or arising as the eye consciousness perceiving the object and the other the object being perceived by that eye consciousness that in essence one can quite relate comfortably that the two come out of the same source and the two are of are of same substance or of same ingredient because they are of the same or the one imprint. And that’s the that that is that’s the reasoning, the proof by which it is established that the two are the cons eye consciousness and the object are of one entity. And by the same explanation, therefore, they use they use alternative phrases such as saying the two are of one entity, the two are of one embodiment, and the two are of one nature. The three alternative way of saying the same thing.
Now as far as the imprint part goes, we can look at it in this way. Say, if the if let’s say an example, the eye consciousness is looking at a book, then the very moment there is the very moment the eye consciousness looks at the book there is already an imprint being laid, an imprint of the consciousness perceiving a book which is laid in on the second moment and that in turn successively leaves imprint on the next moment and next moment and so forth. So there is a succession of imprints being laid with each each instance of looking at the book by the eye consciousness in that way. What that would mean is let’s say in different example say if there are five minutes of looking at the book then the then the first minute of looking at the book by eye consciousness would leave an imprint in the second minute and that second minute as well would leave on the third and third would leave on the fourth and on the fifth. So in this way they are like a one after another continuous laying of imprint each time oh, sorry, with each instance of the looking at the book.
Now let’s look at another example, say, flower. When the eye consciousness looks at the flower, then there would be a thought thinking, oh, it’s a flower. It’s a good flower. Oh, good flower. So one would admire.
Now at that time, it is only the eye consciousness which perceives the flower. None of the other five consciousnesses perceives the flower. The ear consciousness doesn’t see the flower or perceive the flower. The nose consciousness doesn’t the tongue consciousness doesn’t and so forth. So it is only the eye consciousness at that moment which perceives the flower and one may so it is only that.
But along with that when the eye consciousness perceives the flower there already is one has attachment thinking oh it’s a good flower so there is an attachment. Now that attachment leaves an imprint so each time one looks at the flower there is an imprint there is an imprint being laid by being attached to the flower. So first moments looking which brings about an attachment imprints one imprint. Second moments looking which brings about an attachment, imprints another imprint and so forth. Now if we look at the flower or if we keep looking for the flowers say for for five moments then there will be five attachment related with looking at the flower which in turn will leave or implant five imprints of that attachment.
Similarly if we had looked at the flower for five minutes then there would have been five minutes of attachment while looking at the flower that in turn would leave even time unit wise saying there will be each minutes leaving of an imprint of attachment so there are five attached or five imprints of attachment already laid with that. Oh, this is same to all other impure thoughts that if there was imprint laid of the first then there will be of the second and third continuously one after another similar to what just we looked at looking at the flower and with attachment and so forth. So it is same with all impure thoughts then there will be continuous laying of imprint the moment they arise. Let’s be more specific, say, it is same with anger, same with hatred, same with pride, same with ignorance, and so forth, all of the impure thoughts. What Similarly, if we look at image of a Buddha Śākyamūni, a thangka or a deity or a lama or a lama or in other words, sublime reliable teacher, then each moment of looking at them leaves our virtuous imprints.
And if we have been looking at them for five moments, then they would already be laying of five virtuous imprints. So this goes also similarly each moment of contact or dealing with virtuous objects. Let’s also say this applies similar to thinking and contemplation on emptiness that if one has been contemplating on emptiness say for five minutes then there will be imprints laid on the contemplation of emptiness for five minutes duration, but of course this would need but then of course this would mean but of course one has to have emptiness appear in one’s mind meaning one needs to have an understanding of emptiness formed in one’s mind to be able to contemplate on it and then to accumulate merit and leave imprint and so forth. It definitely has to be where the contemplation of emptiness is where one does understand emptiness and emptiness or its meaning so forth appears to one’s mind only then there will be imprint laid or the imprint imprint of contemplation on emptiness. In the case those who don’t have the emptiness appearing in their mind then we perhaps might say there will be some sort of similar imprint similar to imprint of contemplation on emptiness.
Oh, then with the flower and the object, with the flower with the object, there are flower of the first moment of second, third, fourth, fifth moment onward. And each of them in turn had been leaving imprints on the next and next and so forth. So if there were if there was a there was a flower which existed for five moments one after another then we would say that there had been five imprints of the flower laid successively stretching to five moments. In such case the imprint is called the imprint of similar kind imprint of similar kind. Similarly, any other object are like that, book, house, and any other object that the earlier this or any other words with all other objects, the preceding and subsequent moment of that object are of similar type therefore they are all called as the imprint of the similar kind.
Imprint of the similar kind or you perhaps might say imprint of the similar kind, imprint of the prototype. But the word actually is kind. So the the imprint of the similar kind. And then there are imprint of other types such as when one hears a sound being when one hears a sound again and again, say one heard it yesterday, one again hears this today, then there is an imprint laid on one’s consciousness. In such case the imprint becomes a type called the imprint of expression, or interpretively imprint of repeated expression.
The and the reason for that is the thing has been heard or expressed again and again that one has earlier and one has heard it later. So there is an imprint laid. Or say if there is expression emptiness emptiness emptiness one hears it again and again by that way then there is an imprint laid by way of repeated expression. If one thinks the flower is inherently existing and one repeatedly thinks that the flower is inherently existing, then there is an imprint laid thinking the flower is inherently existing. In such case the imprint becomes the type called the imprint of the view of self which interpretively becomes the imprint of ego grasping grasping at the object or the phenomena as truly existing or alternatively as inherently existing.
Similarly, this applies to all avenues of one’s actions or one’s doing, either through mind, one’s speech, or through one’s body or physical actions. How that is so is how that is so is, for example, through bodily actions if one engages if one engages mistakenly, say, in any of the four unwholesome actions done by body, killing, stealing, sexual conduct, and sexual misconduct, misconduct, then three through body: killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct, then they leave each an imprint on the consciousness of unwholesome actions. Similarly, if one does any unwholesome actions through speech which are for lying, slander, divisive speech, and idle talk or gossip, then each of them leaves an imprint on the consciousness which are unwholesome and through mind wrong harmful intent and ill will or even envy, ill will then that also leaves an imprint on the mind of unwholesome action. So with all 10 types of non virtuous actions done through body, speech, and mind, we can say each of them lays an imprint that is non virtuous. In short, if one does virtuous action, then that leaves a virtuous imprint, if one does non virtuous action that leaves non virtuous imprint, if one does neutral action that leaves neutral imprint and that would mean what whatever the action, so too they imprint.
Therefore, if we stop non virtuous actions, we then would stop the imprint of non virtuous action that would then mean we would stop receiving a fruition of unwanted fruition of the non virtuous imprints and we that would I mean we won’t experience any dissatisfaction problems or sufferings which are the results of unwholesome imprint. By the same way, by the same standard if we continue to do as much as we can virtuous action then there will be continuous laying of virtuous imprint and they would in turn become the causes producing happiness, wanted, nice results of fruits. The imprints of two types from one angle of view, collective imprint and individual imprint. Out of collective imprint comes things which are collectively perceived, enjoyed and come as a collective object of use by collective groups of beings. Whereas in the case of in in individual imprint, in that case, the individual imprint produce objects and object of experiences which are only to be experienced by individuals such as if it is an object of visible object of sight produced by individual imprint then that would appear only to the sight or vision of that individual whose imprint produced that.
And it that does not appear to others collectively. All the collective things around which we collectively see and come into use are produced by collective imprints, whereas the individual objects which appear individually to one self are produced by individual imprints. Now with the flower, there are the two types, the individual flower to be seen individually and collective which is subject to sight collectively. Now when we look at the flower it is an object being perceived as a sight. Now there is a flower which appears collectively to be seen by all and to be perceived by all so that is a collective sight produced by collective imprint.
Now the flower which now the flower which I see is not seen by Dawa, and the flower flower which Dawa sees is not seen by me. And the flower which Jampa Kaldhen sees is not the flower seen by we two. So there are individual flower that appears appears individually. So like that, with each of you, there is are a flower that appears each to each of you and that appears to each of you individually and not cross way that the one being seen by one particular person is as well seen by the others. There is definitely according to the present tenet a flower which is seen individually by each of you separately.
Because the flower which I perceive is a flower produced by imprint of which the half manifest as my eye consciousness perceiving the flower and half of the imprint manifest as that flower being perceived by me. So the two in my case the eye consciousness perceiving the flower and the flower being perceived are produced by one imprint splitting into two. So it is individually to do with my own imprint the very sight of the flower. So that is the object of flower of individual perception and individually to be seen or perceived flower. Like that in each of your case there is a flower to be perceived due to manifesting of the imprint of each of you individually.
And then there is a flower which is collectively to be seen as a collective sight of a collective imprint. So one can say there are those types of way the individual and the collective imprint arise in the individual and collective side.