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.
- 1:06
There's a basic notion in Buddhism, which I've often repeated, that is not so much what we do, but why we do what we do. You know, the reason behind the motivation, which is going to determine the quality of the outcome. If you remember when, a long time ago in a previous life, when we were studying the lamrim, the graduated path, We study karma. And there's nothing,
- 29:07
The tension we often hold in our stomach muscles just allow your belly to go soft, trunk erect, relax your lower back muscles and throughout the pelvic region, the
- 54:39
One is direct perception, direct perceiver. My eye consciousness. You can see the flower. I can know the flower directly. Very pretty flowers. But there's another valid way of knowing, and this is through inference. We can use reasoning, logic. And this has its limits, but nonetheless, it's quite useful in coming to an understanding.
- 1:00:34
Next to that is valid cognizers, reasoning. But within those, the very first moment is the most powerful. So we're moving toward... A gradual, how to appreciate the necessity for developing these antidotes, to developing these countermeasures in terms of these valid cognizers.
- 1:20:39
I'm sorry, there's no more back on the table, are there? How many do we need? I wonder if there's any on the desk there, in the folder. There might be some more in the folder there. We'll print some more out. So a correct sign. A correct sign also is, we can easily say the correct reason or correct reasoning or correct proof.
Transcript
0:09 I Report an error in the passage at 0:09
0:20 always feel a bit self-conscious walking you. You sound like you're having such a good time. And then I have to apologize for my presence. Oh, shucks. Report an error in the passage at 0:20
0:42 If you remember, I think a couple weeks I asked if you have some quotation or a story that you'd like to share. You know, generally we try to adjust our motivation. I guess it's something that we have to be doing all the time. There's a basic notion in Buddhism, which I've often repeated, that is not so much what we do, but why we do what we do. You know, the reason behind the motivation, which is going to determine the quality of the outcome. Report an error in the passage at 0:42
1:20 If you remember when, a long time ago in a previous life, when we were studying the lamrim, the graduated path, We study karma. And there's nothing, Report an error in the passage at 1:20
1:37 there's no notion of predestination or fate, as it were. And our actions in and of themselves, we really can't say if they're going to bring about a positive or a negative effect. We can only determine that in terms of the ethical, you could say, valence, the ethical quality of that action. And if something on the outside could appear. Report an error in the passage at 1:37
2:03 Very holy and sacred and so forth, but on the inside we don't know, do we, what's going on sometimes in our own mind. So it's very much dependent upon our motivation, whether it's beneficial or not. And so if you're going to involve yourself in some activities and practice, or I guess life in general, we would hope to... Report an error in the passage at 2:03
2:35 To gain something out of it, something positive. And we can't have the short-term effects. That's beyond our control to some degree. But we can begin to gain some control over the long-term karmic effects, the results in terms of determined by the quality of the motivation. Report an error in the passage at 2:35
3:05 So I think it's worthwhile to, rather than having, you know, I don't... I don't think anyone here has a particularly negative motivation for being here. Report an error in the passage at 3:05
3:19 Maybe they're looking for, pardon? Well, you might, you know, fame or the money involved. Maybe you might want to prove Report an error in the passage at 3:19
3:40 Jampa doesn't know what he's talking about, which wouldn't be too difficult, but that could be your motivation, you know, something like that. But you might have an indifferent motivation. Report an error in the passage at 3:40
3:50 That's, you know, it's Monday night. What do I do on Monday night? Oh, yeah. So you get in the car and you come here. Okay. That's quite possible. But, you know, what we're doing, we're doing in order to benefit ourselves most immediately. And we can have a greater vision about the benefit that we're trying to derive from what we're involved in to also not only benefit ourselves, but... Report an error in the passage at 3:50
4:23 A widening circle of others as well. So, you know, however great or narrow that beneficial attitude is, still it's beneficial. And so we try to adjust our motivation. Report an error in the passage at 4:23
4:42 You know, we have problems, don't we? I don't know, maybe I'm projecting on you people, maybe. Report an error in the passage at 4:42
4:56 But we aren't the problem. The problem's the problem. And the situation is workable. So I think we're learning some basic life skills. Hopefully Buddhism is about what is happening in our everyday life. We're not here to please God, perhaps not even our teachers in certain respects. We're just trying to have some of our perhaps dysfunctional patterns pointed out to us, some dysfunctional ways or mistaken or not so healthy attitudes. Report an error in the passage at 4:56
5:37 Ways that we can begin to work with them in a more realistic fashion, developing some skills and tools to work with. I think that's quite an intelligent approach to what it means to be an ordinary human being who, like we all share in the human condition, and part of the human condition is what we call dukkha, that life hurts us in some way. Report an error in the passage at 5:37
6:05 It has joy, sure. It has meaning, fulfillment, but nonetheless it hurts us. Sometimes it hurts us more than not, and we don't want to be hurt. And I think Buddhism is, that's what the Buddha, you know, it said that the Buddha only taught two things, suffering and the way to end suffering. And the rest he left to scholars and philosophers and so forth. He's very pragmatic in that sense, trying to help us in a very practical sense. Report an error in the passage at 6:05
6:39 And working with happiness and suffering. And the way that we can, however much we learn or don't learn, at least behind that effort, we can make a positive, have a positive motivation behind it. Then no matter what, whether we come away a little more confused than when we came, which is... It can happen, I guess. Maybe Jampa doesn't know what he's talking about. He just creates more confusion. That can all be beside the point. Report an error in the passage at 6:39
7:15 It can still be beneficial. It doesn't matter in a way. I shouldn't say that. Even if the Dalai Lama was sitting here and you had a negative motivation, what benefit would it be to yourself? Report an error in the passage at 7:15
7:33 But even if Jampa is sitting up here and you have beneficial motivation, Fisher, you know. Report an error in the passage at 7:33
7:42 Then there's something to be gained. Report an error in the passage at 7:42
7:46 So it's only a matter of profit for ourselves. So we just, you know, this is why we do what we do in adjusting our motivation. We stop and pause. We stop acting. Stop speeding. And we reflect, you know. Report an error in the passage at 7:46
8:03 There's an old Chinese saying. There's so many old Chinese sayings. Report an error in the passage at 8:03
8:12 Unless you change your direction, you're likely to end up where you're headed. he's been, um... Report an error in the passage at 8:12
8:17 And what is the direction that you're going? Where is the bulk of your time and energy and resources being directed towards? Report an error in the passage at 8:17
8:33 Where is it taking you? How far have you gotten along in this project of life? And is it really where you want to go? Report an error in the passage at 8:33
8:49 I got off the subject of motivation. And I remember I asked if you have some quotation, some story to share. You know, sometimes I blah, blah, blah, blah on for sometimes, try to do my best. But do you have anything that you came up with? Report an error in the passage at 8:49
· · · silence, 1 minute
9:52 Yeah, yeah. Report an error in the passage at 9:52
· · · silence, 2 minutes
11:32 Thank you for that. That was good. Okay. There's hope. Shantideva in his Guide to the Bodhisattva's Way of Life said, everything becomes easier. Upon familiarity. So even, you know, can you imagine a baby's, everything's strange, mysterious, you know, in Report an error in the passage at 11:32
12:01 a bicycle, Report an error in the passage at 12:01
12:05 up against the driveway wall of my house, going like that, going Report an error in the passage at 12:05
12:15 over quite a lot. But eventually it becomes second nature, doesn't it? You don't even think about it. Report an error in the passage at 12:15
12:27 Thank you. Thank you. Report an error in the passage at 12:27
12:33 Does anybody else have a thought that's been very encouraging? Report an error in the passage at 12:33
12:52 I was going to read, so I'll read it to you. If no one else has seen it. I think I've read this before. There's an American doctor by the name of Rachel Raymond. Rachel Raymond. She's written a few books. One of them is called The Kitchen Table Wisdom. Report an error in the passage at 12:52
13:16 I'm going to read a page from a book called My Grandfather's Blessing. My Grandfather's Blessing. And she's a doctor in California. And she was born with a life-threatening disease, and she lived with it for most of her life. Report an error in the passage at 13:16
13:40 And though she was a pediatric physician, pediatric doctor, she eventually began to work with the terminally ill and those who had experienced some kind of trauma. So now she does mostly work in psychotherapy. Report an error in the passage at 13:40
13:59 So she's working with various patients who are going through difficult illnesses in various ways. And this is a chapter from her book, My Grandfather's Blessing. It's called The Way Through. Sometimes the very things that threaten our life may strengthen the life in us. Report an error in the passage at 13:59
14:24 Loss and crisis often activate the will to live. When this happens, we grow larger than the obstacles that face us. And free ourselves from problems that never go away by living beyond them. One of my patients, a young man with juvenile diabetes, was shown this way to freedom in the form of a dream. Report an error in the passage at 14:24
14:45 David was diagnosed with juvenile diabetes two weeks after his 17th birthday. He responded to it with the rage of a trapped animal. Like an animal in a cage, he flung himself against the limitations of his disease. Refusing to hold to a diet, forgetting to take his insulin, using his diabetes to hurt himself over and over. Fearing for his life, his parents insisted that he come into therapy. Report an error in the passage at 14:45
15:16 He was reluctant, but he obeyed them. He had been in therapy for almost six months without making much progress when he had a dream so intense that he had not realized he had been asleep until he awoke. Report an error in the passage at 15:16
15:34 deep and unsuspected in him. David was not a spiritual young man. He might not have recognized this statue, except that the image is part of our culture in California. Although he had seen many pictures of the Buddha, this statue was different. He was surprised to feel a kinship toward it, perhaps because the Buddha was a young man, not much older than himself. He struggled to describe the statue, how the statue had looked. Report an error in the passage at 15:34
16:21 And this is in quotations. Its face was very still and peaceful, Rachel, he told me. But there was something more that he could not easily put into words. He fell silent. And then he told me that the Buddha seemed to be listening to something deep within himself. Report an error in the passage at 16:21
16:39 The statue had an odd effect on David. Alone in the room with it, he had felt more and more at peace in himself. He had experienced his unfamiliar sense of peace for a while when, without warning, a dagger was thrown from somewhere behind him. It buried itself deep in the Buddha's heart. David was profoundly shocked. He felt betrayed, overwhelmed with feelings of despair and anguish. Report an error in the passage at 16:39
17:08 From the depths of these feelings had emerged a single question. Why is life like this? And then the statue had begun to grow, so slowly that at first he was not sure it was really happening, but so it was. And suddenly he knew beyond doubt that this was the Buddha's response to the knife. The statue continued to grow, its face as peaceful as before. Report an error in the passage at 17:08
17:35 The knife did not change either. Gradually, it became a tiny black speck on the breast of the enormous smiling Buddha. Watching this, David felt something release in him and found that he could breathe deeply for the first time in a long time. He awoke with tears in his eyes. Often when someone tells a dream, they find a deeper understanding of its meaning. Report an error in the passage at 17:35
18:02 As David told me his dream, he recognized the feelings he had when he first saw the dagger, the despair and anguish. And even the question, why is life like this? Were the same feelings and questions that had come up for him in the doctor's office when he had heard for the first time that he had diabetes. Report an error in the passage at 18:02
18:24 As he put it, when this disease plunged into the heart of my life. But its response had been very different from the Buddha's. Report an error in the passage at 18:24
18:34 David had seen in his dream much of the opening of a door. When his doctor had told him that his disease was incurable, his response had been rage and despair. He had felt that the life in him had been stopped and that there was no way to move forward. But in the most exquisite way possible, life had shown him something different. Report an error in the passage at 18:34
18:59 His dream offered him the hope wholeness and suggested that, over time, he might grow in such a way that the wound of his illness might... Might become a smaller and smaller part of the sum total of his life. That he might yet have a good life, even though it would not be an easy life. Report an error in the passage at 18:59
19:20 Nothing his doctor had told him has suggested this possibility. So, you know, I think we all have our problems in our various ways. Report an error in the passage at 19:20
19:37 And, you know, Buddhism is offering us some kinds of tools to work with. Those problems in a realistic and practical fashion. But maybe those problems, the traumas and the dysfunctions and the negative patterns in our own minds aren't going to be completely healed in the course of this life. But nonetheless, they don't have to be the totality of our identity. We don't have to identify with our illness, with our dysfunctions, with what's wrong with us. Report an error in the passage at 19:37
20:16 They can perhaps remain and always be there in some fashion, but we can see ourselves as much greater than our disease, than the negative patterns of our mind or the traumas that we've experienced, the wounds that we still carry within us. Until they're just a speck, they still remain, but they don't define who we are. There's some kind of basic sanity about ourselves that we can begin more and more to identify with. Report an error in the passage at 20:16
20:46 Expand and occupy that space to a greater and greater degree. Some kind of basic intelligence and caring about ourselves, which is greater or can be greater than any dysfunction of our present minds. And that's what we're working with. That's what we're trying to access and help to develop. Report an error in the passage at 20:46
21:16 So we go for refuge in that possibility of some basic sanity, some basic caring. Intelligence about ourselves. Report an error in the passage at 21:16
21:31 And we use the Dharma as the means to cultivate that quality, that basic occurs. Report an error in the passage at 21:31
21:46 I don't mean, there's something about the social context which brings out, can bring out, can function as a way of helping us to create that kind of mandala, that kind of holy, sacred space which allows for the expression of the best of ourselves. Report an error in the passage at 21:46
22:09 Even if it's not apparent to ourselves. I don't mean to be mysterious, but all that goes on for us is not totally conscious or apparent to ourselves. Report an error in the passage at 22:09
22:26 And we can have some kind of faith even in that, that there's some goodness working through ourselves. Report an error in the passage at 22:26
22:35 I go for refuge until I'm awakened to the Buddha, Dharma and Saṅgha through the collections of merit and wisdom. created out of generosity and the other practices. May I become a Buddha for the sake of all sentient beings. I go for refuge until I am awakened to the Buddha, Dharma and Saṅgha. Through the collections of merit and wisdom created out of generosity in the other practices, may I become a Buddha for the sake of all sentient beings. Report an error in the passage at 22:35
23:05 I go for refuge until I am awakened to the Buddha, Dharma and Saṅgha. Through the collections of merit and wisdom created out of generosity and the other practices, may I become a Buddha for the sake of all sentient beings. May all sentient beings have happiness in the causes of happiness. May all sentient beings be free from suffering in the causes of suffering. Report an error in the passage at 23:05
23:29 May all sentient beings be inseparable from the joy that is without sorrow. May all sentient beings abide in equanimity. Free from attachment for some and aversion toward others. Report an error in the passage at 23:29
23:47 So if you'd like to stand and we'll sit together, if that makes sense, in Report an error in the passage at 23:47
· · · silence, 1 minute
24:40 a comfortable, firm posture. Report an error in the passage at 24:40
24:49 In Zen Buddhism, they have an expression, sit like a Buddha and you are a Buddha. But we can be a comfortable Buddha and Report an error in the passage at 24:49
25:01 less a Buddha. So I invite you to bring your awareness to the crown of your head, your scalp, and begin by imagining or actually feeling the wrinkles in your brow. And your forehead smoothing out the Report an error in the passage at 25:01
25:26 pressure in and around your eyes, diminishing face. Report an error in the passage at 25:26
25:54 Your tongue is soft and jaw relaxed. Report an error in the passage at 25:54
26:01 And bringing your awareness to the back of your neck. And perhaps gently turning your head to each side a few times. Very gently loosening, stretching the muscles of the back of the neck. Report an error in the passage at 26:01
26:25 And bringing your awareness to your upper back and shoulders. And drawing your shoulders up. Towards your ears, circling them to the back, down to the front, just rotating your shoulders a few times. Report an error in the passage at 26:25
26:54 And eventually returning your shoulders back up towards your ears and just allowing them to drop comfortably to the sides. And with that, the feeling of some kind of burden or weight that you may have unknowingly been carrying around on your back over the course of the day, moving down and through your body. Report an error in the passage at 26:54
27:18 Into the ground, a feeling of relief. The burden's been lifted from your back, from your shoulders. Report an error in the passage at 27:18
27:34 Bring your awareness all the way down to your hands. Your hands are soft and loose. Report an error in the passage at 27:34
27:47 Relaxing your lower arms and Report an error in the passage at 27:47
27:57 your upper arms. Report an error in the passage at 27:57
28:04 What would it feel like if your arms were completely relaxed? What would that feel like? Report an error in the passage at 28:04
28:21 Your chest is at ease. Report an error in the passage at 28:21
28:30 Relaxing throughout the heart area, the central space of the chest, Report an error in the passage at 28:30
28:47 portion of the back. Report an error in the passage at 28:47
29:06 And releasing. The tension we often hold in our stomach muscles just allow your belly to go soft, Report an error in the passage at 29:06
29:37 trunk erect, relax your lower back muscles and Report an error in the passage at 29:37
30:01 throughout the pelvic region, the Report an error in the passage at 30:01
30:21 buttocks, Report an error in the passage at 30:21
30:44 the upper legs and Report an error in the passage at 30:44
31:04 finally your feet soft and loose. Report an error in the passage at 31:04
31:18 We're going to scan through our body once again from the crown down through the central portion of the body as you move with awareness downward. Paying particular attention to any tightnesses and tensions, where Report an error in the passage at 31:18
31:38 you feel some tightness, for example. Breathing in and following that breath with awareness to wherever the tightness is being held and suffusing that area with a breath of awareness. Report an error in the passage at 31:38
31:51 And then as if breathing out from that same area and with that out breath, imagining or actually experiencing some kind of release, if only slightly, the tightness loosens. Report an error in the passage at 31:51
32:09 So again and again, breathing into those various areas. Of tightness and tension in the body and breathing out from those areas. Report an error in the passage at 32:09
· · · silence, 1 minute
33:05 So there's an overall impression with each out-breath. The body is sinking deeper and deeper into a state of relaxation. A Report an error in the passage at 33:05
33:29 short while in a relaxed and easy way to stay with your body. Report an error in the passage at 33:29
· · · silence, 2 minutes
35:33 I invite you to become aware of the fact that you're breathing and to notice what is the sensation of the body which indicates to you that you're breathing in and out. When you became aware that you were breathing, where did your mind go to? What physical sensation? Wherever is most clear and obvious. Report an error in the passage at 35:33
35:57 And just lightly rest your attention on the physical sensation associated with the natural in and out of the breath. And if it's helpful, you can count the breaths, breathing in, breathing out, counting one, in out two, and so forth. Report an error in the passage at 35:57
36:21 Make a gentle effort, but don't struggle. Report an error in the passage at 36:21
· · · silence, 4 minutes
39:59 Put your mind back. Report an error in the passage at 39:59
· · · silence, 5 minutes
44:35 We're going to shift our attention to the sensation of the body other than the breath. It's the pressure of your buttocks on the chair, on the cushion, your hands on your lap, whatever is predominant. Report an error in the passage at 44:35
44:52 It's focusing your awareness on the sensation of the body other than the breath. Report an error in the passage at 44:52
· · · silence, 1 minute
46:05 Again, we'll shift our attention this time to the sounds around us. We're simply going to listen to sounds. It's very quiet. You have to listen very closely. Listening to sound. Report an error in the passage at 46:05
· · · silence, 1 minute
47:27 And again, shifting our attention this time, turning our attention inward to the mind itself. Thoughts, words passing through our mind, pictures, images, but also states of mind, whether the mind is restless, maybe it's sleepy, pleasant feelings, unpleasant feelings, states of mind, emotions, Report an error in the passage at 47:27
47:54 all the objects and states of mind, watching the mind itself. Report an error in the passage at 47:54
· · · silence, 1 minute
48:56 And then finally just... Allow your mind to become involved in any object that it naturally tends toward, whether it's a sensation of the body or a sound or a particular thought or the breath itself. Report an error in the passage at 48:56
49:13 But in a gentle, relaxed way, maintain awareness, watchfulness, just observing, Report an error in the passage at 49:13
· · · silence, 1 minute
50:02 staying awake, staying aware. Report an error in the passage at 50:02
· · · silence, 1 minute
50:37 And then bring your mind back to the breath, easy, gentle, in a natural or the natural breath. Report an error in the passage at 50:37
· · · silence, 2 minutes
52:53 Stand up if you like. Report an error in the passage at 52:53
53:22 I thought we would, if you find it helpful, if you find it useful, let me know if you don't or do. If we went through the last quiz together, and I'll quiz you. Report an error in the passage at 53:22
53:38 That was quiz four. You have the answers. And then we'll talk about that, see what kind of questions or doubts or confusions. yeah. Okay. Report an error in the passage at 53:38
53:53 Might exist. So this was around inferential valid cognizant. Difficult words, aren't they? Report an error in the passage at 53:53
54:10 Is everybody with me on this? Report an error in the passage at 54:10
54:25 So there are two valid ways of knowing in terms of Buddhist epistemology, Buddhist philosophy, if you like. One is direct perception, direct perceiver. My eye consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 54:25
54:47 You can see the flower. I can know the flower directly. Very pretty flowers. But there's another valid way of knowing, and this is through inference. We can use reasoning, logic. And this has its limits, but nonetheless, it's quite useful in coming to an understanding. Report an error in the passage at 54:47
55:13 There's a lot of emphasis placed upon it. So the ability to use our intellect. To reason things out, to understand what is the correct reason and come to these understandings. And these understandings can be quite powerful. So these kinds of inferential understandings we're calling inferential valid cognizers. Report an error in the passage at 55:13
55:41 Big word, isn't it? So the definition of an inferential valid cognizer. So we've Report an error in the passage at 55:41
55:54 come across these first two characteristics before. It's new and incontrovertible. Report an error in the passage at 55:54
56:06 So what is the word new in that definition? What is it? Report an error in the passage at 56:06
56:15 First moment. So I've come to an understanding of it of some sort. For example, I understand Report an error in the passage at 56:15
56:25 that Report an error in the passage at 56:25
56:31 sound is impermanent. That's quite a usual example. Report an error in the passage at 56:31
56:42 The first moment of that understanding that I come to, just that first moment, is new. And the reason that emphasis is placed upon the idea of new is it's a very, I understand that moment of consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 56:42
57:01 And so the sūtra school, Sautantrika, which is the tenant system or the philosophic system or the school that we're... Discussing all of what we're talking about in terms of the mind and awareness and knowers and so forth, it sees the mind as a continuum of mind moments. They break their units of mind. Sometimes it's said there are 64 mind moments in the snap of a finger. Report an error in the passage at 57:01
57:37 So they're seeing consciousness as breaking up mind moments, one rising after another, after another, after another, forming a continuum. I can see the flower. I can look at it for some time. I might look at it for 15 seconds. I might look at it for a minute. So that very first moment that I see the flower is new. Report an error in the passage at 57:37
57:58 After that, it's no longer new. And the reason the emphasis is being made upon being new is like someone who makes a discovery. They discover... Report an error in the passage at 57:58
58:16 The shape of DNA molecule or something like that, or a breakthrough with polio vaccine. So they have the new discovery. They came about by that by their own power. Those who come to that understanding of DNA molecule, how it's shaped or how to develop the vaccine to fight polio or whatever it was, they no longer... Report an error in the passage at 58:16
58:42 They're relying upon their earlier understanding to come to that same understanding. By the power of that first person who came up with the idea, they're now understanding that. So they're relying upon that first discoverer, the inventor, in order to understand the shape of the DNA. So just likewise, the first moment I see the flower, it's self-powered. It realizes the object by way of its own power. Report an error in the passage at 58:42
59:09 After that, it begins to... Rely upon the previous moment in order to realize the flower, to understand the flower, to see the flower. It doesn't have the same effectiveness or force to it than the first moment. Report an error in the passage at 59:09
59:26 There's some kind of purposefulness in all of these studies, believe it or not. They're all being directed toward the elimination of ignorance. The development of wisdom, for example, the development of compassion, the elimination of hatred and so forth. How can we eliminate, you know, I mentioned in talking about the motivation, some of these dysfunctions of our mind, some of these wrong consciousnesses. Report an error in the passage at 59:26
59:58 Ignorance is a wrong consciousness. Hatred is a wrong consciousness. Jealousy is a wrong consciousness. And we're going to study what a wrong consciousness is. But they're very deeply ingrained patterns of our mind. And we need very powerful antidotes in order to begin to neutralize those patterns and form new pathways, new understandings, develop new attitudes and feelings and emotions. Report an error in the passage at 59:58
1:00:26 The most powerful of these that we're trying to get at is direct perception. Report an error in the passage at 1:00:26
1:00:34 Next to that is valid cognizers, reasoning. But within those, the very first moment is the most powerful. So we're moving toward... A gradual, how to appreciate the necessity for developing these antidotes, to developing these countermeasures in terms of these valid cognizers. I know that's a horrible word to wrap your, but nonetheless it's just a word, valid cognizance. Report an error in the passage at 1:00:34
1:01:07 These valid cognizers are the antidotes, are the countermeasures, which can help to neutralize and overcome these. Wrong consciousness. So amongst them, the very first moment is extremely powerful, very forceful. So new. The word that's being, you know, we talked about valid cognizers. Valid cognizers. The word actually means more, something like authoritative. Report an error in the passage at 1:01:07
1:01:47 In Sanskrit, It's pramana. In Tibetan it's zemma. It means more like, pra means new. Zemma actually means to measure. It is the measure. It is authoritative. It is the idea of model consciousness that we're working toward developing. Report an error in the passage at 1:01:47
1:02:12 They're calling it a valid cognizer. It's an authoritative, very stable, powerful type of consciousness, whatever its object is. Report an error in the passage at 1:02:12
1:02:24 It says incontrovertible. What do we mean by incontrovertible? Report an error in the passage at 1:02:24
1:02:35 So it can't be contradicted. Report an error in the passage at 1:02:35
1:02:44 It means it realizes its object. What did we say it meant to realize an object? I gave a sort of analogy. Remember? In terms of sunglasses. Report an error in the passage at 1:02:44
1:03:08 Would you like to explain that to us? Report an error in the passage at 1:03:08
1:03:20 Exactly. So reality is always there. It's not that we have to invent a reality. But we're seeing the world through glasses darkly, as it were. We're seeing it filtered through our misconceptions, through our misapprehensions. So all of what we're trying to do is, you know, it's not as if becoming a Buddha was getting 10 PhDs. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:20
1:03:49 Or becoming an encyclopedia of knowledge. It is simply removing the veils which prevent us from seeing the way things actually are. It's always there. So all of these consciousnesses are simply, these developments are trying to help us develop realizations, that is say, which are powerful enough to remove the lenses, these distorted lenses out of which we're looking upon our world. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:49
1:04:19 And see things like Clark Kent takes off his glass. I don't know where that came from. Okay, so that's what incontrovertible means. It means to realize it cannot be contradicted by another valid consciousness. It's very stable. It's authoritative with regard. My consciousness is authoritative with regard to this flower. It's very stable. Report an error in the passage at 1:04:19
1:04:48 It would be difficult. For somebody to say, you know, you think that's pink, that flower is pink, but really it's blue. I'd say, well, I don't think you know what you're talking about. Report an error in the passage at 1:04:48
1:05:02 Well, they say, I would have no reason to disbelieve what I'm actually experiencing, would I? So it has a great deal of force, power within our minds. In controversial, determinative knower. So the word determinative... It's used only with thought consciousnesses, conceptual consciousness. It says, determinative knower, this is this, this is such as such. Report an error in the passage at 1:05:02
1:05:33 It determines. So it's a conceptual consciousness determining something. Okay? And it directly is producing independence upon a correct sign, which is its base. All consciousnesses arise independence. What are the three conditions necessary for consciousness? A particular consciousness to arise. Three conditions. Report an error in the passage at 1:05:33
1:06:06 Pretty good. You're getting there. You're getting there. That's almost. Three conditions. Okay. Previous moment of consciousness. Okay. And the observed object condition. Report an error in the passage at 1:06:06
1:06:32 Okay. That's almost the same. And the third one? Report an error in the passage at 1:06:32
1:06:44 Yeah, that's right. The uncommon empowering condition is the sense faculty. Okay. I think we had those in note two. Report an error in the passage at 1:06:44
1:07:04 Page three of note one. So in order for a consciousness to arise, it arises independence upon three conditions as immediately preceding condition, which is we need a consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:04
1:07:20 Consciousness arises from a previous moment of consciousness. So that's the immediately preceding condition. But it also depends upon the observed object condition, like the flower. And then it also relies upon a sense medium, like the eye-sense power. When these three come together, an eye perceiver apprehending the flower arises. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:20
1:07:50 So all consciousness. Arise independence upon a base. These are the bases upon which they arise. Here it says that this inferential valid cognizer arises independence upon a base. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:50
1:08:07 In this case, it's not an external object like a flower or something like that. Eye consciousness is rising and dependent upon a flower. It's a correct reason. Here it says a correct sign. Correct reason, correct sign are the same thing. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:07
1:08:25 So this consciousness arises independent upon a correct reason, a correct sign. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:25
1:08:35 Okay? And we're going to go through what a correct sign is or a correct reason is. This gets a bit technical and we don't have to. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:35
1:08:48 It's a subject in and of itself, signs and reasonings. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:48
1:08:56 But we can... I'll talk about it a little bit. It might be useful. But I'm just trying to get across the point. So we're talking about a very powerful type of consciousness, a valid knower that understands an object and it arises in dependence upon a correct reason, a correct sign. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:56
1:09:20 In the West, we might use a syllogism. Report an error in the passage at 1:09:20
1:09:28 John is a man. All men are mortal. and, you know, Report an error in the passage at 1:09:28
1:09:32 John is immortal. So we're using syllogism or reasoning, logic, deduction in order to come to understandings. And these are valid understandings. Is that okay so far? Yeah? So, differential valid cognizers. So these are yes or nos. Unnecessarily new? Yes or no? Okay. Why? Report an error in the passage at 1:09:32
1:10:09 Yeah. It's in the definition. Okay, good. If it's a valid cognizer, it has to be new. Are they necessarily incontrovertible? Report an error in the passage at 1:10:09
1:10:26 Because it says, you believe everything you read? Are necessarily non-mistaken? Aha. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:26
1:10:37 Okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:37
1:10:48 Okay, you say it could be either? Or either? Report an error in the passage at 1:10:48
1:10:56 They have to be mistaken. Aha. Is it? Report an error in the passage at 1:10:56
1:10:58 Do you want to argue with her? Why do they have to be mistaken? Report an error in the passage at 1:10:58
1:11:11 Because of the frog. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:11
· · · silence, 1 minute
1:11:45 Okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:45
1:11:56 I think you're getting onto something. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:56
1:12:07 Everybody hear that? Want to repeat? mistaken because you can't frog you to be mistaken Report an error in the passage at 1:12:07
· · · silence, 1 minute
1:12:17 Okay, all thought consciousness, all conceptual consciousness are mistaken. Why are they mistaken? Report an error in the passage at 1:12:17
1:12:39 That's right. Yeah, you're getting there. You're getting there. Anybody want to develop that a little bit further? What's the mistake? Report an error in the passage at 1:12:39
1:12:52 Yeah? Report an error in the passage at 1:12:52
1:12:57 Okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:12:57
1:13:01 Not quite a facsimile. Yeah, but that's close. If I, I, I. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:01
1:13:06 Because they are facsimiles. Yeah, you're right there. They're mistaken with respect to the appearing object. Remember we did the lemon experiment? Report an error in the passage at 1:13:06
1:13:23 We thought about a lemon and we physiologically reacted as if we salivated. So what are we using when we think about a lemon? How are we knowing the lemon? Report an error in the passage at 1:13:23
1:13:41 We're using an image of a lemon. All thought consciousnesses are mistaken with respect to their appearing object, the appearing object. Remember what the appearing object of a thought consciousness is? The appearing object, a mental image. It takes the mental image for the thing itself. When I think about my room at home right now, Report an error in the passage at 1:13:41
1:14:14 Images, pictures in my mind, symbols, representations. And they're appearing. That's all they are. They're maps. But they appear to be the actual thing. And the mind will mistake them to be the actual thing, just like in the lemon experiment. So the mind is mistaken with regard to the appearing object. The appearing object is simply a mental image of my room, but it appears to be my room. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:14
1:14:46 But it's not. It doesn't mean it's wrong. It's a lot of valuable information. Just like if I have a photograph of my partner. And you say, oh, yeah, she's got this length hair and she's got two eyes. It's a lot of valuable information, accurate information. But it would be a mistake to take that picture for her, herself, wouldn't it? Well, that's what we do. That's what conceptual consciousnesses do. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:46
1:15:16 They take what is a... We'll say a photograph to be the thing itself. It's not wrong. The photograph might be really correct. It is correct. But it's not the thing itself. So it's only in that way that all conceptual consciences are mistaken. We're using our idea about the object as if we see the idea of the object as if it were the object itself. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:16
1:15:43 We do that all the time when we relate with people. Quite often, whenever there's an affective element, an emotional element, there's always a degree of projection of greater or lesser. And that means to say that we're probably lesser or greater dealing with our idea of the person rather than the person themselves. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:43
1:16:07 Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 1:16:07
1:16:18 Okay. That's a good question. So what does incontrovertible mean? What do we mean by that? What do we mean by that? Report an error in the passage at 1:16:18
1:16:36 Let's say, let's say, it Report an error in the passage at 1:16:36
1:16:45 can't be argued. If I say, Tony Abbott is the Prime Minister of Australia. Report an error in the passage at 1:16:45
1:17:03 Is that correct? I'm just using images in my own, when we talk about it and discuss it, I'm just using symbols, representations in my own mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:17:03
1:17:14 But it's incontrovertible. It's correct. But if I took my idea of Tony Abbott and prime minister for an actual prime minister, then in that way it's mistaken. Report an error in the passage at 1:17:14
1:17:28 But nonetheless, Tony Abbott is the prime minister. So it's accurate information. It's incontrovertible. It's authoritative. Report an error in the passage at 1:17:28
1:17:40 But I'm using my ideas about Tony Abbott, not the actual Tony Abbott. Does that make any sense? It's like thinking a photograph. Yeah, Report an error in the passage at 1:17:40
1:17:59 that's right. That's right. It's all it is. It's mistaken with respect to this appearing object because we're using a mental image. That's right. And we're going to talk more about mental images down the track. It's quite interesting. So necessary, it's not necessarily, are necessary not mistaken? No, they're necessarily mistaken. Report an error in the passage at 1:17:59
1:17:56 Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 1:17:56
1:18:25 Good. Unnecessary conceptual. Why is that? Report an error in the passage at 1:18:25
1:18:37 Good. So with regard to inferential, is this okay? We're doing okay? Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:37
1:18:49 Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:49
1:18:53 Okay. List the three divisions of inferential cognizers and give an example for each. So in our text, the inferential cognizers are just these understandings that we come to. I, Report an error in the passage at 1:18:53
1:19:08 Correct understandings that we come to, and I'm just being very rough here so don't quote me on this, that we come to on the basis of a correct reason. And there are three types. And here are listed the three types. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:08
1:19:38 Let's talk about first before we move to that. Some of you have notes. Second, number two. You have your notes, number two. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:38
1:19:51 don't have notes, number two. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:51
1:19:56 We'll Report an error in the passage at 1:19:56
1:20:00 get some more notes number two. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:00
1:20:15 It says in our definition of a valid cognizer, inferential valid cognizer, it says directly produce independence upon the correct sign. I want to talk very briefly about what a correct sign is, okay? And this is, I've written this up in your notes too. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:15
1:20:39 I'm sorry, there's no more back on the table, are there? How many do we need? Report an error in the passage at 1:20:39
1:21:00 I wonder if there's any on the desk there, in the folder. There might be some more in the folder there. Report an error in the passage at 1:21:00
1:21:13 We'll print some more out. So a correct sign. A correct sign also is, we can easily say the correct reason or correct reasoning or correct proof. Report an error in the passage at 1:21:13
1:21:26 So as I tried to get, we talked about the fact that all consciousnesses are produced upon a base. They arise in dependence. Report an error in the passage at 1:21:26
1:21:33 So here the consciousness is dependent upon a correct reason. It arises in dependence upon a correct reason. So a consciousness which arises in dependence upon a correct reason is an inferential cognizer, inference. For example, Report an error in the passage at 1:21:33
1:22:01 we use this example that sound is impermanent. Is that okay? That's kind of a standard. An example that's always been used, sound is impermanent. Report an error in the passage at 1:22:01
1:22:16 So you have a thesis. I was going to use a whiteboard, actually. You have a thesis. Somebody is wondering, is sound impermanent or is it impermanent? So somebody has doubt. I'm not sure if sound is impermanent. And so you're going to give them a reason establishing that thesis, that sound is impermanent. Report an error in the passage at 1:22:16
1:22:40 And you give them... it and the reason that Report an error in the passage at 1:22:40
1:22:41 The reason, or another word for reason is sign, but I think reason is more easy to understand because it is a product. Report an error in the passage at 1:22:41
1:22:57 Now, is product a correct reason establishing the thesis that sound is impermanent? So somebody is wondering, is sound impermanent or not? And you say, it follows that sound is impermanent because it is a product. Report an error in the passage at 1:22:57
1:23:19 So he has to perform some mental gymnastics at that moment. He has to establish that that's a correct sign. So what does it mean for it to be a correct sign or a correct reason? I use the word correct reason. I think it's easier to understand. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:19
1:23:37 Are you with me? Okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:37
1:23:54 So a correct reason is defined as that which is the three modes. That's just a very complicated way of saying what is a correct reason. Okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:54
1:24:15 The subject is sound. We're trying to establish what we call the predicate. That is the characteristic of sound. Is sound impermanent or not? Sound as a subject, it follows that it is impermanent, and we're going to state a reason because it is a product. Report an error in the passage at 1:24:15
1:24:38 Now, is product a correct reason establishing this thesis that sound is impermanent? If it is the three modes, then it is the correct reason. And what are the three modes? The first one is the property of the subject. Is this too complicated? So is the reason, product, does it apply to sound? Report an error in the passage at 1:24:38
1:25:16 So a product, we can say, is that which is... Produced by causes and conditions. Like if you beat a drum, you produce a sound. So can we apply the reason to the subject? So that's the first mode. That's called the property of the subject. The second is what's called the pervasion. Is every instance of the reason an instant of the predicate? Report an error in the passage at 1:25:16
1:25:55 Is every instant of product an instant of being impermanent? So whatever is a product is necessarily impermanent. The third one we don't have to worry about. It's just the reverse of that. So this person is thinking, maybe. Report an error in the passage at 1:25:55
1:26:27 So he's wondering, is sound impermanent or not? Is sound impermanent or not? So you've presented it is impermanent because it is a product. So he or she is going over in her mind, well, sound is a product because it's produced by causes. If I beat a drum, I'm going to make a sound. So it is produced by causes. And I think anything that's produced by causes, anything that's a product is impermanent. Report an error in the passage at 1:26:27
1:26:55 The next moment... He will establish the thesis that sound is impermanent. He will generate, on that basis, he will go on to develop an inferential, valid cognizer apprehending the impermanence of sound, believe it or not. Report an error in the passage at 1:26:55
1:27:21 That's right. So Report an error in the passage at 1:27:21
1:27:29 we're trying to, okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:27:29
1:27:34 If I said, yeah. Report an error in the passage at 1:27:34
1:27:36 If I said, play around with this a little bit, this is the way we debate in the Buddhist School of Dialectics. We present syllogisms. And it's very formal, but it's very effective. Report an error in the passage at 1:27:36
1:28:00 If I said, sound is impermanent because it smells. Now, smells is a reason. Might not be a correct reason. We're checking it out. It's a reason. I gave you a reason. What more do you want? Okay. Sound is impermanent because it smells. Is the property of the subject, that first mode, is that satisfied? Report an error in the passage at 1:28:00
1:28:28 Why? Report an error in the passage at 1:28:28
1:28:36 Because smell does not apply to sound. Report an error in the passage at 1:28:36
1:28:44 Some people, if you ever heard my piano play and you say it stinks. It's been... Report an error in the passage at 1:28:44
1:28:50 But anyway, that was an absurd example, I think. Sound is impermanent. Okay, if I said, okay, let's try another one. Sound is impermanent because it is an object of a tongue consciousness. Okay, Report an error in the passage at 1:28:50
1:29:17 so that's not a correct reason. Sound is impermanent because it exists. Sound is impermanent because it exists. Report an error in the passage at 1:29:17
1:29:30 Now, is the property of the position, the property of the subject, does exist apply to sound? Okay, so that's satisfying. What about the second, what we call the pervasion? Report an error in the passage at 1:29:30
1:29:43 Is every instant of existence pervaded by being impermanent? Report an error in the passage at 1:29:43
1:29:52 For example, Report an error in the passage at 1:29:52
1:29:58 if it's an existence, it's not pervaded by being impermanent. For example, a mental image. A mental image is an existence, but it's not impermanent. Why is it not impermanent? It's permanent. Good. So that would not be a correct reason. Report an error in the passage at 1:29:58
1:30:23 Empty of existence. Report an error in the passage at 1:30:23
1:30:29 So mental image is permanent. So there are some phenomena. So existence is divided into impermanent and permanent. Some objects are impermanent. Some objects are permanent. Report an error in the passage at 1:30:29
1:30:49 Now emptiness is a type of permanent phenomena. But it's not like mental image, unconditioned space. Report an error in the passage at 1:30:49
1:31:06 Unconditioned space, for example, selfless emptiness is permanent. The non-existence of elephants in this room is permanent. Report an error in the passage at 1:31:06
1:31:20 Negations are generally permanent. So the fabrications of the mind, physical things, are permanent because they arise in dependence on causes and conditions. Report an error in the passage at 1:31:20
1:31:37 So should we try another one? Report an error in the passage at 1:31:37
1:31:51 I mean, some people, there would be some debate about that. Some people say Buddha nature is the emptiness of the mind, in which case it would be permanent. But other people say it. Report an error in the passage at 1:31:51
1:32:07 So you're getting the idea what we mean by a correct reason? Okay, let's try one more example, a simple example. Report an error in the passage at 1:32:07
1:32:30 The flower is an object of eye consciousness. So someone's wondering, is a flower the object of eye consciousness? I'm not sure. If a flower is an object of eye consciousness, that was a bad choice. Report an error in the passage at 1:32:30
1:32:54 Pardon? Report an error in the passage at 1:32:54
1:33:03 John is... an American. John is an Australian citizen because he has an Australian passport. No, we don't know anybody. John. John is an Australian citizen because somebody's wondering, is John an Australian citizen or not? He is because he has an Australian passport. Is that a correct reason? So first off, we check. Report an error in the passage at 1:33:03
1:33:36 The property of the subject is, does John have an Australian passport? Report an error in the passage at 1:33:36
1:33:49 Does everyone who has an Australian passport, are they an Australian citizen? Report an error in the passage at 1:33:49
1:34:03 Let's say it's legal. Let's say a legal Australian passport. Report an error in the passage at 1:34:03
1:34:12 So in dependence upon that, you could develop an inferential valid cognizer apprehending John as an Australian citizen. Based upon the reason that he has an Australian passport. So it's a correct reason. What if I said John is an Australian citizen because he's a man? Report an error in the passage at 1:34:12
1:34:38 What's wrong with that? Report an error in the passage at 1:34:38
1:34:42 Okay, there's what we call no pervasion. If it's a man, it's not necessarily an Australian citizen. Okay? Report an error in the passage at 1:34:42
1:34:56 Did you follow that? If it's a man, for example, for Report an error in the passage at 1:34:56
1:35:07 example, Report an error in the passage at 1:35:07
1:35:11 President Obama. He's a man, but he's not an Australian citizen. So all men, if it's a man, it's not necessarily an Australian citizen. John is an Australian citizen because he eats Report an error in the passage at 1:35:11
1:35:39 kangaroo meat. Did you eat kangaroo meat? Because he's in Australia. he, he. Report an error in the passage at 1:35:39
1:35:51 He lives in Australia. Okay. John must be an Australian citizen because he lives in Australia. Is that a correct reason? Why? Report an error in the passage at 1:35:51
1:36:02 Why is that not? Report an error in the passage at 1:36:02
1:36:07 Okay. John is an Australian citizen because he has three legs. Report an error in the passage at 1:36:07
1:36:31 Is that a correct reason? Report an error in the passage at 1:36:31
1:36:37 Does John have three legs? Is the reason applicable? Does it apply to the subject? Report an error in the passage at 1:36:37
1:36:47 Okay. So you're getting a sense of what a correct reason is. Okay. Okay. Yeah, yeah. Report an error in the passage at 1:36:47
1:37:11 The predicate was John is an Australian citizen because he has an Australian passport. Whoever is not an Australian citizen, It's pervaded by not having an Australian passport. Report an error in the passage at 1:37:11
1:37:30 Yeah, you could be an Australian citizen without having an Australian passport. But if you had an Australian passport, yeah. Okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:37:30
1:37:49 I just wanted to, you know, so you have some understanding about what we mean by correct reason. So it's quite technical and there are various types of reasons. Maybe we can. Report an error in the passage at 1:37:49
1:38:03 But it's very exacting what qualifies for a correct reason. So I don't know if you've ever noticed, generally when you have some kind of discussion with people, you have some kind of argumentation, you start moving them in some kind of direction. That person takes this particular position. When they see that the drift of the argument is going against them, Usually they change the subject. They shift positions without trying to notice it. In Buddhist dialectics, in the debates, they can't do that. Report an error in the passage at 1:38:03
1:38:44 You want to have a person take a particular position and then you try to refute that position. They can't go right. They can't go left. Eventually you have to jump off. They have to say, my original position. Was it correct? And it's a real learning tool because generally we don't get that far. We don't see where we've actually gone wrong. Report an error in the passage at 1:38:44
1:39:13 It's not obvious to ourselves or we go off on some tangent. We go off on another subject. We change the subject. So it's quite a useful study tool. That's why they use it. Questioning everything. Everything is questioned in that way. But it's very strict rules of how the questioning proceeds. So there are three types. Report an error in the passage at 1:39:13
1:39:41 So we're talking about inferential valid cognizers, which arise in dependence upon this kind of base of a correct reason. And there are three types. Report an error in the passage at 1:39:41
1:39:51 Inferential valid cognizer by the power of the fact, Report an error in the passage at 1:39:51
1:39:59 inferential valid cognizer through renown, and inferential valid cognizer through belief. Okay? So we're talking about types of consciousnesses which are very authoritative, which realize their object, which are very stable. So these are the types of consciousnesses we're talking about, these understandings, as opposed to assumptions, for example, or what to say of wrong consciousnesses. Report an error in the passage at 1:39:59
1:40:30 So the first of these are inferential valid cognizers by the power of the fact. For example, the inferential valid cognizers The inferential cognizer that realizes sound is impermanent through the sign of being a product. So somebody could think John is not an Australian citizen. You say he is an Australian citizen because he has an Australian passport. Ah, okay. So they had the wrong consciousness. John doesn't have it. Report an error in the passage at 1:40:30
1:41:07 Is that okay if I use that example? They think, oh, I thought John wasn't an Australian citizen, but if he has an Australian passport, he must be an Australian citizen. I was wrong. So he had wrong consciousness, and that wrong consciousness was able to be contravened, was able to be, he had a superimposition, superimposition when we're imposing that colored, we're looking at the object filtered through our misconception, and we removed it. Report an error in the passage at 1:41:07
1:41:37 Ah, he's not a... I had a misconception that he was not an Australian citizen. I removed that. I see that he is an Australian citizen. How was that new understanding, the basis of that new understanding? On the basis of the correct reason that he has an Australian passport. So I removed that superposition. I removed that false conception by the power of that reason. Report an error in the passage at 1:41:37
1:42:09 Through the sign or the reason of being a product. Does that make sense? So we're going from wrong consciousnesses, misconceptions and so forth, to correct inferences. Report an error in the passage at 1:42:09
1:42:22 Inferential valid cognition through renown. This is a bit strange, but anyway, we can talk about it. Report an error in the passage at 1:42:22
1:42:38 This is a reason. Let's look at the example. An inferential cognizer, it realizes, is suitable to express the round orb in the sky as in the night that's seen by the term moon from the sign existing among objects. We can call anything anything. This is brought up. If you look on Report an error in the passage at 1:42:38
1:43:13 page three of the notes, Report an error in the passage at 1:43:13
1:43:18 inferential valid cognizer through renowned. The standard example is... It's presented here in this syllogism. The subject, the rabbit possessor, I'm sorry about that. The subject, the rabbit possessor, is suitable to be expressed by the term moon because of existing among objects of thought. So in Tibet and India, we see a man in the moon, or at least we generally say that. Report an error in the passage at 1:43:18
1:43:54 You see the shadows and the craters on the moon. Sometimes you can make out the face of a man. In India and Tibet, they make out a rabbit. So in poetry, they refer to the moon, that round orb in the sky at night. They refer to it as a rabbit possessor. Report an error in the passage at 1:43:54
1:44:18 It's not very poetic, but anyway. And we can refer to that by the moon. And I use this example. Report an error in the passage at 1:44:18
1:44:33 We can call a person Lucky. It's not so common of a name anymore. There used to be a gangster by the name of Lucky somebody. Lucky Masiano or something. Report an error in the passage at 1:44:33
1:44:54 And so whether it was Lucky or not, we can call him Lucky. And what happens? It becomes a matter of renown. He becomes popularly known as lucky. When we see that person come in, we say, I'm lucky. So there's nothing about him which maybe is unlucky. Report an error in the passage at 1:44:54
1:45:19 But by the power of association, by the power of renown, just that everybody comes to know him by that name, we can correctly term him, understand him as being this person lucky. Okay? Report an error in the passage at 1:45:19
1:45:37 So we can call anything anything and it becomes a matter of the power of association or the power of renown that we can correctly say this person is lucky, this person is Jampa, this person is John, this is a book. There's nothing about it that makes it a book. It's just a matter of consensus that we've all come to know it as a book. Report an error in the passage at 1:45:37
1:46:05 And we can rightly understand it as being a book. Now, if you were to, on the other hand, so there's nothing in the nature of this person or this object which makes it a book. Report an error in the passage at 1:46:05
1:46:21 But in the case of, for example, fire, there's something in its very nature which is hot. So we could not call fire cold. It would not... Report an error in the passage at 1:46:21
1:46:41 When we say fire is hot, we're expressing something about its nature. When we call this person lucky, we're just talking about what is... When we say the fire is hot, we're calling it that by the power of the object. It's the nature of the object. When we call a person lucky or Jampa, it's simply not by the power of the object, but by the power of association, by the power of renown. Report an error in the passage at 1:46:41
1:47:07 It's what it's commonly known as. So we can correctly name something as John or Lucky or in that way. That's all this is trying to get at by the power of making that kind of distinction. Report an error in the passage at 1:47:07
1:47:23 Is that okay? This becomes important later on when we come, eventually we're going to come to, when we study, when we go into emptiness. Report an error in the passage at 1:47:23
1:47:43 We don't go into emptiness, the subject of emptiness. Later on. How do we, in Prasangika, the highest tenet school, right now we said there were four tenet schools or philosophic systems. This is Sūtra school. Eventually we're going to discuss the ultimate nature of reality in terms of what is called the consequence of middle way school. Report an error in the passage at 1:47:43
1:48:08 In Sanskrit, Prasangika, what does it mean to exist? For something to exist, what character, what What attributes does it have to possess? How do we know something exists? We're questioning existence itself. So one of them, things are what they are through the power of renown, through consensus. This is known as a book. This is known as a flower. There's nothing about it which makes it a book. Report an error in the passage at 1:48:08
1:48:40 It's not in its nature. One of the qualities is it's simply a matter of consensus, of renown. It's popularly known as that. And it becomes important when we come to understanding the nature of conventional reality. It's only a convention. So this is kind of, begins to touch upon that idea. And I just wanted, just to complete, is that okay? And then the third one is quite interesting. Report an error in the passage at 1:48:40
1:49:15 Because even, you know, it's the inferential valid cognizer through belief. And the example here is given. An influential valid cognizer that realizes that the scripture, so we're talking about some text. There's a text, and this is an actual quote from a sūtra, a discourse of the Buddha, where it says, from giving resources, from ethics, a happy migration. Report an error in the passage at 1:49:15
1:49:46 Even to say, you know, the workings of karma. This is a source, or this is a... A description of the workings of karma. That if, you know, from giving, you get prosperity. The results of generosity are that you yourself will have material things. You will have prosperity. Those, just because we say, well, how do I know that's true? You say, well, that's what the Buddha said. Well, that's not quite good enough, just because the Buddha said it. Report an error in the passage at 1:49:46
1:50:24 You know, we don't have any... Even if the Buddha said it, in and of itself is not sufficient for us to come to an understanding that what he said is true. Even if you have a great deal of reliance and faith in the Buddha, we still have to establish whether that particular citation, that particular text is to be taken in that way or not. Report an error in the passage at 1:50:24
1:50:55 Just because the Buddha said it is not sufficient. Report an error in the passage at 1:50:55
1:51:00 So how do we come to that understanding, that this text, that this particular text can be believed? In other words, I can assume it's correct. Report an error in the passage at 1:51:00
1:51:11 We even have to put that to some kind of test. And that test is being scripture free from the three contradictions. That's the test. So what are the three contradictions? Report an error in the passage at 1:51:11
1:51:31 Pardon? Report an error in the passage at 1:51:31
1:51:39 Yeah, it's also, yeah, I was just reading from the... From the answer to the homework quiz four, from giving resources, from ethics, a happy migration. So we're trying to empower the mind. We're trying to overcome misconceptions. That requires an antidote which is even of greater strength than that which we're trying to overcome. Report an error in the passage at 1:51:39
1:52:06 So merely assuming, oh, it must be right, the Buddha said it, it's not very powerful. Even if you have a great deal of faith in that the Buddha was an authority on these subjects, we want to ensure that we must develop a high degree of conviction that this statement is valid. Report an error in the passage at 1:52:06
1:52:31 We put it to a test. And the test is it has to be free from three contradictions. Is it following me so far? Okay, this is a big... Big subject. We've got four minutes to do it. I talked about previously one way of, you know, we have what we call phenomena or everything. I don't want to use the word thing. Phenomena or all existences can divide it. There are many, many ways to divide an existence. We just divided it into permanent and impermanent. Report an error in the passage at 1:52:31
1:53:15 That's one way of dividing. There's another way that we can divide phenomena or existences. And this is on page two of your notes. Report an error in the passage at 1:53:15
1:53:28 Three types of phenomena. And these are in terms of how we understand them. We can divide phenomena from different points of view. Report an error in the passage at 1:53:28
1:53:39 There are manifest phenomena. So those are obvious phenomena. Like this flower. We can initially understand a manifest phenomena. For example, this flower, independence upon a direct eye consciousness, a direct perceiver. I don't have to use reasoning. I don't have to use the words of the Buddha. I can see that. An ordinary person can initially realize flower independence upon a direct perceiver, their eye consciousness, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:53:39
1:54:17 That's what we mean by a manifest phenomena, or I would say obvious phenomena, okay? But there are certain types of phenomena which are not obvious, which we cannot initially understand independence upon. An ordinary person cannot initially understand independence upon their sense consciousnesses. For example, the subtle impermanence. Report an error in the passage at 1:54:17
1:54:44 For example, sound is impermanent. cannot, that is called a We have to depend initially to understand that sound is impermanent. We have to depend initially at least on a reason. We went through the various reasons, didn't we? We have to depend upon a correct sign, a correct reason. So there is a class of phenomena called hidden phenomena, which are not, by hidden it means they're obscure. Report an error in the passage at 1:54:44
1:55:17 We can't see them, we can't taste them, we can't touch them. The impermanence of sound, you can't see it, you can't taste it, you can't touch it. But nonetheless, you can understand it. But how are you going to understand it? So this type of phenomena, which we cannot initially understand and depends upon a direct receiver, is called a hidden phenomena or an obscure phenomena. Report an error in the passage at 1:55:17
1:55:40 And there are two levels. One is called slightly obscure or slightly hidden, and the other is extremely hidden. Report an error in the passage at 1:55:40
1:55:53 An example of slightly hidden is the impermanence of sound. We went through the reasoning, which established that we said sound is impermanent. I can understand that sound is impermanent, independence upon a correct reason, product. Ah, now I understand. Sound is impermanent. So I understand slightly hidden phenomena making use of... Report an error in the passage at 1:55:53
1:56:24 I'm jumping ahead. Okay, I'll just say that. There are some phenomena which we cannot initially understand based upon reason. These are called extremely hidden phenomena. And this level of phenomena, the example that's normally given, are the subtle features of the law of cause and effect. For example, that from giving resources come. Report an error in the passage at 1:56:24
1:57:07 We may not, we can't see, the connection might be, you know, the result of your giving today may not come for a long time in the future. So we can't see that connection. We cannot use an evidence or a reason. We have to make use of a reason of belief in order to establish, to become convinced. Report an error in the passage at 1:57:07
1:57:40 Another word for belief here is what we're trying to develop is a powerful conviction that this is so. Even though I can't see it, I can't reason it out, I'm still convinced of this is the case by way of a reason of belief. Report an error in the passage at 1:57:40
1:58:01 We'll continue next week, okay? I hope this wasn't... I hope it's not too technical. Report an error in the passage at 1:58:01
1:58:12 So look at the... Report an error in the passage at 1:58:12
1:58:17 You know, the notes too. And Report an error in the passage at 1:58:17
1:58:24 we'll continue with those. And then if you could, in Report an error in the passage at 1:58:24
1:58:37 our, and I'll make some copies of notes too before you leave if some people don't have them. If you want to take them with you, I'll make some copies. Report an error in the passage at 1:58:37
1:58:52 Okay, we'll do that. Okay, there are, okay. There were no notes too. If you could look at pages, So this, it may sound like a great deal, but as we've come to learn, it's not so much. 37 through 41. 37 through 41 in our text. Report an error in the passage at 1:58:52
1:59:18 But take a look at notes too, okay? Particularly. And there's a quiz five handout. Report an error in the passage at 1:59:18
1:59:32 And there's dedication. Report an error in the passage at 1:59:32
1:59:55 Male beings everywhere, plagued by sufferings of body and mind, attain an ocean of happiness and joy by virtue of my merits. May no living creatures suffer, commit evil or fall ill. May no one be afraid or belittled with a mind weighed down by depression. May the blind see forms and deaf hear sounds. May those whose bodies are worn with toil be restored on finding repose. Report an error in the passage at 1:59:55
2:00:21 May the naked find clothing, the hungry find food. May the thirsty find water and delicious drink. 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 2:00:21
2:00:44 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 may people think of benefiting each other. For as long as space remains, for as long as sentient beings remain, until then may I too remain to dispel the miseries of the world. Report an error in the passage at 2:00:44
2:01:12 Through these skillful actions may I quickly become an awakened spiritual master and lead each and every living being to that awakened realm. May the supreme jewel of the awakened heart and mind that have not arisen arise and grow and may those that have arisen never diminish but increase more and more. Report an error in the passage at 2:01:12
2:01:32 In the land encircled by snows, you are the source of all happiness and well-being. Powerful Chenrizi Tenzin Gyatso, please remain to the end of cycling existence for Report an error in the passage at 2:01:32
2:01:53 your endurance. Report an error in the passage at 2:01:53
2:01:59 So would people like copies of number two? Okay, how many do we need? Three, four, five, six, okay. Report an error in the passage at 2:01:59
Related talks
Talk by Jampa Jaffe, recorded 15 September 2014. Original at Vajrayana Institute via Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/Mindcognition. Licensed CC BY-NC-ND 3.0. Transcript generated automatically and may contain errors; the audio is the authoritative version.
Recorded at Vajrayana Institute, Sydney, and archived by the institute on Internet Archive. More from Vajrayana Institute