← Glen Svensson

Glen Svensson: Gelug Tradition of Mahamudra (part 7)

Glen Svensson · 1 h 9 min · Kunsang Yeshe via Internet Archive

Download audio

Automated transcript, not yet checked by a person; report an error.

Words the recogniser was unsure of are underlined with dots. Use “Report an error” beside any passage to tell us what the teacher actually says.

Key passages

The teacher's own words, quoted from the transcript below and chosen automatically as representative.

  • 0:35

    What are we going to experience? And so in that last paragraph it says, the nature of the meditative equipoid is lucid and extremely clear, so a lot of clarity, not obscured by anything at all, and since it is not established in any way as an entity having form, it is a clear vacuity like space. Moreover, whichever of the good or bad objects of the five senses that appear, they are dawn vividly, just like reflections in a clear mirror. And the experience that dawns is beyond identifying it as this or that.

  • 1:13

    So, as we progress along the path of shamatha, these two qualities of stability and clarity will become more and more pronounced. But actually, there's one other quality that we will start to experience, and that is bliss. So there generally is said that when we're approaching shamatha there's three qualities. There's stability but it's usually described as like non-conceptuality because the mind becomes still.

  • 3:59

    But here, if we go to the top of page 7, it says, no matter how stable such concentration may be, if it is not imbued with the bliss of physical and mental pliancy, it is merely a single-pointed mind of desire realm, where concentration that is so imbued is said to be the mind of shamatha. So here in the diagram, we're talking about being up here at stage 9, having these qualities, but that is still not shamatha. Because we don't have here what's called the pliancy. So to understand how we transition between that ninth stage and actual shamatha, which is the middle diagram at the top here.

  • 22:06

    And if we look at the next paragraph it says, Although in the scriptures along with their commentaries the selflessness of phenomena is determined first, when meditating it is necessary to first meditate on the selflessness of person. So when we come to... Determine what does emptiness or selflessness mean. Often we use phenomena, physical things around us, examining them to come to appreciate what emptiness means, to come to an intellectual understanding of emptiness.

  • 31:32

    to better appreciate then what emptiness really means. And emptiness means things are not independently existent. To better appreciate what that means intellectually, it's helpful to then appreciate what we mean by dependently existent because that's what this view is. So the statement there then is

0:04 Okay, where were we? We're just finishing off actually the shamatha section. If we go down to the bottom of page 6, it says, through preserving this state in that way, what kinds of marks of achievement will be seen? So here what we're talking about is, as we progress along the path to shamatha, what sorts of experiences? Report an error

0:35 What are we going to experience? And so in that last paragraph it says, the nature of the meditative equipoid is lucid and extremely clear, so a lot of clarity, not obscured by anything at all, and since it is not established in any way as an entity having form, it is a clear vacuity like space. Moreover, whichever of the good or bad objects of the five senses that appear, they are dawn vividly, just like reflections in a clear mirror. And the experience that dawns is beyond identifying it as this or that. Report an error

1:13 So, as we progress along the path of shamatha, these two qualities of stability and clarity will become more and more pronounced. Report an error

1:25 But actually, there's one other quality that we will start to experience, and that is bliss. Report an error

1:37 So there generally is said that when we're approaching shamatha there's three qualities. There's stability but it's usually described as like non-conceptuality because the mind becomes still. So we have a very open spacious non-conceptual mind, extremely clear as mentioned here, extreme clarity and bliss. Report an error

2:05 Now all of those three experiences are very nice and as we progress, even as a beginner, we will start to have a little bit of some of these experiences from time to time. They'll come and they'll go. Sometimes in our meditation our mind will feel extremely clear, sometimes quite still and non-conceptual. Report an error

2:28 In other times we'll get to experience a little bit of bliss in our mind. And all the meditation manuals warn against these experiences because they're all very nice experiences and it's easy to get caught up in attachment to them, craving, clinging them. So as we just previously mentioned before the break, we talked a little bit about some not so pleasant experiences, fear, depression, anxiety. Report an error

2:57 When these sorts of experiences come up, of course, simply don't. Have aversion to them. Don't try and get rid of them. Again, simply observe them, arise and pass. Similarly with the positive, the nice experiences here, the experiences of bliss, non-conceptuality, clarity. Again, don't get caught up in them. Don't crave them, clinging. Don't identify with them. Simply observe them. Otherwise, we're going to have a lot of problems. Report an error

3:24 And in fact, all the meditation manuals say if we get caught up in these experiences, Our shamatha practice will come to a grinding halt. So likewise here, simply observe them. And as a beginner, they'll come and they'll go. And as we progress further on shamatha, they'll become more pronounced and more often they will occur. And when we achieve shamatha, of course, they'll be there all the time. Report an error

3:54 We'll have a clear mind, a stable mind and a very blissful state of mind. But here, if we go to the top of page 7, it says, no matter how stable such concentration may be, if it is not imbued with the bliss of physical and mental pliancy, it is merely a single-pointed mind of desire realm, where concentration that is so imbued is said to be the mind of shamatha. Report an error

4:17 So here in the diagram, we're talking about being up here at stage 9, having these qualities, but that is still not shamatha. Because we don't have here what's called the pliancy. So to understand how we transition between that ninth stage and actual shamatha, which is the middle diagram at the top here. Report an error

4:47 Again, Alan Wallace I think has a very nice way of describing that transition. So maybe I can read that out to you. Report an error

5:00 He says the following. the realization of the 9th The ninth stage of attentional balance you are primed to achieve shamatha. The nine preceding stages entail many incremental changes but the actual accomplishment of shamatha involves a radical transition in your body and mind. You will be like a butterfly emerging from its cocoon. This shift is characterized by specific experiences that take place Within a discrete, relatively brief period of time. According to the accounts from the Indo-Tibetan tradition of Buddhism, the first sign of achievement of shamatha is the experience of a sense of heaviness and numbness on the top of the head. Report an error

5:49 This allegedly happens to anyone who experiences this transition, regardless of the specific method followed. It is said to feel as if a palm were being placed on the top of your head. It is not unpleasant or harmful, just unusual. Something remarkable must be taking place in the cortical region of your brain at this point. Report an error

6:14 But so far no one has monitored the brain correlates of this shift using magnetic resonance imaging or an electroencephalograph. This physical sensation on the top of the head is symptomatic of a shift in your nervous system or network of vital energies that is correlated with gaining freedom from mental dysfunction, a general state of mental imbalance characterized by stiffness, rigidity and unwieldiness. Report an error

6:44 Consequently you have achieved a state of mental pliancy in which your mind is fit and supple like never before. From a contemplative perspective, when the mind is dysfunctional or prone to laxity and excitation, It is hard to generate enthusiasm for healing the afflictions of the mind or for devoting yourself to virtuous mental activity. Report an error

7:09 Once you are free of such mental dysfunction, you can focus your mind without resistance to any meaningful object or task. And such a mind is now set to be fit or serviceable. This is the key to achieving optimal mental performance. Following the sense of pressure on the top of your head, You experience the movement of vital energies moving in your body. And when they have coursed everywhere throughout your body, you feel as if you are filled with the power of this dynamic energy. Report an error

7:42 You are now freed of physical dysfunction, so your body feels buoyant and light like never before. And that's symbolized by the person flying through the sky there. Report an error

7:57 Both your body and mind are now imbued with an exceptional degree of pliancy. Which makes them remarkably fit for engaging in all kinds of mental training and other meaningful activities. When physical appliance initially arises, the vital energies catalyse an extraordinary sense of physical bliss. Which then triggers an equally exceptional experience of mental bliss. This rush of physical and mental rapture is transient, which is a good thing. Report an error

8:30 For it so captivates the attention that you can do little else except enjoy it. Gradually it subsides and you are freed from the turbulence caused by this intense joy. Your attention settles down in perfect stability and vividness. You have now achieved shamatha. Sounds good, huh? To Report an error

8:56 finish off, just one more paragraph here. It says, The meditators of present day Tibet are mostly of a single mind in proclaiming In that way, the ultimate nature of the mind can indeed be directly and clearly seen. However, it cannot be grasped or indicated, saying, It is this. Therefore, rest naturally without grasping to whatever dawns. These are oral instructions that point out the Buddha in the palm of your hand. Report an error

9:25 Nevertheless, I, Chukki Geltsam, say that this approach is a marvellous, skilful method for beginners to accomplish mental abiding, And it's a way to introduce the conventional nature of the mind. So again the conventional nature of the mind is the mind is simply clear and knowing or has clarity and awareness. Report an error

9:47 And so that's what we are coming to see in this shamatha practice. But as I mentioned we have these three experiences. We have the bliss, we have the clarity and the non-conceptuality. Report an error

10:02 Those three experiences of shamatha can be easily mistaken for a realisation of nature of reality. And so I think that's what the Panchen, Losan, Chikki, Giosan is warning against a bit here, saying that these sorts of instructions are something that's a marvellous, skilful method for beginners to accomplish mental abiding. Report an error

10:27 And that we need to be careful not to... Misinterpret this experience of bliss, clarity and non-conceptuality as something other than that. Something as interpreted as a deep experience of emptiness or something. So that's I think a little bit what he's sort of saying in that paragraph there. And so that brings the shamatha explanation to a close. Report an error

10:54 Is there any last questions about shamatha practice before we now... Have a look at the Vipassanā practice. Report an error

11:07 Then let's move on. So here in the Vipassanā section, so remember with this stable, calm, clear mind, we are in a very good situation to now try to penetrate nature of reality. So that's the last part of this diagram up here where you see the meditator on the mind, the elephant of the mind with the sword in the right hand. Report an error

11:28 This is the sword of wisdom to cut ignorance. So this is signifying that on the basis of shamatha we can now really, in a good way, practice Vipassanā. Report an error

11:42 And so here it says in the first paragraph, I shall now describe how to introduce the ultimate nature of the mind based on the oral instructions of my root guru Sangya Yeshi, who assuming the guise of a saffron-robed monk eliminated the darkness obscuring my mind. So now he's talking about introducing the ultimate nature of the mind. Report an error

12:03 The shamatha practice, we can come to directly experience the conventional nature of the mind, this simple clarity and awareness. But of course the ultimate nature of the mind is emptiness, shunyata, the empty of independent existence. So now he's going to describe how we go about practicing this on the basis of shamatha. In the first section here, It talks about a general presentation of the different ways to introduce nature of the mind. And then the second presentation says here, presenting having extracted the essence of these instructions. Report an error

12:45 So in the first section here, he is quoting a lot from the oral Mahamudra lineage, the tradition of oral Mahamudra, where here you will find that The instructions in terms of coming to realise the nature of the mind are often relied on the master's own personal meditative experience and relied on them giving some very short, precise instructions to the student to help them in their own meditative experience. Report an error

13:25 So what you find sometimes in this oral approach Is that the instructions, if we apply logical analysis to them, sometimes they don't really hold up under logical analysis. But they are designed from personal meditative experience and can help the student in that. So here what we're going to do is have a look at a couple of these types of approaches. Report an error

13:58 And then we're going to look at... How to come to determine emptiness precisely based on some of these oral instructions. So in the first section it says, as said by the teacher, and of course the teacher here is Buddhist Shakyamuni, it says, when one realises the mind there is enlightenment, therefore do not seek enlightenment elsewhere. Report an error

14:24 If we go down after the next two quotes it says, in this way there is the plight of saṃsāra. And the great world of Nirvāṇa through respectively not realising and realising the reality of one's own mind as it is. All the sacred sutras and tantras are in complete agreement on this point. Saying that really if we want to escape saṃsāra, this type of existence we're in, if we want to overcome our ignorance and disturbing emotions and all the suffering that they produce, we need to come to realised nature of our own mind. Report an error

15:00 We need to come to realise the nature of reality. In other words, we need to come to realise emptiness. And so then let's have a look at a couple of these oral traditions. There are five listed in the text here. Maybe we just briefly look at the first two. The first one says, one tradition states, within a state of meditative equipoise, one investigates whether one's own mind is established as being inside or outside. Report an error

15:29 Where something that arises, abides or ceases, when one sees that it is not established in any of these ways, then one has cut through a basis or root of mind, one has been introduced to the nature of the mind and one has attained the meaning of Mahamudra. And to support that, there's a quote from Doha. Doha is like a song. Report an error

15:57 A lot of the early masters in India, Literally sang their disciples into enlightenment. Through these Doha's, they would give these very short pith instructions on what the disciples should do in their meditation. And here's an example. It says, When the mind and all appearances are sought, they are not found. Even a searcher does not exist. Report an error

16:25 Since that absence neither arises nor ceases in the three times, that very thing that never changes is the nature. It is the mode of abiding of great bliss, thus all appearances are Dharmakaya. So what you see in these very short pithy statements is that often they're a little bit difficult to understand. Report an error

16:47 Again, mainly these are instructions for a student who is at a certain level and that these very short pithy instructions have some sort of direct impact on the student who then can really... come to realise the nature of the mind. Similarly we can look at the second one over the page which says, another tradition states that one searches for the mind within the parts of one's own body, from the crown of the head to the soles of the feet. Report an error

17:19 When one sees that it is not established as being any of these parts, that it is not established in any way as something physical, having a shape, colour and so forth, Then one sees the nature of the mind. And again, as quoting Shankar Rinpoche, I think, was a great master in the Mahamudra lineage. The nature of one's own mind is the seed of all. It is from the very beginning, not different from the minds of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. It appears as the Dharmakaya. Report an error

17:49 It is not matter and it is lumens by nature, not established as a functioning thing. It has no colour or size. So here are some instructions to help us to understand the ultimate nature of the mind. But actually if we investigate some of these instructions with rigorous analysis, some of them don't really hold up so well to logic. Report an error

18:17 But they are designed through meditative experience to sort of directly trigger something in the student's mind a little bit. So what we're going to do now then is... Based on these oral instructions, what is really the nature of the mind that all these oral instructions are pointing to? And so that's the second presentation that starts on the top of page 9. Report an error

18:42 And here I think is again coming through the tradition through Lama Tsongkhapa. I think Lama Tsongkhapa had a very, very profound way of really... Penetrating, coming to understand what this emptiness is, the nature of reality. So let's have a look at that. The first verse at the top in the sūtra says, Due to not knowing the way in which things are empty, peaceful and unproduced, migrators wander. Report an error

19:14 The teacher, or Buddha, possessing compassion for them, caused them to enter by skillful methods and hundreds of reasonings. Report an error

19:24 Thus it is taught that due to not knowing the profound emptiness, the way in which things are selfless, migrators wander in saṃsāra. The teacher who possesses great compassion for those who wander in saṃsāra, in order to liberate them from saṃsāra, cause them to enter the path of realizing selflessness directly and indirectly by skillful methods for realizing selflessness and hundreds of reasonings for determining selflessness. Report an error

19:52 And so if we look at the next... Paragraph 1 says, Furthermore, with respect to directly realizing selflessness, it is necessary to meditate having first determined selflessness through hearing and contemplating. So what this means is that to come to directly realize, and here we see selflessness used a lot. There are a number of different philosophical schools in Buddhism and this idea of selflessness can have a slightly different meaning. Report an error

20:26 But here, in this text, we are following what's called the Majamika school, middle way school. And in this philosophical school, the word selflessness is equivalent to emptiness. They mean the same thing. In other philosophical schools in Buddhism, the word selflessness can mean something slightly different. Report an error

20:48 But here, selflessness and emptiness, same, same. And it says here, first we need to determine selflessness or emptiness through hearing and contemplating. So first we need to hear about this idea of emptiness. We need to contemplate this using, as mentioned here, lines of reasoning. We are to investigate this idea in a logical way to come to an intellectual understanding of selflessness or emptiness through hearing and contemplating. Report an error

21:24 So that's what we're going to do a little bit now. And then based on that we should then meditate on that idea to come to eventually directly experience emptiness and meditation. Now to do that it says here, following on the next sentence, although for such a selflessness there is no division into course and subtle in terms of its entity, there are two types by way of a division into person and phenomena. Report an error

21:50 So here when we talk about emptiness, we can divide emptiness in terms of Emptiness of person, emptiness of phenomena. And here phenomena means everything other than person. And if we look at the next paragraph it says, Although in the scriptures along with their commentaries the selflessness of phenomena is determined first, when meditating it is necessary to first meditate on the selflessness of person. Report an error

22:20 So when we come to... Determine what does emptiness or selflessness mean. Often we use phenomena, physical things around us, examining them to come to appreciate what emptiness means, to come to an intellectual understanding of emptiness. But then when we come to meditate, it's recommended that we first use ourself as a person, as the object to investigate. Report an error

22:53 When we meditate on emptiness we can pick anything but here it recommended that we first use person because a number of reasons. One is that the person is something very familiar to us and also the person, me, the agent is where we first go wrong, where we first have problems is we first mistakenly understand how we exist as a person. Report an error

23:22 So that's really where the whole thing starts to go wrong and so by investigating, meditating on me, the person, how I exist is where we usually begin. Report an error

23:35 How do we do this investigation? Report an error

23:41 If we go down a couple of paragraphs and it says, first, since the conceived object, it says, since the conceived object of the conception of the being, the I, the person as truly existent, Investigation. Report an error

23:55 is a truly existent being, a truly existent I, a truly existent person. It is necessary to refute those. Refuting is to view them as lacking true existence because by ascertaining the person to be lacking true existence and familiarizing with that, the conception of person as truly existent will be reversed. Report an error

24:16 For that reason, I will first explain with guiding instructions The way in which the object of negation appears and the way in which it is apprehended. So what this is saying is that we need to investigate reality. We need to investigate how things appear, how we apprehend them and then how they actually exist. Report an error

24:44 And so we can do that. And in the next session we're going to actually do an emptiness meditation on the person. But before that now, what we're going to do is have a look at what we mean by emptiness, to come to some vague intellectual understanding of that and then try and apply this in the meditation on the person. Report an error

25:13 So here it says we have to check How things appear and how they are apprehended. So, here it talks about a truly existent, that we conceive of ourself as truly existent. Now, what that means, Report an error

· · ·

26:09 how do things appear to Report an error

26:16 us? It Report an error

26:21 appears to us as if we are in no way contributing to this external world, that it's there objectively, independent of our perception. Report an error

26:35 Here's what we mean by independent existence. That things appear to exist independently. They Report an error

26:56 appear to exist to us. There's a number of words, technical words, that are used to describe this word. The first one, probably the most common that you'll see, is inherent existence. Report an error

27:25 Inherent existence has the sort of connotation of things existing within themselves. Self-contained, self-existent. So that's what the word inherent existence means. That they have some existence inherent within themselves. They are self-existent. The Report an error

28:01 second word that we hear is something existing from its own side. So that has the connotation like, you know, this clock existing from its own side has the connotation that we are in no way contributing to the existence of this clock. It simply exists from its own side. The third word, which is the one mentioned here in the text, is true existence. Report an error

28:43 Something is true, generally in our language, something is true if it's not deceiving us. And here, things appear to exist completely independent of us. Report an error

28:58 If, in fact, they existed how they appeared to us, they would be true. They wouldn't be deceiving us. So true existence means Something existing in the same way in which it appears. Things appear to be independent. If in fact they do exist in that way, they would have true existence, meaning the way in which they appear and the way in which they exist match. Report an error

29:23 They're not deceiving us. So these are three words which mean independent existence. So that's how things appear to us. How do we apprehend things? We apprehend them as being in fact like this. We never question these appearances. Why? Because this is how things always appear to us since we were born even before according to Buddhism. Report an error

29:55 Things have always appeared to us in this way. They've always appeared to exist independently of us so we never question these appearances. We never investigate that. So we simply buy into those appearances, we accept them, we accept that there is an independent world there and there's an independent me here. Report an error

30:15 There's an inherently existing world there, inherently existing me here. But here we are to investigate, in fact, how things exist. Report an error

30:29 And if we really investigate these appearances and see whether or not things exist in the way they appear, We'll find that in fact they don't exist in this way if we actually investigate. And so here then we Report an error

· · ·

31:28 come Report an error

31:32 to better appreciate then what emptiness really means. And emptiness means things are not independently existent. To better appreciate what that means intellectually, it's helpful to then appreciate what we mean by dependently existent because that's what this view is. So the statement there then is Report an error

· · ·

32:32 that things, Report an error

32:37 remember inherent existence means independent existence. So things are empty of inherent existence meaning things are not independently existent. Why? Because they are dependently existent. So the word dependent arising means dependently existent. Here the word arising means coming into existence. Report an error

33:02 So things are not independently existent because they come into existence dependently. So this phrase here, empty of inherent existence, is emptiness. Report an error

33:22 Shunyata. Report an error

33:26 Emptiness is the fact that things are empty of inherent existence. Or in other words, things are not independently existent. So emptiness doesn't mean nothing really exists. Report an error

33:41 Things are not independently existent. So emptiness is describing the nature of reality through negation, through negating how things don't exist. How do things exist? They exist dependently. So to better appreciate then emptiness, we can look at what we mean by the word dependently existent or dependent arising. Report an error

34:21 Three ways or three levels in which something exists dependently. The first one is that things come into existence depending on causes and conditions. Report an error

34:47 This clock here, for instance, had many causes and conditions for it to come into existence. One of the early first conditions, of course, someone needed to think about designing this clock. Report an error

35:02 Then, of course, all the various raw materials needed to be out of the ground or came from. Those raw materials needed to be refined. The various components needed to be manufactured and then all the various components needed to be assembled. And then of course all the factories and all the people involved in that were also necessary. Report an error

35:26 So all of those causes and conditions needed to come together for us to have this clock here. I think fairly straightforward. The Report an error

35:40 clock exists depending on its parts. For this clock to exist we need the plastic casing, we need the screen. We need the dials on the bottom, we need the components, we need the battery. Without all of those parts, there's no clock. Again, pretty straightforward. Report an error

36:03 But here what we're saying is that this idea of dependency should be refuting that things are independent. So the fact that this clock is created from causes and conditions and is dependent on parts should be refuting the fact That this clock exists independent of us. But I think it doesn't do that for us, really, does it? I mean, we can happily accept that this came into existence through all these cause and conditions and is dependent on its past. Report an error

36:37 But at the same time, we can happily accept that when I walk in the door, there's already a clock here. That I'm in no way contributing to the existence of the clock. Fair comment? Because it should be. The idea of cause and conditions in part... Should be refuting the fact that there's already a clock when I walk in the door. But it doesn't seem to do that. Why? Because our understanding of these is quite superficial. Report an error

37:11 To understand what these mean at really a deeper level, we have to go to the third way in which everything, including this clock, is a dependent arising. Report an error

· · ·

38:02 So again, if we look at these words, we might think, yeah, I know. It means that there is a thing here which we're calling a clock. Again, fairly superficial understanding of what we mean by imputation, labelling, designation or conception. Report an error

38:25 Because when we look out on the world, what's really going on is we are receiving a mass of sense data coming in. And of course we have to make some sense out of this, some meaning. Otherwise we couldn't function, we couldn't do anything. So what we do is we draw lines around various collections of data, turn them into objects so we can break up this data into meaningful chunks so that we can make some sense out of what we see. Report an error

39:08 But of course we're not the only people on this planet and We need to communicate with others. So not only do we need to do this dividing up, but we need to give names to the various chunks. Report an error

39:28 Now, how we do this dividing is not fixed. It's arbitrary, depending on the meaning that we want to get out of what we see. Report an error

39:41 For example, in this example I think I used on Thursday in similar teaching, if we look here, If you look in this direction, to make some meaning out of this data, all this data here, we could simply draw one line and say there's an altar there. One altar. Or we could draw Report an error

40:09 five lines and say there's five cupboards there. Or we could draw four lines and say there's four statues there. We could draw... Eight lines and say there's eight offerings there, we could draw many lines. So depending on the meaning we want to get out of that data, we draw different lines. So it's not fixed how we divide up the world, completely arbitrary. Therefore, Report an error

40:48 things, so this view here is that say that things are merely labelled, merely imputed. If we search amongst all that data, We're not going to find those things because those things are brought into existence when we draw a line and give a name. There's nothing there from its own side beyond our conceptual framework because it's our conceptual framework which brings these things into existence. Report an error

41:20 Hence, things are merely labelled, merely imputed. This Report an error

41:38 idea, what these other two... things mean at a little bit deeper level again in advance I'll have to apologise for my drawing actually I might be frank to come and draw my little diagram Report an error

41:54 the artist. Report an error

· · ·

44:23 stops and the sprouts start if they exist from their own side they exist Report an error

44:53 Similarly Report an error

45:00 with parts. Report an error

45:05 Again, we'll use the same example I did on Thursday. This pen exists depending on its parts. But where is this pen here? Report an error

45:15 Can we find the pen if we search for the pen here? Where exactly is the pen here? Report an error

45:25 Is this a pen? Report an error

45:39 Is the tube, metal tube, a pen? Is the ink in the middle a pen? Is the little round tip ball thing on the end a pen? No? Where's the pen? No pen to be found. But then usually people say, oh yeah, of course, it's obvious. The pen is the collection of all that stuff. Report an error

46:03 Here's the collection of all that stuff. Is that a pen? Then people say, oh no, no, you've got to put that collection in a certain way. Report an error

46:15 You have to let me know then when the pen comes into existence. Report an error

· · ·

46:55 So when Report an error

47:02 it comes into existence, when this configuration of data resembles our concept of pen. And our concept of pen, our concepts usually have at least two parts, appearance and functionality. So when that looks sort of like our concept of pen and it performs the function of our concept of pen, then we have a pen. Report an error

47:26 That's the pen when it comes into existence. So here a pen is something merely labelled depending on this collection of stuff. Whereas we normally think, what do we say? We say this is a pen. Report an error

47:49 Effectively what we're saying is the pen is the collection of the parts. But this view is saying no. This view is saying the pen is something labelled depending on this collection of parts. So there's two different statements here. There is the pen is the collection of the parts, is what we think. This view is saying the pen is labelled depending on the collection of the parts. If we can appreciate those two things are not saying the same thing, we're beginning to understand something about emptiness. Report an error

48:29 Again, the pen is the collection of the parts versus the pen is labelled depending on the collection of the parts. So actually here is another example of cognitive fusion. Report an error

48:44 There's two things here. There's the basis. And then there's the label pen. And we are applying the label to the basis. But we do cognitive fusion and fuse the label with the basis. This is the pen. So actually it's another example of cognitive fusion. The basis and the label, the label is applied to the basis. Report an error

49:16 The label is not the basis. The pen is something labelled depending on the basis. Report an error

49:29 So what's the problem? Report an error

49:35 What's the problem with seeing things in this way? So remember again, when we look out on the world, we have to draw these lines around collections of data, give them names. We have to do that. No problem there. The problem is that we don't realise we're doing that. The problem is that when we look out on the world, it appears as if the world is already divided up into these separate things. Report an error

50:03 It appears, in fact, as if the world is made up of boundaries, that things are already divided up and so the world is full of these boundaries. Report an error

50:15 But actually, what this view is saying is that there's no boundaries. We draw lines and conceptually isolate chunks in this seamless world. Report an error

50:30 What's the problem with seeing the world already divided up as full of boundaries? Report an error

50:42 Talking about the world itself. Yeah, that's next point I'm coming up to. The problem is, and we use this example of the flowers here, although they're looking a bit sad at the moment, they're wilting a bit, but we look at these flowers. Report an error

51:02 Every time we experience something in the world, we have one of three feelings, either pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. So let's say, for instance, I'm looking at these flowers and I'm having a pleasant experience. Report an error

51:19 Together with the belief that these flowers are independent of me, that they are existing independent of my conceptual framework, Report an error

51:30 will lead us to think that, for instance, let's say for example again, I'm having a pleasant experience and I'm believing that those flowers are existing independent of me, then that will lead me to believe that there must be some attractive quality there. Which is causing my pleasant feeling. So I'll see these as inherently attractive. Not only as inherently existent, i.e. Report an error

52:03 independent, but also inherently attractive. Then, of course, I'm having a pleasant feeling. I like pleasant feelings. Those flowers seem to be causing my pleasant feeling. I want those flowers. Attachment. Alternatively, if I'm looking at these flowers, I'm having an unpleasant feeling, together with this belief that these flowers exist independent of me, then we will go on to believe there must be some unattractive quality there causing my unpleasant feeling. Report an error

52:40 Not only inherent and existent, but inherently unattractive. I'm having an unpleasant feeling, they seem to be causing my unpleasant feeling, I don't want unpleasant feelings, get rid of those flowers. Aversion. So, with pleasant, unpleasant feelings, with a belief that things are independent of us, easily leads to attachment and aversion, which is driving our whole behaviour, creating a lot of problems and sufferings for ourselves. Report an error

53:12 That's why this belief is a problem. Report an error

53:26 What's your projection? In Report an error

53:37 fact, on that very point, If these were existing independent of our conceptual framework, then if they're inherently one way or another, if they're attractive and they're existing independent, if they're inherently attractive, it means actually anyone who looked at them would have to see attractive flowers. Report an error

54:00 Because that's what they are. They don't depend on my conceptual framework to be attractive. They're attractive from their own side. Meaning that anyone who saw them would have to see them as attractive. Report an error

54:12 Actually though, in English, don't we say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. When we say that, we don't actually believe it. Report an error

54:25 But this view is saying that actually that is true. So beauty is in the eye of the beholder is exactly this view. But we don't really believe that, certainly in our behaviour. If we really believe that, actually it would be impossible to become attached to anything. Because attachment's all about the belief that the beauty is there, isn't it? Because that is causing my happiness because the beauty is there. Report an error

54:53 So actually if we really experientially believed beauty in the eye of the beholder, we could actually enjoy things and we would never have attachment or clinging or craving to them. But that's not the case, I think. I think we have clinging, craving things. And that is... It's saying beauty is not in the eye of the beholder, the beauty is there and I want it because it seems to be causing me happiness. That's the problem. Report an error

55:23 Now when we look out on the world, the very first line that we normally draw in our experiences is we draw a line around here and we conceptually isolate the me part of the experience, the experiencer. And we give a label, me, I, person, experiencer, subject, observer, witness, whatever. Report an error

55:57 Again we have to do that to make sense out of, because there's simply a single experience. Within single experience there's two aspects. There's the experiencer part of experience and the experienced part of experience. So again to make sense out of that single experience we conceptually isolate. Experiencer from experienced. Nothing wrong with that. But again, we don't realise we are doing this. We believe that there's already this independent me here, this independent experiencer here. Report an error

56:34 But that belief is actually illogical. And to highlight that, again I'll use the same example from Thursday and ask the question, is this big? Report an error

56:48 Is that big? Well let's compare it to... So is that big? So big exists depending on small. Likewise, up can only exist depending on down, in, on out and so forth and so forth. Similarly, me can only exist depending on not me. Experiencer can only exist depending on experienced. Subject can only exist depending on object. Report an error

57:24 That's not what we instinctively grasp to. We believe there's an independent me here and an independent objective world there. That belief in an independent me, which is called self-grasping, that is exactly the same as saying this is big. It just does not make any sense. Big only exists dependently on small. You can only have me dependent on not me, or in other words, the world or you. Report an error

57:56 Because in fact here, Me, from my perspective, is here. You is there. From your perspective, me is there. You is here. So is this me or you? Report an error

58:11 No? It's just a label. From this perspective, I apply label me. From your perspective, you apply label you. But if it was inherently me, then it would be me. You'd be confused. Report an error

58:32 ha, ha, ha. Report an error

58:53 Exactly. And that is very much highlighted, I think, when we, particularly we meet people from other different cultures and we see something and we argue with them. We say, it's that. And they go, no, it's that. Because their conceptual framework is quite different than ours. You know, like beauty. In some cultures, this thing is beautiful. In others, it's ugly. Report an error

59:27 I mean, what is it? Is it beautiful or ugly? And we can see that in fashion. That's good fashion or cycles. Report an error

59:55 So, in fact, this is one of the objections or problems that people have sometimes. People often think that, and this comes down to the idea of attachment, is that without attachment, Life would be very dull and boring and that attachment sort of equates to somehow joy and happiness. And so when we talk about this sort of example and then we talk about realising emptiness, that there's no beauty inherently there, I go, oh, life's going to be very boring, isn't it? Report an error

1:00:40 There's no beauty there. There's no beauty anywhere there. But actually, we're not saying that there's no beauty. We're saying it's not inherently beautiful. The beauty is in... Which means that if we realise emptiness, and we happen to before see those flowers as attractive, when we realise emptiness, it's not somehow that these flowers are going to be very bland and boring. Report an error

1:01:08 We're going to still see them as attractive, but we're going to realise that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, directly, not somehow intellectually. Report an error

1:01:20 Therefore... It would become almost impossible to have any craving for them. Which means, actually, that we could appreciate the beauty more. Because now, in things we enjoy in our relationships, if we have strong attachment to a person or a thing, that actually interferes with our enjoyment. Report an error

1:01:44 Because our mind is agitated. Oh, I've got to get that, I've got to get that. You know, I've got to get that chocolate cake. And then when we get it, we're sort of eating it fast. We're not really enjoying it. We probably eat too much. And then it's finished. We go, oh, I need some more. So actually this strong attachment completely destroys our enjoying our experience. Report an error

1:02:05 Whereas if we came to realise emptiness, we had the chocolate cake, we'd go, oh, I like chocolate cake. We'd get it. We'd eat it. We'd actually enjoy it fully. And when it's finished, okay, it's finished. No problem. So actually what you'll find, Is that when we come to really appreciate this view more experientially, rather than just vague beauty in the eye of the beholder, we'll come to appreciate and enjoy life much, much more with less and less and less craving and clinging, which just causes us problems. Report an error

1:02:42 That's what's going to happen. And so on that point, and I think Frank can bear with me on that, is that again, sometimes people, artists, complain about, oh no, no, I don't want to do that. I don't want to realise this emptiness. Otherwise, my creativity is just going to go out the window. I'm going to become some very boring person. I'm not going to be able to be creative. Report an error

1:03:04 But actually, again, it's the complete opposite. It's going to be the complete opposite. Because now, things like clinging and craving and stuff actually block the creative process. Of course, clinging and craving and suffering in our past is a lot of fuel for what we produce. But the actual creative process is coming from a deep level of the mind, when the mind is still and clear. And I think, particularly if we come to realise emptiness, nature of reality, and we reduce our disturbing emotions, not only will the creative process become more stronger, but we'll be being creative for more deeper meanings, rather than maybe as a bit of an ego trip. Report an error

1:03:48 We'll actually be creating more creative things. For a better purpose, rather than just an ego trip, actually to inspire people, to help people, to inspire people through our work. So I think that's what's going to happen. Report an error

1:04:09 And on that very point, again, to help us to understand what's going on here, and again, same as I talked about on Thursday, and then we're going to have a short break. Report an error

1:04:26 Again, the first line we draw is around here. And we give the label me or subject or experiencer or whatever. Again we have to do that so no problem there. But the problem is again cognitive fusion. We identify with the me part of the experience. We contract around this. We see ourself as completely independent of the world. Report an error

1:04:52 And so when we contract around this me part and in our experiences we're consciously doing that. So often we're doing something and we're thinking, I am doing this, I am saying that, I am going there, I am reading this book, I, I, I, I, I. Either very consciously or at least subconsciously, we're contracting around the me, the agent. So we're seeing ourselves as separate, independent of the world and then we act on that basis. Report an error

1:05:26 But because this is completely out of sync, With the interdependent nature of reality, we are actually struggling and fighting against reality and our behaviour and of course when we struggle and fight against reality, we suffer and lose and the people around us suffer and lose. Report an error

1:05:44 But sometimes we don't so consciously contract around the me and we don't so consciously split off. And sometimes this happens when we are engaging in activity with strong focus. If we're really focused on something, we're more focused on the activity rather than the me doing the activity. In those cases, the contraction around the me is reduced a little bit. And this often happens, for example, when we're absorbed in a good book or absorbed in a movie or even absorbed in solving a problem at work. Report an error

1:06:26 At those times, the contraction around the me is less. We're not so forcefully splitting ourselves off. We're not so out of sync with reality. And we know from our own experience in those situations things seem to flow much better, time seems to go quite quickly and things seem to go very well. That's because we're not so out of sync. And this is highlighted a lot in people who have very high level of concentration. Report an error

1:06:59 People who have... Developed their activity many, many years through a high level of focus. Example, the professional musicians, professional athletes. When they're engaging in activities, through the force of their concentration, that contraction, the me, me, me part of it, is very, very, very much reduced and often they report things like they're in the flow state or in the zone because the activity is the focus, not the me doing the activity. Report an error

1:07:29 In those situations they report often that there was no sense of a me. There was just the music playing or there was just the sporting activity taking place. And they often report that that situation was optimal performance. Because again the contraction is much reduced through the force of concentration. Report an error

1:07:51 But here what we're saying of course is that to overcome this contraction we need to come to realise This idea of emptiness. We need to not only reduce it through concentration, but we need to eliminate it by developing the wisdom of emptiness. So that's what we need to do. Report an error

1:08:19 And again, that independent eye, again with the idea of cognitive fusion, is we not only identify with the independent eye, but we identify with the contents. Or the experiences or the memories of that independent I. That's our identity. So we've invested a lot of time and energy investing in this identity. Report an error

1:08:46 And that's who we believe we are. But that's just creating a suffering. And so we don't like to give that up because we've spent all our life perpetuating this idea, haven't we? Report an error

1:09:03 And so people often say then, well, if I'm not my memories and thoughts and so forth, who am I? Report an error

1:09:11 And so that's what we're going to... So let's have a break. Report an error

Report an error

Passage at . Please listen to the audio before you suggest a fix.

Suggest a fix

Passage at . Please listen to the audio before you suggest a fix.

Related talks

  1. Glen Svensson: Gelug Tradition of Mahamudra (part 8)

    Glen Svensson · 1 h 11 min

  2. Glen Svensson: Gelug Tradition of Mahamudra (part 1)

    Glen Svensson · 1 h 14 min

  3. Glen Svensson: Gelug Tradition of Mahamudra (part 6)

    Glen Svensson · 1 h 1 min

  4. Glen Svensson: Gelug Tradition of Mahamudra (part 5)

    Glen Svensson · 1 h 26 min

  5. Glen Svensson: Gelug Tradition of Mahamudra (part 2)

    Glen Svensson · 59 min

  6. Glen Svensson: Gelug Tradition of Mahamudra (part 3)

    Glen Svensson · 1 h 13 min

Talk by Glen Svensson. Original at Kunsang Yeshe Retreat Centre via Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/GlenSvenssonGelugTraditionOfMahamudra. Licensed CC BY-ND 3.0. Transcript generated automatically and may contain errors; the audio is the authoritative version.

Recorded at Kunsang Yeshe Retreat Centre, Victoria, and archived by the centre on Internet Archive. More from Kunsang Yeshe

Listen on Internet Archive · CC BY-ND 3.0