Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. The lone barking dog in a Carlos Castaneda passage — a man begging his death to release him from dull and dreary chains of life — opens this 94-minute session by naming the existential tedium that makes practice urgent. Ven Jampa Gendun examines equalizing self and others at two levels: conventionally, a hospital ward and a line of beggars illustrate that all beings equally want happiness and none want to suffer; ultimately, a Tibetan parable of a chaotic house gradually cleared of animals shows that friend, enemy, and stranger are relative labels, not fixed realities. Śāntideva’s image of a hand removing a thorn from a foot grounds the case for universal compassion. The session frames other-centeredness as wise self-interest rather than moral obligation, closing with a desert-fathers story about choosing strength for another even while lost oneself.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 02 HoP 1990 08 14.mp3
UUID: eededfc1-51dc-4184-8db9-e98a92a69ca7
Teacher: Ven Jampa Gendun
Collection: Heart of the Path (Ven Jampa Gendun)
Date: 1990-08-14
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 94.4 minutes
Words: ~11,278
Continually bringing the mind back to the breath again and again and again. It’s in a very gentle patient manner. Like one analogy that can be used is in paper training of a puppy. And they approach the problem with the sense that the puppy is intelligent. It’s not trying to give you a hard time.
It simply doesn’t know what you want it to do. And if you want your training to go well, then it’s of no use to get uptight, to become become undisciplined undisciplined in your discipline, but to keep a consistent, gentle, patient way of relating. And then things will go well. Your puppy will finally get the idea of what it is that you want to do. You’ll be happy, and this will make your puppy happy, and your relationship with will go well.
Just simply, again and again, bringing the puppy back to the paper. The puppy runs off, and you gently, patiently bring it back again and again, bringing the mind back to the breath again and again. Our motivation last week in talking about setting direction, committing ourselves to the inner principle of Buddha, our own Buddha within ourselves, the awakening principle, and by means of the Dharma in the social context of a spiritual community. And what it might mean to become a Buddha. So in a sort of bringing it down to what’s happening out on the street, you know, in our terms, something we can begin to understand, And the the qualities of an awakened mind, somebody who has who is as if woken up from a trance.
In many respects, are half asleep as it were, and we have to wake up to the reality. You know, the truth can make you free. The truth has therapeutic quality about it. And being able to see the truth clearly. And this is the quality of wisdom.
And being able to see things actually actually are both on a both in a a mundane conventional sense, but also in a final ultimate sense without divorced of our preconceptions, our our mistaken notions, our wrong ideas, our our wishes, our our likes, our dislikes. But in fact, the the suchness, the way things are in themselves. And some contact with the actual way things are. And the quality of the feeling tone of of an awakened mind. That of love and compassion.
The, you know, an intense longing that sentient beings be free in the commitment, the extending of oneself to actually bring them about in fact. This loving quality of love compassion. And the quality of mental and spiritual energy. Effortless, spontaneous generosity. A a spontaneity of skillful actions.
And so we you know, this may begin to give us some feeling about what an awakened mind might be like. But, you know, we have to ask, well, you know, is that in any way relevant to myself? These are all very noble and desirable qualities. But they they sound terribly far removed from my my everyday experience of what I have to what I go through each day, my present state of being, my present states of mind. Is this just kind of an idea, artificial state, and that we’re trying to some kind of promotion Steven Spielberg in one of his movies, you know, Awakening number two or Awakening number three.
Or is there something about us which naturally suggests that perhaps, you know, these exalted states we can talk about wisdom, love, compassion, spontaneous mental and physical energy, spiritual energy. Perhaps is there something about ourselves at present that these noble and exalted states may be, in fact, simply an extension about who we are now. You know, the the seed of enlightenment, the seed of awakening is in every woman and man. That is to say, everyone everyone here. We all have some knowledge, some wisdom.
No matter how obscure, no matter how faint that wisdom might be, it’s still there. From time to time, we see we see things clearly. We know things. We all have some love and compassion. No matter how ex exclusive, no matter how limited that love and compassion might be from time to time, we have it.
It’s there. We all have some energy. Some mental, spiritual energy. No matter how unrefined, no matter how unspontaneous that energy might be, it’s still there. So all of the qualities of what constitutes a healthy, loving, sane human being are there in potential.
And it’s as if it were a seed form. We don’t have to go to anyone outside of ourselves, to any place outside of ourselves. We don’t have to ask for it. We don’t have to pray for it. We already possess it.
You know, our own basic sanity, our own basic love, compassion, and our own basic energy. But this is where the whole idea of awakening finds its birth. Suggest that we in ourselves suggest the possibility of mental health. In our finest moments, we experience a taste of what it might be like to be a Buddha or simply a fulfilled, authentic, self actualized human being. We simply have to foster these seeds.
What is already there? You know, we have the the main cause. Every product requires two types of causes. A main cause and a cooperative cause. The main cause is our very buddha nature.
Our own seeds of awakening. Our own wisdom. Our own love and compassion. And this energy that we have. We simply have to foster this by cultivating a path, providing the cooperative cause, you know, to to grow this this the the lotus of awakening within our own mind.
And this is what we go for refuge, to take to develop this confidence, this conviction. I in a great deal, the problem of suffering comes up in my my my definition of what I mean by love. To the will to extend oneself for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another spiritual growth. The will to extend oneself for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another spiritual growth. For one’s own or another spiritual growth.
You know, to our ultimate refuge is our own mental health. If that were not the case, then either the the we either we’d have to look to materialism to find the solution to suffering, or there is no solution. If materialism were a workable method, then which people should be happy? People who are surrounded with power, with fame, with beauty, with all the supposedly good things of life should be happy. That would that would be a consequence, would necessitate.
But in fact, that’s not the case. You know, I’ve in my own experience, I and having having lived in India, having seen meditators who lived in mud huts with burlap sacks hum over the doorways and cardboard walls and the wind blowing through, who were the most happiest and content people that I’ve ever met. So obviously, we need comforts, material comforts, you know, clothing, stylish clothing, warm, comfortable, good nutritious food, delicious, a cheerful home. All of these contribute to the to our quality of our life. But they in themselves are not the determined quality.
And without the proper attitude toward these things, even these things can be sources of difficulties, complicate our lives, can be sources of more problems. That happiness is basically a a product of mental health. And mental health is a result of cultivating healthy states of mind. And that seems to be the bottom line that we’re talking about. Taking the responsibility for your problems, owning your problems.
Empowering yourself to find your solution. This is what I mean by extending oneself, that the will to choose, I choose. I love myself. That sounds strange, doesn’t it? Sounds very ego egotistical.
I love myself that I want to cease my suffering. To the I love myself to the extent that I’m really willing to work to cease my suffering. And the way I see as ceasing my suffering is the cultivation of my own mind, my own states of skillful skillful states of mind, and the decreasing of unskillful states of I choose. I love myself. You know, I once asked the abbot of a Zen monastery in Bodh Gaya, I said, the reason we meditate is because we have compassion for ourselves. And the reason we are going for refuge is because we love ourselves.
We care enough about ourselves to take responsibility for our own suffering. And we begin to see If we looked at suffering and confronted that issue, if we didn’t see a solution to it, then it would become terribly depressing because there would be no sense in looking at suffering. We should seek to avoid it, confronting that issue as much as possible if we couldn’t solve the problem of suffering. But if we can begin to see that we have the solution to the problem of suffering, that we have the seeds of solving our own difficulties, problems, our own feelings of dissatisfaction, disappointment, frustration, and all the difficulties which confront us every day of our life. And dissatisfaction permeates our existence.
We have to acknowledge that fact. But additionally, acknowledge the fact that we can solve it if we choose to, if we choose to love ourselves. And this choosing is loving oneself. It’s not that I have this. The choosing to nourish oneself is the way we love ourselves.
This is how we display our own love toward ourselves, to end our problems. To make this effort to you know, I I like to you know, there’s a very you know, talking about I was talking about suffering this afternoon when I gave a talk this afternoon. Guess it’s just on my mind. The quality of our lives. Yeah.
It’s not so much we’re not basket cases, and we’re not saying that. And this is, in very simple terms, is one of a very beautiful description of the quality of my life. The quality of, I think of any And then you’re not so much different than myself. I I I think. It’s a it’s a simple quotation from a book by Carlos Castaneda about Don Juan.
And Don Juan is a a Yaqui Indian, probably in northern Mexico or southeastern United southwestern United States. He’s a man of of wisdom, a man of knowledge. He’s an old, poor, poverty stricken, apparently simple man. But he’s very wise. And they’re in a very lonely spot out in the desert.
And there’s in the southwestern United States, there are the perhaps large plateaus, very flat and desolate areas. And I, you know, have a feeling that evening is coming on. And it’s the sun is going down, and the desert becomes very silent. And Don Juan is speaking to Carlos Castaneda. He paused.
The silence around us was frightening. The wind hissed softly, and then I heard the distant barking of a lone dog. Listen to that barking, Don Juan went on. That is the way my beloved Earth is helping me now to bring this last point to you. That barking is the saddest thing one can hear.
We were quiet for a moment. The barking of that lone dog was so sad, and the stillness around us so intense that I experienced a numbing anguish. It made me think of my own life, my sadness, my not knowing where to go, what to do. That dog’s barking is the nocturnal voice of a man, Don Juan said. It comes from a house in that valley towards the south.
A man is shouting through his dog, since they are companion slaves for life. His sadness is boredom. He’s begging his death to come and release him from the dull and dreary chains of life. Don Juan’s words had caught a most disturbing line in me. I felt as if he was speaking directly to me.
That barking and the loneliness it creates speaks of the feelings of men, he went on. Men for whom an entire life was like a Sunday afternoon. An afternoon which was not altogether miserable, but rather hot and dull and uncomfortable. They sweated and fussed a great deal. They didn’t know where to go or what to do.
That afternoon left them only with the memory of petty annoyances and tedium. And then suddenly it was over. It was already night. And we don’t quite know what to do with ourselves. We have these feelings of, very subtle feelings of alienation, fragmentation, inauthenticity, seeking union with ourselves, seeking union with others, with with nature.
And this this most subtle existential problems permeate our very existence. And this is kind of the tone of our life. Beginning to choose to love ourselves, to begin to take refuge within ourselves, to to commit ourselves to our own mental health. And we do this in the sense of reminding ourselves we’re in fact the solution to our problems lies. To the inner principle of awakening by the means of the skills of Dharma in the social context of a spiritual community.
I go for refuge until I am enlightened to the Buddha, the Dharma, and the highest assembly. From the virtuous merit that I collect by listening to the teachings, may I attain the state of the Buddha to be able to benefit all sentient beings. I go for refuge until I’m enlightened to the Buddha, the Dharma, and the highest assembly. And the virtuous merit that I collect by listening to the teachings, may I attain the state of a Buddha to be able to benefit all sentient beings. I go for refuge until I am enlightened to the Buddha, the Dharma, and the highest assembly.
And the virtuous merit that I collect by practicing the teachings, may I attain the state of a Buddha to be able to benefit all sentient beings. So we’re to take up the difficult task of learning to love not only ourselves, but even the more difficult task of loving others. And the fullest development of this as expressed in awakening heart, bodhicitta, the mind of enlightenment. Having having the courage and performing the work, the hard work of developing oneself to facilitate one’s ability to help others, to develop oneself for the benefit of others. In in the development of the awakening heart, there are two meditative traditions.
There’s a meditative tradition of the sevenfold cause and effect instructions, and a meditative tradition of equalizing and exchanging self with others. We’re looking at the the latter of these two. Equalizing and exchanging self with others. You know, first we seek to equalize self, ourselves with others, and to find an equality amongst others. Then, based upon that, we begin to look at the advantages of other centeredness, and the disadvantages of self centeredness.
Then we practice the method of exchanging self with others. The meditation technique, the visualization technique of giving and taking develop exceptional resolve, and as an outcome of that process, develop an awakening heart. The altruistic aspiration to achieve highest enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings. You know, essentially, this process, this meditative process leading is a way of of opening our hearts. And I I think opening our hearts, opening to the world.
Same thing there. Our hearts are like the world. That we can opening our hearts and opening to the world. Opening to others. Essentially, in a more meaningful, authentic, effective interaction.
We’re trying to find some appropriate way to relate with others. Mental health is a social phenomenon. It cannot be developed in isolation from others. The very fact that we have an aspect to our self, the social self which exists in relationship to others, means that we we must that this entails that we must find an appropriate way of relating with others. And the most skillful, the most opportune means of relating with others is expressed in the awakening heart.
We have to find a a way of relating with others if we’re going to be healthy. We have a way of relating with others now, but it’s it’s not a skillful way. The most skillful way if we’re going to be happy, we have to find an appropriate way of relating with others. We have we are social beings. This entails This demands that we find an appropriate You know, it’s not that we’re trying to find Become perfect beings in a perfect world, but to find appropriate ways of relating in an imperfect world.
The most efficacious, pragmatically speaking. And this is, as far as the social aspect to ourselves, this is expressed in an awakening heart. And opening our hearts to others as much as possible, and as much as we can, leaving our hearts open, meaning opening to the world. There’s, you know, we have to begin to There’s a softening of our tough ego leather of our hearts. So we have to develop kind of a soft spot in our hearts, Some kind of sensitivity, a tender heart, a feeling connectedness, a feeling of warmth, of concern for others.
These are all qualities of an appropriately effective way of relating to others, both for our own welfare and for the welfare of others. You know, we we we can begin to discover that we are loving people. That we and we allow ourselves to be loving in all our various relations, in all our various situations as they arise, that life brings us. So we begin to discover our self existing more. And we we may be our enlightened nature, which I mentioned last week.
And this can become something more than just a temporary high. It can become it brings a commitment to to further training because we begin to see, to trust in ourselves. We find that we are really loving people all along. We didn’t think so. We become our own inspiration as it were.
So we developed this to bring this to consummation and that I’m a loving person. I can help people. I can develop myself. I can I’m I choose to extend myself, to take responsibility, to benefit others, to take, you know, this idea of leadership. You know, there’s a one of the operative words in in developing when we talk about exceptional resolve, is somewhere down the line.
With this idea of sole responsibility, sole, to take sole responsibility to do something, that it’s up to me. I think it’s a very it’s a great it’s a very significant shift in attitude. It’s up to me to do something, to help the world, to change the world. No matter whether it’s even whether just to help in the in the ecological field. It’s up to me.
And we always have this, well, somebody else is going to do it. I can leave it to the guy down the street or someone. But what happens when you get the feeling it’s up to me? It’s my responsibility. That you assume I choose to assume that responsibility, that leadership.
And we have to extend ourselves, don’t we? This idea of choosing to extend oneself, you know, be going beginning I think I’ve used the phrase, our only limitations are those we acknowledge. And somehow, we have to break out of this self defeating prophecy which we have designed for ourselves in the type of self image that we’ve created for ourselves. We have to find a way to go beyond ourselves, Our present conception of ourselves. And this requires work, and this requires courage.
And these are expressed in loving ourselves and beginning to love others. You know, we cannot become a Buddha without an awakening heart. So this is saying something. It’s saying that the optimum mode of being, which Buddhahood represents, can only be achieved in accepting responsibilities for others. So mental health, you know, if we bring that down to our level to some degree, the more I can begin to concern myself with others, then the healthier I’m becoming, even if it’s in small, insignificant ways.
The the the fundamental method for finding happiness and eliminating one’s own suffering is to become more and more concerned with the happiness of others, and the sufferings of others. In a lesser vehicle practice, we develop a concern for ourselves and our probable future states. If we don’t grow, you know, what can I expect in the future? If simply perpetuate my existing patterns, What what kind of life? What kind of experience can I expect?
If I don’t change, I have to change. And we begin to befriend ourselves. And we’d begin a gentle discipline of cutting through ego’s gains. The greater vehicle is simply an extension of that, of that process. It brings it to a logical conclusion.
You know, through training in ethics, concentration, and wisdom of the lesser vehicle, we begin to see that our sense of isolation, that our sense of smug self sufficiency are very much illusions. And our heart, has begun to open to ourselves, begins to open up to others, Beginning to see our essential connectedness and our our essential sameness. And last week, we began the discussion of equalizing self with others. And we talked about this from there’s two points of view, from the conventional point of view and from the absolute point of view. From the conventional point of view, again, there were two divisions, from the side of others and from one’s own side.
The essential from the side of others, essentially, we’re trying to see that all sentient beings are alike in wanting happiness and not wanting to suffer. And that that seems rather simplistic, doesn’t it? But many of the profound statements of of any religion seem quite simplistic because we cannot see the significance of what is being said. I think we resist seeing significance of what is being said. There is a resistance to change, and there is a resistance.
There is a there is a an entropy, a an inertia, which which resists growth. You know, some people and some people personify this as evil, but maybe it’s not necessary to do that. That that is that the very weight of our ego based existence is like holding us down. And to see the significance of some of these statements, like the very simple statement that all beings want happiness, they don’t want to suffer, would mean that we would have to change, and we resist change. So though it may seem simple, it’s because we aren’t able to see this it’s profundity, because we resist seeing its profundity, because it doesn’t touch us very deeply.
That all beings want to be happy, that none want to suffer, and that the needs and wants of others are basically the same as mine. Mine. Others may take on a these needs and wants might take on a variety of superficial appearances, but essentially, they want they are the same. All beings want happiness and don’t want to suffer. There’s a verse from the one prayer service that we do quite often at Buddha House, which is called offering to the spiritual master, Guru Puja, in which the verse says, there is no difference between ourselves and others.
None of us wishes even the slightest of suffering, nor is ever content with the happiness we have. Realizing this, we seek your blessings that we may enhance the bliss and joy of others. So, you know, using the We have to use the the experience of our of our own life, of our everyday life, to see that from the side of others, from the very smallest insect up to humans, all want happiness. None want to suffer. And this this insight begins to break down this habitual attitude of objectifying, of devaluing, of reifying, of, you know, taking like depreciating others.
I use the imagery to begin to see this in the concentration camp, but the traditional meditative imagery is that one walks into a ward. You’re doctor, a highly skilled doctor. And on this ward, there are patients who are all equally ill, all equally in need of your attention. But amongst those patients, there are various types. There are some very beautiful, male, female, beautiful, ugly, rich, poor, educated, uneducated, polite, nasty.
And, you know, trying to and imaginatively walking on this ward, what is your instinctive reaction to these various types of individuals? Who are you going to attend to first? Who are you going to expend the most energy with? The most time. The most care.
It won’t be equal. Instinctively, it won’t be. We’re going to be attracted to some and have aversions toward others. But if we look at it reasonably, they’re all equally ill. They all equally need your help.
They’re all equally in want. Another image that’s used in meditation is and this is if you’ve been to India, this is you can understand where this imagery comes from. You’re walking down the road, and on the side of the road, there’s a line of beggars. And there’s a you know, beggars aren’t just beggars. There’s a great difference amongst beggars.
There’s some who are you know, there’s male beggars, females. There are those who are extremely polite. Please, sir, can would you please give me a little bit of money? There is, again, really nasty ones, and they like, you owe them a living. That’s the reaction you have.
And there are those who are beautiful, those who are ugly, that you don’t even want to look at. You know, go away. Pretend that they don’t want to to you don’t want them to exist. When and these are you know, you see your natural reactions. But beneath all of these superficial appearances, and they’re all equally in need of your help.
They’re all equally hungry, cold. So, you know, trying to go beyond our usual habitual way of relating and beginning to use our wisdom to look at things in a more in a deeper sense, a more profound sense, and see that, in fact, my usual habitual way of relating is not in accordance with the reality of this situation. In reality, they all need my help equally, these patients, these beggars. You know, which one are you going to give first? Which one are you going to give the most to?
Then we we looked at the equality of others from our own side and and that others are equally kind to us. And, you know, this goes without saying that we consider those who give to us, those we like, those who are nice to us as being kind. But additionally, those vast majority of people who we feel completely unrelated with, unconnected with, trying to be to develop an appreciation, trying to see develop a sense, a world view. Our religion is our world view. Even atheists have a religion.
A worldview which sees that the universe is supportive to our needs. This is my a participatory universe. This is my world. It’s a world which is supporting me, in which there’s a feeling of connectedness and beginning to appreciate those who are supporting you. And not from you know, and as I mentioned, from a pragmatic sense point of view.
Not there’s no moral judgment being made. That in developing a worldview, it simply appreciates what is being done for me. Not and we I choose to appreciate. And then we have this notion that things are objective, that because this person does something for me for money, then it’s like, you know, I scratch my back, and you scratch your back. There’s no sense of It doesn’t go beyond that.
It stays on this level. Even though I might scratch your back in return, I can still appreciate you scratching my back. It’s very kind of you. You know, why not? Maybe people do get paid money for their various jobs.
But from your side, the attitude that you take can be one of appreciation, of gratitude, of thanks. And this is only to your benefit. This is only, as Rinpoche would say, there’s only profit in this. There can be no loss. A feeling of connectedness, and appreciation, and gratitude relatedness to others.
And then trying to see the kindness of our enemies, which, you know, is difficult. No question. Beginning to see that it is our enemies who give us real strength. It is they who give us the courage of patience, who teach us what real love is, what real compassion is, who strip us niceties and show us where we’re really at, who reveal the real depth of our understanding, of our love, our insight. Ultimately, within the tradition of thought transformation, the enemy is said to be one’s greatest spiritual teacher.
Teacher. All three of these types of individuals, friend, enemy, and stranger, are in their own unique way contributing to our happiness. Some quite immediately, temporarily. In the case of our friends, that’s why they’re our friends. But additionally, the enemies will be ultimately bringing about our welfare.
It is in dependence upon our enemies that we will someday be Buddhas. And you don’t have to like your enemy, but you can appreciate them. And you don’t you don’t have to like someone to love them, to be willing to extend oneself for their spiritual growth. You may not want to invite them over for a meal or associate with them, but you can still have a positive, unconditional regard for them. Because, you know, looking beneath the superficial way of where we usually relate and seeing that they are ultimately benefiting yourself.
I mean, that’s not easy to develop that. Now we’re going to look at equalizing self and others from the ultimate point of view. Now, we have this classification of friend, enemy, and stranger. And we have a sense, an instinctive sense, that these types of individuals exist from their own side, of our attitudes, independent of our way of seeing them as such. In dependence upon acceding to that objective appearance, we develop attachment for the friend, aversion for the enemy, and a feeling of indifference for the stranger.
And it depends upon this. We help our friends. We harm our enemies, and we we could care less about strangers. That’s as if they don’t exist. Such a way of relating prevents us from developing unconditional positive regard.
The operative word here is unconditional, where you have a positive regard whether they’re my friend, enemy, or stranger. I still have positive regard right now. All our ways of relating with others are simply an expression of one ego state or another, are simply based upon one projection or another. There’s a verse here from a book called Zen and the Art of Helping. If only I could throw away the urge to trace my patterns in your heart, I could really see you.
You know, generally, when we see others, more than not, we are seeing our own projections, our own needs, you know, our own wants reflected back at us, our own insufficiency. We don’t really see others. Very rarely, do we? If friend and enemy existed from their own side as they appear, that is to say, if they existed objectively, objectively existent friend, objectively existent enemy in their own right, then they wouldn’t be dependent upon causes and conditions. A friend would be forever a friend.
An enemy would be forever an enemy. But we know that from our own experience that that’s not true. That, in fact, our best friend can become our enemy overnight. We’ve all experienced that to some degree. And an enemy, just through a few kind words, a gesture, can become a friend.
But we cling to these friends. We cling to these enemies as if they were always going to be exist in that way. And we remain fixated on that. And this is the way we relate with them, as if they didn’t depend upon our labeling them as friend, enemy, and stranger in context of the current situation. You know, who we going to Who should we be attached to?
Who should we have aversion to? Someone who slapped your face yesterday and gave you a gift today, or someone who gave you a gift yesterday and slapped your face today? I think I got that right. They both gave you a gift. They both slapped your face.
The only difference is in time. But, you know, this is if we look at the situation reasonably, logically. But, in fact, in practice, we are going to fixate. We’re going to have a a very definite way of relating to one as opposed to the other. We’re going to have conceive of one as a friend, the other as an enemy, even though, in fact, objectively speaking, what they’ve done is exactly equal.
If if friend and enemy existed from their own side, objectively, for example, a friend, then anyone who, you know, they really are a friend. These likable, positive, beautiful qualities about this person are there for everybody to see. Mean, anybody can see that for themselves. If that were the case, then everybody should, upon meeting that person, should see likable, loving, beautiful qualities. Everybody should see that have different, very similar values.
You might look upon a third person very differently. One sees them as quite an agreeable person, likable person. The other is I don’t like that person at all. So these qualities of likability, positive qualities, are not objectively existing from the side of the object. Ultimately, none of the qualities inhere in the person themselves, but we feel that they do.
In feeling that way, we react with attachment, aversion, and indifference. So this is the feelings of equality toward others is rooted in a misconception as to the ultimate nature of these types of individuals. Individuals. Another aspect of ultimate from the ultimate point of view. It’s from another text by Śāntideva who is the source of this teaching.
This other text is called Compendium of Training. In this text he says, both self and others are dependent like this side and that side. Both self and other are dependent like this side and that side. And further on he says, if one does not establish self, then upon what can other come about? If one does not establish self, then it relies upon what does other come about?
So this is the what I call the unsolvable puzzle of relativity. This is what we are entrapped, ensnarled in. Self and others are merely a way of speaking. These are handy references, nothing more than that. These are conventions.
They’re functional. They’re server use. They don’t ultimately exist as such. But we can see them in two, exist that way. This is is true of all dualities that we set up.
Far is dependent upon near. Short is dependent upon long. Good is dependent upon bad. If I hold up these three fingers, if I hold up my ring finger, and I say, is that short or is that long? Mean anything to say that.
It only is short and long in reference to something else, relative to something else. It is not absolutely in itself, from its own side, long or short. Compared to my little finger, it’s long. Compared to my big finger, it’s short. It’s only relatively long or short, not absolutely.
If if the far if far is exist only in relationship to near, if the far existed absolutely, then no matter how close I approached, far would always be far. It would never change to near. It existed from its own side, absolutely, if it didn’t exist in relationship to near. Likewise, enemies and friends. They are posited by way of comparing.
This person is my friend compared to this person. This person is my enemy compared to this person. That the friend and enemy exist in relation, in comparison. They don’t absolutely exist. If we didn’t have friends, we wouldn’t have enemies.
If we had no enemies, we would have no friend. If we’re this is what I mean by the unsolvable puzzle of relativity that we’re ensnarled in. That if we’re going to conceive of friends, we’re going to have to take along enemies. Otherwise, the concept of friend has no meaning. Friend only has meaning in contrast to enemy.
This person promotes my self interest because compared to this person who doesn’t promote my self interest. This person is my enemy because they detract from my self interest in comparison to this person. This is my friend. This is my enemy. And we have a continuum of rating people relative to one another.
They don’t exist in themselves as friend nor enemy, only relative. But we hold them as if they existed otherwise, as if they exist as my friend in and of themselves. My enemy in and of myself, in and of themselves. I knew there’s a story, and we don’t have much that that is told to illustrate this idea of relativity in a very practical sense. I’ll tell it very quickly.
I enjoy telling. It takes place in Tibet, and I’m sure you’ve all heard this story. Practice patience, Indulge me. Oh, this this is woman. She’s she’s running down the the middle of the square.
She’s very distraught. Her hair is in mess. Her dress is all wrinkled and and dirty. She’s a mess. She’s crying.
She’s running down the middle of the square. Very upset. And her teacher, her lama sees her. And he he calls me. Come over here.
Come. And she comes over and she’s sobbing. Oh, lama. She says, what’s wrong? Oh, lama.
It’s I can’t stand it anymore. My home, it’s so terrible. I just It’s so filthy. It stinks. It it’s so noisy.
I just can’t stay there anymore. I’ve gotta leave. There’s all these people. There’s there’s all these just have to go away. No.
No. It says, be okay. Don’t Don’t don’t worry. I have I have a solution. I have an idea.
And she’s, okay. Please help me. Okay. Do you have any chickens? Yes.
Yes. Take your chickens and put them in the house. She for a moment, she’s kind of startled, but she has a great deal of faith. So she’s, okay. I’ll I’ll I’ll try.
She goes home. She puts the chickens in the house. Next day, same time, same same square. There’s again, she’s running. This time, she’s even worse shape.
She’s frantic. She’s beside herself, running down the middle of square. And again, the Lama’s there. Come over. Come over.
Come. She comes, oh, Lama. It’s it’s worse than it was yesterday. The the chickens kept me up all night clucking, clucking, and they’re making a mess of the floor. It’s it’s stinks.
Feathers flying everywhere. And he said, it’s gonna be okay. I have an idea. And she little bit of doubt rising in her mind, she has faith. So she said, what what she said, well, bit of question.
Do you have do you have a goat? Yes. Put the goat in the house. Okay. She goes back, puts the goat in the house.
Next day, same place on the square. Again, this time even worse worse condition. You know, she’s about ready to have her knowers break down. And again, the Lama calls her up, and she says, oh, please, Lama. No more suggestion.
No. I can’t take it. I’m just finished. I’m leaving. Goodbye.
No. No. No. I have an idea. No.
No. They argue for a few minutes. Okay. She said, okay. She relents.
She says, what now? She says, do you have do you have a cow? But Lama, no. No. It’s gonna be okay.
Do you have a cow? Yes, I have a cow. Put the cow in the house. Next day, same place, thing, out on the square again. Anyway, she’s even in worse shape than she was the day before, and the Lama calls her again.
Please no more suggestions. Than the floor stinks. I can’t even walk on the floor. The goat is eating the mattress. Keeps me up all night.
The cow’s mooing. It’s terrible. I have an idea. No more suggestions. No, no, no.
This this over. Take the cow out of the house. I’ll take the cow out house. Next day, she’s she’s, you know, her dress is a little bit cleaner than it was the day the previous. She’s not crying today.
And Lama calls over, how is it today? It’s a little bit better. You know, at least I can walk on the floor because I got rid the cow. It’s a little bit better than it was yesterday. Okay.
Good. Good. Take the goat out of the house. Okay. Next day, she got a hair comb.
She’s not crying anymore. How is it? And calls her, how is it today? Oh, it’s not it’s not too bad. At least goat doesn’t, you know, doesn’t eat the mattress and the floor is halfway clean now, and I I got a better night’s sleep.
So, it’s a little bit better than it was. Of course, good. Now, take the chickens out of the house. Okay. Next day, on this day, she’s wearing a nice clean dress.
Her hair is nicely combed. She seems she’s almost has a smile on her face, he calls her and says, how is it now? I said, oh Lama, it’s such a nice place. I mean, it’s so quiet there and clean, and I don’t know why I ever wanted to leave in the first place. So the the point of that long drawn out story is objectively, the situation hasn’t changed from that very first day that the lama saw her running frantically along through the square.
This situation hasn’t changed, but what? Her perception of the situation has changed. What it to what it was, what, three days ago. It’s great, like a paradise. And she’s holding in her memory, and compared to that what she’s conceiving of her standard of measurement, this is really a great situation.
So her sense of well-being, sense of how she’s perceiving that situation is in terms of her memory, in terms of another standard, a reference. And this is what we do with friends, enemy, and strangers. Let’s compare to this person, this person is my friend. Compared to this person, this is my enemy. But but by grasping at these individuals as independently existing in and of themselves.
We create by grasping others to exist independently. We create an independently existing self. Independence in creating an independently existing self, we create an independently existing other. And then, out of this, the feelings of isolation, the feelings of alienation, defensiveness, competitiveness, conflict, they all arise out of a misconception about the nature of who and other we I and others are. Misconception about the nature of who and other we I and others are.
Why are you unhappy? Because ninety nine point nine percent of everything you think and everything you do is for yourself, and there isn’t one. So ultimately, I know the greater the greater vehicle, the question of who’s suffering ultimately does not even arrive. And here we can begin to see how wisdom supports compassion. There is just suffering.
And because ultimately, ultimately, it doesn’t it does not belong to anyone, it is to be eliminated since no one wants to suffer. The question about whether it’s my suffering or your suffering is not ultimately meaningful. It is simply suffering, and it is to be eliminated. Even, you know, even to say that we should concern ourselves with the happiness and suffering of others is, to some degree, is only a manner of speaking applicable to the relative world. Ultimately, it has no meaning since, ultimately, there is no owner of suffering.
But relatively, there is suffering, which is to be eliminated. And talking about elimination of suffering. You know, why should I do this? Why should I take responsibility for the other suffering? There’s a one section in the in in which this Śāntideva, the author, source of this meditative tradition, takes up a form of a debate with a disputant.
And he said, you know, why should I take responsibility for other suffering? The sufferer should take responsibility for their own suffering. That sounds rather legitimate, at least superficially. And so, Śāntideva counters this with the argument. Well, if the sufferer should be, you know, if we are to be responsible for the sufferings of others, then why is it that when when the foot steps on a thorn, why is it that the hand reaches down and pulls the thorn out of the foot?
The hand’s not suffering. But naturally enough, we reach down with the hand and pull the the thorn out of the foot. The disputant says, yeah, well, that’s true. I do do that. Well, it’s because it’s because they’re both part of the same whole, and therefore it’s logical that they should take responsibility when the whole is suffering, that the part should take responsibility for that to eliminate that suffering.
And Śāntideva carries the argument towards its ultimate conclusions, and likewise, that sentient beings are all limbs of this great being of sentient life. As long as the whole of suffering, each of those parts must take responsibility to eliminate that suffering, Whether we call that suffering my suffering or other is irrelevant. As long as the whole is suffering, the parts are to take responsibility. You from the from the ultimate point of view, we’re trying to break down our notion that the partiality, that the biases that we feel, the way we presently relate with others is somehow justifiable. You know, we have a self righteousness about ourselves.
The way I relate to others’ friends and enemies is reasonable, and that because this person is really is my friend objectively. This person really is my enemy objectively. And I’ll be damned if I’m going to treat them any other way. They deserve the way I’m treating them. This person did this, this, this, and this, objectively speaking, is he deserves the way I’m treating him.
She deserves the way of treating him. We’re trying to develop a sense of the arbitrary and changeable the arbitrary quality and and of the and changeable quality of the labeling process. That these labels of friend enemy and stranger are arbitrary and changeable so that we don’t grasp to them, that we don’t fixate on them so tightly, that we create some space for the up for the possibility of change. Some flexibility in our way of relating. Equality of self in others from the conventional and ultimate points of view.
I’m talking about disadvantages of self centeredness. The disadvantages of self centeredness and advantages of other centeredness. You know, just as one wants happiness and does not want to suffer, so all beings want happiness and do not want to suffer. And we are all the same in this. So I should identify with all these equal beings and take all of their suffering seriously just as I do my own, in the same way that I take my own suffering seriously.
Since, you know, I am used to identifying with the parts of my body, my own body, and I take my own pain seriously. Whether that pain occurs within my hand or within my foot, it’s just as much of a concern to me. You know, carrying this argument further, you know, we as I mentioned, the disputant objects that this is unrealistic. We simply do not feel the pain of others. Therefore, not feeling the pain of others as our own, hence, we cannot automatically respond to their pain in the same way that we respond automatically to our own pain.
So again, Śāntideva, in Engaging in Bodhisattva Deeds, he argues against this. That the only we only feel our pain because we appropriate it through identifying with it, through identification with our bodily senses as ours. You know, the Buddha said, I might have read this quote previously, suffering alone exists, none who suffers. Suffering alone exists, none who suffers. The deed there is, but no doer thereof.
nirvana is, but no seeker, but no one seeking it. The path there is, but no one who travels it. And we’re talking about why I should identify with the pain of others. Can’t realistically identify with the pain of others, since it’s not my pain. I can’t automatically respond to it the same way I can respond to my pain.
And Śāntideva is beginning to set forth an argument that this sense of my pain is only brought about through a process of identifying that pain as my pain. Cultivating through a habituation process. For example, you know, when we’re in the heat of emotion, when we’re under hypnosis, we cannot feel at all pain which would normally be excruciating. Because the conditions we are temporarily, we are not identifying with that pain as ours, you know, under emotional situations, intense emotional situations, under hypnosis. And I remember seeing that someone having a flame, you know, passed underneath their fingers, which would normally be extremely painful, and they didn’t feel at all.
So there’s a dis identification with that sensation. You know, this shows that our sensations are due to the habit of identification, and that habits can be modified. You know, one of the methods that nowadays is used with chronic pain in dealing with the in workshops, which deal with pain workshops, is to begin to seek to distance ourselves from that pain. That is, we’re trying to alter our perception, that sensation, as mine. It’s no longer our pain.
We dis identify. Adversely, we can gradually accustom ourselves to identify with other beings as well, and their pain. And we can come to feel their pain just as we do now. That is to say, we can feel the equality of self in others. You know, we didn’t, in this process of identification, we didn’t begin as children to identify with our bodies automatically.
We had to learn to do that and become accustomed to it. You know, this, what, the semen of our father and the ovum of our mother form this combination formed a basis for our consciousness in the womb. But if you were to find some semen and ovum on your bed sheet, it’d be rather repellent. But through habituation, we have learned to identify what was once semen and ovum as I, and cherish it. This simply through the process of habituation, of a custom.
So this ego identification, it takes a long time, you know, beginning in infancy. Initially, the child does not conceive of identifying with its body, a sense of I and not I. This is a learning process. It’s a conditioning process. But additionally, soldiers, athletes, citizens of nations, believers in particular religions, ideologies, they can easily recondition themselves to identify more powerfully with the group than they do with themselves as individuals.
That people, through this reconditioning process, that soldiers are willing to die in battle, overcoming their supposedly instinctive sense of self preservation to die for their country, having reconditioned their sense of identity to to identifying with the squadron, with their nation, that people are willing to become martyrs for their religion. People are willing to, you know, for their national goals. Look what’s happening in Iraq Iraq. Murders for the faith. Cultural conditioning can override supposed all powerful survival instinct.
So the question is, why then can’t we why cannot we condition the conditioning of the opening of hearts to others? The conditioning of our opening our hearts to others cause one to expand one’s sense of identity to include all beings, You know, as other beings are the limbs, as if we were the limbs of this great sentient being of sentient life. You know, this is rather mind blowing conception, I think, to have a sense of identity of I which extends to all sentient life. There’s no reason why it can’t be done. It’s logically conceivable through habituation, It is not unrealistic, but even compellingly practical that we should develop a natural, rational, instinctively powerful altruism.
For there’s nothing artificial about the, quote, hard fact that essentially all living beings want to be happy and don’t want to suffer. And additionally, the psychology of an awakening heart is not something otherworldly or too far removed from the normal call of human beings. In fact, it’s evident from our own experience that human beings are never happier than when they transcend the the narrow habitual ego sense. And they’re never more miserable when than when they completely caught up in their own claustrophobic, narrow minded, exaggerated self concern. That beings are never more happy than when they lose their self this sense of self confinement which we find ourselves with.
You know, to whatever degree, they’re never more miserable than when we are caught up in our exaggerated self concerns of ego. Practically speaking. You know, we’re trying to see within our own experience the advantages disadvantages of self centeredness. Sense pleasures reach their height when the experience loses their ordinary boundaries. For example, when we when we are carried away by beautiful music.
It is the most exhilarating, fulfilling moments that we experience. And always seem to be associated with associated with going outside of our narrow, our usual habitual narrow boundaries. Somehow transcending our con this prison that we have entrapped ourselves in, of going out, of moving out. The, you know, emotional pleasures is greatest through love when there’s when there’s a loss of self and a union with the beloved, which is you know, it’s almost like the the quality of the identifying of a child with its mother. There’s not two.
It hasn’t learned to differentiate yet between itself and its own mother. Aesthetic pleasures, intellectual pleasures. There are proportionate to the intensity of the degree that that beauty or truth are take one beyond oneself, but into what some kind of expansive universality of bliss transcendence. All of these you know, I I’m moving to the inner sense of going out of our self. The most profound, moving, fulfilling, authentic self validating experience.
So, you know, what we’re trying to what I’m trying to get across is that we’re not talking about something, some complex philosophy, some kind of theory, but a very simple statement about life, about what is actually happening to us. We have to find some way to open up even a slight crack in this wall of of our ego centered cell, of this ego centered prison that we’ve entrapped ourselves in, and to create some inkling of a doubt that this perpetual self centeredness is self defeating. And then there might be another way of being, a more skillful, more appropriate way of being. That it’s not getting us what we want. It’s not getting us happiness.
And another way of being may lead us to the fulfillment that we’re all looking for. And whatever it is we’re looking for, that there might be really another way of being. You know, we everyone takes advantages of somebody else. The whole world is taking advantage of another. We all we all try to take advantage of someone else to profit only for ourselves.
The whole world is built upon self centeredness, self attachment, you know, racism, classism, sexism. In big countries that we’ve just seen, gobble up small countries, big children take candy away from small children. Husbands take advantage of their wives. I make friends with someone because he or she can somehow benefit me. You know, it’s the same with the rest of the world.
Boyfriends or girlfriends, everybody wants something. Everybody’s got their their hidden agenda. Everybody’s using everybody else. And this in this context, in a quotation from Lama Zopa Rinpoche, who’s a spiritual director of FPMT, which is a member of his his picture on the wall. And talking about this Self centeredness, self-cherishing.
However, you’re trying to see the disadvantages of self centeredness, self-cherishing. However, the essential thing is whatever problems arise, to be aware every time, immediately, that all these problems come from your selfish mind. This problem is given to me by my own self-cherishing thought. Every time, immediately, try to recognize this. As long as you put all the blame outside, there is no happiness.
In reality, all problems, all the difficulties of life come from the self-cherishing thought. All these problems are the result of negative karmas accumulated in the past out of self-cherishing thought. Being under the control of self-cherishing thought, you allow the disturbing thoughts to arise, and then you are motivated by this negative karma. These problems not only come from past karma accumulated under control of self self-cherishing thought, but also come from your self-cherishing thought in day to day life. The self-cherishing thought.
And there’s a within your own experience. And one way believing in your own basic sanity, your own basic wisdom, that if you’re able to demonstrate to yourself through your within your own experience, the the what is in one’s own self interest, then the mind will naturally move in that direction. Aside from all theories, aside from all logic, because pleasure and pain take priority over logic for us. That if you can see it’s in your own best interest to move toward other cherishing, and it’s in your own to your own detriment, your present habitual patterns of self-centeredness. Nothing more needs to be done because your own Buddha nature, your own basic sanity will begin to do the rest.
But if we misconceive, what is the nature of happiness? Or if we fail to look. Now, we’ve all had the experiences, but we missed the lesson. And we have to learn, or we’re going to make the same mistake again and again. If you can see by putting your hand in a flame, that’s happiness.
And you shouldn’t be surprised if you continually are being burnt. We somehow have to learn from our experiences if we’re going to grow. Our basic sanity, if we can takes us toward that which we conceive of as happiness. So we have to make sure that what we conceive of as happiness is, in fact, happiness. It is not some type of misconceived suffering.
Within our own experience, trying to validate that we’re never more happy than we are concerned with others needs, others wants. And we’re never more miserable than we’re when we’re completely caught up in our own claustrophobic self exaggerated self concern. And then nothing more needs to be done. We can rely on our own wisdom, our own basic sanity to do the rest. We will begin to match the center of psychological gravity will begin to move from self to other naturally.
We don’t have to force it. We don’t have to pretend. We don’t have to operate on the level of shoulds and musts. We can operate on level of want. There’s a quotation from Dostoevsky in a book called Brothers Karamazov.
And in this, the dying Christian father, Greek Orthodox father, has his disciples gathered around him. And he he looks about him, and he addresses them. Fathers and teachers, I ponder what is hell?? I maintain that it is the suffering of being unable to love. You know, the feeling of isolation, of loneliness, of frustration, conflict, defensiveness, competitiveness, feelings of being unloved, unwanted, useless, all stem from our self centeredness, our exaggerated self concern.
It’s not to say that we cannot avoid dealing with our problems, but and it’s quite right to deal with our problems, but we have to keep them in some kind of perspective, some kind of global, universal perspective. In such a mind which is completely caught up with itself, there’s no space for others. There’s no there’s no love. There’s no communication. There’s no touching of another’s heart and having one’s own heart touched.
Just the sore spot. Just the sore spot with a big iron fence around it. This is black hole which sucks everything into its own nothingness. A quotation from Thomas Merton. For a man to be alive, he must exercise not only the acts belonging to vegetative and animal life.
He must not only subsist, grow, be sentient, not only move himself around, feed himself, and the rest. He must carry on the activities proper to his own specifically human kind of life. He must, that is to say, think intelligently. And above all, he must direct his actions by free decisions made in the light of his own thinking. These decisions, moreover, must tend to his own intellectual and moral and spiritual growth.
They must tend to make him more aware of his capacities for knowledge and for free action. They must expand and extend his power to love others and to dedicate himself to their good, for it is in doing this that he finds his own fulfillment. And we have to go on and on and on trying to find with our own experience and our own intuition and from our own reason validating that our self interest lies in other centeredness, that our own pain and suffering arises out of our self centeredness. Again, and again, and again, bringing this to mind in whatever way we can. You know, I I mentioned that the Dalai Lama said that we should we are naturally selfish, so we should be wisely selfish.
Wisely selfish. And this is the way we can be wisely selfish is to become other centered to, again and again, concern ourselves with the with others. For and concerning ourselves more with others, welfare, we will experience more happiness than we could have hoped for. I if I can take a minute while I’m thinking. You know, it’s some kind of leap is necessary.
You know, we have to grow some way. We have to go we have to change because the way we’ve been operating up to now isn’t working. And there is a persistence, as I mentioned, inertia. We perpetuate our patterns. We discount those things which contradict our patterns.
We focus on those we enforce our patterns. We forget about those instances which in any way might invalidate our preconceptions. We put ourselves in situations which reinforce our patterns. We create relationships which reinforce our patterns. And so, we’re working against inertia, inertia of our unskillful patterns.
Yep. You know, we have to make a choice. I think somehow this idea of this word choice is becoming more significant to me. You know, we we seem to be all waiting for something. Everybody is waiting for something.
There’s a play by Beckett waiting for I pronounce it Godot, but got it. Read it many many years ago, but I remember there these individuals just waiting for us. Not quite sure what. Maybe it’s God, but we’re all waiting. You know, some people are waiting for the white knight on a shiny horse to come right along and take them away from all this.
Maybe they’re waiting for for a savior to to redeem them. Or maybe they’re waiting for morphine shot where they won’t have to feel any pain to take up this difficult task. You know, waiting for the to get a Bodhisattva certificate before they practice other center. But it seems that sooner or later, you had just begin to choose. Maybe for no reason whatsoever than because you feel you have to change.
And this seems to be the way to go about it. Now we’re going to I like to I know it’s getting late. Maybe I’ll tell a very quick story while I’m in the mood for this story. Here’s a story. It’s about it takes place in the fourth century in the Egyptian desert amongst the Christian fathers, the ascetics who hermits who live in the desert there.
And there became two fathers who became renowned for their wisdom, their understanding. And people used to go to them for a confession, and they lived in separate caves. And one was quite wrathful, and the other one was quite soft, gentle. So depending upon what kind of penitent penitence you wanted to get, you went to one or the other. So it it it came to pass that the soft, father, he some some doubts arose as to his vocation.
He began to wonder if he, in fact, he was doing the right thing. And to it came to pass that the wrathful father, he too had developed some doubts about his vocation, about whether he was doing the right thing. And so they thought each in their own separate places that they would go visit the other and talk over their difficulties, express their doubts, and try to solve them. So they set out unbeknownst to each other to visit each other. And they came to a clearing at night and halfway between them, two caves.
And the they didn’t know each other initially. And the gentle father said to the wrathful father, I’m on my way to visit this particular father because I have these doubts about my vocation, and I’m worried, and I’m concerned. Feel lost. And the wrathful father, he said nothing. He said, oh, I’m going there.
I’ll go with you. I’ll take you there. And so they both the gentle father and the wrathful father returned to the wrathful father’s cave. And the wrathful father said, I am that that monk that you were going to visit. And so the gentle father, he stayed with the wrathful father for almost a year, and he would listen to them.
He would serve him, listen to him, taking confessions, watching him pray. They would talk and discuss. And at the end of the year, the gentle father went to the wrathful father and said, you you have resolved all my doubts. I have regained my faith. And now it’s time for me to return my own cave.
And the the wrathful father said to the gentle father, you know, when we met on the desert that night one year ago, I too had doubts. I too was lost. I too was confused. And the gentle father said, why didn’t you tell me? Why didn’t you tell me at that time that you were going you were going through the same experience as myself?
And the wrathful father said, at that moment, one of us had to be strong, or we would have both been lost. So in this, you know, though we may not have the power, or we might not conceive of ourselves as having the strength that we choose to take that responsibility. That is simply as a matter of choice. And out of that choosing, we draw upon a power which was unbeknownst to us, which lay dormant, which, was covered over by our own limited self conception about who we, in fact, who we thought.