Transform Your Mind & Change Your Life Retreat - 7-Point Mind Training from Atisha (part 20)

· · · silence, 1 minute

0:46 I'd like to linger just for a short time on this practice before going to the next aphorism in the text. So I think that a very short exercise makes it probably perfectly obvious, something that should have been obvious all along, and that is that the sixth sense is not like a third eye or something occult or mystical. Report an error in the passage at 0:46 Highlight the passage at 0:46

1:08 I'm not refuting that there are deeper forms of vision that may indeed be mystical and so forth, but the sixth sense is as ordinary as visual or auditory. It is a sense by which we illuminate what's taking place in the mind, mental perception. Mental perception, our direct awareness of what's occurring in the space of the mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:08 Highlight the passage at 1:08

1:27 And during the daytime, there's all types of activities, and I alluded to a certain bandwidth of them. And at night, of course, when we're dreaming, then everything we're experiencing while in the midst of a dream is all taking place within that sixth domain. You're probably entirely unaware of your body, sounds in the environment. Report an error in the passage at 1:27 Highlight the passage at 1:27

1:47 Visual, your eyes are closed and so forth and so on. So one reason that dreams can be so vivid is that all your awareness, as if you have cultivated a very deep samādhi, all your awareness is now channeled into only one out of six domains. Whereas normally it's like one river flows out into six tributaries and then they're all pretty shallow and so forth. And here all of the water from the six is flowing into one. Report an error in the passage at 1:47 Highlight the passage at 1:47

2:13 And so dreams can be extremely realistic, high definition. And thereby trigger all kinds of emotions, desires and so on. So the sixth sense is the mental perception. And I want to elaborate on this, but I find it utterly astonishing that it's almost entirely overlooked in academic psychology. I just find that amazing. That they never even acknowledge that, oh, by the way, you can observe what this is all about. Report an error in the passage at 2:13 Highlight the passage at 2:13

2:38 You know, what this discipline is about. Your mind. I can elaborate. I'm not going to. Let's just keep it real. And not slip into the myopia of the 20th century. And so here we're focusing on this. And the whole idea is internally, within your own subjective experience, cultivate a type of objectivity that is very similar to the ideal of objectivity in scientific inquiry. Report an error in the passage at 2:38 Highlight the passage at 2:38

3:03 That you're observing something. Whether maybe it's an insect or you're a bird watcher or an ornithologist and you like to observe the birds. I mean, I used to do this a lot. You like to observe the birds from a very quiet place, maybe inside a blind, but you like to observe the birds behaving, not freaking out because you're there or going into defense mode because they think maybe they're going to shoot you. Report an error in the passage at 3:03 Highlight the passage at 3:03

3:23 You like to be invisible, innocuous, passive. And so you're watching the birds in their native habitat doing things as if you're not there. That's objectivity. That's objectivity. Ornithologists do that, and it's true of many, many fields of science. You're trying to see what's there without it being influenced by your presence, let alone, you know, without it being, how do you say, dominated by your presence there. Report an error in the passage at 3:23 Highlight the passage at 3:23

3:49 Well, that's exactly what we're trying to do here. Rather than experiencing our thoughts, emotions, desires, and immediately judge, well, number one, identifying with them, then there's no objectivity at all. Report an error in the passage at 3:49 Highlight the passage at 3:49

4:00 But also not immediately judging them, which we find very easy to do, and not preferring them and liking them and not liking them. Imagine a bird watcher who only watches birds that he finds so pretty. Report an error in the passage at 4:00 Highlight the passage at 4:00

4:13 I mean, it would be, okay, another hobby. But there's no objectivity there. So as we have the ideal of objectivity, of observing something without messing with it, and also observing something without biases. Without prejudice, without having pet theories that you're always trying to prove and so on. Objectivity of two sides. Observe without messing with it and observe it without the subjective biases about money, prestige, power, which are dominating modern science nowadays. Report an error in the passage at 4:13 Highlight the passage at 4:13

4:43 And they can also dominate your meditative practice. Subjective impulses, subjective biases. We're seeking to cultivate within this subjective domain, within that, an objectivity of observing without messing with it, without preferring, without manipulating, controlling, dominating, interfering, just observing it, and observing whatever comes up and being open to whatever comes up, discerningly, but without editing, without censorship and so forth. Report an error in the passage at 4:43 Highlight the passage at 4:43

5:12 So it is really a stance, a platform. We're beginning a truly scientific, radically empirical study of the mind. And you'll find this nowhere in modern cognitive psychology. That's because it's dominated by materialism. It blocks this off at every juncture. So I really hope that humanity awakens from the stupor of materialism as quickly as possible. Report an error in the passage at 5:12 Highlight the passage at 5:12

5:34 Because it's killing us, but also stupefying us in the process. And so here we're cultivating this. And among the six modes of awareness that we have, the visual and so forth, The others are somewhat plastic, somewhat trainable, but not very. I don't think there's any training we can do to be able to see gamma, to see, you know, ultraviolet frequencies. Report an error in the passage at 5:34 Highlight the passage at 5:34

5:58 Like, you can't look really hard. You can't see infrared. And then, you know, we get to my age or ten years ago, I might be able to do a whole lot of exercise with my eyes to be able to read without glasses. I'm just lazy. Oh, now I can read. And now I'm illiterate. Oh, I hate that. And so, not very plastic. And the auditory. My wife keeps on telling me, you know, my hearing is not as good as it used to be. Report an error in the passage at 5:58 Highlight the passage at 5:58

6:25 And I say, what? Probably nothing I can do about that at all. Maybe there is, but if it is, it's only going to get back to normal. So we have these five, and like so forth, olfactory, gustatory and tactile. But when it comes to the sixth one, the sixth mode of perception, that with no comparison, immeasurably greater. Report an error in the passage at 6:25 Highlight the passage at 6:25

6:46 Then whatever plasticity there may be, with respect to the five physical senses, this is the one you can train and train and train, and the sky is the limit. I mean, literally, there is no upper ceiling to how far you can develop mental perception. So, we already have that, of course, and some people use it and some people don't use it. Report an error in the passage at 6:46 Highlight the passage at 6:46

7:07 There are philosophers that are so metacognitively impaired, literally, that they even deny the existence of introspection. That's like a muscle that's gone so, it's like jello. And you say the right arm has no muscle in it at all. Because you've just never used it. I mean, it's kind of like, you know, right arm has no muscle in it. Report an error in the passage at 7:07 Highlight the passage at 7:07

7:26 Why? Because you never used it. It's just kind of jello, jello, jello. So they're not even aware of it. Well, again, not lingering there. This is, out of six modes, this is the one that can be refined, sharpened, extended, heightened in unimaginable ways. Report an error in the passage at 7:26 Highlight the passage at 7:26

7:42 But you have to use it. Just like a muscle, you have to use it and then you can refine it and refine it well into these realms, as Atisha said, develop shamatha and now extrasensory modes of perception will naturally arise. And they're arising out of an extremely finely tuned quality of awareness, which is mental. And out of that will arise old, old memories, past life memories, remote viewing, precognition, knowing other people's thoughts. Report an error in the passage at 7:42 Highlight the passage at 7:42

8:13 So what's going through their minds. And of course this very elusive but enormously important faculty that we have called intuition. Very difficult to define scientifically, and yet I think it's a term meaningful to all of us. And some people are born very gifted when it comes to intuition, some people not so much. Report an error in the passage at 8:13 Highlight the passage at 8:13

8:35 But it's one of those, again, intuition, we say, where does it come from? Because I will define it as a mode of knowing. If it's simply a hunch or a guess, then we'll call it a hunch or a guess. Or kind of a feeling, I kind of think, you know, whatever. That's all very fine, but those are hunches, guesses and so forth. But I would suggest that intuition, as I'm using the term, is in fact a mode of knowing. Report an error in the passage at 8:35 Highlight the passage at 8:35

8:56 It's a mode of knowing. It is a mode of knowing that is mental, not visual, auditory and so forth. It's knowing that is not conceptual or inferential. It is a direct knowing. But it's a direct knowing of things that are not just... Evident to everybody, like the color of a robe and so forth and so on. Not just an image that simply comes to mind, but a deeper type of knowing. And then if we ask, well, we know about visual perception, arises independence upon this visual cortex and so forth, what is the root of? Report an error in the passage at 8:56 Highlight the passage at 8:56

9:24 How can we know something that's not just coming by way of our ordinary six perceptions, something deeper than that? How can we know that? What's its origin? And I would suggest that there are two, superficial and deeper, the same continuum. That is, we may know things intuitively because the knowing is there and it's stored in our hard drive, if we use this awful metaphor, your substrate consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 9:24 Highlight the passage at 9:24

9:51 It's stored there, this continuum of consciousness that carries on from lifetime to lifetime to lifetime. And there's so much evidence for this, on the good side and the bad side. There are many, many cases of children who, you know, as soon as they encounter water, they freak out. And in some cases they have past life recall and they drown in their past life. There's so many stories I won't give any more, but there are ways of knowing that are stored from our vast amount of experience from past lives. Report an error in the passage at 9:51 Highlight the passage at 9:51

10:22 And we may not be able to see it like the hands in front of your face, but it is a knowing that simply seems to be coming out of the blue, so to speak. But it has that taste of certainty that this isn't a hunch, this isn't a guess, this is not an inference. It's not simply something I've seen, like there it is, but it's a knowing coming from a deeper place. And one place, one possibility to look to where you may be sufficient is tapping into that vast reservoir of experience, understanding, insight, knowledge. Report an error in the passage at 10:22 Highlight the passage at 10:22

10:51 You've acquired in past life. Like when the procurant Dalai Lama, when he was being tested at the age of two and a half, I think, to see whether he was in fact the incarnation of the 13th Dalai Lama. You may know the story. He was set before him. Various objects that had been very, how do you say, very personal possessions of the 13th Dalai Lama. Like his walking staff that he used, his rosary and things that he was very familiar with. Report an error in the passage at 10:51 Highlight the passage at 10:51

11:21 But then they were mixed up with a bunch of other ones, other walking staff, other rosaries, other this and that. So it was all helter-skelter. And so he's just, and he said these monks who were traveling incognito, you know, they said, well, they just laid them out and see what he would do. And what did he do? He said, that's mine. That's mine. Report an error in the passage at 11:21 Highlight the passage at 11:21

11:39 That's mine. And that's mine. No, no, that's not mine. This is mine. The one he mistook, that is mine and then not mine, was something that had belonged to him, he'd given away. And then he had another one. Now, this is a two-and-a-half-year-old child. And this, if he were unique, like a messiah or something, you'd say, well, you know, then we worship him. Report an error in the passage at 11:39 Highlight the passage at 11:39

12:03 It's common. This is the standard way. For centuries, Tibetans have been helping to recognize with certainty the tukus, the incarnations of past Lamas. How did this little boy know that was mine? Was he seeing an image, property of the 13th Dalai Lama? I kind of doubt that. He just knew. That's mine. That's mine. Report an error in the passage at 12:03 Highlight the passage at 12:03

12:22 So that would be very straightforward. He owned them only like five years earlier, and he recognized them with a different body. But then we can go to a much deeper dimension. For example, precognition is a type of intuition. So you know, or remote viewing. If this has happened so many times that you know, I mean, have you ever heard of this? Report an error in the passage at 12:22 Highlight the passage at 12:22

12:44 I woke in the middle of the night and I had a sense my grandmother had just died. And then the next morning I learned, yeah, she died last night. I mean, it happened so many times to write out all this coincidence. It's kind of just looking stupid. Now that's remote. Your grandmother lives a thousand miles away. Report an error in the passage at 12:44 Highlight the passage at 12:44

13:00 And whether it's that or another thing, where there's a strong karmic connection, like grandmother and grandchild, or spouse or mother, mother, mother, child, very close friends. And because of these connections, these karmic connections, almost like resonance, reverberating strings, vibrating strings, something happens way over there and on some deep level, something comes up and you have this very strong intuition, I think I better give a call. Report an error in the passage at 13:00 Highlight the passage at 13:00

13:29 And then you find, oh, yeah, it was true. Sometimes bad, sometimes good. But that's remote, right? That's far away and in time right now. Well, you can't tap into your substrate consciousness, which is a great repository for past memories, to know what happened tonight at midnight when your grandmother died. Your substrate's not going to tell you about that because it's not in its database, right? Report an error in the passage at 13:29 Highlight the passage at 13:29

13:51 So for that kind of thing, for remote viewing in real time right now, knowing something taking place right now distantly. Substrate consciousness doesn't explain it. There's no explanatory power in that for that type of knowing. Or precognition. And there's some very strong evidence for that as well. Report an error in the passage at 13:51 Highlight the passage at 13:51

14:07 So there it is. Knowing something's going to happen. And it's not just kind of think, I think the odds are 65 % it will. No, actually knowing it. And then lo and behold, it does prove to be valid. Well, if you're knowing something about the future, your substrate consciousness has never been there. So you can't tap into that. Report an error in the passage at 14:07 Highlight the passage at 14:07

14:24 That won't provide you any data. So there has to be... Unless one just wants to discount everything I'm saying, no, this is a New Age mystical mumbo-jumbo. In which case, good, your life becomes much simpler, but more superficial. If you tap into this, even from science there's a lot of good research, but for the contemplative, massive amount of experience, massive, then you need to explain this. Report an error in the passage at 14:24 Highlight the passage at 14:24

14:50 Precognition, remote viewing, knowing others' minds and so forth. So you need to posit, if you'd like to make this intellectual, then you need to posit another dimension of consciousness that is non-local and atemporal. It's not located in your body. It's not located now versus five minutes from now. So it's non-local, it's atemporal. Report an error in the passage at 14:50 Highlight the passage at 14:50

15:12 It pervades and it's basically, it's pervasive and you may be able to tap into that. And this is the ultimate source of intuition. It's Buddha nature. It's pristine awareness, primordial consciousness, indivisible from Dharma Datu, the absolute space of phenomenon or emptiness. And so, cognitively speaking, and that's where we're going in this very next aphorism, cognitively speaking, we're seeking to tap into the wisdom, the insight, the knowing that it's our birthright, our heritage from past lives, from the substrate consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 15:12 Highlight the passage at 15:12

15:48 But ultimately, This section right here, and I was going to ultimate bodhicitta, it's really all about, from my perspective, it's just perfectly clear, that this is all about tapping into that deepest dimension of awareness. The ultimate source of intuition, and the intuition finally is the intuition of Buddha mind, which is all-pervasive. So this is cognitive. Report an error in the passage at 15:48 Highlight the passage at 15:48

16:11 But I wanted to linger here, and that is just on this one practice, that this practice right here, this is a way to utilize and refine. Report an error in the passage at 16:11 Highlight the passage at 16:11

16:20 This sixth mode of perception to develop it, enhance it, so that we have clearer and clearer, more precise, more refined awareness of what's taking place in the mind from moment to moment to moment. And what comes up, well, could be coming up from very deep spaces, from the substrate consciousness or even from Rigpa itself, a pristine awareness. So this, to my mind, this... Report an error in the passage at 16:20 Highlight the passage at 16:20

16:44 Cultivating this awareness, using this awareness, refining this awareness of what is going on in the mind is something that should be taught, I think, to children everywhere. Whatever their religious beliefs or lack of religious beliefs, it just strikes me as, again, I sometimes feel like an alien coming in and saying, wow, this is a very strange planet. Report an error in the passage at 16:44 Highlight the passage at 16:44

17:05 Take me to your leader. Happily I found him, the Dalai Lama. I found him when I was 21. Take me to your leader, your spiritual leader. So I found my guide. But just, it's so incredibly weird. There's so many qualities of modernity that what should be happening, of course, is that every child should be taught how to use their minds and not just learn skills that will help them in their hedonic well-being, which of course is important, but never learn how to observe their own minds. Report an error in the passage at 17:05 Highlight the passage at 17:05

17:33 The children are not taught this. When we consider what's more dangerous, a car or a mind. In a car, you can kill a dozen people at a time. In one drunken collision, kill a dozen people. I mean, it's a weapon of pretty serious destruction, right? And everybody knows that. A car, let alone a truck. You can really kill a lot of people with a truck. So much mass there, especially at high velocity. Report an error in the passage at 17:33 Highlight the passage at 17:33

18:00 And so then we all know that if you want to get a license to drive a truck, I think that's special training. Like one of those 18-wheelers. You can't just hop behind them. I think I'm ready to go. Now you have to have the training, you have to get a license for that. And just for a car, and even for a motorcycle, even a two-wheeler, you can kill somebody with a motorcycle, at least yourself, maybe some other people as well. Report an error in the passage at 18:00 Highlight the passage at 18:00

18:21 So these are like guns. I mean, you point in the wrong direction, you'll kill somebody. And so for motorcycles, for cars, for trucks, let alone airplanes and so forth, you must get training, you must pass the examination, then you must pass the licensing, and you probably have to get it renewed every once in a while. Report an error in the passage at 18:21 Highlight the passage at 18:21

18:36 Just to make sure, are you still capable of driving this vehicle? Because it can be very dangerous to yourself and other people. So, motorcycle, car and truck and human mind, which is more dangerous, which has done more damage throughout history. Obviously, I mean, the killing of six million Jews during, you know, under the Nazis, that was done by somebody's mind. And then getting other people's minds to agree and then getting it done. Report an error in the passage at 18:36 Highlight the passage at 18:36

19:01 World wars are started with mind. Weapons of mass destruction are created by minds, and the list goes on, and also cured for polio, and the wonders of medicine, and the wonders of philosophical insight, wisdom, compassion, and so forth, all coming from the mind. So the mind is the most powerful force in nature, at least the nature we know about, on our planet. This massive transformation of our planet by our population. Report an error in the passage at 19:01 Highlight the passage at 19:01

19:27 It wasn't done with our muscles. It was done with that massive overload of intelligence we have. And for better and worse, of course, we have massively transformed this whole planet. And it's with our minds that are doing this and continue to do it. And so why then, when the mind is so powerful for good and evil, why aren't children taught how to use it from very early age on and learn how to observe the mind? Report an error in the passage at 19:27 Highlight the passage at 19:27

19:54 So I was reflecting on this a little bit this morning. And that is, if you're driving, then of course you hop in the car and you really basically want to be there already. But you have to go through all the motions here, take a right, take a left and get there. But most people basically, if they could just teleport, they'd teleport and they wouldn't have cars. Report an error in the passage at 19:54 Highlight the passage at 19:54

20:15 Because they just want to be there, right? But to be there, of course, what we're aware of is we have to be aware of the cars around you, traffic signs and so forth and so on. But if that's all you're aware of, if you're a complete extrovert as a driver, you're just aware of the surrounding pedestrians and other cars in front and behind and so forth, it's not enough. Report an error in the passage at 20:15 Highlight the passage at 20:15

20:33 I mean, it's good. It's very important. No substitute for it. And let's leave out these self-driving cars. I think they're still a work in progress. But if you're driving, then, you also need to be aware of, you should have a dashboard. You should know whether you're running out of gas. You should know whether your car is overheating. You should know whether you're going over the speed limit. You should know the car to see, know whether it's been well-tuned, whether the brakes are going to give out. Report an error in the passage at 20:33 Highlight the passage at 20:33

20:57 Have you surfaced it regularly? Are your tires properly inflated? You should know your vehicle. And that's what that dashboard is all about. All those lights there to let you know the vehicle that you're using to get through the traffic, that it's safe, it's in working order. And you keep on checking it now and then. Checking it. That's what all those arrays are for. That you're not, in addition to being extroverted, you're also inverting your awareness in upon the car. Report an error in the passage at 20:57 Highlight the passage at 20:57

21:22 Then I was thinking this morning, it's not only that, but if you have kids in the back seat and they're having a food fight. You should be aware of that, probably get them to stop, at least not throw food in your direction, because that could be dangerous, right? And then if you're having a big argument with a person in a passenger seat, you should be aware maybe this would be better to do the argument first and drive second, not to drive to do them simultaneously. Report an error in the passage at 21:22 Highlight the passage at 21:22

21:46 And then we can go even deeper, and that is how many drinks did you have before you got behind the steering wheel? Are you aware of whether your mind, your body mind are really capable of driving safely? Or are you just filled with rage over something that you can hop in the car in Los Angeles and drive with road rage, in which case then you're really a menace to society? Report an error in the passage at 21:46 Highlight the passage at 21:46

22:08 Or are you a trucker driving at two o 'clock in the morning and you think you're awake but you're not quite sure? And are you bound to now create a lot of misery for people? Because you just shouldn't be behind because you're too tired. You're too tired. Most accidents take place like between 1 and 4 o 'clock in the morning. And so are you aware of the mind, the body mind you're bringing to it, suitable? Report an error in the passage at 22:08 Highlight the passage at 22:08

22:32 The passengers in the car are suitable. On a very innocent note, I get picked up a lot when I travel. Usually they're at the airport. And very often the person who puts me at the airport is really interested in Dharma. And they got me. Report an error in the passage at 22:32 Highlight the passage at 22:32

22:47 They don't ask, couldn't you spell 15 minutes? They go, I've got you. You're a slave in my car now. By the way, can I ask you some questions? And you know I can never say no. Because they might just hit the brakes and say, well if no, then me no, me too. So yeah, they have a captive audience. So what happens is it happens so many times I can't count it. So we immediately start going on. We get in this really interesting conversation about Dharma, something aspect, something I know about and the person is interested in. Report an error in the passage at 22:47 Highlight the passage at 22:47

22:52 Here's, here's. Report an error in the passage at 22:52 Highlight the passage at 22:52

23:01 him. Report an error in the passage at 23:01 Highlight the passage at 23:01

23:16 And then we get lost. Report an error in the passage at 23:16 Highlight the passage at 23:16

23:22 Oh, I miss that turn-off. I mean, it's happened more times than I can count. People are taking me out to a restaurant, and now I've forgotten where it is. I think it's that way. I get out the GPS. And so sometimes it better not to even have an interesting conversation and drive, because your navigation goes completely out the window. I don't know where we are. Report an error in the passage at 23:22 Highlight the passage at 23:22

23:43 So, there it is. This is something, again, to cultivate the ability, like relaxation, stillness and clarity. Cultivate the ability. Have some time in the morning just to sharpen that blade and be very clearly, vividly aware in this whole spectrum of what's the state of the mind, what's the quality of mind, just all these questions, like the dashboard. Report an error in the passage at 23:43 Highlight the passage at 23:43

24:08 What's the degree of clarity versus dullness, agitation versus calm? What are the type of thoughts, the type of emotions, the type of desires? What's coming up from moment to moment? What's happening? You're taking your pulse, so to speak, or giving yourself an x-ray. You are observing your mind. But then when you set out, you come out of your room and you're then making breakfast, maybe for your family, you're setting out on the road, you're going to work and so forth, of course we mustn't be kind of just absorbed, focusing in upon our minds. Report an error in the passage at 24:08 Highlight the passage at 24:08

24:37 We won't be good drivers and so forth. So obviously we come out just like a good driver is attending to the environment, but also checking up and all those other factors. One's own mind, passengers, dashboard, be aware of what you're bringing to the traffic and not what just the traffic is bringing to you. Report an error in the passage at 24:37 Highlight the passage at 24:37

24:54 Sounds familiar, yeah? But when it comes to observing the mind, they'll be checking up periodically, just pretty much like checking the dashboard. You don't go into samādhi on the dashboard while you're driving, otherwise you won't be a safe driver. But you don't ignore the dashboard. You don't ignore the car. Report an error in the passage at 24:54 Highlight the passage at 24:54

25:13 Or once I was driving an old car, a used car that I bought, and I saw this green spewy stuff coming off from the hood. It didn't look good. It was just fuming green smoke. And that was actually the funeral rite for that car. It never ran again. But at least I had the sense, that can't be good. And I didn't just say, well let's drive faster, maybe I'll leave it behind. Report an error in the passage at 25:13 Highlight the passage at 25:13

25:41 And then the green behind me, that didn't, no, I just saw that and I said, no, that's not good. And of course it did what everybody would do, you'd pull over to the side of the car, the car over the side of the road, and it was towed, and then I got $1,000 for that car. It's basically a big paperweight, because that was the end of that car. But you see, you do notice that, and you don't think, well, how bad could it be? Report an error in the passage at 25:41 Highlight the passage at 25:41

26:04 And then just continue along. It'll probably fix itself. Well, it doesn't. To come back time and time again throughout the day, just checking, exactly like the dashboard. Just checking, how's the mind now? How's the mind now? And if you find that the mind is like as if drunk, or as if in rage, or as if in totally preoccupied, or as if completely dull, that's probably not the best time to do anything else. Report an error in the passage at 26:04 Highlight the passage at 26:04

26:32 Because it won't go very well. In which case, then come back and balance the mind. Reboot, start again, establish your baseline, and then continue. Report an error in the passage at 26:32 Highlight the passage at 26:32

26:41 That's the fifth one and it's directly relevant here to where we're going now. And I'll just read a short bit and then we'll take our break. But we need to venture into ultimate bodhicitta now. Report an error in the passage at 26:41 Highlight the passage at 26:41

26:56 And so it's viewing the, in terms of the outline, the outline is now the non-inherent nature of apprehended objects. Now what does that mean? If apprehended objects, and that is anything that comes to mind, whether it's mental, like an image or a thought or an emotion, or whether it's a person, It's a place, anything that we apprehend, anything that appears to us is, oh, that's a thought, that's a person, that's justice, that's beauty, that's an electron. These are all objects, apprehended objects, right? Report an error in the passage at 26:56 Highlight the passage at 26:56

27:24 And how apprehended objects appear to us, just pretty much universally, even in the dream state. In the dream state, you say, oh, if you're not lucid, you say, oh, there's Mount Fuji. Oh, there it is, Mount Fuji. So there's an object. And if you're dreaming of Mount Fuji, it looks like that's real Mount Fuji and it's really there and it's a big dead volcano and there it is very, very massively there. Report an error in the passage at 27:24 Highlight the passage at 27:24

27:50 And that's how it appears, as if there's really a Mount Fuji over there that you can point your finger to and it's there from its own side. So in dreams, things appear to be existing from their own side. People and everything else. Your body seems to be really there appearing to you and in the waking state exactly in the same way. Mount Fuji. Report an error in the passage at 27:50 Highlight the passage at 27:50

28:10 And people and places and everything else, including justice and injustice, so forth. These are apprehended objects and they appear as if they're existing completely autonomously from their own side, objectively, existing by their own characteristics, such that our awareness of them is passive. Report an error in the passage at 28:10 Highlight the passage at 28:10

28:29 That was already Mount Fuji. I just saw it. That was already injustice. I just saw it. This man is a complete idiot. I just witnessed that. It's not my judgment. He's just objectively. Just look, he's a complete idiot. But it's all objective and everything appears that way, as if existing from its own side. And we're challenging that, challenging that. Report an error in the passage at 28:29 Highlight the passage at 28:29

28:51 It's the emptiness of that type of autonomous self-existence from its own side, by its own characteristics. And again, this kind of mudrā does come to mind because when we, the verb is reifying. When we reify something, it comes from the Latin res, which means real or reality. When we reify something, this is grasping to it as if it exists from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 28:51 Highlight the passage at 28:51

29:19 Again, own side, inherent nature, intrinsic nature, totally in and of itself. And I'm simply passively witnessing what's there. That's how things appear. And the Vipassanā here is to recognize that every apprehended object Report an error in the passage at 29:19 Highlight the passage at 29:19

29:37 Is empty of that type of existence. That is not there. Now, it's not only there this way, that is my awareness of it is passive. I'm just telling you what I saw. People often say that. I'm just telling you what I saw. This guy is so arrogant. I'm just telling you what I saw. That his arrogance was objective. Report an error in the passage at 29:37 Highlight the passage at 29:37

29:55 You could almost scientifically measure it. It's ten out of ten. He's so arrogant. As if we're just seeing it. And I'm just telling you what I saw. Or this person is so smug. Unbelievably smug. Just gotcha. Or I can read this person like a book. This person is. And then we put in a couple of adjectives. I gotcha. You are pretty much summarized by three adjectives. And gorgeous, intelligent and funny. Report an error in the passage at 29:55 Highlight the passage at 29:55

30:25 That's who you are. Obnoxious, smug and arrogant. Or whatever. But three adjectives should pretty well do it, right? When we draw these cartoons of other people or ourselves or anything else, and we have a sense, but I'm just telling you what I saw, and that's what I saw presented. So that sense of completely detachment, disengagement, total, I would say, absolute bifurcation of the object over there existing, and I'm over here, the subject, and I'm just telling you what I saw, and I'm no way involved in that. Report an error in the passage at 30:25 Highlight the passage at 30:25

30:56 That's not my judgment, I'm just telling you what's true. So we decontextualize in terms of subject-object. As if they're completely separate. That's one. But then another thing about reification. It's a crucial term. It's good to learn because it's so enormously relevant. It's a good term for Buddhism. And we have it from modern philosophy. Reification, reify. Reified adjective. That we also, when we reify something, anything, anything at all, we reify it. Report an error in the passage at 30:56 Highlight the passage at 30:56

31:23 By the very fact of reification, we also decontextualize. We decontextualize. We see that. We apprehend that entity, whatever it may be, separate from, isolated from, its environment. From its past and from the concurrent situations. It's like a cookie cutter that comes in and whacks the cookie cutter into the dough and then separates from the rest of the dough and then sees this as all by itself. Report an error in the passage at 31:23 Highlight the passage at 31:23

31:53 And then we have a label for it and then we label and we say this. So the absence of that, this is exactly the central theme of this insight, is to see that in fact nothing exists in that way. Radically decontextualized in terms of what's happening out there, in terms of what we're apprehending, but also radically decontextualized in terms of what are we bringing to the table. Report an error in the passage at 31:53 Highlight the passage at 31:53

32:19 When we say, that's just what I saw, well, what did you just see? And what did you project? And how entangled is that perception? So that's why we have this simple, simple exercise that was taught by the Buddha himself. That was almost a direct quote from the Buddha's teachings, very quintessential teachings to one, one contemplative by the name of Bahiya. Report an error in the passage at 32:19 Highlight the passage at 32:19

32:42 That when you're seeing, see if you can just see what you're seeing without all of the interpretation, the contextualization, the associations, the labeling, the judgments. All the stuff, I mean it's layers and layers and layers of clothing we superimpose upon and bind and cloak what we're tending to. Report an error in the passage at 32:42 Highlight the passage at 32:42

33:05 Especially when we know people well and we have a great big database of experiences with them and observations of their personality, their habits and so forth. It's not to say we're delusional, it's just saying our observations, awareness of that other person tend to be very much, how do you say, drawn on memory. Report an error in the passage at 33:05 Highlight the passage at 33:05

33:24 So if that person suddenly behaves in a very different way, we may miss it. Because we'll see the unfamiliar within the context of the familiar, and we may miss it entirely. It can happen in all different directions. So, the aphorism, and then we'll take a break, I'm just going to read it and we'll come back to it. Report an error in the passage at 33:24 Highlight the passage at 33:24

33:43 View all phenomena as if they were dreams. Well, we could spend the rest of the four days on that one, easily. As if, but the translation is very close. And the words are very, very precise in the Tibetan. Churnam Milam Daburta, view phenomena, view phenomena as if they were dreams or as being dreamlike, as dreamlike. Report an error in the passage at 33:43 Highlight the passage at 33:43

34:10 But to view phenomena in the waking state, knowing perfectly well that you're awake, to view phenomena as being dreamlike, for that to be really meaningful, to be filled with, you know, very clear understanding, then you should know what dreams are like. If it's dreamlike, if you view everything as banana-like, then you should know a lot about bananas before you would go there. So obviously that's silly, but viewing phenomena as dreamlike, well then for that it would be good to have more than a dictionary understanding what dreams are. Report an error in the passage at 34:10 Highlight the passage at 34:10

34:42 Many people have very poor dream recall, but people have good dream recall and all the more those who have experienced lucid dreams. So here's once again the objectivity. When you're having a non-lucid dream, you have no objectivity in the dream at all. Because you're totally immersed in it and you think you are actually that person in the dream who for your first dream in the night you have a lifespan of maybe ten minutes. Report an error in the passage at 34:42 Highlight the passage at 34:42

35:05 Because that's about how long the earliest dreams last in the first dream cycle out of five, six, seven dreams per night. So there you are in a lifespan of ten minutes and thinking this is who you really are. But as that dream persona you're going to be dead in ten minutes. Five minutes, four minutes, counting and then... Report an error in the passage at 35:05 Highlight the passage at 35:05

35:25 And then you're right back to dreamless sleep and that little persona is finished, dead, right? But during that ten minutes when we are reifying, thinking this is who I really am and these are real people and this is the real situation, well we're fundamentally deluded about everything and we're reifying everything so we don't have even remotely any objective understanding of the dream because we don't even know we're dreaming. Report an error in the passage at 35:25 Highlight the passage at 35:25

35:49 Whereas in contrast to that, And here again, it's not binary, but a gradient, insofar as you become lucid in the dream. And that is why you're dreaming, you know you're dreaming. And I say it's a spectrum, because you may be, if you're having a nightmare, and something really ghoulish, really weird and terrifying occurs, threatening occurs, this is the easiest, Tsongkhapa said, this is the easiest way to have a lucid dream, is it's so weird, bizarre, you know, coming up. Report an error in the passage at 35:49 Highlight the passage at 35:49

36:21 And it's really awful. And then the little voice in the mind says, this is a nightmare. I don't have to put up with this. And then immediately get out. You're like, you know, like you're a pilot in a jet that's just been hit with a missile and it's going down. I don't have to put up with this. You get the ejector belt and it's out and the plane shot and then you float gently down. Report an error in the passage at 36:21 Highlight the passage at 36:21

36:43 So that's the easiest way to have a very short lucid dream. You recognize it's a dream so you can get out. That's not very lucid. But at least you did see that was an option. Very much like that jet fighter pilot. I don't have to burn. I can pop. So you go. But there's the minimal amount. Or people have a minimal amount. I kind of think I'm dreaming, but it just kind of stays there. Report an error in the passage at 36:43 Highlight the passage at 36:43

37:09 Kind of like, this is kind of, I think I'm dreaming, sort of. But it's kind of vague and so forth. To people who have very thorough, deep comprehension, they've explored the nature of dream reality. They've explored it, they've investigated it, they've worked with it. And it just gets clearer and clearer and clearer, the nature of dream reality. And those people objectively observing, investigating, exploring the nature of dream reality, both their presence in the dream as well as what they're dreaming and the other people they encounter in the dream. Report an error in the passage at 37:09 Highlight the passage at 37:09

37:41 People who are exploring the dream while knowing they're dreaming, now those are the scientists of dreams. Because they have the objectivity, they're not afraid. So there's not a lot of bias. If King Kong appears, you know, as a dream King Kong, you don't have to freak out. You know, you can be really relaxed and then you see whatever comes up. Report an error in the passage at 37:41 Highlight the passage at 37:41

37:59 That's the way to know what dreams are really like. By exploring them and working with them and transforming them and just seeing what's, here's a whole spectrum of reality, dream reality, what's its nature. And then what you'll see from that, if you're very lucid, you'll see that even, it's bizarre, but even while you're very, very lucid, If somebody comes and knocks on your door and then says, good to meet you, and shakes your hand, the person seems, even when you're lucid, the person shakes your hand, you feel the firmness of the person's hand. Report an error in the passage at 37:59 Highlight the passage at 37:59

38:36 And you know there's no person there. But you feel the firmness. You have a good grip, a good handshake. And you see the person as if they're really coming through the door and anything else. So you know perfectly well. I mean, you're very lucid now. And you know there's nobody at the door. This is all three creations of your own mind. And there's only one subject in the whole dream. Everybody else seems to be. Report an error in the passage at 38:36 Highlight the passage at 38:36

38:59 Somebody says, oh, you're wonderful, you're so impressive, you're just a delight to be with. And they're saying this. Who's saying this? You. There's nobody else there, right? If it's an ordinary dream, I won't talk about exceptional dream for the time being, exceptional only in the sense that you are aware that you're dreaming, then all these other people seem to have emotions. Report an error in the passage at 38:59 Highlight the passage at 38:59

39:20 I'll tell the story, it was one of my earliest dreams, I've told it many times, but I became very vividly aware, this early, early, early lucid dream, many years ago, that something happened in the dream, which was such an anomaly, I won't go into details, that I just knew it had to be a dream, and it wasn't intellectual, I knew this is a dream. Report an error in the passage at 39:20 Highlight the passage at 39:20

39:39 And I was out in the car, and there was a passenger seat, we pulled over to have some lunch, went to one of those classic diners, you know, the four Michael tables and all of that, hamburgers, fries and that kind of thing, and I was just thrilled. There was such euphoria that this is a dream, this is a dream. I was so happy. This is eudaimonic well-being. Something I was bringing to the dream because I recognized the nature of the reality I was experiencing. Report an error in the passage at 39:39 Highlight the passage at 39:39

40:02 That's quite a kick. So I was just like an evangelist, like I've seen the light, I've seen the light. I wanted to share the good word. And I went into this diner with all these kind of truckers hunched over their hamburgers and fries. And I went from one to the other and said, do you know this is a dream? Do you know this is a dream? Report an error in the passage at 40:02 Highlight the passage at 40:02

40:19 And not one of them was even interested. It was like I was Jehovah's Witness. Report an error in the passage at 40:19 Highlight the passage at 40:19

40:29 And I was so excited because I knew it was a dream. And I was really quite plus that they not only didn't seem to know that it was a dream, they didn't even care. They were more worried about their hamburgers than they were the fact that this is a dream, you know? Now, of course, one could really ask, this is, I think, my second lucid dream. How lucid was I? If you're asking them. Report an error in the passage at 40:29 Highlight the passage at 40:29

40:53 Whether they know this is a dream, they're not there. There's nobody there. This is an appearance like watching a movie of people eating hamburgers and asking, do you know this is a movie? Report an error in the passage at 40:53 Highlight the passage at 40:53

41:07 Do you know this is a movie? If you're asking the people in the movie, do you know this is a movie? There's something you're not very lucid yet. Report an error in the passage at 41:07 Highlight the passage at 41:07

41:16 So there was only one person who was lucid in the dream because there's only one person in the dream. And the rest were these free creations. of my own mind manifesting as people, but what was so bizarre is that the responses were not predictable. And that is if you create a computer program and then you click in a certain code, then the computer does what it's programmed to do. Report an error in the passage at 41:16 Highlight the passage at 41:16

41:41 Because it's your code, it's your computer and it's your program. So it doesn't surprise you and say, hello, my name is Siri and I'm actually conscious. It doesn't do that. It just does what it's expected, what it's told to do. Whereas here you are in a dream, you're running like it's your holodeck, and you have all these people that are all complete comprehensions of your mind, and then they turn around and surprise you, like you expect them to be, oh, Alan, you've become lucid. Report an error in the passage at 41:41 Highlight the passage at 41:41

42:09 This is fantastic, I revere you. Please, tell us about the nature of lucid dreams. That would have been nice. I didn't know what they were going to say, and then they surprised me, rather disappointed me. And yet there's only one person there. So you see this. And so you see, well, they really appear to be like real people who are hunching over their, you know, hunkering over their hamburgers and so forth, and show this astonishing lack of curiosity. Report an error in the passage at 42:09 Highlight the passage at 42:09

42:37 They seem to be really there, and they seem to have their own, I mean, they didn't all say the same thing, like, you know, like they have a program, I am not interested, thank you, go away. Each had a different response of way of expressing their indifference to my evangelical zeal. Report an error in the passage at 42:37 Highlight the passage at 42:37

42:53 And so everything appears to be real, but you know it's not. And you actually know it's not. And then you explore it further. So once you've really gotten to know the nature of dreams, then you can go back to the waking state. And then you can explore for yourself to what extent. He's saying you as if dream, but he didn't say that they're identical. Because they're not. Dreams and waking state are not the same. Report an error in the passage at 42:53 Highlight the passage at 42:53

43:17 Clearly. Because here, there are a whole bunch of people looking back. And yes, I am looking from my perspective. In case you think you're dreaming me, you're not. Report an error in the passage at 43:17 Highlight the passage at 43:17

43:27 If there are 60 people in the room, there are 60 perspectives on what's taking place right now. If you're dreaming and giving a Dharma talk, there's one perspective and the appearances of other people, 60 people having perspective. But they don't. They don't have parents. They won't die. They're not getting old. They're not people. They're mere appearances, like in a television or movie. Report an error in the passage at 43:27 Highlight the passage at 43:27

43:51 So there are differences. But now, to what extent is it like a dream, which means not identical? Well, for starters, we'll take our break. And that is, in this waking experience right now, everything appears to be. The environment, the sunshine through the clouds, the room, the snack, the toilets, maybe there's some tea or cookies, biscuits you can have. Report an error in the passage at 43:51 Highlight the passage at 43:51

44:13 It all appears to be really there from its own side. But where are these appearances? Where are these appearances? The colors you see in Mel's shawl. No, no, a sweater here. Report an error in the passage at 44:13 Highlight the passage at 44:13

44:30 Clothing. Shawl. Okay, shawl. The shawl, let's call it red. You know, for shorthand, it's red. Nice design. So are there molecules in Mel's shawl that are actually red? Or atoms or electrons? No. I mean, we generally know. They're just true. There aren't any. So the molecules are not red. Your shawl is emitting photons of certain frequencies. Report an error in the passage at 44:30 Highlight the passage at 44:30

44:52 Are there any red photons being emitted from your shawl and striking my retina? Little red BBs of light. And no photons have no color. Nor do electromagnetic fields, if you want to go that route, of waves and particles. There are no waves that are red flying through the air. No little particles of red photons. And then, photons do strike the retina. They do catalyze complex series of electrochemical events culminating in the visual cortex. Report an error in the passage at 44:52 Highlight the passage at 44:52

45:20 So the visual cortex, a big part of the brain back here. Is there any part of my visual cortex that turns red? Any neuron, axon, dendrite, synapse? No. No. So there's nothing here that's red. Nothing in between that's red. And nothing out there in the molecules that make up your shawl that is red. So where's red? The molecules are over there, that's for sure. My brain is over here, that's clear, true, uncontested. But red, the red I see, where is it? It's not out there, not in between, and it's not inside my head. Report an error in the passage at 45:20 Highlight the passage at 45:20

45:50 Which means that it's just not in physical space at all. Because where else would it be? They're 100 meters away? It's silly. So if it's in physical space, it's got to be somewhere within this little area here. Your shawl in between of my brain, and it's not. So red, and all the colors we see, I was just taking that as one example, all the colors you see at all times, they do not exist in physical space. They're not in physical space. Report an error in the passage at 45:50 Highlight the passage at 45:50

46:16 They're not out there in between or inside your head. That's for all visual impressions. They're not out there. But all sounds, sound waves travel through the air, but sound arises independent upon the auditory cortices. So the sound isn't out there. When a tree falls, it's not in the tree. The sound itself is not in the tree. It's not in the sound waves. That's just ripples in the atmosphere, but it's not sound. And there's no sound inside your head. Report an error in the passage at 46:16 Highlight the passage at 46:16

46:44 I mean, if you put a little microphone next to the neurons, they don't go, Timber! You know, there's no sound in there. It's dead silent like a tomb. There are no sounds inside your head, not in the neurons, the molecules inside your head. So the sounds are not out there, they're not in physical space, not outside in between or inside your head. Report an error in the passage at 46:44 Highlight the passage at 46:44

47:03 Nor are smells. The smells are not in the little molecules suspended in the atmosphere. They're not in between, they're not in your taste buds, or so smells, on your olfactory lobes. And the tastes are not out there. Tactical sensations, warmth, cold and so forth, they're not out there in there and your brain is not getting warmer or colder as you're experiencing warmth and cold. Report an error in the passage at 47:03 Highlight the passage at 47:03

47:22 So all of the appearances, in short, all of the appearances of our five physical senses are all not located in physical space anywhere. Report an error in the passage at 47:22 Highlight the passage at 47:22

47:33 And then, well, we looked into the sixth domain, the domain of the mind, right? So the thoughts, images, memories, fantasies, desires, emotions, that whole bandwidth of mental events that you are observing in the space of the mind. Report an error in the passage at 47:33 Highlight the passage at 47:33

47:47 We've been mesmerized, I think frankly brainwashed to think these are all occurring, thoughts are inside your head, images are inside your head, there's just no evidence, that's just, that's mumbo-jumbo. There's no thoughts inside your head. Who's ever seen a thought inside your head? It's crazy talk. You really think the thought's inside a neuron? Or a couple get together and then there's a thought, you know, a little collective little mob of neurons and then suddenly there's a thought there? Report an error in the passage at 47:47 Highlight the passage at 47:47

48:12 It's complete superstition. But it's become such a common way of speaking that people are taking it literally now. But it's ridiculous. And there's never been any evidence for it. But we just now all say thoughts. Oh, I had this thought. I had this in my head. I had this image. I had this memory. I had this dream occurred in my head. No, it's not. It's just superstition. There are no thoughts in your head. Report an error in the passage at 48:12 Highlight the passage at 48:12

48:35 I can tell you what's inside your head. Chemicals and electricity. I just summed up everything inside your head. Chemicals, electricity. There's nothing else there. And it's a chemical electricity, a physical phenomenon in a physical space. But your thoughts, emotions and so forth are not in physical space. None of them are. Report an error in the passage at 48:35 Highlight the passage at 48:35

48:53 So in other words, all the experiences we're having, all the appearances we're having, are all in non-physical space. They're all in the space of awareness, which is not located outside, inside or anywhere else in physical space. Well, what's it like in a dream? In a dream you're seeing visual appearances, you may hear a Bach cantata, you may smell roses and day cinnamon and feel the texture of velvet and have all kinds of emotions, thoughts and so forth. Report an error in the passage at 48:53 Highlight the passage at 48:53

49:20 You can have facsimiles of appearances of all the five senses, of course, and you can have every possible mental state, emotions, desires and so forth in a dream. And all of those in a dream are all taking place in only one domain and that's the space of the mind. And all of our experiences in the waking state, all the appearances are Taking place in the space of awareness. So we feel that we're seeing, we have that sense because of reification and taking appearances at face value as if the people we're seeing all these appearances are out there. Report an error in the passage at 49:20 Highlight the passage at 49:20

49:54 They certainly seem to be. There's the blue color of the sky over there, the eucalyptus tree. I can see the way, I can see way over there, this branch is moving. I can see the green way over there and it's not. If you think way over there is physical space, it's not. So this is dreamlike. That all our experiences you're having at all times, they're all arising in the space of your mind. At all times. And in that way, there is no difference. In that way, now there are other differences. Report an error in the passage at 49:54 Highlight the passage at 49:54

50:21 Like 60 perspectives versus one. That's a big difference. Or if I die right now, you'd be all here and then just deal with the corpse. But you'd be here, untouched. Not unaffected, but you don't die. Whereas if you die in the dream, there are no survivors. Report an error in the passage at 50:21 Highlight the passage at 50:21

50:39 Not all those people in the dream, they don't wonder, where did he go? Where did he go? They go, you know, they just, which is gone. Because there was actually one, only one subject, was here happily. This is intersubjective. So ordinary dreams are not intersubjective. It's solo performance. Report an error in the passage at 50:39 Highlight the passage at 50:39

51:00 But this is intersubjective. So some significant differences for sure. But the similarities are much stronger than we might easily imagine. That this is all dreamlike. We'll elaborate on that a bit more, but now it's ten minutes till the hour, so let's come back at ten minutes past. We'll go right back to meditation. Report an error in the passage at 51:00 Highlight the passage at 51:00