Special Insight 1: Wisdom of Emptiness (21 June 2011)

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:25 Oh, you know, there's a ton of traffic out there. There's a bunch of traffic lights out. Report an error in the passage at 1:25 Highlight the passage at 1:25

1:34 What's going on? Report an error in the passage at 1:34 Highlight the passage at 1:34

1:39 I forgot about that. Report an error in the passage at 1:39 Highlight the passage at 1:39

1:45 Yeah, there was a middle Report an error in the passage at 1:45 Highlight the passage at 1:45

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:12 light, please. Report an error in the passage at 3:12 Highlight the passage at 3:12

3:17 Yeah, perfect. They get turned on. It feels cooler this way, too. It's always somebody's fault. Report an error in the passage at 3:17 Highlight the passage at 3:17

3:38 All right. Well, thank you for coming on such a beautiful evening. Report an error in the passage at 3:38 Highlight the passage at 3:38

3:50 Right. So let's spend a minute and set our motivation. Settle our minds and then set our motivation so Report an error in the passage at 3:50 Highlight the passage at 3:50

· · · silence, 1 minute

5:00 we can remember that we are not inherently existent, independent beings, but we are here due to the kindness of countless others Report an error in the passage at 5:00 Highlight the passage at 5:00

5:41 composed completely. Of non-me elements and Report an error in the passage at 5:41 Highlight the passage at 5:41

6:17 the development of our mind is dependent on the kindness of our many teachers, Lama Tsongkhapa, Geshe Dagpa, Lama Zopa Rinpoche, His Holiness the Dalai Lama, etc. Report an error in the passage at 6:17 Highlight the passage at 6:17

7:04 Our benefit of Report an error in the passage at 7:04 Highlight the passage at 7:04

7:09 others, Report an error in the passage at 7:09 Highlight the passage at 7:09

· · · silence, 1 minute

7:59 countless beings suffering, Report an error in the passage at 7:59 Highlight the passage at 7:59

8:08 suffer as long as they're encyclical, Report an error in the passage at 8:08 Highlight the passage at 8:08

· · · silence, 1 minute

8:42 our great compassion and exceptional resolve. We take responsibility for freeing these beings to Report an error in the passage at 8:42 Highlight the passage at 8:42

8:55 achieve complete in order to benefit all. Report an error in the passage at 8:55 Highlight the passage at 8:55

· · · silence, 1 minute

9:58 I'll start with the praise to Manjushri on the first page of the white book. Report an error in the passage at 9:58 Highlight the passage at 9:58

10:23 Obeisance to my guru and protector Manjushri, who holds to his heart a scriptural text symbolic of his seeing all things as they are, whose intelligence shines forth as a sun, unclouded by delusions or traces of ignorance. Who teaches in sixty ways with the loving compassion of a father for his only son. All creatures caught in the prison of saṃsāra, confused in the darkness of their ignorance, overwhelmed by their suffering. Report an error in the passage at 10:23 Highlight the passage at 10:23

10:49 You whose dragon thunder-like proclamation of Dharma arouses us from the stupor of our delusions and frees us from the iron chains of our karma. Who wields the sword of wisdom hewing down suffering wherever its sprouts appear. Clearing away the darkness of ignorance, you whose princely body is adorned with 112 marks of a Buddha, who has completed the stages achieving the highest perfection of a bodhisattva, who has been pure from the beginning, I bow down to you, O Manjushri. Report an error in the passage at 10:49 Highlight the passage at 10:49

11:34 With the brilliance of your wisdom, O compassionate one. Oh, my rabbit's sanity, rabbit's sanity. Report an error in the passage at 11:34 Highlight the passage at 11:34

11:37 Illuminate the darkness in closing my mind. Enlighten my intelligence and wisdom so that I may gain insight into Buddha's words and the texts that explain them. Report an error in the passage at 11:37 Highlight the passage at 11:37

11:50 And then the Heart Sūtra on page 76. Report an error in the passage at 11:50 Highlight the passage at 11:50

12:02 I prostrate to the Arya Triple Gem. Thus did I hear it one time. The Bhagavan was dwelling on Mass Vulture's mountain in Rajgriya, together with a great community of monks and a great community of bodhisattvas. At that time, the Bhagavan was absorbed in the concentration on the categories of phenomena called profound perception. Also at that time, the bodhisattva, mahasattva, aria, avalokiteshvara, looked upon the very practice of the profound perfection of wisdom and beheld those five aggregates also as empty of inherent nature. Report an error in the passage at 12:02 Highlight the passage at 12:02

12:36 Then through the power of Buddha, the Venerable Shariputra said this to the Bodhisattva, Maha Sattva, Arya Avalokiteshvara. How should any son of the lineage train who wishes to practice the activity of the profound perfection of wisdom? He said that, and the Bodhisattva, Maha Sattva, Arya Avalokiteshvara said this to the Venerable Sharivadiputra. Report an error in the passage at 12:36 Highlight the passage at 12:36

12:59 Shariputra, any son of the lineage or daughter of the lineage who wishes to practice the activity of the profound perfection of wisdom should look upon it like this, correctly and repeatedly beholding those five aggregates also as empty of inherent nature. Form is empty, emptiness is form. Emptiness is not other than form. Form is also not other than emptiness. In the same way, feeling, discrimination, compositional factors and consciousness are empty. Report an error in the passage at 12:59 Highlight the passage at 12:59

13:28 Shariputra, likewise all phenomena are emptiness, without characteristic, unproduced, unceased, stainless, not without stain, not deficient, not fulfilled. Shariputra, therefore in emptiness there is no form, no feeling, no discrimination, no compositional factors, no consciousness, no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind. Report an error in the passage at 13:28 Highlight the passage at 13:28

13:55 No visual form, no sound, no odor, no taste, no object of touch and no phenomenon. There is no eye element and so on up to and including no mind element and no mental consciousness element. There is no ignorance, no extinction of ignorance and so on up to and including no aging and death and no extinction of aging and death. Report an error in the passage at 13:55 Highlight the passage at 13:55

14:18 Similarly, there is no suffering, origination, cessation and path. There is no exalted wisdom, no attainment, and also no non-attainment. Shariputra, therefore, because there is no attainment, bodhisattvas rely on and dwell in the perfection of wisdom, the mind without obscuration and without fear. Having completely passed beyond error, they reach the end point of nirvāṇa. All the Buddhas who dwell in three times also manifestly completely awaken to unsurpassable, perfect, complete enlightenment. Report an error in the passage at 14:18 Highlight the passage at 14:18

14:51 In reliance on the perfection of wisdom. Therefore, the mantra of the perfection of wisdom, the mantra of great knowledge, the unsurpassed mantra, the mantra equal to the unequaled, mantra that thoroughly pacifies all suffering, should be known as truth since it is not false. The mantra of the perfection of wisdom is declared. Report an error in the passage at 14:51 Highlight the passage at 14:51

15:11 Thayetha Om Gathe Gathe Paragathe Parasam Gathe Bodhi Soha Sariputra, the Bodhisattva, Mahasattva should train in the profound perfection of wisdom like that. Then the Bhagavan arose from that concentration and commended the Bodhisattva, Mahasattva, Arya, Avalokiteshvara, saying, Well said, well said, son of the lineage, it is like that. Report an error in the passage at 15:11 Highlight the passage at 15:11

15:36 It is like that. One should practice a profound perfection of wisdom just as you have indicated. Even the Tathagatas rejoice. The Bhagavan having thus spoken. The venerable Charivadiputra, the Bodhisattva, Mahasattva, Arya, Avalokiteshvara, and those surrounding in their entirety, along with the world of gods, humans, asuras and Gandharvas, were overjoyed and highly praised that spoken by the Bhagavan. Report an error in the passage at 15:36 Highlight the passage at 15:36

16:03 And then on page 98 is refuge in bodhicitta. Report an error in the passage at 16:03 Highlight the passage at 16:03

16:14 I go for refuge until I am enlightened to the Buddha, the Dharma and the Supreme Assembly. By the merits I create through listening to the Dharma, may I become a Buddha in order to benefit all sentient beings. I go for refuge until I am enlightened to the Buddha, the Dharma and the Supreme Assembly. By the merits I create through listening to the Dharma, may I become a Buddha in order to benefit all sentient beings. I go for refuge until I am enlightened to the Buddha, the Dharma and the Supreme Assembly. Report an error in the passage at 16:14 Highlight the passage at 16:14

16:44 By the merits I create through listening to the Dharma, may I become a Buddha in order to benefit all sentient beings. Report an error in the passage at 16:44 Highlight the passage at 16:44

17:02 Okay, Report an error in the passage at 17:02 Highlight the passage at 17:02

17:06 so we're in the middle length lamrim. If you have the Corco, Philip Corco version, we are on the bottom of page 253. And if you have Jeffrey Hopkins' final exposition of wisdom, we are on page 40. Report an error in the passage at 17:06 Highlight the passage at 17:06

17:34 So just a bit of review. Report an error in the passage at 17:34 Highlight the passage at 17:34

17:39 So last time we talked about how ignorance is the basis of all of our mental afflictions, all of our suffering, all of our contaminated karma. Report an error in the passage at 17:39 Highlight the passage at 17:39

17:50 And Lama Tsongkhapa talked about how it's extremely important to identify ignorance. Not just conceptually, not just knowing the words, but identifying ignorance in our experience. Seeing how we perceive things and how we conceive of things and how we see things as being so solid and existing from their own side. Report an error in the passage at 17:50 Highlight the passage at 17:50

18:17 Because it's easy to leave these teachings on an intellectual level. Like, oh yeah, yeah, nothing exists from its own side. Yeah, there's no clock there. Yeah, no big deal, right? Report an error in the passage at 18:17 Highlight the passage at 18:17

18:31 But when we really get it, it shakes us up, right? If it hasn't shaken us up, then we haven't really gotten it yet. Because this is really the basis of all of our mental afflictions. So if we have any mental afflictions, that's a sure bet that we still hang on to inherent existence. So we need to identify ignorance and really... Report an error in the passage at 18:31 Highlight the passage at 18:31

19:00 You know, from moment to moment, you know, take some time in our life and just look at how we see things, right? Just notice because we've seen things this way forever, right? And so we don't even know that there's anything wrong with it. So I find it very useful. I mean, it takes time, right, to really notice, distinguish between what the perception of things existing from their own side. Report an error in the passage at 19:00 Highlight the passage at 19:00

19:32 Versus things just existing conventionally. There's a huge difference, right? But actually in our experience it's pretty subtle and we probably haven't distinguished that completely yet. And actually we can't until we actually realize emptiness. But useful to really look at how we see things. Report an error in the passage at 19:32 Highlight the passage at 19:32

19:59 So Lama Tsongkhapa talked about how ignorance is the opposite. Of the wisdom realizing emptiness, right? The contradictory equivalent to the wisdom realizing emptiness. Not just a lack of wisdom, but it's holding on to the exact opposite. Because the wisdom realizing emptiness realizes that things don't exist from their own side, don't exist by way of their own characteristics. Report an error in the passage at 19:59 Highlight the passage at 19:59

20:28 Don't exist inherently. Whereas we hold on to the exact opposite. We think that things do exist inherently. We believe in it. We grasp onto it, which is why we're still in cyclic existence. So the wisdom realizing emptiness is our ticket out of saṃsāra. It's our ticket to end suffering forever. So sometimes when we study this stuff, it can get frustrating. Report an error in the passage at 20:28 Highlight the passage at 20:28

20:57 It can get confusing, but if we keep our eye on why we're doing it, oh yeah, this is how we get out of saṃsāra. You know, when I really get it, then I'm on my way out of saṃsāra. No more suffering. It's kind of hard maybe to imagine being free from suffering forever. Report an error in the passage at 20:57 Highlight the passage at 20:57

21:21 Seems to Report an error in the passage at 21:21 Highlight the passage at 21:21

21:28 me. So this ignorance, according to the Prasangika school, right? Considered the most subtle, highest school, is apprehending phenomena to exist, well, as we said, from their own side, in and of themselves, right, by way of their own entity, as if there's an entity right here, independent of the mind, as if there's an entity here, independent of the mind, Report an error in the passage at 21:28 Highlight the passage at 21:28

21:56 whereas it is just imputed by the mind, right? There is data perceived and the conceptual mind. It organizes data into objects. There aren't actually solid objects from their own side. Report an error in the passage at 21:56 Highlight the passage at 21:56

22:17 So phenomena are merely imputed by the power of conception. Merely imputed. There's nothing at all from the side of the object that makes it what it is. It's just merely imputed. And yet it functions. So this is, I think, extremely difficult to get. Report an error in the passage at 22:17 Highlight the passage at 22:17

22:42 We can understand how the lower schools say, right, so Prasangika says, right, there's nothing at all on this basis. There's nothing at all in my hand that is a clock. You can't find clock at all among the basis. And yet clock still exists, right? And that's pretty far out, really, right? I mean, the lower schools say, If you can't find it, how can it exist? If you can't find it, that means it doesn't exist. And that kind of makes sense, right? Report an error in the passage at 22:42 Highlight the passage at 22:42

23:25 If it's not findable, how can it exist? So the Prasangika position is very subtle. It's like, you can't find it, and yet it functions, and it exists conventionally. Report an error in the passage at 23:25 Highlight the passage at 23:25

23:44 That's pretty hard to understand, but that's precisely what the Prasangikas are saying. Report an error in the passage at 23:44 Highlight the passage at 23:44

23:59 So there's a clock that exists conventionally in my hand. It exists only through imputation. Well, imputation on a valid base. Let's say it that way. Imputation. It's not that every imputation is valid. You need to impute it on a valid base. It's only a convention. It's only a worldly convention. Report an error in the passage at 23:59 Highlight the passage at 23:59

24:30 So things are imputed by the power of conception. There are no mental afflictions possible without a conceptual mind, without conception, right? We talked about that. Desire arises independence on conception. Report an error in the passage at 24:30 Highlight the passage at 24:30

24:48 Anger arises independence on conception. Report an error in the passage at 24:48 Highlight the passage at 24:48

24:56 Usually, I was thinking about this in the car coming over, like anger usually arises, well often arises because we think somebody did something wrong. That person is wrong or that action is wrong, right? That's a conception, right? He's wrong. Report an error in the passage at 24:56 Highlight the passage at 24:56

25:20 That was wrong. He shouldn't have done that, right? Those are conceptions, right? So I was thinking, I mean this is very loose, right? But thinking something is wrong is a conception of inherent existence, right? Something is wrong. It's like the difference between thinking that is wrong and, oh, I'm just labeling that wrong, right? Report an error in the passage at 25:20 Highlight the passage at 25:20

25:58 It's much lighter, right, when you say, oh, I consider that to be wrong versus that is wrong, right? And we see how that is wrong gets us riled up, right? We can feel the fire rising, right? That's wrong. But a statement like that is wrong or that is bad or that is anything, right, Report an error in the passage at 25:58 Highlight the passage at 25:58

26:33 is saying that that is, right, the basis of designation is the phenomenon, which is a conception of inherent existence, right? conception of inherent existence is finding that thing to be. Whatever the label is. It is that as opposed to I'm just imputing it as that. See the difference? It's interesting just to look at it in terms of language because then we can really identify it, you know, the way we see things. Report an error in the passage at 26:33 Highlight the passage at 26:33

27:22 Worst art, yeah, arguments, mental afflictions, anger. So, yeah. So the problem isn't, well... Well, so anytime we label something that I'm right, I am right, or you are wrong, right? There's a disguised, or maybe not so disguised, right? Grasping onto inherent existence there. Report an error in the passage at 27:22 Highlight the passage at 27:22

27:59 Does that make sense? So that's Report an error in the passage at 27:59 Highlight the passage at 27:59

28:08 why when we realize emptiness... It's said, right, we won't hold so strongly to opinions. Like we won't have such strong opinions about things, right? Because strong opinions are based on that is right from its own side, right? That other position is wrong from its own side as opposed to, oh, well, this is how I think about things, right? Report an error in the passage at 28:08 Highlight the passage at 28:08

28:34 Or this is how, this is just a convention that some people hold. This is just one way of looking at things. Report an error in the passage at 28:34 Highlight the passage at 28:34

28:47 Anyway, so this is just something I was playing around in my mind. I would hold that loosely. Report an error in the passage at 28:47 Highlight the passage at 28:47

29:03 So, in general, I also want to bring up the fact that labels aren't necessarily bad. We're not trying to get rid of labels altogether. Report an error in the passage at 29:03 Highlight the passage at 29:03

29:15 The problem is grasping onto labels and believing in those labels as being that phenomenon. That is... Report an error in the passage at 29:15 Highlight the passage at 29:15

29:28 But that is the right way of looking at things. That is Tim. That's not John. That is Tim, right? So the label isn't the problem, right? That's a clock. That's a clock. That's not a problem, right? That I label this a clock. That I label this a table. That I label this a person. That I label this me. That's not the problem. The problem is grasping onto that. Report an error in the passage at 29:28 Highlight the passage at 29:28

30:00 If we remember that it's just a label, it's light. But when we label it, as soon as I label this clock, it immediately appears back as if clock comes from its own side. As if it is a clock, as opposed to it's just labeled as a clock. It happens with everything. I label it bad, and then it is bad. It becomes bad. Report an error in the passage at 30:00 Highlight the passage at 30:00

30:41 I was playing with that today too about how a lot of us have this habit of perceiving when we experience pain, we label that bad. We experience discomfort, we label that bad. We experience difficulties, we label that bad. Report an error in the passage at 30:41 Highlight the passage at 30:41

31:11 And then we develop aversion. Right? And so... So through mind training, we can play with that. If we label it bad, it's going to bring up a mental affliction most likely. But if we think, oh yeah, well this is useful, label it useful, label it beneficial, a learning opportunity, then the mind, the orientation of the mind is completely different. Report an error in the passage at 31:11 Highlight the passage at 31:11

31:45 So sometimes we're playing with labels in mind training. Report an error in the passage at 31:45 Highlight the passage at 31:45

31:59 So back to the text. Report an error in the passage at 31:59 Highlight the passage at 31:59

32:04 So on the bottom of page 253 or page 40, Report an error in the passage at 32:04 Highlight the passage at 32:04

32:17 Lama Tsongkhapa says, For those reasons, the manner of apprehending things as truly existent, the object of negation is to apprehend them not as posited by the power of beginningless conceptions, but as established objectively by way of their own entity. Report an error in the passage at 32:17 Highlight the passage at 32:17

32:40 So the manner of apprehending things as truly existent is the object of negation, right? The object of negation. Does everybody know that term, the object of negation or the object of refutation, right? That's the object we need to refute. That's the object we need to identify in our own experience that we hold on to but doesn't exist at all. Report an error in the passage at 32:40 Highlight the passage at 32:40

33:09 This. True existence, not being posited by the power of beginningless conceptions, being established objectively by way of their own entity. Report an error in the passage at 33:09 Highlight the passage at 33:09

33:25 So we Report an error in the passage at 33:25 Highlight the passage at 33:25

· · · silence, 1 minute

33:58 have a Report an error in the passage at 33:58 Highlight the passage at 33:58

34:04 conception of something being wrong from its own side. So we have a conception, a mind, a conceptual mind, that something is wrong from its own side. So the object navigation is, in this case, wrong from its own side. We need to see that this object doesn't exist at all. Report an error in the passage at 34:04 Highlight the passage at 34:04

34:34 We need to try to find this object. This is the object that we have. We're hanging on to. We believe exists. Report an error in the passage at 34:34 Highlight the passage at 34:34

34:46 And so in our emptiness meditation... We need to try to find this wrong from its own side. Try to find the wrong among its basis. Or a conception of a person existing from its own side. A conception of a friend existing from its own side. A conception of me existing from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 34:46 Highlight the passage at 34:46

35:18 We talked previously about appearing objects. So Report an error in the passage at 35:18 Highlight the passage at 35:18

35:26 the appearing object of the conception of wrong from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 35:26 Highlight the passage at 35:26

35:50 Can you even read this? Report an error in the passage at 35:50 Highlight the passage at 35:50

35:57 So the appearing object of a conception is always a mental image. Remember that? Mental image. We have a mental image in our mind of whatever it is, wrong from its own side, or a mental image of an annoying person from its own side, or a mental image of me, a solid me, an inherently existent me. Report an error in the passage at 35:57 Highlight the passage at 35:57

36:25 So, once again, the... Object of reputation is that, wrong from its own side. Lama Tsongkhapa then says its referent object is called self or inherent nature. So the referent object is this. The referent object is wrong from its own side. If we have a conception of wrong from its own side, its referent object is wrong from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 36:25 Highlight the passage at 36:25

36:57 Its appearing object is the mental image of it being wrong. So the mental image exists, but the referent object doesn't exist. The referent object of a conception of inherent existence doesn't exist. Wrong from its own side doesn't exist. Report an error in the passage at 36:57 Highlight the passage at 36:57

37:20 It's not the same, but in this case, in this case, it is. The referent object is a more general term. It's whenever we have a conception. The referent object is whatever we have a mental image of in our mind. So if I have a mental image of an annoying person, the referent object is an annoying person. Report an error in the passage at 37:20 Highlight the passage at 37:20

37:55 The appearing object is a mental image of an annoying person. The referent object is the annoying person. So the object of negation is the referent object. Report an error in the passage at 37:55 Highlight the passage at 37:55

38:15 of real me. me that exists among the body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 38:15 Highlight the passage at 38:15

38:28 referent object is a me that exists among the body and mind. the object of refutation. Report an error in the passage at 38:28 Highlight the passage at 38:28

38:41 this referent object of a conception of inherent existence doesn't exist at all. Report an error in the passage at 38:41 Highlight the passage at 38:41

38:51 the object of negation. Report an error in the passage at 38:51 Highlight the passage at 38:51

39:00 The difference between referent object and object of negation. If I have a conception, I could have a conception about anything. I could have a conception about emptiness, the emptiness of true existence. Report an error in the passage at 39:00 Highlight the passage at 39:00

39:25 The referent object of the conception of the emptiness of true existence is emptiness of true existence, but it's not an object of negation. right. Report an error in the passage at 39:25 Highlight the passage at 39:25

39:37 It exists, right? Whereas the referent object of a conception of inherent existence is always the object of negation. Yeah. But a conception of just a merely imputed person, there's no object of negation there. You know, the referent object isn't an object of negation. A conception of a beautiful day, a merely labeled beautiful day, you know. Report an error in the passage at 39:37 Highlight the passage at 39:37

40:07 The referent object is a merely imputed beautiful day and it's not an object of negation. So an object of negation is specifically an inherently existent something or an existence from its own side, existence by way of its own entity. That's the object of negation. It's specific. Report an error in the passage at 40:07 Highlight the passage at 40:07

40:37 The microphone is behind you. We have a new cordless microphone. Oh, wow. Hachi machi. So does referent mean in reference to or referring to rather than refuted by? Yes. Okay, that makes it clearer maybe. Yes. Yeah, that's good. So the referent object is the object that that conception is referring to, right? Report an error in the passage at 40:37 Highlight the passage at 40:37

41:04 That conception of inherent existence is referring to inherent existence. Report an error in the passage at 41:04 Highlight the passage at 41:04

41:13 Another translation for the same thing is the conceived object. Sometimes we'll see in some books the conceived object. It's the same thing as the referent object. It's a slightly different... That term evokes a different image, but it's the same thing. Report an error in the passage at 41:13 Highlight the passage at 41:13

41:45 Lama Tsongkhapa says the referent object of this conception is... Called self or inherent nature. So this term self, just to talk in general, the term self is a little bit confusing because there are two different ways that term is used. When we talk about self in general, it's synonymous with person. A self exists. Report an error in the passage at 41:45 Highlight the passage at 41:45

42:12 A self exists conventionally. Report an error in the passage at 42:12 Highlight the passage at 42:12

42:20 A person exists conventionally. A self exists conventionally. As merely imputed. Whereas in this context, when we talk about selflessness, then we're talking about a self that doesn't exist. We're talking about an inherently existent self, an inherently existent person, Report an error in the passage at 42:20 Highlight the passage at 42:20

42:46 or an inherently existent clock. So self has two meanings. When we talk about selflessness, we're talking about the inherent existence, lack of inherent existence in prasangika. Report an error in the passage at 42:46 Highlight the passage at 42:46

43:06 So the non-existence of this, Lama Tsongkhapa says, the non-existence of this with a person as substratum is taught to be the selflessness of a person, and the non-existence of it with phenomena such as eye and a nose, an eye and a nose as substratum is taught to be the selflessness of phenomena. So for all of the Mahāyāna schools, we talk about selflessness of persons versus selflessness of phenomena. Report an error in the passage at 43:06 Highlight the passage at 43:06

43:36 So for Prasangika, the selflessness of persons that we have to realize to get out of saṃsāra is the lack of an inherently existent person. Person or being, right? It could be an animal or something, right? Lack of an inherently existent person or being. Whereas the selflessness of phenomena is a lack of an inherently existent phenomena other than a person, a lack of an inherently existent clock, the lack of an inherently existent table. Report an error in the passage at 43:36 Highlight the passage at 43:36

44:06 As well as the lack of an inherently existent body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 44:06 Highlight the passage at 44:06

44:12 So the only difference between selflessness of persons and selflessness of phenomena is what the basis is or the focal object is, right? If we're negating the inherent existence of a person or a phenomenon other than person. That's the difference in prasangika. Where in other schools, we remember there was a difference in what you were negating. Report an error in the passage at 44:12 Highlight the passage at 44:12

44:36 Like in Svatandrika, the selflessness of persons. Was the lack of a self-sufficient, substantially existent self, whereas the selflessness phenomena was a lack of a truly existent something. So there was a difference in subtlety of what was being negated in the other schools. Am I making any sense? You guys are just kind of looking at me. As opposed to in Prasanghika, you're negating... Report an error in the passage at 44:36 Highlight the passage at 44:36

45:08 The same thing, inherent existence, but just on different bases, on persons versus phenomena. So in prasangika, it's consistent all around. You have to realize the lack of inherent existence in order to get out of saṃsāra, as well as in order to get enlightened. Report an error in the passage at 45:08 Highlight the passage at 45:08

45:28 Whereas the other school said, well, you know, in order to get out of saṃsāra, you need to realize the lack of a self-sufficient, substantial self. But if you want Buddhahood, then you realize the lack of something more subtle, right? True existence or subject and object is a different entity. Report an error in the passage at 45:28 Highlight the passage at 45:28

45:52 So what was the selflessness of a person, according to Prasangika? Report an error in the passage at 45:52 Highlight the passage at 45:52

46:00 What's the selflessness of a person? Anybody? A Report an error in the passage at 46:00 Highlight the passage at 46:00

46:14 lack of an inherently existent person from their own side. And what's the selflessness of phenomena? It's the lack of inherently existent phenomena, like anything other than a person, basically, including body and mind. Exactly. Any aggregates. Yep. Perfect. Report an error in the passage at 46:14 Highlight the passage at 46:14

47:13 Yep. And according to Prasangikas, we have to realize the lack of inherent existence of all phenomena, not just of... The person. Report an error in the passage at 47:13 Highlight the passage at 47:13

· · · silence, 1 minute

48:08 So then Lama Report an error in the passage at 48:08 Highlight the passage at 48:08

48:31 Tsongkhapa on page 254 and Hopkins on page 41 gets into the view of the transitory collection. First of all, we'll talk about the self of persons, the person that exists and the person that doesn't exist, right? We're never refuting the existence of a person altogether, right? A person does exist conventionally, right? Report an error in the passage at 48:31 Highlight the passage at 48:31

49:04 But what each school asserts as what exists, the person that exists conventionally is different, right? So in the lower schools, like there's some Semitiyas who are some Vibashikas who assert here, Lama Tsongkhapa says, Part, but I think it's all of the five aggregates. So the five aggregates, the body and the mind, are considered by some schools as being the person. Report an error in the passage at 49:04 Highlight the passage at 49:04

49:39 The body and the mind is the person, according to some schools. Report an error in the passage at 49:39 Highlight the passage at 49:39

49:48 Some of the vibashikas, the samitiyas. Report an error in the passage at 49:48 Highlight the passage at 49:48

49:53 Some schools assert that it's... The chitta mantras, well one of the chitta mantra schools assert that it's the mind basis of all is the person. The mind basis of all, which is the neutral, like the eighth consciousness that's neutral that is the repository for the karmic seeds. Chitta mantras say that is the person. Other schools like Svatantrakas and some chitta mantras assert that it's the mental consciousness that is the person. Report an error in the passage at 49:53 Highlight the passage at 49:53

50:33 They all refute the self-sufficient, substantial, existent person. So they refute the self-sufficient person, but they all assert a person that does exist. So prasangikas say none of those things is the person. The person is merely an imputation on the four or five aggregates, the body and or mind. It's just... Report an error in the passage at 50:33 Highlight the passage at 50:33

51:01 An imputation. It's not the mental consciousness. It's not the mind basis of all. It's not all the body and the mind. The person cannot be found at all on the body and the mind. The person does not exist on the body and mind at all. It is just imputed by the conceptual mind. It's just something very light. Very, very light. Report an error in the passage at 51:01 Highlight the passage at 51:01

51:33 Like the difference. This is really. The subtlety, right, of Prasangika. All the other schools say the person has to be findable on its basis, has to be findable on the body and the mind. And Prasangikas say, nope, there's no person. But Report an error in the passage at 51:33 Highlight the passage at 51:33

51:56 the person does exist as a mere imputation. There's no person at all among the body and mind. It's just an imputation on the body. It's a big difference whether the basis, the body and mind, is the person or whether or not, It's the basis of the imputation. So the I and the body and mind are not the same. Report an error in the passage at 51:56 Highlight the passage at 51:56

52:30 One nice way, I think, of looking at inherent existence is, it seems to be that the I is fused with the body and the mind, inseparable from the body and the mind. Report an error in the passage at 52:30 Highlight the passage at 52:30

52:48 One of the examples is like... Milk mixed with water, right? Seems like I am inseparable from this body and mind. And Prasangikas say, nope, the I is just imputed on this body. Report an error in the passage at 52:48 Highlight the passage at 52:48

53:14 So what is the I that exists? It's the mere I, according to Prasangikas, the mere I, which is a mere imputation on the body and the mind. Report an error in the passage at 53:14 Highlight the passage at 53:14

53:38 So the person... The person who's practicing, the person who's in cyclic existence, the person cultivating the paths is the mere I. Mere I, the I that's merely imputed on the body and the mind. Report an error in the passage at 53:38 Highlight the passage at 53:38

54:12 So there are different assertions about the root of cyclic existence. The root of cyclic existence basically is the conception of inherent existence. Nagarjuna says it's the conception of an inherently existent phenomena. Chandrakirti says it's the conception of an inherently existent person. Report an error in the passage at 54:12 Highlight the passage at 54:12

54:39 But perhaps the chief problem maker, troublemaker, is the view of the transitory collection. The view of the transitory collection is a conception of a self of persons. And that's a specific conception of a self of persons. It's the conception of an inherently existent I or mine. A conception of the inherently existent I or mine. Because that's the biggest troublemaker, right? Report an error in the passage at 54:39 Highlight the passage at 54:39

55:16 Conceiving a separate I, a real I that's separate from others. And hanging on to me, right, that's the basis of most of our self-cherishing. We believe that there's a real I. Report an error in the passage at 55:16 Highlight the passage at 55:16

55:48 So here, the transitory collection here is the body and mind. It's the five aggregates. Maybe I should talk about the five aggregates a little bit. Report an error in the passage at 55:48 Highlight the passage at 55:48

56:08 Five aggregates are just the body and mind broken out into five parts. Report an error in the passage at 56:08 Highlight the passage at 56:08

· · · silence, 1 minute

57:02 So in the context of the person, okay, well, the five aggregates in general are form. Feeling. Feeling, discrimination, compositional factors and consciousness. We can talk about the five aggregates in general or the five aggregates in relation to a person. So here we'll talk about the five aggregates in relation to a person. So the form aggregate in relation to a person is our body. Report an error in the passage at 57:02 Highlight the passage at 57:02

57:36 And then the other four aggregates are related to our mind. Our feeling. Which is a mental factor that perceives pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. It's an experience. We stick our hand in fire and then a feeling of unpleasant arises. That unpleasant feeling is Report an error in the passage at 57:36 Highlight the passage at 57:36

58:05 a feeling aggregate. Report an error in the passage at 58:05 Highlight the passage at 58:05

58:11 The discrimination aggregate is that mental factor distinguishing. objects, right? Distinguishing between right and wrong, distinguishing between this person and that person. It distinguishes between objects. Report an error in the passage at 58:11 Highlight the passage at 58:11

58:38 Compositional factors really are the rest of the mental factors. There's a presentation of minds and mental factors. Main minds and mental factors that accompany that mind. I don't want to get that in detail but Consciousness is the main mind that knows the general entity of an object. Then there are a bunch of mental factors that operate in conjunction with the main mind. Report an error in the passage at 58:38 Highlight the passage at 58:38

59:11 There's always a feeling that is associated with the main mind. Discrimination. There might be a mental affliction. That's also a mental factor. Other mental factors are like anger. that knows, right, the general entity of the clock. Report an error in the passage at 59:11 Highlight the passage at 59:11

59:24 Like attachment, ignorance, those are afflictions. But there are also other mental factors that are virtuous like faith and concentration. Wow, I don't even remember them. But anyway, there's a list of 51 mental factors. So 49 of the mental factors are included in the compositional factors aggregate. Report an error in the passage at 59:24 Highlight the passage at 59:24

59:52 Whereas feeling and discrimination are separated out. As different aggregates, because these are two big ones that are the basis of mental afflictions. Because on the basis of pleasant feelings, attachment arises. On the basis of painful feelings, anger, irritation arises. And discrimination, on the basis of discriminating between right and wrong, my opinion, my right opinion and your wrong opinion, we have... Report an error in the passage at 59:52 Highlight the passage at 59:52

1:00:27 Mental afflictions. So these are two important mental factors that we need to pay attention to. Report an error in the passage at 1:00:27 Highlight the passage at 1:00:27

1:00:40 So back to the view of the transitory collection. The view of the transitory collection. First of all, what appears to the mind is, well, when you see a person, right? You first must, first the body and or mind must appear to you. And then you conceive that. As inherently existent, according to Nagarjuna, Report an error in the passage at 1:00:40 Highlight the passage at 1:00:40

1:01:12 first the body and or mind appears. You conceive of that as being inherently existent. And then you impute I on that body and mind. And then we conceive of that as being inherently existent. Happens very fast. So the view of the transitory collection. Report an error in the passage at 1:01:12 Highlight the passage at 1:01:12

1:01:34 What's considered the observed object of the view of the transitory collection is the mere eye. The mere eye appears to the view of the transitory collection and then we grasp onto that as being inherently existent. Report an error in the passage at 1:01:34 Highlight the passage at 1:01:34

1:01:53 So the eye appears and we grasp onto it as being inherently existent and that's the view of the transitory collection. Report an error in the passage at 1:01:53 Highlight the passage at 1:01:53

1:02:08 So that arises maybe quite frequently. I can't believe they did that to me. Or I hope they like me. Or I hope I do really well on that job interview. That inherently existent person. So that's the view of the transitory collection viewing I. There's also a view of the transitory collection conceiving of mine. Report an error in the passage at 1:02:08 Highlight the passage at 1:02:08

1:02:42 So these are the big troublemakers. The I. In the mind, oh, that's my, don't take my seat, right? That's my seat, right? Or that's, you know, don't mess with my mind, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:02:42 Highlight the passage at 1:02:42

1:03:02 Or that's, depends Report an error in the passage at 1:03:02 Highlight the passage at 1:03:02

1:03:11 on how you look at it. Or my reputation, right? Or my house, right? It's conceiving of my something, right? As soon as something becomes Mine, we have a much different orientation toward it than if it's somebody else's. Well, if we're most people. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:11 Highlight the passage at 1:03:11

1:03:36 And that is also based on grasping onto an inherently existent me. And based on having an inherently existent me, then I can consider something as mine. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:36 Highlight the passage at 1:03:36

1:03:51 But it really depends on grasping onto an inherently existent me first. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:51 Highlight the passage at 1:03:51

1:03:59 So if I think, okay, well don't mess with my mind, right? First there has to be a me that has a mind, right? Me, inherently existent me, and then grasping onto that and then considering the mind mine or my seat, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:03:59 Highlight the passage at 1:03:59

1:04:27 There's inherently this me that then considers the seat mine or my opinion or my, you know, this list can go endless, right? What we can grasp onto. Huh? My, oh yeah, my money. Report an error in the passage at 1:04:27 Highlight the passage at 1:04:27

1:04:52 Don't waste my money. Those, Report an error in the passage at 1:04:52 Highlight the passage at 1:04:52

1:04:57 so, okay. So the mine, so the view of the transitory collection is considered a conception of a self of person. So when we talk about a view of the transitory collection of mine, we're not talking about a conception of my hand as being mine. We're talking about, it's more, how do I explain this? It's the my, like it's not the object of the mine, it's the subject, it's the I part. Report an error in the passage at 1:04:57 Highlight the passage at 1:04:57

1:05:45 I'll, uh, Report an error in the passage at 1:05:45 Highlight the passage at 1:05:45

1:05:49 we guess you jump a tech chook says much better than I do. So he says, when we say mine, that thought is naturally related to the idea of I, right? It cannot arise without the thought of I arising. Thus, as there is no way to observe mine without the I, so this view of the transitory collection. Viewing mine is said to take the eye as an object. Report an error in the passage at 1:05:49 Highlight the passage at 1:05:49

1:06:34 So Jeffrey Hopkins talks about a commentary by Jamyung Shepa. He says he takes this term mine more as what Hopkins would translate as my and is thus a person. He says, for him, the my is the one who makes things into mine. Normally when we say mine, we think of the object possessed, like the hand, but you can also look at the mine more in terms of my, and thus as a person, the owner. Report an error in the passage at 1:06:34 Highlight the passage at 1:06:34

1:07:12 It's like a more active I. It's that feeling of my, or it's that conception of my, as opposed to focusing on the object. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:12 Highlight the passage at 1:07:12

1:07:27 The emphasis here is on the my, that it's mine and it's not somebody else's, right? It's a more active way of looking at the I, right? The I is kind of more passive, right? Whereas my, it's taking that more actively outwards. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:27 Highlight the passage at 1:07:27

1:07:49 Okay, so it's a subtle difference. So the conception of my hand is being inherently existent as my hand is being inherently existent. It's not a view of the transitory collection. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:49 Highlight the passage at 1:07:49

1:08:06 It's the my part. It's the conception of I that's more active. That's the view of the transitory collection. Okay, so that's a technical thing. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:06 Highlight the passage at 1:08:06

1:08:23 Does that kind of make sense? Sort of. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:23 Highlight the passage at 1:08:23

1:08:35 Could you just say it's the ego? Report an error in the passage at 1:08:35 Highlight the passage at 1:08:35

1:08:42 What, the view of the transitory collection? Report an error in the passage at 1:08:42 Highlight the passage at 1:08:42

1:08:47 It's the ego. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:47 Highlight the passage at 1:08:47

1:08:52 I mean, I think the ego is... A more general term that's used in a lot of different ways. The view of the transitory collection in this particular context, right, in the Prasangikas, is the conception of an inherently existent person. No, a conception of an inherently existent I or my. Whereas the ego, I mean, it could be a conception of a self-sufficient, substantial existent person. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:52 Highlight the passage at 1:08:52

1:09:22 It doesn't have to be an inherently existent person. So I think we'll stick with the view of the transitory collection even though it's a mouthful. Okay, so Chandrakirti often emphasizes that it's this view of the transitory collection that is the root of cyclic existence. It's the root of all of our mental afflictions. It's the root of our suffering is viewing I as inherently existent or is existing on its own, from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 1:09:22 Highlight the passage at 1:09:22

1:09:57 By way of its own characteristics, by way of its own entity or mine. Report an error in the passage at 1:09:57 Highlight the passage at 1:09:57

1:10:11 Okay, so maybe we take a break here and then after the break we'll continue. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:11 Highlight the passage at 1:10:11

1:10:30 Oh, and there are tarts that Shane brought us, kindly brought us. So those are in the back, in the bookstore. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:30 Highlight the passage at 1:10:30

1:10:51 But Report an error in the passage at 1:10:51 Highlight the passage at 1:10:51

1:11:04 delicious, only merely imputed though. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:04 Highlight the passage at 1:11:04

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:11:43 What do you mean an eye? Report an error in the passage at 1:11:43 Highlight the passage at 1:11:43

1:11:47 I would, not me. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:47 Highlight the passage at 1:11:47

1:12:01 funny, I was discussing that with someone today who's a non-Buddhist, and it's so hard for people just to let go of their mind, and mind, and mind. They kept reading that up, I guess. Report an error in the passage at 1:12:01 Highlight the passage at 1:12:01

1:12:12 Yeah, you can tell people all you want but they're not going to believe you. Report an error in the passage at 1:12:12 Highlight the passage at 1:12:12

1:12:23 say that Chandra Cury asserts that the view of the transitory collection is inherently existing? Report an error in the passage at 1:12:23 Highlight the passage at 1:12:23

1:12:32 Well, I don't know what I said, but yeah, so the view of the transitory collection itself is the root of cyclic existence, not as inherently existing, because the view of the transitory collection is a conception of inherent existence already. Report an error in the passage at 1:12:32 Highlight the passage at 1:12:32

1:12:50 That's where it gets easier, because a lot of this stuff is coming to terms with the terms. Yeah! Report an error in the passage at 1:12:50 Highlight the passage at 1:12:50

1:13:02 Okay, that's good. That's why you don't call it here Report an error in the passage at 1:13:02 Highlight the passage at 1:13:02

1:13:11 and talk about it, and you don't have exactly the thing. Yeah, exactly. We need to know the terminology that's being used in the text, otherwise we have lost. And the other question I had in this part, right where we're at, he's talking about in this one. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:11 Highlight the passage at 1:13:11

1:13:33 It's called observed object. Is that apprehended object you used a little while back? Yeah, there are a lot of different objects, aren't there? Report an error in the passage at 1:13:33 Highlight the passage at 1:13:33

1:13:57 Yeah. a difference. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:57 Highlight the passage at 1:13:57

1:13:57 is yet a different object. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:57 Highlight the passage at 1:13:57

1:14:07 yeah, Report an error in the passage at 1:14:07 Highlight the passage at 1:14:07

1:14:12 the observed. So in this conception of an inherently existent I or mine, the referent object or the conceived object is the inherently existent I or mine. The observed object is really I. So you observe an I and then you grasp onto it as being inherently existent. So it's like that. Like, what are you observing and then how are you holding that to exist? So the observed object would just be, he was saying is the mere eye. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:12 Highlight the passage at 1:14:12

1:14:51 So observing the eye and then grasping onto it is the mere eye. And the transitory collection is the same as the five aggregates? Yeah, the transitory collection is the five aggregates. I like this term, right, because it's a collection of... transitory, impermanent, ever-changing. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:51 Highlight the passage at 1:14:51

1:15:25 Yeah, yeah. Sometimes it's translated as transitory view, and that's not correct, right? It's not the view that's transitory, it's the... Five aggregates that are transitory, that are constantly changing. And it's a view of those constantly changing aggregates as being inherently existent, right? Which is kind of cool, isn't it? Yeah, it is, yeah. You can see the process then happening there. I think there's this committee now that's trying to standardize a lot of things across. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:25 Highlight the passage at 1:15:25

1:16:10 I'm so happy that's happening because that's one of the reasons I don't like how he just asserts his own. He does that, I think, for me more than anybody does. He says, oh, I call it mine. You should call it mine. Everybody else is calling it mine. You know what I mean? Because I'm just way a beginner student. So when I read his stuff, I'm always confused because I can't. Report an error in the passage at 1:16:10 Highlight the passage at 1:16:10

1:16:40 don't have the capacity to remember that, oh, he talks about Yeah, it's very Report an error in the passage at 1:16:40 Highlight the passage at 1:16:40

1:16:51 confusing when they're different. Yeah, yeah, exactly. I mean, because we have to first get what the terms mean, right? And then we can get how they use the terms, right? You know, it's, yeah, it can be a bit daunting at first. If the terms change from who's doing the translation, it's just, even for medicine, when you get to the part where you're reading the names out loud, it's a different name. Report an error in the passage at 1:16:51 Highlight the passage at 1:16:51

1:17:24 It's like, is this the same one, or is this the one name? They're probably the same. And then you ask too many questions, and they say, they're clumsy. Report an error in the passage at 1:17:24 Highlight the passage at 1:17:24

1:17:39 Yeah, it's so annoying. I remember early on, I was a really enthusiastic Dharma student. Right at the beginning and I then I memorized the Heart Sūtra like the one that we had at Koh Pan and I memorized like the foundation of all good qualities and then the FPMT prayer book comes out with a different translation. Report an error in the passage at 1:17:39 Highlight the passage at 1:17:39

1:18:11 I mean it inspires you to learn Tibetan right because it's just decided. I'm like, oh. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:11 Highlight the passage at 1:18:11

1:18:28 A committee who decided how to translate these, you know, whereas we, you know, we're such individualists, you know, everybody has. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:28 Highlight the passage at 1:18:28

1:18:41 Well, I mean, there's, but personality-wise, I think, we're a little more individual. You know, my translation is better, but, you know, slowly, slowly. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:41 Highlight the passage at 1:18:41

1:19:12 along the same lines of the logical arguments refuting this point and that point. I just ran across their site for the first time and they translated maybe 50 or 60 snippets of text. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:12 Highlight the passage at 1:19:12

1:19:30 And they're trying to translate. They have the entire ones, Tangir and Tangir. Both of them, they have the entire thing. It's amazing because I didn't know that. That's amazing. Damn. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:30 Highlight the passage at 1:19:30

1:19:54 just merely level, responsibility tends to stay with you, then the clock's just some kind of functioning device to help you keep that. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:54 Highlight the passage at 1:19:54

1:20:07 Yeah, I mean exactly, just that difference, right? Merely labeled. By my mind, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:20:07 Highlight the passage at 1:20:07

1:20:25 It's bad. it exists from its own side, it's supposed to work as a warranty. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:25 Highlight the passage at 1:20:25

1:20:28 There is actually a place at the Metrium, place downtown in San Francisco. They're having some art display exhibition for the next few days. And it's collections of cans. And they have, like, I saw a photo, right? And there's all these cans that are making up, like, a 20-foot-long hot dog with mustard on it and a bottle of mustard behind it. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:28 Highlight the passage at 1:20:28

1:21:00 But if you get close enough to it, you can just see that it's individual cans. And I was thinking about that. I wonder if this is really good. Because it's one thing if there's like the actual object that represents this inside the can. But if it's not, it's purely just like it's a hot dog. I Report an error in the passage at 1:21:00 Highlight the passage at 1:21:00

1:21:26 mean, that reminds me of like impressionist paintings, you know. They're just all, they're dots and then we organize them into a single. And I saw there's an ad for one of these. I think it's asthma medicine. Report an error in the passage at 1:21:26 Highlight the passage at 1:21:26

1:21:46 And they have a bunch of little balls that come together out of nowhere into the shape of a person doing something like active sports or something or running or something. Uh-huh. Report an error in the passage at 1:21:46 Highlight the passage at 1:21:46

1:22:06 don't know what it's like, it's a transitory collection of something, and when you really look at it, it's like, it's just, just dots. Yep. Yep. And they're not even those. Ding, ding. I don't know where the bell is. Report an error in the passage at 1:22:06 Highlight the passage at 1:22:06

1:22:35 Oh, sure. Report an error in the passage at 1:22:35 Highlight the passage at 1:22:35

1:22:54 could to the shock factor. No. I don't know. So, yeah, to get the scary feeling, because, I mean, I Report an error in the passage at 1:22:54 Highlight the passage at 1:22:54

1:23:10 Yeah, so there's a book called mind in its function So we have Report an error in the passage at 1:23:10 Highlight the passage at 1:23:10

1:23:33 to get used to this terminology, right? View of the transitory collection. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:33 Highlight the passage at 1:23:33

1:23:42 So Tim and I were just talking at break about how cool this term is actually. Because transitory collection, right? It's the collection of the body and the mind, the collection of the aggregates that's transitory, that's constantly changing. There's a constantly changing body and mind that we grasp onto as being an inherently existent me. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:42 Highlight the passage at 1:23:42

1:24:17 So this view of the transitory collection is the conception of an inherently existent I or mine. Report an error in the passage at 1:24:17 Highlight the passage at 1:24:17

1:24:29 And it's a conception of a self of persons. Report an error in the passage at 1:24:29 Highlight the passage at 1:24:29

1:24:36 But it's not synonymous with a conception of self of persons, right? Because self of persons can refer to a conception of an inherently existent you, right? Inherently existent Tim and an inherently existent Liza and an inherently existent David, etc. But the view of the transitory collection is specifically talking about me or I and holding... Report an error in the passage at 1:24:36 Highlight the passage at 1:24:36

1:25:05 Me to inherently exist. And that being the center of most of our mental afflictions. Report an error in the passage at 1:25:05 Highlight the passage at 1:25:05

1:25:18 Grasping on if I feel pleasure, I want more of that. And so attachment. If I feel pain, I want to get rid of it. Aversion, anger, irritation. Report an error in the passage at 1:25:18 Highlight the passage at 1:25:18

1:25:39 Central afflictions centered around that feeling. Report an error in the passage at 1:25:39 Highlight the passage at 1:25:39

1:25:49 So how are we doing so far? Report an error in the passage at 1:25:49 Highlight the passage at 1:25:49

1:25:58 We are. Merely imputed. So do we have any questions before we go into, I want to do a meditation. Report an error in the passage at 1:25:58 Highlight the passage at 1:25:58

1:26:12 So this isn't just a bunch of words. So Report an error in the passage at 1:26:12 Highlight the passage at 1:26:12

1:26:44 let's just start by meditating on the breath. Just calm our mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:26:44 Highlight the passage at 1:26:44

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:28:07 So then let's bring up a sensation of me, a solid me sitting here. I am sitting here. I'm covering. Covering a particular area, Report an error in the passage at 1:28:07 Highlight the passage at 1:28:07

1:28:27 covering the body, parts of our body, in the sense of a solid me sitting here. Report an error in the passage at 1:28:27 Highlight the passage at 1:28:27

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:29:19 So notice how this eye appears as being quite solid and concrete, sitting Report an error in the passage at 1:29:19 Highlight the passage at 1:29:19

1:29:34 on this cushion or on this chair, Report an error in the passage at 1:29:34 Highlight the passage at 1:29:34

1:29:43 covering a particular area. Report an error in the passage at 1:29:43 Highlight the passage at 1:29:43

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:30:21 So then let's look a little deeper. This Report an error in the passage at 1:30:21 Highlight the passage at 1:30:21

1:30:27 body is actually composed of many particles. Atoms, subatomic particles, Report an error in the passage at 1:30:27 Highlight the passage at 1:30:27

1:30:47 constantly Report an error in the passage at 1:30:47 Highlight the passage at 1:30:47

1:30:55 space in between. Report an error in the passage at 1:30:55 Highlight the passage at 1:30:55

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:31:32 Is there really a solid body covering all of these particles? Is Report an error in the passage at 1:31:32 Highlight the passage at 1:31:32

1:32:09 there a single body amongst all of these hundreds and thousands of particles? Focus Report an error in the passage at 1:32:09 Highlight the passage at 1:32:09

1:32:33 on these particles with as much concentration as you can. Report an error in the passage at 1:32:33 Highlight the passage at 1:32:33

· · · silence, 2 minutes

1:34:23 Next, let's examine the mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:34:23 Highlight the passage at 1:34:23

1:34:32 Notice how the mind appears. Report an error in the passage at 1:34:32 Highlight the passage at 1:34:32

1:35:01 Substantial thing consists Report an error in the passage at 1:35:01 Highlight the passage at 1:35:01

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:35:41 of constantly changing perceptions. Report an error in the passage at 1:35:41 Highlight the passage at 1:35:41

1:36:00 Which one is the mind? Report an error in the passage at 1:36:00 Highlight the passage at 1:36:00

1:36:05 The feeling of pain? Report an error in the passage at 1:36:05 Highlight the passage at 1:36:05

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:36:51 So we may get the sense of the mind as being constantly changing, consisting of many things. Report an error in the passage at 1:36:51 Highlight the passage at 1:36:51

1:37:12 Is there a singular mind? Report an error in the passage at 1:37:12 Highlight the passage at 1:37:12

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:38:39 Then allow that solid singular I to come up again. Report an error in the passage at 1:38:39 Highlight the passage at 1:38:39

1:39:05 Exist? Report an error in the passage at 1:39:05 Highlight the passage at 1:39:05

1:39:12 Was there? A singular body covering the particles? Report an error in the passage at 1:39:12 Highlight the passage at 1:39:12

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:40:03 Or does the eye exist separate from the body and the mind? If I take away the body, take away the mind, is there something left? Report an error in the passage at 1:40:03 Highlight the passage at 1:40:03

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:41:29 The body's not substantial. The mind is not substantial. Report an error in the passage at 1:41:29 Highlight the passage at 1:41:29

1:41:39 There's no eye separate from the body or mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:41:39 Highlight the passage at 1:41:39

1:41:59 Lack of a findable eye. Report an error in the passage at 1:41:59 Highlight the passage at 1:41:59

· · · silence, 2 minutes

1:43:46 Listen, the eye is unfindable in its basis and separate from its basis. Report an error in the passage at 1:43:46 Highlight the passage at 1:43:46

1:43:57 It exists as an impulse. Reputation as a label in the body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:43:57 Highlight the passage at 1:43:57

· · · silence, 2 minutes

1:45:38 So Nagarjuna said that as long as we, the aggregates are apprehended as inherently existent and I will be apprehended in them. Report an error in the passage at 1:45:38 Highlight the passage at 1:45:38

1:45:52 As long as the aggregates are apprehended and I will be apprehended in them. So meaning as long as we perceive our body and mind, body and or mind as being solid or inherently existent, then we'll, perceive the eye as Report an error in the passage at 1:45:52 Highlight the passage at 1:45:52

1:46:17 is why I wanted to disintegrate the body and disintegrate You have Report an error in the passage at 1:46:17 Highlight the passage at 1:46:17

1:46:25 to Report an error in the passage at 1:46:25 Highlight the passage at 1:46:25

1:46:35 push the button on the bottom to turn it on. I found that very easy to see Report an error in the passage at 1:46:35 Highlight the passage at 1:46:35

1:46:55 the quantum physics kind of body. Report an error in the passage at 1:46:55 Highlight the passage at 1:46:55

1:47:00 Didn't really feel like it wasn't me, like there was an eye right away. And then at the end, you went back into it or something, and it was like a costume that was the eye. It was just this shell that went back over all the little spinning particles of nothingness. Report an error in the passage at 1:47:00 Highlight the passage at 1:47:00

1:47:36 An imagined shell, right? Is there really a shell? No, no, but it was just like it was, that was the eye and it was just this, it was like it was cloth. I mean, you know, it was empty. It was like there was nothing inside. It was just this thing, this label, I guess. It was really cool because it was like totally empty. Report an error in the passage at 1:47:36 Highlight the passage at 1:47:36

1:48:03 I mean, it was like there was not an eye. Yeah. Exactly, exactly. Right there immediately. Yeah. So that shell, right, that covers those parts is just a figment of our imagination, right? That's that when we allowed the thought of I to come up, then it came up as being, you know, a whole thing, right, that covers its parts. Report an error in the passage at 1:48:03 Highlight the passage at 1:48:03

1:48:38 And that is the appearance of inherent existence. It is something covering its parts. It's an appearance of inherent existence, and that's false. That's why it was just like, you know, I didn't see, like, a face, but I knew that's what it was. It was just this thing that that was what I'm thinking. That's what you think is an eye, and you're covering all this other nothingness. Report an error in the passage at 1:48:38 Highlight the passage at 1:48:38

1:49:12 Margaret? Report an error in the passage at 1:49:12 Highlight the passage at 1:49:12

1:49:17 I thought, like, what you said, that the eye is just a thought. I mean, that's... Wow. It's incredible because that really makes Report an error in the passage at 1:49:17 Highlight the passage at 1:49:17

1:49:34 it even less real, you know, when I think about it in that way. So that really hit me. And I'm curious because I think a few classes you had mentioned how we believe in this, I don't know if I'm going to get this right, but the self-sufficient, self-sufficient, substantial existence. I'm not sure if I got that right. Yeah, that was perfect. So, and that was, is that something that we already have in us when we are, say, conceived or when we come together before we're born? Report an error in the passage at 1:49:34 Highlight the passage at 1:49:34

1:50:15 And I'm just kind of wondering how, and at the same time, I guess it's like, I guess karmically we have to be, and then I'm just looking at our environment and how that just supports this fantasy of ours, you know what I mean? So it's like, I'm wondering. I guess we have to come into it, and then when we're growing up in the environment, it just kind of reinforces that. I don't know. Yeah, exactly. Report an error in the passage at 1:50:15 Highlight the passage at 1:50:15

1:50:41 So there's, you know, with the self-sufficient, substantive, existent self, as well as the inherently existent self, right, two different levels of subtlety, both of those have what is called an innate form, which is a form that we're born with, right, and that we've always had. It's like instinctive. And then in our society it gets reinforced. So there's what they call an innate version that we're born with and then an intellectually acquired version that we learn. Report an error in the passage at 1:50:41 Highlight the passage at 1:50:41

1:51:18 So there are two different levels of subtlety. And the root of cyclic existence is the innate form. And the innate form, even animals, insects, everybody has. They don't learn philosophical views, but they still have these views innately, instinctively. They still have that grasping to the eye, the real eye. Is that what gets formed in the bardo before we even enter this life? Report an error in the passage at 1:51:18 Highlight the passage at 1:51:18

1:51:50 We cling on to this sense of eye. I'm asking, I don't know. Even before that, beginningless time. Report an error in the passage at 1:51:50 Highlight the passage at 1:51:50

1:52:03 Right, which is why it's so hard to uproot it, right? Because we have these such strong habits for such a long time, right? So even though like we may have a meditation, it's like, oh yeah. It's so depressing. Report an error in the passage at 1:52:03 Highlight the passage at 1:52:03

1:52:19 It doesn't really exist. And then we come out of that meditation. Then everything appears so real and solid and inherently existent. And then we believe in it again. You know, that meditation, we need to make stronger and stronger and stronger, right, over time. That's why we need calm and binding. Report an error in the passage at 1:52:19 Highlight the passage at 1:52:19

1:52:39 Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 1:52:39 Highlight the passage at 1:52:39

1:52:47 All right. Any other comments or questions? Report an error in the passage at 1:52:47 Highlight the passage at 1:52:47

1:52:58 There are many different meditations on emptiness, so I want to try different ones because some work better for some people and some others work better. Better for other people. Report an error in the passage at 1:52:58 Highlight the passage at 1:52:58

1:53:12 So slowly, slowly, I found some good quotes in case you get discouraged. Report an error in the passage at 1:53:12 Highlight the passage at 1:53:12

1:53:25 So, first of all, in Emptiness Yoga by Jeffrey Hopkins, he says that this process is very difficult due to thick, heavy predispositions and karmic obstructions. Grinched. Report an error in the passage at 1:53:25 Highlight the passage at 1:53:25

1:53:43 So we need to do it again and again and again. And we need to create merit and we need to purify. We need to create merit. Because in order to have an experience of emptiness, we need merit. Even to understand it intellectually, we need merit. We need to create the causes. We need to create the positive energy. And one good way of creating merit is cherishing others. Right? Bodhicitta, love and compassion. Report an error in the passage at 1:53:43 Highlight the passage at 1:53:43

1:54:16 Then we stop grasping onto the me so strongly and that really helps to realize emptiness or at least to understand emptiness more and more. And then he also continues, Hopkins says, this kind of practice is emotionally harrowing. Report an error in the passage at 1:54:16 Highlight the passage at 1:54:16

1:54:44 If it's working, it's emotionally harrowing. For our mind has been convinced to remain in its place for eons and eons. The inertia to stay with the status quo is great. Report an error in the passage at 1:54:44 Highlight the passage at 1:54:44

1:55:03 This conceptual mind has to make a decision, has to do some unusual thinking. Instead of taking everything as given, it must challenge appearances, because everything appears as being inherently existent. Report an error in the passage at 1:55:03 Highlight the passage at 1:55:03

1:55:24 We need a willingness for new experience. Even if it entails the reopening of wounds of emotions built on views of reality. This analysis involves anxiety. Report an error in the passage at 1:55:24 Highlight the passage at 1:55:24

1:55:40 It is necessary to build the kind of mind that will not want to sink back and be overcome by inertia. A mind willing to change. Willing to see everything change. Report an error in the passage at 1:55:40 Highlight the passage at 1:55:40

1:56:01 As we do this kind of meditation. The ego wants to assert itself, distract the mind, resist meditation, think of how stupid it is or how useless it is, or just think about anything else. Report an error in the passage at 1:56:01 Highlight the passage at 1:56:01

1:56:24 I notice that my mind gets more easily distracted with emptiness meditations than with any other kind of meditation. Suddenly... You know, my mind is off on something completely different, right? Even if I've been doing calm abiding meditation for a while, you know, it's very easy for the mind to go off, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:56:24 Highlight the passage at 1:56:24

1:56:44 It's very scary for the ego, right, to meditate on emptiness. So we need to just recognize that, right? Bring it back, bring it back, bring the mind back as much as we can. Report an error in the passage at 1:56:44 Highlight the passage at 1:56:44

1:57:01 uh... And just expect that we'll have resistance to this, right? Because the ego doesn't like it. It knows it's getting destroyed. Report an error in the passage at 1:57:01 Highlight the passage at 1:57:01

1:57:16 Yeah, yeah. Report an error in the passage at 1:57:16 Highlight the passage at 1:57:16

1:57:21 Well, burritos are delicious from their own side. Report an error in the passage at 1:57:21 Highlight the passage at 1:57:21

1:57:31 So yeah, so we need to watch that mind that gets uncomfortable, that finds this very unsettling. right. Report an error in the passage at 1:57:31 Highlight the passage at 1:57:31

1:57:42 And just stick with it, right? Be okay with, just be with and accept the discomfort. I think Guy Newland gave a great analogy of meditating on emptiness can be like a small child screaming in your ear as you're trying to meditate. Report an error in the passage at 1:57:42 Highlight the passage at 1:57:42

1:58:08 Or, you know, or fingernails on the chalkboard, right? Can be really nerve-wracking. Report an error in the passage at 1:58:08 Highlight the passage at 1:58:08

1:58:20 Not label it bad, right? Because we have that often, well, we often have that habit of if we don't like something, if it's painful, if it's scary, you know, we live Report an error in the passage at 1:58:20 Highlight the passage at 1:58:20

1:58:37 comfortable with uncertainty. And also, like, the rug is getting pulled from under you. She talks about that, right? The rug is getting pulled from under you. And I just repeated what he said. So we have to be comfortable without, right, something solid to stand on, right? Just being... Yeah, uncomfortable with not knowing what's going to happen, with not having anything solid, because actually there is nothing solid. Report an error in the passage at 1:58:37 Highlight the passage at 1:58:37

1:59:16 It's scary, but it's liberating too, right? So, Report an error in the passage at 1:59:16 Highlight the passage at 1:59:16

1:59:35 okay. So I... Sent you a commentary to read right by Geshe Jampa Tekchok, so if you have time to read that, that's very helpful. I mean, other, there are a lot of supporting reading, you know, I mean, different books that you can read. His Holiness is How to See Yourself as You Really Are is excellent, as well as How to Realize Emptiness. Those two are less technical books if you're... Report an error in the passage at 1:59:35 Highlight the passage at 1:59:35

2:00:01 If you shy away from the really technical, those two are very accessible. How to See Yourself as You Really Are by His Holiness the Dalai Lama and How to Realize Emptiness by Gen Lam Rimpa. And I believe that they're both in the bookstore here. And then if you want more technical ones, then I highly recommend Jeffrey Hopkins, Meditation on Emptiness and Emptiness Yoga. Report an error in the passage at 2:00:01 Highlight the passage at 2:00:01

2:00:32 Okay, then Pema Chodron's books. I mean, there's so many books, right, and different people resonate with different books. Yeah, so Pema Chodron could be helpful. Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 2:00:32 Highlight the passage at 2:00:32

2:00:46 So let's dedicate to Report an error in the passage at 2:00:46 Highlight the passage at 2:00:46

2:01:00 Shantideva's dedication tonight, page 246. Report an error in the passage at 2:01:00 Highlight the passage at 2:01:00

2:01:18 May all beings everywhere, plagued by sufferings of body and mind, obtain an ocean of happiness and joy by virtue of my merits. May no living creature suffer, commit evil or ever fall ill. May no one be afraid or belittled with a mind weighed down by depression. May the blind see forms and the deaf hear sounds. May those whose bodies are worn with toil be restored on finding repose. Report an error in the passage at 2:01:18 Highlight the passage at 2:01:18

2:01:45 May the naked find clothing, the hungry find food. May the thirsty find water and delicious drinks. May the poor find wealth, those weak with sorrow find joy. May the forlorn find hope, constant happiness and prosperity. May there be timely rains and bountiful harvests. May all medicines be effective and wholesome prayers bear fruit. May all who are sick and ill quickly be freed from their ailments. Report an error in the passage at 2:01:45 Highlight the passage at 2:01:45

2:02:13 Whatever diseases there are in the world, may they never occur again. May the frightened cease to be afraid and those bound be freed. May the powerless find power and may people think of benefiting each other. For as long as space remains, for as long as sentient beings remain, until then may I too remain to dispel the miseries of the world. Report an error in the passage at 2:02:13 Highlight the passage at 2:02:13

2:02:41 Also dedicate for the good health and long life of all our spiritual masters. I guess you don't Report an error in the passage at 2:02:41 Highlight the passage at 2:02:41

· · · silence, 1 minute

2:03:25 manifest recovery from his stroke. Report an error in the passage at 2:03:25 Highlight the passage at 2:03:25

· · · silence, 1 minute

2:04:12 Have a good week. Report an error in the passage at 2:04:12 Highlight the passage at 2:04:12

2:04:18 Keep thinking about emptiness. Report an error in the passage at 2:04:18 Highlight the passage at 2:04:18

2:04:23 The Report an error in the passage at 2:04:23 Highlight the passage at 2:04:23

2:04:52 edges of what? Ah, Report an error in the passage at 2:04:52 Highlight the passage at 2:04:52

2:04:59 thank you so much. All right, yeah, that's a very good sign. All right, Geshe Dagpa teaches again tomorrow. Yes. Report an error in the passage at 2:04:59 Highlight the passage at 2:04:59

2:05:16 Yeah, so everybody can come to class with Geshe Dagpa tomorrow night and then go to the airport to see off Chodin Rinpoche. Or not. Or not Report an error in the passage at 2:05:16 Highlight the passage at 2:05:16