Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 28-minute teaching, Ven Jampa Ignyen works through two core frameworks for understanding mind. First, a sevenfold classification of awareness types—eye awareness, mental awareness, dream awareness, and others—distinguished by whether they are conceptual or non-conceptual, mistaken or not. Second, a threefold classification of all cognition itself: conception (which holds generic sounds and images), non-mistaken non-conceptual awareness (which engages what is actually there), and mistaken non-conceptual awareness (which engages appearances of what doesn’t exist). The central principle: wrong awareness is cognition that engages its object incorrectly. He illustrates this with concrete examples—dream awareness perceiving blue where no blue exists, eye awareness distorted by jaundice—then turns to the workings of conception itself: how the mind fuses words and images, and the difference between authentic conceptions (whose objects actually exist) and inauthentic conceptions (whose don’t). For serious practitioners with prior study.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 10 M and C 2001 08 28.mp3
UUID: 44f170b4-24e7-4df4-8040-7643131d2a5d
Teacher: Ven Jampa Ignyen
Collection: y Mind and Cognition 2001 Month 07-09 (Ven Jampa Ignyen)
Date: 2001-08-28
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 28.4 minutes
Words: ~2,916
Eye awareness. It follows it is conceiving cognition. Why? Because you accept that. Because it’s wrong awareness.
And if it’s wrong awareness for you, must be what? Cognition mistaken to its conceived object. Then the author says that is unacceptable because it is non conceptual awareness, because it is sense awareness. So here that that’s a very useful debate because it very simply it states that eye awareness is always non conceptual. But conception can arise simultaneously with it.
Our system. Cognition incorrectly engaging its object is the definition of wrong awareness. So that covers every instance of wrong awareness. It’s just cognition incorrectly engaging its object. When it’s talking about incorrectly engaging its object, it’s talking about its referent object.
And if classified, there are two conceptual and non conceptual. For example, conception holding sound is permanent or conception holding sound is probably permanent. Also is wrong awareness. Or conception holding a rabbit with horns. Now for two, non conceptual wrong awareness, there are two, mental awareness and sense awareness.
Now the instance of mental awareness is, for example, dream awareness to which the blue of a dream clearly appears as blue. Dream awareness is the three. It is mental awareness, it is non conceptual awareness, and wrong awareness. Because in order, it is dream awareness. So being dream awareness means that it’s mental awareness.
And because and it is non conceptual awareness because it is awareness free of conceiving cognition holding the potential fusion of sound and image. And it is wrong awareness because, three, it is awareness holding its object, the form of Dharma base as blue when there is no blue. What that means there, the form of Dharma base is that what is experienced in a dream is regarded as form, but it’s a subtle form here, the form of Dharma base. What is the form of Dharma base? It is that within Buddhism is five aggregates, twelve bases, and eighteen elements or eighteen realms.
Is that okay? Everyone knows the twelve the everyone knows the five aggregates. Twelve bases. Eye sense base, ear sense base, nose sense base, tongue sense base, body sense base, mental sense base. And then we have physical objects, sounds, aromas, flavors, tactile objects, tactility, and dharma.
Those twelve are the twelve bases. In the dharma base, which includes everything that’s permanent and subtle form and so forth, there is a type of subtle form which is the object observed by dream awareness. And so dream awareness tends to hold that type of form, that subtle form as, say, gross form when it isn’t gross form. Right. The literals literal meaning of dharma there is it’s really talking about objects of mental awareness.
What type of eye awareness? It’s what yes. It’s the object of mental awareness. In fact, in the twelve bases, we just have the six pairs. We have eye awareness, physical we have form, color and shape, the ear awareness, sound, nose awareness, aroma, tongue awareness, flavor, body awareness, tactile objects, mental awareness, mental consciousness, dharma.
No. It’s dharma in a dharma actually here means that which holds its nature. Or zin pa. In Tibet Tibetan, it’s defined as that which holds its nature is the actual definition of dharma. And it was that in Sanskrit, the word dharma comes from the root dhri, meaning to hold.
So dharma means that which holds its nature, and that’s all all that is that’s basically what’s meant by dharma. But within dharma and dharma itself refers to everything that exists. Everything is a dharma because everything holds its nature. But within all existent entities, the central dharmas, the ones with value, then they’re that’s like virtue. That’s a more an inner meaning of Dharma.
And then within that, it’s emptiness. But here it’s talking about Dharma base. Or here we we could take refuge for instance in its essential meaning that of emptiness or virtue. But there’s said to be ten meanings of the word Dharma. Right.
So then on the next page, number two. What was number one? Okay. Sense awareness, number two. Is that okay for dream awareness?
It’s all those things? Yeah. Okay. Two, for sense awareness. Wrong sense awareness is, for example, sense awareness to which a white snow mountain appears as blue and sense awareness to which a white conch shell appears as yellow to someone with jaundice.
Again, for the threefold classification of cognition, there are three. Okay. So that, in a sense, completes the presentation of mind in in seven. And it’s very good if we can memorize those seven. There’s not many only seven.
But it’s not easy because because as we try and remember them, we try and work out their meaning. And when when we try and work out their meaning, it becomes a little bit harder. But it’s it’s necessary. We should know the meaning of these types of awareness. So just those seven.
Now we have a in a sense, we had a sevenfold classification of awareness. Now we have a threefold classification of cognition, and there are three. Explaining conception, taking a generic image as its held object. Explaining non mistaken, non conceptual awareness, taking the real as its held object. Explaining mistaken non conceptual awareness, taking the clear appearance of the non existent as its held object.
So in fact, all awareness, again, can be included in those three. Conception or non conceptual awareness. And non conceptual awareness just has two types, non mistaken and mistaken. Now when it says conception taking its generic image as its held object, held object that means appearing object. Of course.
There’s a little bit, even in the Tibetan, it’s some debate on this term here. But anyway, we have a threefold classification of awareness. So the first one there is conception. And the definition of conception again is conceiving cognition, cognition holding the potential fusion of sound and image. Sound and image means generic sound, generic image.
Further, as it says, sound from the term sound and image is generic sound. Image is generic image. Holding their potential fusion is holding their union. There is need to state potential because there is need to include the conceptions of beings untrained in symbols. That is because though the conception in their continuum in their continuums does not hold the fusion of sound and image, it merely holds the potential fusion of sound and image.
Yes. Even though beings have conception, they may not be skilled in the use of conception or understand or or use conception. Like, for instance, animals or, for instance, babies when they’re first training, those who are untrained in symbols. What do you mean by the feeling of the sound? Here, we use generic sound and generic image in order to conceive of things.
We put them together, the potential fusion of both sound and image when we conceive of something. Like when we we think of a horse trotting along on a bitumen road, we can hear the clop, clop, clop, clop, clop, it goes, you know, it’s synchronized with the, you know, the horse trotting along. So we have a fusion there of sound, generic sound, generic image. Both are permanent. Both we’re accessing in order to conceive of that horse.
Okay. So this has gone into in some depth now. If classified conception has three, conception holding generic sound alone, conception holding generic image alone, conception holding both sound and image. For example, the conception of a vase generated in dependence on a mere sound vase in the continuum of a being who does not know that capable of functioning as a bulbous flat based water container is a vase. That’s the definition of vase.
That capable functioning as a bulbous flat based water container. But we can have even if we don’t know what a vase is, we can still have a conception of vase. Within it’s only of, say, a generic image. It’s not a Generic image, not on the generic sound. Okay.
We just do this one for a start. We can have conception holding generic sound alone, and that’s the conception of a vase generated in dependence on a mere sound vase. Right. So in dependence on a mere sound vase, a conception arises. And that’s conception holding generic sound alone.
I mean, if someone speaks in another language, we hear words we don’t know what they are. And we reflect on the meaning of those words without understanding their meaning. So that’s conception holding generic sound alone. Conception holding generic image alone is for instance, the conception of the bulbous generated in dependence on merely seeing the bulbous thing in the continuum of that person. So in other words, if we see a bulbous thing, which is a vase, we don’t know what it’s called, but later we recall that that is conception generated conception holding generic image alone.
And now the third one, for example, the conception of vase and the continuum of being who knows a vase, knows the term vase like ourselves. We know the term vase. We know the image associated with the word. So we fuse those together. Or in a sense, we access a fusion of the generic sound and the generic image.
And then it says under that, what are the generic sound and generic image of a vase? For the first conception, the appearance appearing as a vase is the generic sound alone. So in the first conception, we just have the word vase without understanding what it refers to. So whatever appears as a vase there is the generic sound alone. Well, even if we say something like bumper.
Anyone know what bumper is? It was a bit of a giveaway, wasn’t it? Okay. Shimmy. Anyone knows what shimmy is?
Cat? Okay. What about Lunkur. Lunkur. Lunkur.
No. No. Lunkur. It’s a dharma. Yeah.
It’s it exists. But through that, you have a conception of generic sound alone. Okay. So that’s like this first example. So whatever appears as it says here, the appearance which appears as a lunkur is what appearance appears as a lunkur?
Well, whatever that is is a generic sound alone. Lunker. That’s a lunkur, I bet. A fan. Okay.
And for the second conception, that appearance appearing as the bulbous is a generic image alone. So if we just have this appearance of some bulbous form, like a vase. Anyway, some of them aren’t very bulbous. That’s generic image alone. And for the third conception, when a vase or the bulbous appears, both generic sound and generic image appear.
Okay. That’s pretty easy, isn’t it? Sorry? No. It doesn’t.
But this is perception holding It’s a problem. Yeah. Here, it’s a problem with the language. I’m thinking about this. It’s when it’s used here, it really means just accessing again.
Doesn’t actually mean that it’s holding in the sense of that it that is its reference object. Conception doesn’t hold its generic image. It holds the object because the generic image appears as that object. But it Appearing object. Referent object.
It’s not. When we conceive of a vase, we actually can hold a vase, don’t we? It’s not that we’re seeking to hold a generic image of a vase. In a way, it’s understood. The language is a little bit misleading here, but if we understand the point that’s being made, then it’s not a problem.
Oh, then that’s that’s an instance of, you know, holding generic sound alone. If you just say the one say a word like that, then whatever appears as the lunkur is the generic sound alone. And so because it’s a generic sound only, I have no picture of what a lunko is. No. But you have a in a sense, you have a picture of what the sound is.
You have something which is appearing as that. Well, what in a sense, what’s being investigated here is the nature of conception. And that we use a fusion of generic sounds and generic images to conceive of objects. That’s what’s being sometimes we just have a generic sound. Other times, we just have a generic image.
But for the most part, we we’re able to put them together. Because even if we get a word, you know, someone says, you know, there’s a, and we’ll instantly say, what are what are you talking about? What’s a? And they’ll tell us, they’ll define it for us. Oh, it’s a it’s a this or that.
What? What does that mean? And we push them until they give us a decent definition, and then we have the image as well. Otherwise it’s murky, we don’t know the image that we’re looking for. We sort through, we got, you know, countless images and we want to, you know, find something to tack to that sound.
That’s right. Just the word. Oh, no. You’re not supposed to because it’s it’s only generic sound. And why we want to have generic image to go with it.
Absolutely. So that’s why we get asked for the definition, meaning of something. What’s the meaning of that term you that’s being used, that I’m using? And you push, what is a lunko? Or what is this?
What is that? Define it. And so therefore we have a we access an image to go with the term, with the sound. Without an image, without an image, a lunko is Oh, not necessarily. We a lot of things we develop conceptions of without ever ever, you know, directly experiencing them.
Like, we all you know, if we’ve never been to New York, we have an idea of what New York is like. You know, it’s got Broadway there somewhere, then, you know, it’s got a harbor, and it’s got a statue in the middle of the harbor, and, you know, it’s got an island here and there and so on. We have, you know, various ideas about these places. We’ve never been there. And movies or Yep.
Photographs and various other things. I know. Yep. You just said a word. But that our process of conception is built up of generic sound and generic image.
They’re potential fusion. Yeah. Are. That’s all. Right.
Now, there’s also over the page, there’s a conception applying names and conception applying meaning. So there are these two types of conception. So conception reflecting this bulbous phenomenon is a vase is both conception applying names and a conception applying meaning because in order, it is conceiving cognition applying the name of a vase to the meaning of a vase. And it is two, conceiving cognition applying an attribute to a specific vase of the specific base. Sorry.
Okay. If it is conception applying meaning, it is not necessarily conception applying names. Why? Because the conception reflecting this being has a walking stick is conception applying meaning because it is conception applying the attribute walking stick to the basis being. If it is conception, it is not necessarily that it is either of those two because, for example, the conception holding the basis of a mixed vase is neither of those two.
Right. So in general, we have the conception which applies names and conception which applies meaning to those names and so on. And then we also have conception which is neither of those two. And then it gives you instances. Conception reflecting this bulbous phenomenon is a vase is both.
It’s conception applying name because it’s saying it is a vase. It’s giving the name vase to that phenomenon. And it’s conception applying meaning because it’s giving an attribute to a basis. Okay. And then as it says, if it’s conception applying meaning, it’s not necessarily applying a name.
And therefore, it gives the instance of the conception reflecting this person has a walking stick is conception applying meaning. Because it’s simply saying that they have have a walking stick. It’s applying an attribute to a basis. The attribute walking stick to the basis person, but it’s not actually giving a name. So there’s different types of conception also possible.
And then again, there’s authentic conception and inauthentic conception. So authentic conceiving cognition, holding the potential fusion of sound and image is the definition of authentic conception and so forth. For inauthentic conception, the first authentic there refers to the fact that it must the object of that conception must exist. If it’s authentic conception, it’s it’s referent object must exist. If it’s inauthentic conception, its referent object doesn’t exist.
For instance, our grasping of true existence is inauthentic conception because its referent object, true existence, does not exist. Right. Okay. I think we did pretty well to get at least this far because it’s there’s a few issues there, and it’d be nice if we had more time to go over them. But I think anyway.
Oh, that’s okay. It’s authentic conception. If it exists, it doesn’t have to exist in the present moment. Disagreement there by the way. Existentialist.
Are this yeah. Is that is that true or not? We’d have to have another example of something impossible or something that doesn’t exist. That’s okay. Once it exists, then we take it off the non existent list.
I don’t know. The southern horned rabbit. I would tend to think that myself. Generally, if it’s got horns, it’s not a rabbit. Okay.
We’ll have a break there.