Special Insight 4: Wisdom of Emptiness (17 January 2012)

0:13 Let's start with the praise to Manjushri on the first page of the white book. Report an error in the passage at 0:13 Highlight the passage at 0:13

0:35 Obeasons 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 the sun, unclouded by delusions or traces of ignorance, who teaches in sixty ways with a loving compassion of a father for his only son. Report an error in the passage at 0:35 Highlight the passage at 0:35

0:53 All creatures caught in the prison of saṃsāra, confused in the darkness of their ignorance, overwhelmed by their suffering. 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. Report an error in the passage at 0:53 Highlight the passage at 0:53

1:15 You, whose princely body is adorned with the 112 marks of a Buddha, who has completed the stages of achieving the highest perfection of a bodhisattva, who has been pure from the beginning, I bow down to you, O Manjushri. I'm a representative, representative. Report an error in the passage at 1:15 Highlight the passage at 1:15

1:38 With the brilliance of your wisdom, O compassionate one, 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. And then the Heart Sūtra on page 76 in the gold book. Report an error in the passage at 1:38 Highlight the passage at 1:38

2:07 I prostrate to the aria triple gym. Thus did I hear at one time. The Bhagavan was dwelling on Massavultures 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 Arya 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 2:07 Highlight the passage at 2:07

2:39 Then through the power of Buddha, the venerable Shariputra said this to the Bodhisattva Mahasattva 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 Mahasattva Arya Avalokiteshvara said this to the venerable Sharivadiputra. Report an error in the passage at 2:39 Highlight the passage at 2:39

3:01 Shari Puja, 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 3:01 Highlight the passage at 3:01

3:29 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, no visual form, no sound, no odor, no taste, no object to touch and no phenomenon. Report an error in the passage at 3:29 Highlight the passage at 3:29

4:00 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. Similarly, there is no suffering, origination, cessation and path. There is no exalted wisdom, no attainment and also no non-attainment. Report an error in the passage at 4:00 Highlight the passage at 4:00

4:25 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 the three times also manifestly completely awaken to unsurpassable, perfect, complete enlightenment and reliance on the perfection of wisdom. Report an error in the passage at 4:25 Highlight the passage at 4:25

4:50 Therefore, the mantra of the perfection of wisdom, the mantra of great knowledge, the unsurpassed mantra, the mantra equal to the unequal, the 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. Tayata Om Gathe Gathe Paragathe Parasam Gathe Bodhishoha. Report an error in the passage at 4:50 Highlight the passage at 4:50

5:13 Shari Putra, 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. It is like that. One should practice the profound perfection of wisdom just as you have indicated. Even the Tathatagas rejoice. The Bhagavan having thus spoken, the Venerable El-Sharivadiputra, 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 5:13 Highlight the passage at 5:13

5:56 And then finally on page 98, Refuge and Bodhicitta. Report an error in the passage at 5:56 Highlight the passage at 5:56

6:12 So we can think about how external things can never bring us any lasting satisfaction because Report an error in the passage at 6:12 Highlight the passage at 6:12

6:27 they're always impermanent. They can never last. The Report an error in the passage at 6:27 Highlight the passage at 6:27

6:44 only way to get lasting happiness and satisfaction is to change our minds and Report an error in the passage at 6:44 Highlight the passage at 6:44

7:01 let go of those mental afflictions that are always wanting more, always craving for more pleasures again and again. Report an error in the passage at 7:01 Highlight the passage at 7:01

7:31 And all beings are in this state, Report an error in the passage at 7:31 Highlight the passage at 7:31

7:42 so with this in mind we can take refuge and generate bodhicitta. I Report an error in the passage at 7:42 Highlight the passage at 7:42

8:11 go for refuge until I'm 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'm enlightened to the Buddha, the Dharma and the Supreme Assembly. By the merits I create through listening to the Dharma. Report an error in the passage at 8:11 Highlight the passage at 8:11

8:32 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. Report an error in the passage at 8:32 Highlight the passage at 8:32

· · · silence, 1 minute

9:30 So last week we reviewed the entire path in a nutshell and talked about how attachment. Emptiness fit into all of that, right? Report an error in the passage at 9:30 Highlight the passage at 9:30

9:49 So just a reminder, we covered this last week. Remember that the root of cyclic existence, the root of all of our problems, all of our dissatisfaction, all of our difficulties, all of our health issues, relationship issues, everything is ignorance, afflicted ignorance, which has the two types, right? Report an error in the passage at 9:49 Highlight the passage at 9:49

10:15 Conception of a self of persons, which is believing in a solidly, concretely, inherently existent person, myself as well as all others. Report an error in the passage at 10:15 Highlight the passage at 10:15

10:28 And then the superimposition of a self of phenomena, which is all phenomena other than people, you know, the tables and cups and cars and houses and everything. But the main one they're talking about here is... The five aggregates, the basis of the person, right? The body and the mind. The form, feeling, discrimination, compositional factors and consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 10:28 Highlight the passage at 10:28

10:54 People know the five aggregates. What's the form aggregate? It's Report an error in the passage at 10:54 Highlight the passage at 10:54

11:02 the body, right? The form aggregate of the person is the body. The feeling aggregate? Report an error in the passage at 11:02 Highlight the passage at 11:02

11:15 So the feeling aggregate actually is two. It's a mental feeling as well as a physical feeling. So the mental feelings of... Happiness and unhappiness and neutral, as well as the physical feelings of pain, pleasure, neutral. And those are a separate aggregate because those drive our attachment and aversion. They drive us all the time, right? Report an error in the passage at 11:15 Highlight the passage at 11:15

11:44 It's pleasurable. I want it. It's painful. Get it away from me. And so that's the basis of... Our mental afflictions most of the time, right? If it's pleasurable, attachment arises. If it's painful, aversion, anger, irritation arises. So the feeling aggregate. Discrimination aggregate? Report an error in the passage at 11:44 Highlight the passage at 11:44

12:16 Yeah, the discernment. So that's the mental factor that can tell the difference between the cushion and the table, one person and another. Report an error in the passage at 12:16 Highlight the passage at 12:16

12:30 And the discrimination aggregate is also important because it's based on that. They say, it's based on that that we have arguments with people. Report an error in the passage at 12:30 Highlight the passage at 12:30

12:42 It's the basis of arguments. The feelings are the basis of attachment and aversion and then the discrimination aggregate is based on our arguments. No, you're wrong, I'm right. It's never like, I'm wrong and you're right. Report an error in the passage at 12:42 Highlight the passage at 12:42

13:00 That's true. When we're arguing. So the discrimination aggregate. And then there's compositional factors aggregate, which is basically all of the other mental factors, including anger and irritation and jealousy and love and the positive ones too, compassion, etc. Report an error in the passage at 13:00 Highlight the passage at 13:00

13:23 And then the consciousness aggregate, which is basically the mind, the main mind. right, Report an error in the passage at 13:23 Highlight the passage at 13:23

13:35 So we apprehend or we superimpose this concrete existence on top of persons and as well as phenomena. So believing that things exist from their own side, right, by way of their own entity, by way of their own characteristics, independent of the mind that's imputing it, right? So you've heard me say this a bazillion times, but it's good to... Report an error in the passage at 13:35 Highlight the passage at 13:35

14:04 Remind ourselves again, right? Colors and shapes appear, the mind labels it cup, and then it appears back as if it's a cup right here, right? Where did cup come from? The mind. Is there any cup at all right here on its parts? Nope. But it appears as if there is, right? It appears as if there's a cup out here projecting its image to you, and you're just passively receiving that information. Report an error in the passage at 14:04 Highlight the passage at 14:04

14:48 Same thing with person. You think that there's a person right here appearing back at you, but person came from your mind. Colors and shapes appeared. Person came from your mind. Body came from your mind. There's no body here. Atoms. It came from your mind. There are no atoms here. Energy came from your mind. No, there's no energy here appearing back at you. Report an error in the passage at 14:48 Highlight the passage at 14:48

15:22 So anything that you look for, you won't be able to find. Things are merely imputed by the mind. They don't exist from their own side at all. Report an error in the passage at 15:22 Highlight the passage at 15:22

15:32 Irritating comes from the mind. Right and wrong comes from your mind. And that's hard, right? That's really hard to live that, right? It's one thing to know intellectually, but to actually live that. Okay, so we believe that things exist from their own side inherently, intrinsically, whereas they're only imputed by the mind. Report an error in the passage at 15:32 Highlight the passage at 15:32

16:05 Independence on a valid base, right? It's not that I can just impute this person. Why? Why is this not a person? Why can't I impute this person? Is it because it really isn't a person? Report an error in the passage at 16:05 Highlight the passage at 16:05

16:27 Yeah. Because it's just a convention, right? It's a convention that this is a... It's not that this isn't a person. It's a convention that it isn't a person. Okay. Report an error in the passage at 16:27 Highlight the passage at 16:27

16:45 And so the main problem, right, between the conception of the self of person and the self phenomena is that grasping to me. That I, me, a real me, a real I that doesn't actually exist. And then grasping at things as being mine, right? In order to achieve the happiness of this I. And that's my friend, that's my stuff. Report an error in the passage at 16:45 Highlight the passage at 16:45

17:20 So we overcome this ignorance by cultivating the wisdom that realizes that thing that we're grasping onto doesn't exist at all. Report an error in the passage at 17:20 Highlight the passage at 17:20

17:36 So I put this quote up again because we had a question on it last week. Not that I can really illuminate it, but I can give you a little more information. And Lynn had a question in particular on this. I don't know if you remember. So Dharmakrita says, In one who sees a self, there's always adherence to I. Report an error in the passage at 17:36 Highlight the passage at 17:36

17:57 Through that adherence, there's attachment to pleasure. Through attachment, faults are obscured. And advantages are seen, whereby there is strong attachment. The mine are taken up as means for achieving pleasure. Hence, as long as there is attraction to self, so long does one revolve in cyclic existence. So if we believe that there's a self, then there's an attachment to me or I. Report an error in the passage at 17:57 Highlight the passage at 17:57

18:33 And then based on that, we have attachment to pleasure. Report an error in the passage at 18:33 Highlight the passage at 18:33

18:41 And then it says through attachment faults are obscured. So this is where the question came up last week. So I looked in some commentaries, and it didn't really illuminate this very much, but about what are these faults that are being obscured. You remember that? Report an error in the passage at 18:41 Highlight the passage at 18:41

19:04 So I thought I would just... Report an error in the passage at 19:04 Highlight the passage at 19:04

19:20 So here, Lama Tsongkhapa, so the translation by... By Jeffrey Hopkins on this, on Lama Tsongkhapa's explanation of this. It says that, Report an error in the passage at 19:20 Highlight the passage at 19:20

19:35 so initially when the I, that is the object of observation of the thought I, is apprehended to exist by way of its own character, desire with respect to the self is generated. Report an error in the passage at 19:35 Highlight the passage at 19:35

19:49 That generates attachment to the self's pleasure. Report an error in the passage at 19:49 Highlight the passage at 19:49

19:57 Then also since the self's pleasure is not independent but depends on the mine, there's an attachment to the mine, mine, M-I-N-E. Report an error in the passage at 19:57 Highlight the passage at 19:57

20:09 Then obscuring the disadvantages of the mine, this attachment brings about perception of the mine as advantageous. So this is different from what I said last week, right? I thought that we're obscuring our own faults. And attached to our own good qualities. But it seems, based on this translation, saying we are obscured from the disadvantages of mine and thinking that mine will bring us happiness, right? Report an error in the passage at 20:09 Highlight the passage at 20:09

20:47 Grasping to mine. And we notice this in our own minds, right? That becomes mine that will bring me happiness, right? The opposite, right? It's the complete opposite. The mind that's attached to something as being mine is actually creating suffering as being mine. Report an error in the passage at 20:47 Highlight the passage at 20:47

21:08 Then the mine are taken up as means of achieving the self's pleasure. And then the afflictive emotions are produced in this way. Then we create karma and we create more cyclic existence. So that's the explanation in here about that. Report an error in the passage at 21:08 Highlight the passage at 21:08

21:34 Make sense? Report an error in the passage at 21:34 Highlight the passage at 21:34

21:39 All right. So we talked about how when the conception of a self of phenomena arises first and then the conception of the self of persons, right? So first we perceive the aggregates. First we perceive the body and mind as existing from its own side. And then we impute person or me to that. Report an error in the passage at 21:39 Highlight the passage at 21:39

22:07 And then the me appears as existing from its own side. Actually, the concept, the conception of me or person never arises without first the appearance of a body and or mine. Report an error in the passage at 22:07 Highlight the passage at 22:07

22:25 Like in space, I don't think, oh, there's a person there. You only think of a person when I see a body or when a thought arises or something like that. Right? Or a feeling arises. Report an error in the passage at 22:25 Highlight the passage at 22:25

22:44 So first there's a conception of the self of phenomena and then the conception of the self of persons. Right? When we're trying to realize emptiness or generate the view, the correct view of emptiness, we say it's first we need to generate the view of the selflessness of persons and then the view of the selflessness of phenomena. Report an error in the passage at 22:44 Highlight the passage at 22:44

23:10 And they say it's easier to generate the view of the selflessness of persons first. Report an error in the passage at 23:10 Highlight the passage at 23:10

23:21 I was reading, I think His Holiness the Dalai Lama said, that's because this eye is with us all the time. We're never without this object of reputation. So it's always there so we can see it. It's easier to see. Report an error in the passage at 23:21 Highlight the passage at 23:21

23:43 So how do we realize the selflessness of persons? It's through this four-point analysis. This is the approach that Lama Tsongkhapa. recommended or he's the one that described right first First identifying the object of negation, identifying that concrete sense of I first. Don't skip this step. Most people skip this step. Lama Tsongkhapa really emphasizes how we need to first notice how the I is appearing to us. Report an error in the passage at 23:43 Highlight the passage at 23:43

24:20 Otherwise, We may conclude that nothing exists at all, right? If we just have this vague sense of me and then I search for that me and then I don't find it, then I think, oh, I don't exist at all, right? We need to identify specifically the target before we refute it, right? So I wanted to read something from Lama Zopa on Report an error in the passage at 24:20 Highlight the passage at 24:20

24:57 this. Report an error in the passage at 24:57 Highlight the passage at 24:57

25:05 You may find useful. So this object of refutation. Report an error in the passage at 25:05 Highlight the passage at 25:05

25:16 You know, just any sense that there's an I here with the body and mind is an object of refutation. Report an error in the passage at 25:16 Highlight the passage at 25:16

25:27 So Lama Zopa says, what we must realize is empty is what we see all of the time. It is always there in our view. Every time we observe the I, whether night or day, it is there. Every time we observe the five aggregates and the sense objects, form, sound, smell, taste, tangible objects and other phenomena, whether night or day, it is there. Report an error in the passage at 25:27 Highlight the passage at 25:27

25:56 What you have to realize is empty is with us 24 hours a day. Whenever we look at the eye, the gakcha, the false object that is to be refuted, appears on the eye. Report an error in the passage at 25:56 Highlight the passage at 25:56

26:13 Whenever we look at the form, it appears on the form. Report an error in the passage at 26:13 Highlight the passage at 26:13

26:19 When we hear sound it's there on the sound. When we smell it's there on the smell. It's there when we smell that false smell. Why? Because that false smell on the smell is the object to be refuted. It is there when we taste the false taste that does not exist. As soon as we contact the object, the false object of contact which does not exist And it's to be refuted is there. Report an error in the passage at 26:19 Highlight the passage at 26:19

26:59 So it's not something that just arises, right? The object of refutation, the object of negation is not something that just arises occasionally. It's not something that arises only when we have a strong emotion about something. It's something that's arising all the time, constantly. Report an error in the passage at 26:59 Highlight the passage at 26:59

27:19 All of the appearances to our mind are mixed with the appearance of existing from its own side. Every time you see the cup, it appears as if it's existing from here. Every time you see a person, it appears to be existing from its own side. Whether our mind believes it is another thing. Once we realize emptiness, we won't believe it all the time, but we'll always appear that way until we become a Buddha. Report an error in the passage at 27:19 Highlight the passage at 27:19

27:54 So the object of refutation is so... Difficult to identify because it's always been there. We've always seen it that way. So I was thinking it's kind of like trying to see our own eyeball. Report an error in the passage at 27:54 Highlight the passage at 27:54

28:13 It's always been there. We can't even distinguish what existence would be like, Report an error in the passage at 28:13 Highlight the passage at 28:13

28:25 conventional existence would be like. At this point, until we realize emptiness, we can't distinguish between... Or very difficult to distinguish between the way things exist and the way that things don't exist. The eye that exists and the eye that doesn't exist. Report an error in the passage at 28:25 Highlight the passage at 28:25

28:46 So we work at it slowly, slowly. Am I making sense? Lynn had her hand up. Report an error in the passage at 28:46 Highlight the passage at 28:46

28:58 Let's, let's. Report an error in the passage at 28:58 Highlight the passage at 28:58

29:06 I was remembering a story that Venerable Chosong told about being in the van with Rinpoche, Lama Zopa Rinpoche. And there was a, see if this relates to what you're talking about. And there was a, they drove through a patch of skunk smell. And everybody in the car except Rinpoche was going, ew, and stuff like that, making sense about, ew, the skunk odor, the scent. Report an error in the passage at 29:06 Highlight the passage at 29:06

29:37 And he said, burnt toast, burnt toast. And just like, there's the smell, and then there's what we do about it. So is that what you're kind of getting? Or there's this... Report an error in the passage at 29:37 Highlight the passage at 29:37

29:52 There's something moving through space right here, and I label it Lynn, and I just keep layering it on these, like peanut butter, and a smear on top of this. So it's almost like he was just, I don't know, it seemed to me he was doing a little emptiness teaching there. Yeah. I mean, on one level, right? Report an error in the passage at 29:52 Highlight the passage at 29:52

30:14 I mean, because there's, right, there's a smell, and then pleasant... Unpleasant or neutral comes from our mind, right? So the ew, right, comes from our mind. Report an error in the passage at 30:14 Highlight the passage at 30:14

30:29 Is there a smell really there? If we search for smell, Report an error in the passage at 30:29 Highlight the passage at 30:29

30:39 if we search for smell, that's not even there. If we search for anything, that's not there, right? Nothing is there if we search for it. Report an error in the passage at 30:39 Highlight the passage at 30:39

30:55 Conventionally, it is not there on the base. Report an error in the passage at 30:55 Highlight the passage at 30:55

31:01 There is no cup here on the base. There is no material here on the base. There are no atoms here on the base. Search for it, you can't find it. Where does atoms come from? Report an error in the passage at 31:01 Highlight the passage at 31:01

31:21 So oftentimes we stop our analysis too soon. We all can feel okay with there's no cup on here, right? There's no cup. The cup came from the mind. But then we think there's something there, though, right? But doing the next level, and that's not there either, and that's not there either, and that's not there either. Report an error in the passage at 31:21 Highlight the passage at 31:21

31:45 And then, you know, it starts to make you nervous, right? And then that's a good sign, right? When you start to get nervous, it's a sign that we're getting it, right? If there's something comfortably there still, we haven't gone far enough. Report an error in the passage at 31:45 Highlight the passage at 31:45

32:11 Yeah. Yes. But there is still something. I mean, there's some physical existence, like, you know, the conventional reality. There's still, because that's what I'm kind of, you said there's nothing conventionally there either. It's, there's some, right? I mean, it's kind of. Tricky. Right? I mean, it's not like, because otherwise you take it to the point where nothing exists and that's not correct either. Report an error in the passage at 32:11 Highlight the passage at 32:11

32:37 Well, remember what the prasangikas say. Yeah. It's almost like it doesn't exist at all. Anything that you look for, you cannot find it. You can't find anything. Report an error in the passage at 32:37 Highlight the passage at 32:37

32:57 So you cannot find anything even conventionally. You can't, like the inherently existent cup, you can't find. The merely imputed cup. You can also not find. Report an error in the passage at 32:57 Highlight the passage at 32:57

33:18 It's almost as if it doesn't exist at all. Almost. But it does exist in function. That's why the emphasis of emptiness and dependent arising are so important. Because when we're getting close to understanding emptiness, it seems as if nothing exists at all. Because even the conventionally existent thing is not findable. Report an error in the passage at 33:18 Highlight the passage at 33:18

33:51 Right? So, so, Rinpoche says something interesting that I haven't, I haven't heard anywhere else. He says, the person is not on the aggregates at all. The person is not findable on the aggregates at all. There's no person there at all on the aggregates. Report an error in the passage at 33:51 Highlight the passage at 33:51

34:18 There's a person in the room, he says. There's a person in the room. There's no person on those aggregates. But there's a person in the room. Report an error in the passage at 34:18 Highlight the passage at 34:18

34:35 It's not, he's not saying there's No person on the aggregates, but there is a person over there. He's not saying that. He's saying there's no findable person at all, and yet conventionally we say there's a person. Report an error in the passage at 34:35 Highlight the passage at 34:35

34:56 Very difficult, right? Very difficult. Report an error in the passage at 34:56 Highlight the passage at 34:56

35:05 That's all I wanted to say. Report an error in the passage at 35:05 Highlight the passage at 35:05

35:15 It's very tricky. I don't know if that addressed your doubt, Jessica. Sort of. Report an error in the passage at 35:15 Highlight the passage at 35:15

35:42 You're saying that you can't find, like, if you look for an atom, you can't find an atom, right? There's no one, there's no atom, specifically the way we think of an atom. That doesn't mean that nothing exists in that space at all. It's just that when you look for an atom, you don't find an atom. Is that what you're kind of saying? I mean, because something, it's not like there's nothing in that space if I, you know. Report an error in the passage at 35:42 Highlight the passage at 35:42

36:10 If there's a wall and I try to put my head through it because I think there's nothing there, it's not going to work. Right. It still exists and functions, right? Right. But be careful with that. That's what I'm trying to, like, there's just that slippery, yeah. Maybe it's how to describe it or something that I, I don't know. Report an error in the passage at 36:10 Highlight the passage at 36:10

36:32 Yeah. We're not saying that there's nothing exists. Report an error in the passage at 36:32 Highlight the passage at 36:32

36:40 What, what is there? What is there? Report an error in the passage at 36:40 Highlight the passage at 36:40

36:47 Anything that you say is there isn't there. Yeah. But it's, yeah, at the same time, things do exist and function, right? Report an error in the passage at 36:47 Highlight the passage at 36:47

37:05 But be careful with that. Report an error in the passage at 37:05 Highlight the passage at 37:05

37:12 Because any time we think that there's something that exists, we have the tendency to reify it, right? It's like, oh, yeah, I know. I know I don't exist ultimately. I know I don't exist inherently, but I do exist. Report an error in the passage at 37:12 Highlight the passage at 37:12

37:35 I do, you know, I do need to be treated well and I do need, you know, I mean just, I do need to grasp onto things as being pleasurable and, you know, as soon as we, you know, as soon as we posit existence, it's so... It's so easy to reinforce that. But what exists? The I that exists? An imputation by mind. A thought. A thought referring to a body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 37:35 Highlight the passage at 37:35

38:14 A thought referring to a constantly changing body and mind. A thought referring to an appearance. Report an error in the passage at 38:14 Highlight the passage at 38:14

38:27 Yeah. So, and the body and mind, yeah, and the body and mind also are thoughts referring to a base. Referring to an appearance. Report an error in the passage at 38:27 Highlight the passage at 38:27

38:46 So anyway, you know, I mean, slowly, slowly we get it more and more deeply, right? So Report an error in the passage at 38:46 Highlight the passage at 38:46

· · · silence, 1 minute

39:27 your Report an error in the passage at 39:27 Highlight the passage at 39:27

39:44 question is, are we just refuting objects or refuting actions as well? Actions also don't exist from their own side. Action of generosity. Okay, so let's see. The action of drinking my tea. Report an error in the passage at 39:44 Highlight the passage at 39:44

40:08 Also doesn't exist from its own side. That is a process of lifting, Report an error in the passage at 40:08 Highlight the passage at 40:08

40:18 pouring, swallowing. Merely imputed by mind. Drinking didn't come from this. It was also imputed by the mind. Everything is like that. Report an error in the passage at 40:18 Highlight the passage at 40:18

40:38 Anything that you can talk about is merely imputed by the mind. Report an error in the passage at 40:38 Highlight the passage at 40:38

40:51 I'm not saying that nothing exists at all. I'm not saying that things don't function. Things do function. They just don't exist independent of a conceptual thought. Report an error in the passage at 40:51 Highlight the passage at 40:51

41:19 Well, we do have language for it, right? Oh, wait, wait, wait, microphone. Yeah, so let's go to refuting the selflessness of phenomena and get to the reasoning of a dependent arising because I think that'll address some of this, what we're talking about. Okay. So here... Report an error in the passage at 41:19 Highlight the passage at 41:19

41:46 With refuting the selflessness of persons, we use the four-point analysis. We understand, okay, first we get the experience. We notice how the I appears to us. Then we think, okay, well, if that I existed, it would have to be either the same as the body and or mind or different from the body and or mind. Report an error in the passage at 41:46 Highlight the passage at 41:46

42:11 There's no other possibilities. It's either the same as the body and or mind or different from the body. That's the second. Identifying all the possibilities. And then the third, okay, if the person was the same as the body and or mind, then what are the absurd consequences? Report an error in the passage at 42:11 Highlight the passage at 42:11

42:37 For example, let's say the person is the body and mind, then you have to say body and mind and person are interchangeable, right? So Report an error in the passage at 42:37 Highlight the passage at 42:37

42:56 if I... If somebody hurt me, I could say, you hurt body and mind. Or if I Report an error in the passage at 42:56 Highlight the passage at 42:56

43:14 think, oh, I'm a really good piano player. Body and mind is a really good piano player. You know, there would be no reason to even express I or person because body and mind and person would be the same. Report an error in the passage at 43:14 Highlight the passage at 43:14

43:36 So there are many absurd consequences. Report an error in the passage at 43:36 Highlight the passage at 43:36

43:46 yeah, and then, yeah, yeah. And then there's the whole my body and mind, right? Body and minds, body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 43:46 Highlight the passage at 43:46

43:58 So we go through this reasoning in our mind again and again and again and again until we're certain. Report an error in the passage at 43:58 Highlight the passage at 43:58

44:14 The way to get a realization is to go through the logical reasoning Report an error in the passage at 44:14 Highlight the passage at 44:14

44:24 really thoroughly. Until we remove all doubt. So we look at the third one and then we also do the same thing with the person and the agritus being inherently different. Report an error in the passage at 44:24 Highlight the passage at 44:24

44:39 So if the person and the body and mind were inherently different, then the body and mind could be in the gompa and the person could be in the bathroom. Report an error in the passage at 44:39 Highlight the passage at 44:39

44:51 It doesn't make sense. So anyway, so we go through that reasoning to realize that the inherently existent I A person does not exist. Report an error in the passage at 44:51 Highlight the passage at 44:51

45:14 So His Holiness the Dalai Lama says, if we initially meditate on the selflessness of a person, it is said to be easier for meditation because the subject is continually present. Report an error in the passage at 45:14 Highlight the passage at 45:14

45:26 If through having analyzed the I, a little understanding of emptiness arises, we should then analyze the mental and physical aggregates in dependence on which the I is imputed. Right? So we first do the reasoning on the eye and then we move it to the body and the mind. Report an error in the passage at 45:26 Highlight the passage at 45:26

45:47 Then settling on the selfless is a phenomena, right? The aggregates, etc. So we can also use the four-point analysis, the same reasoning that we just talked about with respect to the person. Report an error in the passage at 45:47 Highlight the passage at 45:47

46:00 The other reasoning that Lama Tsongkhapa brought up was the reasoning of dependent arising. That which exists arisen dependently does not have autonomy. All these lack autonomy. Hence the self does not exist inherently. So if we really think about it, if things really existed inherently, they couldn't depend on anything else, right? Report an error in the passage at 46:00 Highlight the passage at 46:00

46:30 If this was inherently, intrinsically a cup, it wouldn't need anything else, any causes and conditions, any imputation, whatever, to make it a cup, right? Because it's intrinsically a cup. It is a cup. If it was really a cup, it wouldn't need to depend on anything for it to be a cup, right? Because it's intrinsically a cup, right? Report an error in the passage at 46:30 Highlight the passage at 46:30

46:56 Inherently a cup. Report an error in the passage at 46:56 Highlight the passage at 46:56

47:00 Same thing with the I, right? If it was really an I, it wouldn't need to depend on mom and dad, food, conceptual imputation, body and mind. Because intrinsically, it's an I or a me. Report an error in the passage at 47:00 Highlight the passage at 47:00

47:32 But that's not the way we normally think, right? We think, oh yeah, I was born from my mom and dad and yeah, I learned from my teachers and yeah, I eat food and all that. But there's still a real me there, right? A real essence of me there, right? That's independent of all those things. So if there was, find it. Report an error in the passage at 47:32 Highlight the passage at 47:32

47:57 Look for it. See if you can find it. Report an error in the passage at 47:57 Highlight the passage at 47:57

48:02 Because I think that's the tricky part of the reasoning of dependent arising is that we all get dependent arising. On a certain level, right? Sure, of course. We're all interdependent. We're dependent on other things. But the part we don't get is that there is no me that is not dependent. Report an error in the passage at 48:02 Highlight the passage at 48:02

48:23 There is no me that is not dependent. We still think that there's some intrinsic me there, right? Yeah, okay, I'm dependent on all of these causes and conditions, but I still think that there's a real essence of me that's not dependent on me. Report an error in the passage at 48:23 Highlight the passage at 48:23

48:43 Check it out. See if you can find it. So when we talk about dependent arising, we're talking about being dependent on causes and conditions. Three levels. Mom, dad, food, teachers, etc. Dependent on parts. Report an error in the passage at 48:43 Highlight the passage at 48:43

49:07 So this one's quite profound, at least in my mind. There's no me that's independent of the parts of me. There's no me that's independent of the body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 49:07 Highlight the passage at 49:07

49:24 There's no me independent of the body and mind. So that kind of eliminates the me that has a body and mind, right? There's no me that's independent of the body and mind. So the me depends on parts. Report an error in the passage at 49:24 Highlight the passage at 49:24

49:45 And then the most subtle one that only the persanghikas. Pause it. Dependence on conceptual imputation. There's no me independent of imputation by thought, labeling by thought. Report an error in the passage at 49:45 Highlight the passage at 49:45

50:08 Okay, so we covered all of this last. But Report an error in the passage at 50:08 Highlight the passage at 50:08

50:19 then what we need to do is not lose track. Right, okay, so as we said, if we search for anything, we can't find it. Nothing. There is no me here at all. There's no me here at all. And it's so close to non-existence. It's so very close to non-existence. But things do exist in function. Report an error in the passage at 50:19 Highlight the passage at 50:19

50:49 Not the way we think they do, but they do exist in function. So Lama Tsongkhapa says, having thus induced certainty through the emptiness, empty of all object. Aims for apprehending characteristics. One does not give up one's ascertainment of the relation between actions and their effects. Report an error in the passage at 50:49 Highlight the passage at 50:49

51:10 Reliance on discarding non-virtues and assuming virtues through that is highly praised. So if we ever get to the point where we're refuting so much that we think there's no cause and effect, then we've gone too far. Report an error in the passage at 51:10 Highlight the passage at 51:10

51:30 If we think... Oh, there's no I that's findable at all. That means I can do whatever I want and it doesn't matter. Then we've gone too far. We've gone to nihilism. So then we need to back up. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Emptiness does not mean there's no cause and effect. Because it's the opposite, right? Report an error in the passage at 51:30 Highlight the passage at 51:30

51:58 Because things are empty, that's Report an error in the passage at 51:58 Highlight the passage at 51:58

52:05 why they can function. Remember we talked about this last time. Because things are empty, that's why they can change. If they existed from their own side, they couldn't change. Report an error in the passage at 52:05 Highlight the passage at 52:05

52:20 If this was really a cup, it could never change into anything else. If it was intrinsically a cup, it could never change into anything else. Because things are empty, they can change. Report an error in the passage at 52:20 Highlight the passage at 52:20

52:35 Change is necessary for functionality. Because things are empty, that's why they can function. Report an error in the passage at 52:35 Highlight the passage at 52:35

52:45 Lama Tsongkhapa says our analysis is complete, right, when our understanding of emptiness reinforces our understanding of cause and effect, of dependent arising. And when our understanding of dependent arising reinforces our understanding of emptiness, when those two reinforce each other, then our view is complete. Report an error in the passage at 52:45 Highlight the passage at 52:45

53:14 But if... At any point we think that there's a contradiction between cause and effect and emptiness, then we still have more work to do. Report an error in the passage at 53:14 Highlight the passage at 53:14

53:26 But that's really subtle and difficult. Report an error in the passage at 53:26 Highlight the passage at 53:26

53:34 So Lama Tsongkhapa says in his three principal aspects of the path, appearances are infallible, dependent arisings. Emptiness is free of assertions of inherent existence or non-existence. As long as these two understandings are seen as separate, one has not yet realized the intention of the Buddha. So that's what I'm talking about, right? Appearances or dependent arisings, emptiness. When these two realizations are simultaneous and concurrent, from the mere sight of infallible dependent arising comes definite knowledge which completely destroys all modes of mental grasping. Report an error in the passage at 53:34 Highlight the passage at 53:34

54:16 At that time, the analysis of the profound view is complete. Report an error in the passage at 54:16 Highlight the passage at 54:16

54:23 So we talked about this. Last term, right? Right now everything appears as if it exists from its own side, right? As if there's a cup right here. Then when we realize emptiness, Lama Zopa says the understanding of it as being illusory or the appearance of it as being illusory doesn't happen right away. Report an error in the passage at 54:23 Highlight the passage at 54:23

54:47 But eventually, right, the appearance of this will reinforce our understanding of emptiness. Right now, the appearance of it reinforces our belief that is concrete, right? But eventually, Report an error in the passage at 54:47 Highlight the passage at 54:47

55:07 when things appear to us, that reinforces our understanding that things don't exist from their own, Report an error in the passage at 55:07 Highlight the passage at 55:07

55:21 eventually. Report an error in the passage at 55:21 Highlight the passage at 55:21

55:25 So I think we have to practice, we have to practice that, right? Not just do the emptiness meditation when we're sitting on the cushion, but when we arise to familiarize ourselves with this. Okay. Joe is an illusory appearance. Sechenling is an illusory appearance. Everybody is an illusory appearance. Everything is an illusory appearance. So we need to bring that off the cushion and remember that as much as we can. Report an error in the passage at 55:25 Highlight the passage at 55:25

56:08 And then Lama Tsongkhapa continues, in addition, appearances clear away the extreme of existence. Emptiness clears away the extreme of non-existence. right? Report an error in the passage at 56:08 Highlight the passage at 56:08

· · · silence, 1 minute

56:17 When you understand the arising of cause and effect from the viewpoint of emptiness, you're not captivated by either of the extreme views. Report an error in the passage at 56:17 Highlight the passage at 56:17

56:27 So the correct view is the middle way. Things don't exist inherently. They don't exist from their own side. And it's also not that they don't exist at all. There's a middle way. They exist as being merely imputed by the mind. Report an error in the passage at 56:27 Highlight the passage at 56:27

56:48 Understanding emptiness and dependent arising clears away the two extremes, so we fall in the middle. Report an error in the passage at 56:48 Highlight the passage at 56:48

57:01 All right, so that was the view that we covered last time. Any questions or comments on that before we move on to the two truths, which we also covered in last term? Report an error in the passage at 57:01 Highlight the passage at 57:01

57:20 Sorry, I'm taking so long with the review, but I just think it's important. Hey, I have a question about what you had said that Lama Zopa Rinpoche had said about that aggregates don't create the person and the person isn't here, but there's still a person that appears that even subtly, and I know I'm totally butchering what you had said, but can you go back to that because I'm still trying to understand how there's still a person that... Report an error in the passage at 57:20 Highlight the passage at 57:20

57:58 exists even on the most subtle level There's something, there's like this gap that I'm not able to connect. That's the trick, right? That's the trick. Because that's what all of the schools say except Prasangika. If you can't find it, how can it exist? Makes sense. If you can't find it, how can you say it exists? Right? Report an error in the passage at 57:58 Highlight the passage at 57:58

58:20 So the person you can't find at all on the aggregates, right? So that's what Rinpoche was saying. There's no person. On the aggregates at all. There's no person on the body and mind at all. No inherently existing person, no merely imputed person on the aggregates at all. Report an error in the passage at 58:20 Highlight the passage at 58:20

58:43 There is a person in the room. So, does that mean it's findable? No. Conventionally, we have the thought person. So we have the thought person that arises based on the appearance of the body. The body and mind. There's a thought person based on the appearance. But there's no person here on the aggregate. Report an error in the passage at 58:43 Highlight the passage at 58:43

59:17 There's a thought person. So that's my understanding of what he's saying. But, Report an error in the passage at 59:17 Highlight the passage at 59:17

59:31 you know, check with other teachers. This is just my understanding. Report an error in the passage at 59:31 Highlight the passage at 59:31

59:44 So is there intention? Intention exists. Is that related to karma then? Yes. Karma is intention. Can you say anything else about what does exist? Report an error in the passage at 59:44 Highlight the passage at 59:44

1:00:01 Almost everything that we believe exists conventionally, everything that we have a worldly consensus about, almost everything of those things exist. Cups exist and tables exist and people exist and rugs exist and tankas exist and rooms exist. They just don't exist as solidly as we think they do. everything that exists, that... Report an error in the passage at 1:00:01 Highlight the passage at 1:00:01

1:00:27 But they exist. Report an error in the passage at 1:00:27 Highlight the passage at 1:00:27

1:00:34 Thoughts exist. Actions exist. Report an error in the passage at 1:00:34 Highlight the passage at 1:00:34

1:00:53 Maybe when we move to the two truths, maybe that will become a little more clear. We hope. And if not, then bring up your question again. Or we can always talk on the side. I mean, this is a lot, right? Because I'm going through this quickly. Because I'm doing a review. So it's kind of hard to... Jump in, but let's work on it, okay? So things do exist conventionally as being merely imputed by the mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:00:53 Highlight the passage at 1:00:53

1:01:28 And they function. They just don't exist from their own side. And they don't exist intrinsically right there. Report an error in the passage at 1:01:28 Highlight the passage at 1:01:28

1:01:46 But I can still drink out of this cup. This thing still, it's not a cup from its own side at all. And I can still pour tea in here. It'll still hold tea and I can still drink out of it. Yeah. So it's very, it's very subtle. It's very, very subtle. Report an error in the passage at 1:01:46 Highlight the passage at 1:01:46

1:02:15 Okay. Are you guys ready for a break? Report an error in the passage at 1:02:15 Highlight the passage at 1:02:15

1:02:22 Why don't we take a break and then we'll continue after. Report an error in the passage at 1:02:22 Highlight the passage at 1:02:22

1:02:37 Oh, okay. Sure. Uh-huh. Yeah, so do you still want a printout of... Right on top of the object to be refuted, even if you meditated for your whole life or hundreds or billions of years, then nothing happens. All you will have done is keep the object of refutation so preciously there, just as you might harbor a jewel. Report an error in the passage at 1:02:37 Highlight the passage at 1:02:37

1:03:16 You may have been meditating on the question, where is the eye? But if you're looking for the merely labeled eye, then the ignorance holding eyes existing from its own side has not been touched. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:16 Highlight the passage at 1:03:16

1:03:31 The false eye appearing as the real eye in the sense of existing from its own side is left intact. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:31 Highlight the passage at 1:03:31

1:03:42 So here really we need to spend time noticing the object of refutation, noticing how the eye appears to us, noticing how the eye appears to us. Independent of conception. Independent of thought. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:42 Highlight the passage at 1:03:42

1:04:07 And as Rinpoche was saying, as I read last week, we need to assemble the causes and conditions, purify, accumulate merit, and then when all the causes and conditions are there, then suddenly we recognize the object of refutation. Suddenly it just appears. Suddenly we get it. And as they say, actually, Report an error in the passage at 1:04:07 Highlight the passage at 1:04:07

1:04:35 Properly identifying the object of refutation, once we get that, then realizing emptiness is not far away. That's the difficult part, they say, is correctly identifying the object of negation. Report an error in the passage at 1:04:35 Highlight the passage at 1:04:35

1:05:10 So, once again, the root of saṃsāra is the eye that appears from there, from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 1:05:10 Highlight the passage at 1:05:10

1:05:26 The thought eye is not the problem. The eye that appears back as if it's really there is the problem. The thought eye is not the problem. The belief that it's really there is the problem. Two Report an error in the passage at 1:05:26 Highlight the passage at 1:05:26

1:05:51 truths. Report an error in the passage at 1:05:51 Highlight the passage at 1:05:51

1:05:55 Ultimate truth and what's often translated as conventional truth, but here we're using the term concealer truth. For reason. So ultimate truth and concealer truth. Report an error in the passage at 1:05:55 Highlight the passage at 1:05:55

1:06:17 Ultimate truths are, right, the ultimate mode of existing, the final way. Report an error in the passage at 1:06:17 Highlight the passage at 1:06:17

1:06:25 The object known by reasoning consciousness perceiving the ultimate. The object known by the direct realization of emptiness, which is emptiness. Emptiness is the ultimate. Emptiness, the lack of existing from its own side, is ultimate truth. Report an error in the passage at 1:06:25 Highlight the passage at 1:06:25

1:06:50 Conventional truths or concealer truths are objects known by conventional valid cognizers that comprehend deceptive objects. Report an error in the passage at 1:06:50 Highlight the passage at 1:06:50

1:07:02 So, actually, so I want to talk about this. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:02 Highlight the passage at 1:07:02

1:07:09 So tables and people and everything else that exists besides emptiness are concealer truths. They do exist and they exist in a deceptive way. They exist. But not in the way we think they exist. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:09 Highlight the passage at 1:07:09

1:07:35 So, highlights. So first of all, the basis of the division of the two truths are objects of knowledge or existence. Everything that exists is either an ultimate truth or a concealer truth. Everything that exists is one or the other. There's nothing that's both and there's nothing that's neither. Everything that exists is either an ultimate truth or a concealer truth. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:35 Highlight the passage at 1:07:35

1:08:14 Is the person an ultimate truth or a concealer truth or neither? Report an error in the passage at 1:08:14 Highlight the passage at 1:08:14

1:08:25 Is the inherently existent person an ultimate truth, concealer truth or neither? Report an error in the passage at 1:08:25 Highlight the passage at 1:08:25

1:08:35 Because the inherently existent person doesn't exist at all. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:35 Highlight the passage at 1:08:35

1:08:42 I get people on that one every time. a concealer too. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:42 Highlight the passage at 1:08:42

1:08:48 So the two truths are objects of knowledge. They're things that exist. Things are our truths. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:48 Highlight the passage at 1:08:48

1:09:02 Every phenomenon has two natures, a conventional nature and an ultimate nature. So everything that exists, we can posit the two truths on everything that exists. Report an error in the passage at 1:09:02 Highlight the passage at 1:09:02

1:09:20 Conventional truth or the concealer truth of the cup is the cup itself. The ultimate truth is its lack of existing from its own side. The conventional truth is the cup, also the impermanence of the cup and the color of the cup. The ultimate truth is its lack of existing from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 1:09:20 Highlight the passage at 1:09:20

1:09:48 And that's true with everything. The basis of the emptiness is the concealer truth. The final way it exists is the ultimate truth. The person is the concealer truth. Report an error in the passage at 1:09:48 Highlight the passage at 1:09:48

1:10:08 The emptiness of existing from its own side is the ultimate truth. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:08 Highlight the passage at 1:10:08

1:10:17 The table is the concealer truth. The emptiness of existing from its own side is the ultimate truth. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:17 Highlight the passage at 1:10:17

1:10:26 So the two truths are always found inseparably. For everything that exists, there's a concealer truth and there's an ultimate truth. It's not that emptinesses are over here and concealer truths are over there. They're inseparable. The ultimate truth is the way the concealer truth exists. It's the way, the final way that the basis exists. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:26 Highlight the passage at 1:10:26

1:10:54 The basis is the concealer truth. The ultimate truth is the final way that it exists. Okay? Report an error in the passage at 1:10:54 Highlight the passage at 1:10:54

1:11:11 Completely inseparable. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:11 Highlight the passage at 1:11:11

1:11:23 Which is what the same entity, different isolates, number three, is also saying. The cup and the emptiness of the cup are the same entity. Conceptually, we can think about the cup as separately from the emptiness of the cup, but they're always found inseparably together. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:23 Highlight the passage at 1:11:23

1:11:46 Just like the cup and the impermanence of the cup are always found together, or the cup and the shape of the cup are always found together. They're the same entity. Similarly, the conventional truth or the concealer truth, the cup, and the emptiness... it are always found together, inseparable. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:46 Highlight the passage at 1:11:46

1:12:22 So truth, the word truth in the context of two truths means it exists the way it appears. Truth means it exists. The way it exists is also the way that it appears. And only ultimate truths are actually truths. Only ultimate truths, only emptinesses exist the way they appear. Report an error in the passage at 1:12:22 Highlight the passage at 1:12:22

1:12:51 To the direct To the direct perceiver, directly realizing it. Report an error in the passage at 1:12:51 Highlight the passage at 1:12:51

1:13:01 Whereas concealer truths are falsities. Concealer truths, everything else but emptiness does not exist the way that it appears. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:01 Highlight the passage at 1:13:01

1:13:18 Everything else appears as if it exists from its own side and it doesn't exist that way. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:18 Highlight the passage at 1:13:18

1:13:27 Appears to exist intrinsically and it doesn't actually exist that way. Cup is a deceptive object. The table is a deceptive object. The me is a deceptive object. It does not exist the way that it appears. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:27 Highlight the passage at 1:13:27

1:13:55 And then both truths are objects of valid consciousnesses. So there are Ultimate valley consciousnesses and conventional valley consciousnesses. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:55 Highlight the passage at 1:13:55

1:14:15 Until we realize emptiness, none of us have an ultimate valley consciousness or a valley cognizer. An ultimate valley cognizer is a realizer of emptiness. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:15 Highlight the passage at 1:14:15

1:14:35 A conventional valley consciousness we all have, right? The mind that thinks this is a cup is a conventional valley cognizer. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:35 Highlight the passage at 1:14:35

1:14:51 So, concealer truths are objects of conventional valid cognizers. One type of mind, right? Conventional valid cognizers. Ultimate truths are objects of another kind of mind, right? The ultimate valid cognizer. So, both are valid. It being a cup is valid. It being empty... Of existing from its own side is also valid. So when we realize the emptiness of the cup, it doesn't invalidate it being a cup conventionally. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:51 Highlight the passage at 1:14:51

1:15:35 It's still validly a cup. It's just not a cup from its own side. It's validly a cup as a mere imputation by mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:35 Highlight the passage at 1:15:35

1:15:51 So what the ultimate valid cognizer... Or the realization of emptiness is refuting is the existence from its own side. It's not refuting that it's a cup conventionally, by worldly convention. It's just refuting that it's a cup independent of convention, independent of mind, intrinsically, from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:51 Highlight the passage at 1:15:51

1:16:20 It's just refuting an independently existing cup. An intrinsically existing cup. It's not refuting that it's a cup that you can drink out of. Report an error in the passage at 1:16:20 Highlight the passage at 1:16:20

1:16:36 So this is tricky, right? Because if we look for a cup, we won't be able to find it at all. But there's still a cup, a validly existing cup that's merely imputed by mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:16:36 Highlight the passage at 1:16:36

1:16:53 Okay? Report an error in the passage at 1:16:53 Highlight the passage at 1:16:53

1:16:56 So we're not refuting cup. We're not refuting that I exist. Right? I hear a lot of people say, well, since I don't exist, then we're not. Refuting that the self exists. We're not refuting that the I exists. Refuting that the inherently existing self exists. The intrinsically existing self exists. The independently existing self exists. The findable self exists. It's not findable at all, and yet it exists as being merely imputed by mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:16:56 Highlight the passage at 1:16:56

1:17:37 Okay? Report an error in the passage at 1:17:37 Highlight the passage at 1:17:37

1:17:52 So... It's imputed by the mind because it functions. I mean, you can kind of loosely say that, but that's not totally technically accurate. It's imputed, right? This is validly imputed as a cup because there's a convention there, right? There's a convention. There's a worldly convention there. Report an error in the passage at 1:17:52 Highlight the passage at 1:17:52

1:18:25 And part of that worldly convention kind of involves function, right? But function, this is the way I think about it, at least. Function isn't really the determining factor of whether or not it's valid to call this a cup, right? Or a clock. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:25 Highlight the passage at 1:18:25

1:18:47 And, you know, the example, and you can ask other teachers, because other teachers say, well, functionality is one of the criteria. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:47 Highlight the passage at 1:18:47

1:18:56 But then... What does functionality mean? If the car ran out of gas, does it function? Is it still a car? That's a slippery slope, right? We still have a convention that it's a car, right? But it's hard to say it's really functioning as a car, but that's Emily's personal view on this. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:56 Highlight the passage at 1:18:56

1:19:32 But what makes it valid to call it a car? Is it just function? It's not really just function, right? Everything has a definition. We have worldly conventions, and if it meets our worldly convention, then it's validly called that, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:19:32 Highlight the passage at 1:19:32

1:19:59 Just like the clock. If the battery is running out of power and the clock is really slow, is it still a clock? Is it functioning? So I'm uncomfortable with saying it's validly a cup because it functions as a cup. I think it's more complicated than that. Lama Zopa says it's validly a cup because there's a valid base. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:59 Highlight the passage at 1:19:59

1:20:32 But valid base is determined by convention. It's not as if it's a valid base from its own side. That's also determined by convention. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:32 Highlight the passage at 1:20:32

1:20:49 Is this too much? I'm seeing some sleepy... Report an error in the passage at 1:20:49 Highlight the passage at 1:20:49

1:20:59 The two truths are not contradictory and they don't harm each other. Concealer truths are validly existing. Ultimate truths also validly exist. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:59 Highlight the passage at 1:20:59

1:21:29 I thought concealer Report an error in the passage at 1:21:29 Highlight the passage at 1:21:29

1:21:40 truths were validly existing to ignorance. out of time. Okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:21:40 Highlight the passage at 1:21:40

1:21:46 So this is a confusing point, right? Concealer truths are valid for conventional valid cognizers. And they are only truths for ignorance. They're only truths for ignorance, right? Concealer truths. Thank you. Concealer truths, right? What is the concealer? The concealer is ignorance. So it's only a truth for ignorance, which means ignorance believes that things exist the way they appear, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:21:46 Highlight the passage at 1:21:46

1:22:29 That's the meaning of truth, that it exists the way it appears. Whereas it doesn't exist the way it appears. It's just ignorance that thinks it exists the way it appears. So in this context, concealer truth means it's a truth. Only for an ignorant consciousness. And to be an ultimate truth, the mode of abidance and mode of appearance have to agree. Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 1:22:29 Highlight the passage at 1:22:29

1:22:58 Okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:22:58 Highlight the passage at 1:22:58

1:23:06 All right. So this, you know, this subject of two truths is very profound. And we spent a lot of time on it last term. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:06 Highlight the passage at 1:23:06

1:23:20 Right. So the concealer truths, Report an error in the passage at 1:23:20 Highlight the passage at 1:23:20

1:23:25 right, are not truths in general. They're misconceived to be truths by ignorance. Right. So this. Ignorance blocks the apprehension of emptiness, right? So it conceals the real nature of phenomena. So concealer truths don't exist the way they appear. They do not exist the way they appear. Cups, people, nothing exists, right? Concealer truths, anything except emptiness does not exist the way it appears. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:25 Highlight the passage at 1:23:25

1:24:00 So persanghikas say That all concealer truths are falsities. They're all falsities. So there's this fatantricas, right, say that concealer truths are, can be divided into real ones and unreal ones. Real ones, things that are correct and things that are incorrect. Real and unreal. Prasanghikas say there are no real conventionalities, there are no real concealer truths because they are all falsities because none of them exist the way they appear. Report an error in the passage at 1:24:00 Highlight the passage at 1:24:00

1:24:54 But we can say according to the world, according to worldly convention, there are certain things that are more correct than others. Report an error in the passage at 1:24:54 Highlight the passage at 1:24:54

1:25:07 So although all concealer truths are falsities, some are Correct or real according to the conventions of the world and some are not. So cups and tables and people are real conventional truths according to the world. Report an error in the passage at 1:25:07 Highlight the passage at 1:25:07

1:25:37 Reflections of a face in a mirror are false or wrong or unreal conventional truths according to the world. Because a reflection of the face appears to be a real face. Where it isn't. So that's a falsity. That's a falsity. It's unreal, even according to the world. So according to the world, there are certain things that are correct and real, and there are certain things that are not. Report an error in the passage at 1:25:37 Highlight the passage at 1:25:37

1:26:09 And it's determined by what they call a superficial cause of error. So if I have taken drugs, and I think that there's an elephant in the room, Report an error in the passage at 1:26:09 Highlight the passage at 1:26:09

1:26:27 That's false according to the world, right? My mind has been affected by drugs. Report an error in the passage at 1:26:27 Highlight the passage at 1:26:27

1:26:38 Or if I'm in a moving car, like, you know, sometimes you're in a moving vehicle, you're not sure if you're in the moving vehicle or the car next to you is in the moving vehicle, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:26:38 Highlight the passage at 1:26:38

1:26:56 So that's another superficial cause of error, right? Being... In that situation and not sure, right, if you're moving or they're moving. So the perception that the car that's standing still is moving because you're moving is also a false conventional truth or a concealer truth. Report an error in the passage at 1:26:56 Highlight the passage at 1:26:56

1:27:20 And then reflections in the face and the mirror, right? They don't exist the way they appear. According to the world, so those are also false conventional truths or concealer truths. But then Lama Tsongkhapa says the Report an error in the passage at 1:27:20 Highlight the passage at 1:27:20

1:27:42 two, the appearances of reflections and the appearance of blue to someone ignorant are not different with regard to whether or not they're mistaken in relation to their appearing objects. Report an error in the passage at 1:27:42 Highlight the passage at 1:27:42

1:28:02 So both are mistaken, the real concealer truth and the false concealer truth. Not different in terms of both being mistaken. So this is a very profound point, I find. Because we think, okay, well that is false, but my perceptions are true. Report an error in the passage at 1:28:02 Highlight the passage at 1:28:02

1:28:26 My perceptions are correct. They're right. And they're not. They're not. They are also mistaken. Report an error in the passage at 1:28:26 Highlight the passage at 1:28:26

1:28:43 Next time we'll get into ultimate truths. But let's do a bit of meditation. Report an error in the passage at 1:28:43 Highlight the passage at 1:28:43

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:29:26 So I'm going to do a meditation similar to what we did last week. Just change it up a little bit. Report an error in the passage at 1:29:26 Highlight the passage at 1:29:26

1:29:36 So bring to mind a situation, maybe a different situation from last week, a situation that irritates us or Report an error in the passage at 1:29:36 Highlight the passage at 1:29:36

1:29:53 causes us anxiety or Report an error in the passage at 1:29:53 Highlight the passage at 1:29:53

1:29:58 distress. Just Report an error in the passage at 1:29:58 Highlight the passage at 1:29:58

1:30:10 try to focus as much as we can without distraction on that situation, noticing the feelings that arise. Report an error in the passage at 1:30:10 Highlight the passage at 1:30:10

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:31:36 Focused on the situation. Delete the I. Report an error in the passage at 1:31:36 Highlight the passage at 1:31:36

1:31:48 Replace it with body and mind. There's no I there at all. Body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:31:48 Highlight the passage at 1:31:48

1:32:04 Focus on the situation with no I. Report an error in the passage at 1:32:04 Highlight the passage at 1:32:04

· · · silence, 2 minutes

1:34:20 I reappear. Report an error in the passage at 1:34:20 Highlight the passage at 1:34:20

1:34:33 What does that I look like? Report an error in the passage at 1:34:33 Highlight the passage at 1:34:33

1:34:39 Does it look like a solid thing? One solid thing? Or many things? Report an error in the passage at 1:34:39 Highlight the passage at 1:34:39

1:35:02 Does it appear to have a location? Report an error in the passage at 1:35:02 Highlight the passage at 1:35:02

1:35:08 Is it more in one place than another? Report an error in the passage at 1:35:08 Highlight the passage at 1:35:08

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:35:59 Is it spacious or is it confined? Report an error in the passage at 1:35:59 Highlight the passage at 1:35:59

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:36:59 Does it appear to be together with the body and mind or separate? Report an error in the passage at 1:36:59 Highlight the passage at 1:36:59

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:38:20 Any observations? Report an error in the passage at 1:38:20 Highlight the passage at 1:38:20

1:38:25 Peter is right next to you. I definitely noticed a difference between taking myself out of this afflictive state and then putting myself back in. It's like it all came flooding back again. But I was able to... Separate it a little bit more at that point. But what I noticed was the situation that I brought up was something where I have a physical thing that's causing me a lot of pain right now. Report an error in the passage at 1:38:25 Highlight the passage at 1:38:25

1:38:57 And just being able to take the self out of it, the pain went away. Or quite a bit. I realized how much of things like pain is associated with our mental state, our relationship with it. And that labeled eye makes it so much worse. So then when we brought the eye back, I was able to kind of feel the eye reappear and the pain came back. Report an error in the passage at 1:38:57 Highlight the passage at 1:38:57

1:39:23 But I was able to see that I kind of see my eye as living somewhere in my body and somewhere in my head at the same time. I was able to isolate it a little bit more into it. And just kind of realizing... You know? Mmhmm. Mmhmm. Report an error in the passage at 1:39:23 Highlight the passage at 1:39:23

1:39:38 It's ridiculous, this thing that I've constructed, and I've been living this way my entire life. Yeah, and you're the only one. Yeah, that's true. Oh well. Yeah, that's great, right? So the I seems to be somewhere in the body and mind, right? Object of refutation. Yeah, so, yeah, yeah. Great. So it's good to get more and more clear, right, about where that eye seems to be residing. And then try to find it, see if it makes sense. Report an error in the passage at 1:39:38 Highlight the passage at 1:39:38

1:40:17 Does it really reside there? And then slowly, slowly, right over time, we'll get a realization. Report an error in the passage at 1:40:17 Highlight the passage at 1:40:17

1:40:27 Anybody else? Effie, then Leslie, and Joe. And it's 8.30 if you need to go, you know, don't feel bad. Just go. Report an error in the passage at 1:40:27 Highlight the passage at 1:40:27

1:40:42 Anyway, this one really worked for me. I didn't just disappear like I did last week. What happened? Report an error in the passage at 1:40:42 Highlight the passage at 1:40:42

1:40:54 I have a battery problem with this thing. Report an error in the passage at 1:40:54 Highlight the passage at 1:40:54

1:41:26 Enjoy Report an error in the passage at 1:41:26 Highlight the passage at 1:41:26

1:41:32 whatever there is about the experience or learn. I just saw it that way I guess. issue. Report an error in the passage at 1:41:32 Highlight the passage at 1:41:32

1:41:22 I brought the Report an error in the passage at 1:41:22 Highlight the passage at 1:41:22

1:41:42 So this one was really positive and worked really well for me. It's Report an error in the passage at 1:41:42 Highlight the passage at 1:41:42

1:41:59 not like you've deleted anything that actually exists. You've just deleted your fantasy of there being a real art. Amazing. Report an error in the passage at 1:41:59 Highlight the passage at 1:41:59

1:42:09 Then, yeah. Then we see how afflictions or mental anxiety are mind-created. Report an error in the passage at 1:42:09 Highlight the passage at 1:42:09

1:42:32 I was pretty impressed with the meditation. I think I misunderstood the... directions in the beginning so The situation I picked wasn't one that was filled with a lot of, you know, anything from my side, I didn't think, but it was work where I was basically had a couple of people and then getting joined in, you know, snippy and I think I had asked the person in charge for help. Report an error in the passage at 1:42:32 Highlight the passage at 1:42:32

1:43:08 And then she wanted to sit and read Facebook on the computer, I guess, instead. And then, you know, it got all pissy about it. And then somebody else, like, ganged in. And I'm like, wait a minute. But, you know, it wasn't something that was one of those big situations for me. But when the eye went away, first they were just like, I'm just kind of seeing these two people's faces. Report an error in the passage at 1:43:08 Highlight the passage at 1:43:08

1:43:48 And it was Report an error in the passage at 1:43:48 Highlight the passage at 1:43:48

1:43:54 funny. I got to where I could just go back and forth, turn it back on, turn the eye back on, which was... Inside and outside, depending on where my focus was, kind of thing. I was trying to find out where I felt like this eye was. But it was almost like a light switch. So it's like, oh, that would be really nice if I could be at work and then turn that light switch and have, you know, and the anxiety and whatever the feelings were just turned off. Report an error in the passage at 1:43:54 Highlight the passage at 1:43:54

1:44:29 With them, all that, you need to stop it. And it was quiet. And I was like, oh boy, what a quiet world it would be if I could, you know, turn that eye off. It's good. What's the record? It's Report an error in the passage at 1:44:29 Highlight the passage at 1:44:29

1:44:48 famous to be able to turn that off any time, right, in the middle of the mental position. Based on, right, how strong your, well, you know, I mean, eventually we'll realize emptiness, right, and with a strong level of concentration with calm abiding, right, so we'll have this experience of the lack of eye. Report an error in the passage at 1:44:48 Highlight the passage at 1:44:48

1:45:10 That we'll be able to bring to everyday experience and just delete it. But, you know, that takes time, right? So with smaller things, it's more effective, right? With the big, huge emotional upsets, a little more difficult, right? But that whole light switch, yeah, just practicing that again and again and again and again, then it'll make it stronger and stronger and stronger. Report an error in the passage at 1:45:10 Highlight the passage at 1:45:10

1:45:34 Yeah, I thought that was the coolest part, is that once I, you know, it was so cool, then... Oh, so I just started kind of going back and forth and back and forth and it was just like, I just find silence very delightful. I live by freeway and I don't have any silence, so, you know, just that it stopped. Yeah. And then, oh, yeah. Report an error in the passage at 1:45:34 Highlight the passage at 1:45:34

1:45:59 Oh, great. Okay, and then Joe. Well, Robin, Robin and then Joe, how's that? Since Robin's right there. Report an error in the passage at 1:45:59 Highlight the passage at 1:45:59

1:46:10 My situation was around... My middle child, who's a senior in high school, a teenager and he's hard to deal with. But I have a lot of concerns about him actually thriving. He's not done well in school. He has unrealistic expectations of what's going to happen next. And so to get into the situation and really get in touch with that, I was feeling a lot of sadness. Report an error in the passage at 1:46:10 Highlight the passage at 1:46:10

1:46:37 And then to remove the I and just say person. or body-mind, I could gain some distance from that. then I went, I really want to give it up? This is my child and he's suffering. It calls into question the bodhicitta and how to be able to be an I in the world and experience and feel the pain. Report an error in the passage at 1:46:37 Highlight the passage at 1:46:37

1:47:09 It can't be, I don't know, it just doesn't feel like it's right to be a person. Or body-mind whenever I'm trying to generate that level of bodhicitta. And so I'm having a lot of pain around that right now. And I think I'll just have to sit with it. But the real question, like, do I really want to give this up? Because wait a minute, I told all these people I'm gonna be a bodhicitta. And then, and it hurts. Report an error in the passage at 1:47:09 Highlight the passage at 1:47:09

1:47:35 It really hurts. So when you deleted the eye, did the caring go away? No, the caring didn't go away and that's how it seemed to just grow exponentially to the amount of suffering that happens everywhere. The caring was still there. Yeah. And my personal pain went away, but then it shot back in as something much larger. Report an error in the passage at 1:47:35 Highlight the passage at 1:47:35

1:48:02 Because I think, I mean, if we delete the eye, the caring should still be there, right? But without... Like you're saying, the personal pain, right? The anxiety and all of that. Which can, well, in theory is supposed to increase the bodhicitta, right? Deleting the I isn't supposed to take away from bodhicitta. It's supposed to increase the bodhicitta. And it won't be focused only on our objects of attachment, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:48:02 Highlight the passage at 1:48:02

1:48:32 Only on our friends and family. Because then it can be focused on all beings. With equanimity, I don't mean with indifference, but without bias towards some and others. And maybe I didn't explain myself correctly. That's exactly what it was. Oh, okay. That's exactly what it was. But then it's like, wait a minute, this is pretty big and this is pretty overwhelming. Report an error in the passage at 1:48:32 Highlight the passage at 1:48:32

1:49:01 And maybe I've just been getting a lot of lip service. And I really need to take it to another level and sit with it. So I really appreciate the opportunity because that's something that wouldn't have normally arisen. It's like I kind of need a rock to rub up against to click a fire sometimes, you know. So I really appreciate it. Last week when you did the same thing, it really opened up a lot of new things for me to think about during the week and it was pretty cool. Report an error in the passage at 1:49:01 Highlight the passage at 1:49:01

1:49:31 Yeah, yeah. Yeah, well, that whole bodhicitta thing is huge. Report an error in the passage at 1:49:31 Highlight the passage at 1:49:31

1:49:40 Thank you. And our bodhicitta is just limited, right? I mean, it just is. Report an error in the passage at 1:49:40 Highlight the passage at 1:49:40

1:49:56 Lama Zopa Rinpoche versus me, I mean, you know, very humbling, right? Yeah. So we just do the best we can, right? And we just are where we are and strive to work. Report an error in the passage at 1:49:56 Highlight the passage at 1:49:56

1:50:20 There was kind of a cool moment, like in the beginning of the meditation, when the eye was there. Painting the scenario and everything, there was sort of a concreteness about the eye. It felt fixed and hard and heavy. And then you said, delete the eye. So I deleted the eye. And then things changed and got just sort of like watching a picture or watching a movie or something. Report an error in the passage at 1:50:20 Highlight the passage at 1:50:20

1:50:47 Not a lot of anxiety or emotion. And then you said, put the eye back. And there was this cool moment where I was kind of like, OK, well, then now what do I want it to look like? Report an error in the passage at 1:50:47 Highlight the passage at 1:50:47

1:50:57 That concreteness that wasn't fixed anymore. It was something that I could say, okay, I want it to look like, I want to be like this in this situation. It was changeable and malleable suddenly. It wasn't something that I had to, this is me. It's like, who do I want to be? So that was kind of cool. That was kind of neat and light. I was like, if there's no really fixed me, then I can be anything. Report an error in the passage at 1:50:57 Highlight the passage at 1:50:57

1:51:20 I can work to be something different or try to be something different in this situation. Report an error in the passage at 1:51:20 Highlight the passage at 1:51:20

1:51:45 So let's keep working on that one. Report an error in the passage at 1:51:45 Highlight the passage at 1:51:45

1:51:50 Page 246. Report an error in the passage at 1:51:50 Highlight the passage at 1:51:50

1:52:09 May all beings everywhere, plagued by sufferings of body and mind, obtain an ocean of happiness and joy, by virtue of lying arrows. 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. Report an error in the passage at 1:52:09 Highlight the passage at 1:52:09

1:52:31 May those whose bodies are worn with toil be restored on finding repose. 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. Report an error in the passage at 1:52:31 Highlight the passage at 1:52:31

1:53:01 May all who are sick and ill quickly be freed from their ailments. 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 make 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 1:53:01 Highlight the passage at 1:53:01

1:53:57 Thank you. Report an error in the passage at 1:53:57 Highlight the passage at 1:53:57