Understanding the Buddhist View of Emptiness (9 August 2008)

· · · silence, 1 minute

0:51 And now let's take a minute to just set our motivation, thinking of our reason for coming here today to spend this day focusing on emptiness. Report an error in the passage at 0:51 Highlight the passage at 0:51

1:04 You may have just been curious about this concept, want to know more about this word that you keep hearing over and over again. Report an error in the passage at 1:04 Highlight the passage at 1:04

1:15 It may be that you've studied a little bit about the nature of our unenlightened existence, the Four Noble Truths, how we keep creating our suffering. And understand that this is a key concept, a key realization. Report an error in the passage at 1:15 Highlight the passage at 1:15

1:34 And then the highest level of motivation according to the Mahāyāna is to practice not just for our own sake, to gain that understanding of the ultimate nature of reality, not just to liberate ourselves from our own unenlightened state, from cyclic existence, but to attain all the capacity of a fully enlightened being. Report an error in the passage at 1:34 Highlight the passage at 1:34

2:01 All the ability to benefit all living beings. So even if you just have some vague understanding of what this is, let's just try and set our motivation to that highest level of motivation to attain enlightenment for the benefit of all living beings. And Report an error in the passage at 2:01 Highlight the passage at 2:01

2:40 now let's read together the Heart Sūtra, page 9. I Report an error in the passage at 2:40 Highlight the passage at 2:40

2:55 prostrate to the Arya Triple Gem. Thus did I hear at one time. The Bhagavan was dwelling on massive vultures mountain in Rajagriha, together with a great community of monks and a great community of bodhisattvas. At that time, the Bhagavan was absorbed in the concentration on the categories of phenomena called profound perception. Also at that time, the bodhisattva, mahasattva, Arya Avalokateshvara, Looked upon the very practice of the profound perfection of wisdom and beheld those five aggregates also as empty of inherent nature. Then through the power of Buddha, the Venerable Shariputra said this to the Bodhisattva Mahasattva Arya Avalokitesvara. Report an error in the passage at 2:55 Highlight the passage at 2:55

3:39 How should any son of the lineage train who wishes to practice the activity of the profound perfection of wisdom? He said that, and the Bodhisattva Mahasattva Arya Avalokiteshvara said this to the Venerable Charidvatiputra, Chariputra, any son of the lineage or daughter of the lineage who wishes to practice the activity of the profound perfection of wisdom should look upon it like this, correctly and repeatedly beholding those five aggregates also as empty of inherent nature. Report an error in the passage at 3:39 Highlight the passage at 3:39

4:10 Form is empty, emptiness is form, emptiness is not other than form, form is also not other than emptiness. In the same way, feeling, discrimination, compositional factors and consciousness are empty. Shariputra, likewise, all phenomena are emptiness, without characteristic, unproduced, unceased, stainless, not without stain, not deficient, not fulfilled. Report an error in the passage at 4:10 Highlight the passage at 4:10

4:37 Shariputra, therefore, in emptiness there is no form, no feeling, no discrimination, no compositional factors, no consciousness, no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind, no visual form, no sound, no odor, no taste, no object of touch and no phenomenon. There is no I element and so on, up to and including no mind element and no mental consciousness element. There is no ignorance, no extinction of ignorance and so on, up to and including no aging and death and no extinction of aging and death. Report an error in the passage at 4:37 Highlight the passage at 4:37

5:15 Similarly, there is no suffering, origination, cessation and path. There is no exalted wisdom, no attainment and also no non-attainment. Shariputra, therefore, because there is no attainment, bodhisattvas rely on and dwell in the perfection of wisdom, the mind without obscuration and without fear. Having completely passed beyond error, they reach the end point of nirvāṇa. All the Buddhas who dwell in the three times also manifestly, completely awaken to unsurpassable, perfect, complete enlightenment. Report an error in the passage at 5:15 Highlight the passage at 5:15

5:50 In reliance on the perfection of wisdom. Therefore, the mantra of the perfection of wisdom, the mantra of great knowledge, the unsurpassed mantra, the mantra equal to the unequaled, the mantra that thoroughly pacifies all suffering, should be known as truth since it is not false. The mantra of the perfection of wisdom is declared. Report an error in the passage at 5:50 Highlight the passage at 5:50

6:12 Dayatā, gāte gāte, pāra gāte, pāra samgāte, bodhi soha. Shari Putra, the Bodhisattva Mahasattva, should train in the profound perfection of wisdom like that. Then the Bhagavan arose from that concentration and commended the Bodhisattva Mahasattva Aryo Avalokitesvara, saying, Well said, well said, son of the lineage, it is like that, it is like that. Report an error in the passage at 6:12 Highlight the passage at 6:12

6:38 One should practice the profound perfection of wisdom just as you have indicated. Even the Tathagattas rejoice. The Bhagavan, having thus spoken the Venerable Charitavati Putra, the Bodhisattva Mahasattva Arya Avukateshvara, those surrounding in their entirety, along with the world of gods, humans, asuras and Gandharvas, were overjoyed and highly praised that spoken by the Bhagavan. Report an error in the passage at 6:38 Highlight the passage at 6:38

7:15 So this Heart Sūtra that we've just recited, is one of the more popular sutras recited in Mahāyāna Buddhist countries. It's recited in the Chinese Mahāyāna, Zen traditions, Tibetan traditions, slightly different versions are recited. But it's one of the most beloved and highly memorized and recited sutras. I also heard once that it's the only sūtra that has actually appeared on Japanese neckties. Report an error in the passage at 7:15 Highlight the passage at 7:15

7:44 So that's something to, you know, I'm not quite sure if that's a good thing or not. bad thing but anyway and this This actually teaches about not only emptiness but also the five paths and we touched on that a little bit last night, the different realizations that you get on the way to Buddhahood between the state of being a completely unenlightened being and all the way up to Buddhahood and we'll talk about that a little bit. Report an error in the passage at 7:44 Highlight the passage at 7:44

8:10 So that's why we recite it to remind ourselves. And the more that you study emptiness, and it's actually really great to get commentaries on the Heart Sūtra because then it becomes more meaningful. And every time you recite it before a teaching, it reminds you of the path, it reminds you of emptiness and so forth. Let's see, is there a couple of seats? Report an error in the passage at 8:10 Highlight the passage at 8:10

8:31 There's a little room up here. Yeah, there are a couple of seats on the side. You can't see the flip chart, which is not so good, but we may be able to. Okay, so welcome, welcome back. Those of you who were here last night, I was very provocative and kept saying, oh, we'll meditate on this tomorrow. I think I lured some people back that weren't planning on it. Now, what I wanted to talk about today is emptiness and present an overview of the emptiness according to the four schools of Buddhism. Report an error in the passage at 8:31 Highlight the passage at 8:31

9:03 Okay? And just a little bit of a disclaimer, this is a lot of information. And the reason that I'm doing this is not, you know, to fill your mind with a bunch of more conceptual thoughts. Some Buddhist schools say it's better not to study at all because your mind just gets full of a lot more concepts. But in our tradition... Report an error in the passage at 9:03 Highlight the passage at 9:03

9:22 We say, no, you really have to understand clearly the object of meditation you need to understand intellectually in order to be able to meditate well. And I found it very useful myself to study a little bit about the four different philosophical schools because then you learn... How you can bring your view up, your view of selflessness can develop by studying the different schools. And there's Emily in the back of the room, which makes me really scared and embarrassed because she studied all of these schools at great length for seven years in the master's program, so she'll tell me later how much I mess up. Report an error in the passage at 9:22 Highlight the passage at 9:22

10:00 But I found that by studying selflessness according to the different schools, you can learn the subtle differences, and each one is actually very profound. You know, sometimes I think in the Tibetan tradition, especially, you know, teachings that we take, we think arrogantly, oh, I'm a Madi Mika Prasangika. Report an error in the passage at 10:00 Highlight the passage at 10:00

10:19 You know, that's the highest school, that's the highest level. And we think we have some understanding of what that means, but I find that if we study the different schools and their subtle differences in selflessness, we learn. I remember at one point making a confession to my good friend Venerable René after studying the four schools for a while, and I said, oh, you know, I think I'm really a Svatantrika Madhyamika. Report an error in the passage at 10:19 Highlight the passage at 10:19

10:43 think I'm really, you know, After studying for a while, I realized that this is really my view. I thought it was this. I thought it was middle-way consequence, but it's really middle-way autonomy. And he goes, that's great. He goes, that's fine. It's still really going to cut through your delusions. Go ahead and work with that. Report an error in the passage at 10:43 Highlight the passage at 10:43

11:01 You know, for now he goes right, you know, because I'm kind of going, oh, you know, I feel so embarrassed. It's really that I think part of it's coming from its own side and then part of it's coming from me and it's like 50-50 and he goes, great, that's really going to cut through delusions. You know, go ahead and hang out at that level for a while and practice with that. So we don't think that you need to just kind of leap up to the highest level, especially if you don't really understand what that is. Report an error in the passage at 11:01 Highlight the passage at 11:01

11:25 It's extremely subtle. Very, very subtle. And what it says, the instruction that we're given in scripture is practice at the highest level that allows you to remain confident in the law of cause and effect. Because if you start to lose confidence in the law of karma, in the law of cause and effect, you need to back off a little bit and really correct your view. Report an error in the passage at 11:25 Highlight the passage at 11:25

11:49 If you start to go to that Joanna Macy hotel towel thing that we explained last night, you know, the... Joanna Macy didn't do it. I don't want to lead anybody to believe that somebody standing in line at the hotel after a Buddhist conference, the suitcase falls open and all the hotel towels spill out and then this person says, oh, it's empty. Report an error in the passage at 11:49 Highlight the passage at 11:49

12:08 It doesn't matter. If you start thinking that emptiness means things don't matter, back off. Go back. Work on your view again. That's absolute, total wrong view. Our view of emptiness should make us have even more confidence and even much more careful about our actions, you know, to realize how we create our reality, you know, how we create our perception of reality and be really, really careful about our karma. Report an error in the passage at 12:08 Highlight the passage at 12:08

12:38 So if it starts to make you feel like nothing matters, nothing exists, oh, it's all just some big hallucination, you know. We need to back off, which is why it's good to go step by step by step. I first taught this course last year right before His Holiness the Dalai Lama taught the text Praise to Dependent Origination in April last year in San Francisco. Report an error in the passage at 12:38 Highlight the passage at 12:38

13:01 And I taught for just four Sunday mornings this quick kind of overview to prepare some of the newer students for that class. And some of them said, even though I didn't understand a word you said, at least I learned some terms that made me able to follow what His Holiness was saying. So another thing to say is, if you're new, today's material may just seem way over your head, don't be discouraged. Report an error in the passage at 13:01 Highlight the passage at 13:01

13:28 You listen to this material over and over and over again, and each time you hear it, it sinks in a little bit deeper. So if you feel a little confused... Don't panic, by all means stop and ask me questions as we go along so I can make sure that I'm clear. But it's a lot to take in and it depends a lot on meditation. Report an error in the passage at 13:28 Highlight the passage at 13:28

13:48 Really to get what these concepts are and what it feels like depends a lot on... Actually practicing and sitting with it in meditation. So this is just going to be an overview and an introduction and then keep going over and over and over again. And then with meditation and with further study, you will be able to deepen your understanding. I heard recently, I wasn't there, but I heard recently that His Holiness the Dalai Lama was asked at one of his talks. Report an error in the passage at 13:48 Highlight the passage at 13:48

14:19 How do I get a direct realization of emptiness? And he said, study, study, study. It takes a lot of study and a lot of going over these concepts. So today is just kind of a quick overview of these concepts. But like I said, stop me, ask questions. By all means, most of you have experienced my style is very interactive. Report an error in the passage at 14:19 Highlight the passage at 14:19

14:42 So by all means, stop and ask questions. So what's the point of studying this anyway? You know, is this just to support good old Jeffrey Hopkins, bless his heart, and we buy all his books, you know, Meditation on Emptiness, Maps of the Profound, you know, 1,500 pages, you know, debates on tenant systems. Report an error in the passage at 14:42 Highlight the passage at 14:42

15:04 Is it just to fill our minds with all of these concepts? You know, is it just to support Snow Lion Publications and buy all these books and then be, you know, some kind of intellectual? No, it's to cut through our suffering. Remember the story I told last night about Lord Buddha and the Sūtra and the Handful of Leaves. Hey, you guys, all I teach is, you know, suffering, the cause of suffering, the cessation and the path that leads to the cessation. Report an error in the passage at 15:04 Highlight the passage at 15:04

15:30 That's all. Study of this, you know, by the end of today. Hopefully I will have given you some tools to reduce your suffering. If I haven't, I haven't done my job. Fire me. Tell them never to invite me back to Seichen Le. You know, the whole point is to reduce your suffering, is to reduce our suffering. And the point is, the way we hold on to things so solid, so concrete, ourselves and all phenomena, we hold on to things in this incredibly concrete way. Report an error in the passage at 15:30 Highlight the passage at 15:30

16:01 We think that we exist in this concrete way we're trying to protect. We think that reality comes at us randomly. We're helpless victims of this random reality that just comes at us. And it causes us to suffer. We want things to be permanent. We hold on to things as permanent. What happens when things change? Report an error in the passage at 16:01 Highlight the passage at 16:01

16:22 We freak out, right? All of this causes us suffering. We think we're victims of random reality. And by studying emptiness, by meditating on emptiness and dependent arising, we see how we co-create our reality, you know, and you get some sort of handle on how you can change your reality. It's not just some random thing coming at you. You know, we're not this concrete, permanent, you know, most of us right in the West, we have this terrible low self-esteem thing. Report an error in the passage at 16:22 Highlight the passage at 16:22

16:50 Oh, everybody has Buddha nature but me. You know, everybody can become enlightened but me. We're not like that. So what studying emptiness should do, it should open you up to the infinite potential of your own mind and help you suffer less. And if I haven't accomplished that by the end of today, just fire me. Tell them, never bring her back again. So that's the point of studying all of this. Report an error in the passage at 16:50 Highlight the passage at 16:50

17:15 It isn't just to learn a bunch of new Sanskrit words and fill our minds with concepts. So what I want to do is just talk a little bit about the different schools. Especially this morning, presenting what the self is that these schools deny and what they say the illustration of the person is. Remember we said yesterday, selflessness is one of the basic tenets of Buddhism. It's what differentiates it from a lot of non-Buddhist schools that existed in ancient India around the same time. Report an error in the passage at 17:15 Highlight the passage at 17:15

17:48 Most of those non-Buddhist schools said that there was some sort of solid, permanent self. Ātman, you know, is the word in Sanskrit. And then the big revolutionary idea that Lord Buddha said was, no, an-ātman, no self, no self. But he didn't mean we're not sitting here in this room on our meditation cushions, you know. It doesn't mean that we don't exist. What the Buddha said was he refuted certain false ways of existing that we... Report an error in the passage at 17:48 Highlight the passage at 17:48

18:21 innately and, you know, learned by our culture, believe in. So for each of these different schools, there was a false way of existing that the Buddha was refuting. False ways of existing at different levels of subtlety of the different schools. And then he said there was an illustration, what they call the illustration of the person. And we talked about this a little bit last night. What is that thing that goes from life to life anyway? Report an error in the passage at 18:21 Highlight the passage at 18:21

18:50 If there's no self, how does karma work? How does rebirth work? If that consciousness that goes from life to life isn't the real self, what's going on? If there isn't some real self that you can hang on to. And all these different Buddhist schools talk about the illustration of the person. Report an error in the passage at 18:50 Highlight the passage at 18:50

19:11 And so we're going to talk both about, you know, what level of self is denied and what the illustration of the person according to those schools is. And then we're going to spend most of our time on this school, the Middle Way Consequence School. Which I said before is the school that's accepted most Tibetan Buddhist traditions as the subtlest and highest philosophical school. Report an error in the passage at 19:11 Highlight the passage at 19:11

19:34 So we'll spend a lot of time on this one, but we'll go through. And just to introduce you to some of the terminology, there are two schools that are considered lower schools, lower philosophical systems. And the reason they're considered lower is... In general, they talk about the selflessness of persons, but not the selflessness of phenomena. So they talk about how the person does not exist in certain false ways, but they don't really penetrate and deconstruct phenomena, the five aggregates and other phenomena, and say that they're equally selfless. Report an error in the passage at 19:34 Highlight the passage at 19:34

20:15 So they focus on the selflessness of the person. The Vaibhashika school, also called the Great Exposition school, is one of those schools. And the Sao Chantika, or Sūtra school, are these schools of the lower tenet systems that refute that there is a self of persons. And then the higher schools talk about selflessness of persons and selflessness of phenomena. Report an error in the passage at 20:15 Highlight the passage at 20:15

20:48 And the Chitta Mantra or Mind Only School is one of these higher philosophical schools, also sometimes known as the Yogacara School, Mind Only School. And then the Madhyamika or Middle Way School, which has two subdivisions, the Sva Tantrika, not to be confused with the Sautrantika, it's really hard, two very similar words. Report an error in the passage at 20:48 Highlight the passage at 20:48

21:16 Svatantrika autonomy, sometimes you'll hear this called the independent school, and then the Prasangika, middle way consequent school. So sometimes I'll just say Prasangika, I mean the middle way consequent school, which is considered to be the highest school by His Holiness the Dalai Lama, Lama Zopa Rinpoche, Gashvi Dagpa, you know, Emily Sue, all the great teachers of our lineage. Report an error in the passage at 21:16 Highlight the passage at 21:16

21:43 Okay. Now it's interesting where these names come from and I just wanted to mention because you kind of think consequence. So what? Is it like what's his name, Truth or Consequences? Those of you that are my age will remember this TV show. Like what's the deal with consequences? And it's all to do with the way these different schools engage in debate. Report an error in the passage at 21:43 Highlight the passage at 21:43

22:05 You know, debate is a big deal in Tibetan Buddhist monasteries, right? Like, you've seen pictures, and some of you may have been someplace like Dharamsala or one of the, yeah, exactly, you know, the monasteries, and you've got, like, one guy sitting on the ground, kind of going like that, and one guy jumping around and doing all this stuff and swinging small and shouting, and you're like, are they fighting? Report an error in the passage at 22:05 Highlight the passage at 22:05

22:25 Is it kung fu? Like, what's going on here? And it's debate. And as one of my friends, this Western monk who studied in the Tibetan monastery said, it's a great thing, you know, because you've got all these young celibate guys and they need to let off steam somehow. So they're like jumping around and leaping and swinging and shouting and, you know, so it's sort of the Kung Fu. Report an error in the passage at 22:25 Highlight the passage at 22:25

22:46 So the way the prosanghika's debate is not by stating a position, but by pointing out the absurd consequences of the other guy's position. So this is why it's called consequence, and this is how it works. And we had a little bit of discussion yesterday about the continuity of consciousness, right? And how come if consciousness is beginningless and endless, how come we say it's not inherently existent? Report an error in the passage at 22:46 Highlight the passage at 22:46

23:12 Doesn't that mean somehow inherently existent? Because it's permanent in the sense of it never will cease to exist. So let's say if Jacob, this was a discussion we had with Jacob, says, because consciousness lasts forever, it's inherently existent. If I were a middle way consequence person, I'd say, so you're saying that beings with consciousness don't have Buddha nature. Report an error in the passage at 23:12 Highlight the passage at 23:12

23:40 Because consciousness is inherently existent, it can never change. So you're saying that beings don't have Buddha nature. So that would be a way of pointing out an observed consequence to that view. And that's the way they debate. They just kind of tear a hole in the position of the person that they think is wrong by pointing out the observed consequence. Report an error in the passage at 23:40 Highlight the passage at 23:40

24:01 Instead of by saying, no, no, because then sentient beings wouldn't have Buddha nature. But because it's... It's empty. You just go, oh, so, you know, from what you're saying, if consciousness is inherently existent, that means it can never change and thereby there's no way for us to progress and become a Buddha. Report an error in the passage at 24:01 Highlight the passage at 24:01

24:18 So you just kind of point out the flaw in that other person's argument. So we won't get into how to debate. That's a whole long story. I was taught that once and all these weird things that you say and like there's this whole like ritual around it and I remember getting a... Kind of a little introduction to it. And it's sort of beyond us. In the West, we study and we take exams and, you know, final exams. We don't like stand up shouting at each other. Report an error in the passage at 24:18 Highlight the passage at 24:18

24:41 It might be interesting if we started doing that at FPMT centers. We need a little more space. You know, we couldn't do that here. But that's the reason that this is called the Consequence School. It's just on the basis of how the debate is carried out. As opposed to the autonomy or independent school that posits independent self-standing. Report an error in the passage at 24:41 Highlight the passage at 24:41

25:01 Using syllogisms, you know, logical points that are self-standing that they posit from their own side rather than just doing this Aikido thing of like undercutting what the other guy has said about how he believes. Okay, that's another point. So the Vaibashika school, let's start with the Vaibashika school and what they say about how the self exists and how the self does not exist. Report an error in the passage at 25:01 Highlight the passage at 25:01

25:27 So the Vaibhashvika, the Great Exposition School, it's based on a text called the Great Detailed Exposition, which is a compendium of teachings of the seven treatises of the manifest knowledge or Abhidharma. Okay, there's three baskets of teachings in Buddhism. Tripataka, it's often called. There's Vinaya texts on ethics and especially the monastic discipline is found in the Vinaya. Report an error in the passage at 25:27 Highlight the passage at 25:27

25:57 There's sutras, which are the discourses. And then there's Abhidharma. Higher knowledge, manifest knowledge. And this basket of teachings includes Buddhist teachings on cosmology, on mind and mental factors and so forth. So there were seven great treatises of Abhidharma and then this compendium called the Great Detailed Exposition is the source of this school. Report an error in the passage at 25:57 Highlight the passage at 25:57

26:25 In the time of Lord Buddha, or shortly after the time of Lord Buddha, This split into 18 sub-schools. So there were 18 sub-schools of Vaibashika. And there's this great chart in Jeffrey Hopkins' Meditation on Emptiness showing how they split first into a couple of schools and then into these 18 sub-schools. Report an error in the passage at 26:25 Highlight the passage at 26:25

26:46 So there's 18 sub-schools of Vaibashika. Now, all of the 18 sub-schools of Vaibashika and everybody else Denies that the self exists as, if I'm just tall enough to deal with this myself, that the self is not permanent, unitary and independent. So all Buddhist schools, including all 18 sub-schools of Vaibhashaka, deny a self which is permanent, unitary and independent. Report an error in the passage at 26:46 Highlight the passage at 26:46

27:23 And all of these terms have a specific meaning. So permanent, not relying on production or disintegration, not changing moment to moment. And a lot of us, if we studied Lamrim, have done meditations on impermanence, meaning that things are produced, they disintegrate moment to moment to moment. Report an error in the passage at 27:23 Highlight the passage at 27:23

27:49 Also, things are not unitary or partless. So this means... Not having parts, being something that's unitary, meaning it doesn't have parts. Also, a self which is independent, not relying on causes and conditions. So the way they usually explain this view of how the self exists is that it's learned by a philosophical system. Report an error in the passage at 27:49 Highlight the passage at 27:49

28:16 And last night, if you were here, we talked about this, you know, the Christian idea of a soul. Right? There's something that's, you know, some permanent, solid part of you that exists that doesn't change moment to moment. It's that thing that's the real you in you. And then when you die, like Casper the ghost, it kind of comes out of you. And it goes to the other side to meet all your relatives. Report an error in the passage at 28:16 Highlight the passage at 28:16

28:39 And then there you're like better looking than you were before. And you all get along, which you didn't at Thanksgiving dinner while you were alive. You know, and then this whole long, you know, whole story about the soul. Like the real you, kind of the pure you, the real essence, in there somewhere. That when you die, goes on to your next life. Report an error in the passage at 28:39 Highlight the passage at 28:39

29:00 And if you're a Christian, you think there's... I remember one time talking to this Tibetan Lama in Dharamsala, and he was just going to the West for the first time. He was going to a center in Germany. And he was asking me these questions, and he said, Oh, I heard most people in the West are this religion called Christian. Report an error in the passage at 29:00 Highlight the passage at 29:00

29:17 Like, what's that about? And I didn't know much about it, but I'm starting to explain certain concepts and heaven and hell came up. And he goes, oh, you're talking about Buddhist heaven and hell, right? Sounds really similar. And I, no, no, Christians have heaven and hell too. And he goes, wait a minute, I thought they didn't believe in rebirth. And I go, oh, they believe in just one. That's forever, you know. And he goes, well, that's stupid. Report an error in the passage at 29:17 Highlight the passage at 29:17

29:40 Like, that doesn't make sense. And I go, you're right. Somebody was on to something, but they just didn't see it, you know. So that's the Christian idea of soul. That thing that's the real you that goes to your one rebirth, you get one shot at either, like, heaven or hell. I don't think they believe in purgatory anymore. I think they threw that one out. So, you know, heaven or hell. Report an error in the passage at 29:40 Highlight the passage at 29:40

29:59 So it's that thing, that essence in you. Also, this was a view of non-Buddhist schools. And so the Buddhists spent a lot of time in a lot of sutras refuting this view. And there are many different Hindu philosophical systems, but this idea of Ātman, right, the self, you know, capital S self. Sometimes now in these New Age books and stuff, there's a little S self and the big S self. So this is the big S self, Ātman. Report an error in the passage at 29:59 Highlight the passage at 29:59

30:26 Again, something that's permanent, unitary and independent, like some essence, some essence that's the real you. And Lord Buddha said, ain't no such animal. There is no such thing as this permanent, unitary and independent self. Report an error in the passage at 30:26 Highlight the passage at 30:26

30:47 The main way that you get a realization of this is by meditating on impermanence, because the main way that this is seen as something that's permanent, not relying on production or disintegration. And this brings up an interesting point, because often in the West we have different Buddhist techniques, right? All coexisting in one country. Report an error in the passage at 30:47 Highlight the passage at 30:47

31:09 This is sort of historically unprecedented. Because of geography, in Asia... Usually every country has sort of one or a couple of related strains of Buddhist schools. Well, here we are, you know, especially in North America and Europe and Australia, too. We've got, you know, Tibetan Buddhism coexisting with Zen, coexisting with Western Vipassanā, you know, it's all. Report an error in the passage at 31:09 Highlight the passage at 31:09

31:34 So often people will go to different teachings and they don't realize that the view of selflessness that's explained comes from a different perspective and they get really confused. One of the main techniques for having a realization of selflessness according to this philosophical school is by meditating on especially subtle impermanence. Report an error in the passage at 31:34 Highlight the passage at 31:34

32:00 Right? Because you're trying to break down this view of how the self exists. So for example, I had a student two weeks ago in Vermont. I was teaching in Vermont for a couple of weeks. And he had been meditating with this Burmese master. And the meditation that they were using was the four foundations of mindfulness. Report an error in the passage at 32:00 Highlight the passage at 32:00

32:21 So you're meditating on, you know... You just kind of meditate on the body. Often the breath is used as an object. You meditate on mind and on mental factors, mostly to get a direct realization of subtle impermanence is sort of the goal of that meditation because that breaks through this view of self. Report an error in the passage at 32:21 Highlight the passage at 32:21

32:43 Okay, so it's interesting because he was going, I don't get it. So I'm just, you know, in the meditation that he was doing, he was kind of watching every action and watching every thought and you see the thoughts rise and fall. You know, you see the breath coming and going to try and get a direct realization of subtle impermanence, which then destroys the view that the self exists as some permanent thing. Report an error in the passage at 32:43 Highlight the passage at 32:43

33:06 There's two levels of impermanence. There's gross impermanence. People die. Buildings fall down. But the subtle impermanence is things are changing moment to moment to moment to moment. And getting a direct realization of that level of impermanence helps destroy this false view of self. So this is one thing when you're meditating and studying in the different techniques, realizing that they're based on different philosophical systems. Report an error in the passage at 33:06 Highlight the passage at 33:06

33:34 Don't try and make... Western Vipassanā have the middle way consequence view of selflessness. Because it doesn't. It's just not going to. So this is just a warning for those of us who tend to like to go to different kinds of teachings. Just don't get confused. Yeah, Ana. Oh, microphone. Report an error in the passage at 33:34 Highlight the passage at 33:34

34:04 In the four schools of Tibetan Buddhism, it is though agreed that there is no us. There is no self. Yes. Oh, by the way, great point. The four schools on the previous flip chart page have nothing to do with the four lineages of Tibetan Buddhism. Totally different thing. There just happen to be four of each. But in general, there's a little bit of a debate, but in general it's said that all four of the Tibetan Buddhist lineages, meaning Gelu, Kagyu, Saki and Nyingma, all ascribe to the Middle Way. Report an error in the passage at 34:04 Highlight the passage at 34:04

34:40 There's a little bit of debate when it comes to tantric practice and what view is held there, but in general it's said that all four of those Tibetan Buddhist lineages ascribed to the middle way consequence. I'm glad you said that because often people get confused and they think, well which one is galupa and which one is sakya and it's not like that. Now, of those, remember I said there was 18 sub-schools of Vaibhashika. Report an error in the passage at 34:40 Highlight the passage at 34:40

35:08 Thirteen of those sub-schools and everybody else, you know, right? Because we're going, we're kind of like splitting off everybody, you know, thirteen sub-schools of bodhicitta and everybody else also deny the self which is substantially existent and self-sufficient. This is the next level of subtlety. Okay, this one mostly learned, you know, Ātman, Christian idea of soul. Report an error in the passage at 35:08 Highlight the passage at 35:08

35:38 Everybody, all Buddhist schools deny this. Everybody but five of the 18 sub-schools of Vaibhashaka also deny a self that exists as substantially existent and self-sufficient. Now, everybody but the middle way consequence school says this is as subtle as it gets. This is the subtlest view of selflessness. Report an error in the passage at 35:38 Highlight the passage at 35:38

36:02 So what does this mean? Substantially existent. and self-sufficient. This means not depending on the five aggregates, not depending on the parts. There's a self that exists dependent, substantially existent, meaning independent of the parts, the composite parts of body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 36:02 Highlight the passage at 36:02

36:28 What those five aggregates are, you know, some of you haven't had that teaching and some of you have and need a review. But this is a self that somehow exists separate from the aggregates. And we talked about this yesterday when we said, you know, the operator, right? Like the crane operator, you know, there's this little... Report an error in the passage at 36:28 Highlight the passage at 36:28

36:48 Or maybe it's a woman these days because of, you know, sitting in the cab of the crane operating it. You know, then the bucket goes up. And so we think, and this is more innate, by the way. You know, we really think that there's some driver. You know, sometimes it's called a driver, an operator of body and mind. And I said, for me, I remember thinking it lives in my head and the eyeballs are little windows. Report an error in the passage at 36:48 Highlight the passage at 36:48

37:15 It's in here somewhere looking out. You know, running the show. Right? And Buddhism says there is no such thing that exists independent of the five aggregates. No such thing. And everybody but five of the Vaibhashikas agree on this level. And most of them, all but middleweight consequence that are the big troublemakers because they're so subtle, say that this is the subtlest view of selflessness. Report an error in the passage at 37:15 Highlight the passage at 37:15

37:43 Okay? Yeah? Report an error in the passage at 37:43 Highlight the passage at 37:43

37:48 I think I haven't quite grasped the... Distinction between those five holder-outers of the 18 subschools between, they agree that, of the first three points on the chart. So independent, not relying on causes and conditions and not having parts, what's the difference between that and not being substantial? Report an error in the passage at 37:48 Highlight the passage at 37:48

38:12 Okay, and we'll get to that point. Okay, we haven't gotten there yet. But you brought up something that I forgot to say, so thank you very much. There's always a bodhisattva emanating in the room to remind the teacher of what they forgot. Report an error in the passage at 38:12 Highlight the passage at 38:12

38:25 Getting back to how do they think the self does exist? What's the illustration of the person for the Vaibhashaka school? What goes from life to life? What carries the karma from life to life? Because remember I said all of these schools deny a certain false way that the self exists, but then in its place they posit a way that the self does exist. Report an error in the passage at 38:25 Highlight the passage at 38:25

38:48 So for those 18 sub-schools of Vaibhashaka, they're denying this, but they're saying that the self exists somewhere within the aggregates. Some of those 18 subschools say it's the mental consciousness. Some say that it's the continuum of all five of the aggregates. Some say that it's all five together. So there's something in place of denying this guy that they say is the real self. Report an error in the passage at 38:48 Highlight the passage at 38:48

39:18 So then 13 of them also deny this one and say that there's some other way that the self does exist. So let's look at the five aggregates. This will really help us understand what this one is. So next we're going to look at the five aggregates. And remember I said yesterday, when Morgan had his question, and I said the way that we meditate on the selflessness of... Report an error in the passage at 39:18 Highlight the passage at 39:18

39:45 Persons, according to the Heart Sūtra, for the first two paths, the paths of accumulation and path of preparation, is meditating on the emptiness of the five aggregates. That's the main meditation. And then the meditation on the self. And I said this thing that Lama Zopa taught me to do and had me do as part of my long retreat was flip-flopping back and forth. Report an error in the passage at 39:45 Highlight the passage at 39:45

40:06 The aggregates, break down the self, break down the aggregates, break down the self. So an understanding of the five aggregates will help us do that meditation which we'll do together later this afternoon. That's the meditation I wanted to introduce. So the five aggregates. The five aggregates encompass all phenomena, but we're mostly here talking about the five aggregates that make up us, that make up the person. Report an error in the passage at 40:06 Highlight the passage at 40:06

40:35 So we've got form. That's really easy. Stuff. Material stuff. Body. Body. All the substances. The material stuff. That's easy. And then we've got four aggregates that make up the mind. So for people who haven't studied the five aggregates, usually instead of five aggregates we just say body and mind. You know, the components of body and mind. Now, we've got four of mind. We have feeling. Report an error in the passage at 40:35 Highlight the passage at 40:35

41:07 Now feeling in Buddhism is something very specific. It's not, you know, usually when we think of feeling in the West we think of emotion, right? Despondency, existential anxiety, you know, joy and excitement. In Buddhism this aggregate just is defined as pleasant, unpleasant and neutral. It's just this raw feeling. Feels good. Report an error in the passage at 41:07 Highlight the passage at 41:07

41:36 Feels crappy, could care less. Pleasant, unpleasant and neutral. That's all that this feeling means here in this aggregate. This also shows up in the 12 links of dependent origination. We'll get there in a minute, this afternoon maybe. Then the second mental aggregate is discernment. It's often called discrimination, but that reminds me a little bit too much of like Civil Rights 1968. So I prefer discernment. And this is the mind's ability to tell the differences between things. Report an error in the passage at 41:36 Highlight the passage at 41:36

42:11 Tall, short, red, blue. You all walk in this room, I recognize who people are. It's the mind's ability to differentiate, discern between things. Between objects of perception, you discern. Now, compositional factors. According to Buddhism, there are 51 mental factors. Report an error in the passage at 42:11 Highlight the passage at 42:11

42:39 Two of them get promoted and become their own aggregates. Lord Buddha promoted two out of the 51 and gave them a higher status, feeling and discernment. All the rest of the 49 are lumped together. In one other category. So all the 49 other ones. And these are things, they're ones called omnipresent mental factors that accompany every moment of thought. Report an error in the passage at 42:39 Highlight the passage at 42:39

43:09 There are the afflictions, delusions. We talked about the 20 derivative delusions yesterday, the ones that are some combination. Remember those recipes of anger, you know, aversion, attachment and ignorance. You know, jealousy. Three parts attachment, two parts aversion and a healthy sprinkling of ignorance is the recipe for jealousy. Pride, resentment, all of these other ones. Report an error in the passage at 43:09 Highlight the passage at 43:09

43:35 And then there are the good ones too, wholesome mental factors. So there's this whole list of mental factors that Emily will teach you one of these days if she hasn't already. Report an error in the passage at 43:35 Highlight the passage at 43:35

43:46 She's like, don't pick on me. Okay, 49 other ones. I'll stop now, just teasing. So 49 other ones. Now why do you think that Lord Buddha decided to pull these two out and emphasize them? It's not random. Lord Buddha never made any mistakes. So there's nothing random about why he decided to promote these two guys and give them their higher status. Anybody have an idea? Yeah, Jacob. Report an error in the passage at 43:46 Highlight the passage at 43:46

44:12 Whoops, microphone. Maybe because of their vitalness to the perception and thinking process? Okay, say more about that. I think feeling is something that is sort of a beginning motivation for any kind of action or thought in my experience. And discernment is a way that I navigate my world. They're both really vital to how I interact with myself and others. Report an error in the passage at 44:12 Highlight the passage at 44:12

44:42 Okay, okay, you're good. That's very true. Now think in terms of the Four Noble Truths. Think in terms of how we create, especially the first two. Suffering and the Cause of Suffering. You want me to talk about that? Does anybody have any ideas? Yeah, Jennifer? Oh, microphone. They're grosser, you know, along the sense, if we input everything through our senses, you know, feeling is sort of like, oh, you know, oh, good, bad, oh, their visual consciousness, we see that, you know, and then... Report an error in the passage at 44:42 Highlight the passage at 44:42

45:18 And discernment too, we're able to automatically see red or blue, you know, it's grosser. And then it seems like the other compositional factors seem to get more subtle based on after going through our senses, then they're like a more refined version of it. Okay, good, good, good. Well, I guess I was going to say, it seems like feeling and discernment are the ones that directly cause you to suffer. Report an error in the passage at 45:18 Highlight the passage at 45:18

45:41 Because if you didn't have feeling, you wouldn't be able to suffer. And if you didn't make discernments, nothing would be wrong. And also what happens next after discernment and then you have a feeling and then what happens? I don't know. Okay. Does anybody have an idea? Do we just hang out with sitting around having something feel bad or good? Report an error in the passage at 45:41 Highlight the passage at 45:41

46:07 What do we do next? Yes. Bingo. Which is karma, right? Volitional action in response to some feeling we have, which is often really stupid. You know, sorry, but it is. We're going to talk about the 12 links. Usually what we do in response to this, are we smart? Do we say like we talked last night about the hamburgers? Report an error in the passage at 46:07 Highlight the passage at 46:07

46:31 Oh, this feeling doesn't have anything to do with the cheeseburger. You know, if this cheeseburger makes me happy, it's because of some virtue we did in the past. Are we smart like that? No. We usually think that it comes from direct contact. So Lord Buddha kept pointing this out over and over and over again. It keeps showing up in all these lists. I think he was trying to tell us something. This shows up big time in the Twelve Links, which we'll get to later on. Report an error in the passage at 46:31 Highlight the passage at 46:31

47:00 It shows up in the Heart Sūtra over and over and over again. He keeps talking about the emptiness of, you know, we've got ourselves. We've got our sense perceptions, we've got the object. You know, the 18 Datus, the 12 Ayatanas, he keeps repeating these lists over and over again to show us how we get into trouble. Report an error in the passage at 47:00 Highlight the passage at 47:00

47:22 What happens? Sense object, you know, my perception comes into contact with that. Discernment, you know, I recognize what it is. I have a good feeling or a bad feeling about it. And then what does that do? Trigger some action. I want another cheeseburger. Oh, I hate this person. I've got to yell at them so they'll go away. You know, whatever it is, right? Whether we feel good or bad, we usually don't hang out with the feeling and get smart about it and analyze and figure that it came from our past karma. Report an error in the passage at 47:22 Highlight the passage at 47:22

47:54 We usually react somehow. Pushing the icky stuff away, grasping onto the good stuff, even if we would create one of the ten non-virtues, right? Because we're not smart about where it comes from. So this is why Lord Buddha pulled these two out. They're the big troublemakers, aren't they? You know, when we react ignorantly to... Report an error in the passage at 47:54 Highlight the passage at 47:54

48:17 The discernment of the object and the feeling that it arises and we stupidly think that that feeling came from that object and not from our past karma. Then we tend to do some karmic action which then will relate in suffering for us later on. And in fact, I think I'm going to... Oh, it's too hard. Can you be my assistant? Keep track of this page. Flip back to the beginning, the very beginning. Report an error in the passage at 48:17 Highlight the passage at 48:17

48:48 all the way. We'll just do this right now since it's coming up. So here's how it goes, okay? We've got the basic ignorance about how things exist, thinking that they come at us randomly, inherently existent from their own side. So then that gives rise to an afflictive emotion. Report an error in the passage at 48:48 Highlight the passage at 48:48

49:16 Attachment, aversion and ignorance, the three poisons and all the derivative ones. Which then causes us to do a karmic action. Based on the afflictive emotion that arises because of our ignorance, causes us to do a karmic action which leads to suffering. So this is how the truth of suffering and the truth of the cause relate to each other. So the Buddha is... Thank you very much. Report an error in the passage at 49:16 Highlight the passage at 49:16

49:43 So this is why the Buddha pulled these two out because they're so important in that chain reaction of how we create karmic actions which leads to suffering. Report an error in the passage at 49:43 Highlight the passage at 49:43

49:54 Okay, so the other 49 are here and then this is consciousness which is, there are six consciousnesses according to this school of Buddhism. The five sense consciousnesses that we usually think about, right? Sight, hearing, smell. Taste and touch. And the sixth one is not ESP, Uri Geller, Bending Spoons. It's mental consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 49:54 Highlight the passage at 49:54

50:22 The sixth consciousness is mental. So it's a consciousness that has a thought as the object. The other consciousnesses have visual consciousness, some visual sense object, hearing, some auditory object. And then the sixth consciousness, the mental consciousness, has a thought as the object. Report an error in the passage at 50:22 Highlight the passage at 50:22

50:42 Now many of these schools say that this aggregate is the illustration of the person, is the self, but not according to the middle way consequence school. Some of these philosophical schools say all of the aggregates together are the self. Many of them say that the consciousness aggregate is the real self. Report an error in the passage at 50:42 Highlight the passage at 50:42

51:05 Will the real self please stand up? The middle way consequence school denies that Consciousness is the real self. And we'll get there. We're jumping ahead a little bit. Okay, so this is a lot. What questions do you have on the five aggregates or on where we are so far? Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 51:05 Highlight the passage at 51:05

51:27 So you mentioned four noble truths with these two aggregates. So I was wondering, do all the five aggregates belong to the first noble truth? or is it just those? Okay, the reason I mention the Four Noble Truths is just to point out how feeling and discernment can lead to our suffering. If feeling and discernment are driven by ignorance instead of wisdom and we misunderstand where our feeling comes from, that good feelings can only come from virtue. Report an error in the passage at 51:27 Highlight the passage at 51:27

52:10 Negative feelings can only come from non-virtue. If we don't understand that and we think that that feeling is a result of the sense contact, we will tend to engage in karmic actions which will lead to suffering as a result. So the karmic, the ignorance, the afflictive emotion and the karmic action are all under the truth of the cause of suffering. Report an error in the passage at 52:10 Highlight the passage at 52:10

52:33 And when discernment and feeling come up, Often we react by creating a karmic action and all of that would be the truth of the cause of suffering. Yeah, Morgan. Report an error in the passage at 52:33 Highlight the passage at 52:33

52:46 So I have a question on the schools. Are you saying, now that the other schools is, they technically would not have directly perceived emptiness because there's still a subtle self, so therefore... Would the highest schools basically say they really didn't have a direct perception of emptiness? Or if they did have a direct perception of emptiness, how is it possible that they misperceived? Report an error in the passage at 52:46 Highlight the passage at 52:46

53:15 Or is it just a direct perception of only phenomena and not the self? Right, right. And that's an excellent question and it's a huge debate. Huge debate. Because there's a difference between a being who's liberated and a being who's enlightened. For liberation, a person who's liberated is called an arhat, a faux destroyer. They've destroyed all the delusions, they're free of karma, that's a result of a direct perception of selflessness. Report an error in the passage at 53:15 Highlight the passage at 53:15

53:46 Now, which level of selflessness does an arhat perceive? According to the Middle Way Consequence School, everyone who's liberated from saṃsāra has to have perceived the subtlest level of selflessness. The other schools say no, it's not like that. And then you get into this big debate. How could they have done it if their schools don't even teach it? Report an error in the passage at 53:46 Highlight the passage at 53:46

54:07 How could they have gotten there if their schools don't even teach it? So this is a really huge debate. Which level of selflessness is necessary to be perceived in order to be liberated from saṃsāra? Is it just the lack of inherent existence, which is the subtlest level according to middle way consequence, or is it another one? Report an error in the passage at 54:07 Highlight the passage at 54:07

54:27 And this is a really, really big debate and there's no definitive answer. But according to the Middle Way Consequence School, every arhat, you know, practicing according to the Vaibhashika Tenet systems, perceives the same, you know, direct, has the same direct realization of emptiness as His Holiness the Dalai Lama studying Middle Way Consequence School. Report an error in the passage at 54:27 Highlight the passage at 54:27

54:49 And they say something like... Oh, when they get there, then it just sort of happens even if they haven't studied it. Because that's what things are empty of when they go into that meditation. Report an error in the passage at 54:49 Highlight the passage at 54:49

55:00 That's the level of emptiness that they perceive. But then the Middle Way Autonomy School has a different view and they all have very, very different views of what that selflessness is. Yeah, but that's a great question, very subtle question. Also, two books that I want to recommend since we're talking for more study on this. Report an error in the passage at 55:00 Highlight the passage at 55:00

55:22 One book that I just find so clear and so amazing, it's a small book by Guy Newland called Appearance and Reality. And he talks about emptiness according to the four philosophical schools. And he is so clear in my mind. I just love that book, Appearance and Reality. Guy Newland, he's written two other books. One is called The Two Truths, which is a little bit fatter and kind of more detailed. I would start with Appearance in Reality if you're interested. Report an error in the passage at 55:22 Highlight the passage at 55:22

55:50 It's short, extremely clear, talks about these four schools, and you can really see how your view needs to develop according to the different levels. Can I say something really quick? I put Report an error in the passage at 55:50 Highlight the passage at 55:50

56:03 I think Karina mentioned this to you, right? She ordered them and they didn't come. So if people would like Appearance in Reality, give your name and information to probably, why don't you just do it to me? Because that way Chloe won't be bothered. And we can actually mail it to you. We can actually, you can purchase it and we can mail it to you or we can just call you when that comes in. Because she was really hoping it would come in time for today. Report an error in the passage at 56:03 Highlight the passage at 56:03

56:26 She feels badly that it didn't come. And then these two other books by Guy Newland, one's called The Two Truths, and he just came out with another one that's got something about emptiness in the title. Introduction to Emptiness, which I haven't seen yet, but I'm really excited about. Because for me, he just explained things really, really clearly, you know, Guy Newland. And then another one is called Realizing Emptiness. Report an error in the passage at 56:26 Highlight the passage at 56:26

56:50 And it's by a Tibetan Lama named Genlam Rinpo who passed away about ten years ago or so. And that's a really, really good one. It's transcripts of teachings that he gave. He did a one-year retreat, a one-year shamatha or calm-abiding retreat in Seattle in like the late 80s. And this is a transcript of talks that he gave that were translated by Alan Wallace, who's also incredibly clear, good translation. Report an error in the passage at 56:50 Highlight the passage at 56:50

57:15 So those two, Appearance in Reality and Realizing Emptiness, if you want to step Study more are two that I found especially helpful. So now that we've gotten some introduction to the five aggregates, let's go back to this selflessness of being substantially existent. So independent of those aggregates. So some self that exists separately and independently from those aggregates. Report an error in the passage at 57:15 Highlight the passage at 57:15

57:44 Okay, some part of you, that driver. That crane operator being that exists separate from the aggregates. Also in philosophy they talk about master and servants. Like that self is some sort of a master and the aggregates are sort of the servants that that master is operating. Now, yesterday I mentioned the three levels of dependent origination. Report an error in the passage at 57:44 Highlight the passage at 57:44

58:17 That things are dependent at the grossest level on causes and conditions. Causes and conditions. Then, subtler level, things are dependent on parts. And then at the subtlest level, they're dependent on your conceptual imputation, which I said is only accepted by the middle way consequence school. Now, you can see how these two levels relate to the first two levels. Report an error in the passage at 58:17 Highlight the passage at 58:17

58:44 of dependent origination. This is saying things are dependent instead of being independent of causes and conditions, you know, permanent, not relying on production or disintegration, dependent on causes and conditions. The person is dependent on causes and conditions. This one is saying the person is dependent on parts. You can't say Tenzin Chogky's five aggregates are sitting here in Nagampa, but the real Tenzin Chogky is upstairs in Maritza's old room having a snooze. Report an error in the passage at 58:44 Highlight the passage at 58:44

59:17 There's no way that the person exists independent of the aggregate. So it's dependent on those parts. It's dependent on aggregates. Report an error in the passage at 59:17 Highlight the passage at 59:17

59:27 So the person exists independent on the parts, that second level of dependent origination. So you can see how those first two levels relate to these two. Report an error in the passage at 59:27 Highlight the passage at 59:27

59:39 You're saying there is no such self that's self-sufficient and substantially existent independent of the five aggregates, the five parts. Report an error in the passage at 59:39 Highlight the passage at 59:39

59:50 Any questions on these two levels so far? Now, those are basically, as I said, this is accepted by everybody. This is accepted by everybody except... Five of those sub-schools of the Vaibhashaka. So for all intents and purposes, pretty much all Buddhist schools accept that there's no such self that exists like this either. Report an error in the passage at 59:50 Highlight the passage at 59:50

1:00:19 So that covers the Vaibhashaka and the Sūtra schools. The Sūtra schools, the Sautrantika schools. So now we're up to the upper schools, the higher schools, that are also talking about selflessness of phenomena. So what does the mind-only school say? Why is it called the mind-only school? Is it saying that everything is consciousness? Is it saying that things are just made of consciousness? Report an error in the passage at 1:00:19 Highlight the passage at 1:00:19

1:00:49 Everything is just a hallucination. Everybody in this room is just some sort of figment of my imagination. Somehow part of my consciousness. What this school says is, and it gets interesting, and this is why it's good to study the different levels of the schools. Because what that school says is that the object and my perception of the object arise from the same karmic seed. Report an error in the passage at 1:00:49 Highlight the passage at 1:00:49

1:01:17 Things aren't independent, meaning the object that I perceive and my perception of the object arise from the same karmic seed, are a result of the same karmic seed. And you can see how that starts to break down that solid view we have of how things exist, right? If the things that are in my reality and my perception of them are a result of the same karmic seed, it starts to break down that feeling I have that it's all randomly coming at me, I'm just a victim, poor me, the solid substantial self. Report an error in the passage at 1:01:17 Highlight the passage at 1:01:17

1:01:56 All of a sudden things start to be a little bit more fluid and I have to take a little bit of responsibility. For my reality. You can see how I'm starting to co-create my reality. And remember we talked yesterday about your karma forcing your perception of reality out there. So it's not so different from saying, you know, they arise from the same karmic seed. The same karmic seed dishes out what shows up in my reality and my perception of it. Report an error in the passage at 1:01:56 Highlight the passage at 1:01:56

1:02:30 So that's what the Mind Only School is saying. It's not saying that external reality is my consciousness, but it's saying it's not a different entity from consciousness. And it arises as a result of the same karmic seed, the reality and my perception arises from that same. So we're getting close, we're getting closer and closer, aren't we? And even if you practice at that level, remember what my good friend Venerable Renee said, hey, that's a lot higher than the way we usually think things are solidly just coming at us. Report an error in the passage at 1:02:30 Highlight the passage at 1:02:30

1:03:05 Even if you practiced at that philosophical level, it would reduce a lot of your suffering because you can no longer be a helpless victim of things just randomly. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:05 Highlight the passage at 1:03:05

1:03:16 If you think, oh wow, the fact that that obnoxious person is in my life and my perception of them as really obnoxious comes from the same karmic seat. If I want to clean up my reality, rid myself of all the obnoxious people, be kind to people, watch my morality. And then you really start to clean up your Reality and see how you can take responsibility for it, even practicing at that level. Yeah, Morgan, do you want to grab the mic? Are you sure? Don't be confused. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:16 Highlight the passage at 1:03:16

1:03:56 Go ahead. Really. So the object, you're saying that I understand the perception, obviously, in the karmic seed, how you could come to that argument, but conventionally the object exists and you're not sharing a collective karmic seed with another individual. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:56 Highlight the passage at 1:03:56

1:04:14 I understand you could say the perception, the feeling, you know, could be the same karmic seed. But how can you say the object, how you expressed it, how could that be if it's multiple parties? Exactly. And that's one of the big debates, how the middle way school refutes the mind only school is exactly that. He always goes for like the essence. Report an error in the passage at 1:04:14 Highlight the passage at 1:04:14

1:04:37 This guy should go into the gushy. Don't you think he should go to Italy next? You know, that's exactly how the middle way school refutes the mind only school. They say, how can there be any consensual reality at all? Like, how can we have any kind of shared reality at all? If every, you know, if the object of my perception comes from my karmic seed, what about the rest of y 'all? It gets really hallucinogenic then. Report an error in the passage at 1:04:37 Highlight the passage at 1:04:37

1:05:02 You know, it's like, how on earth? Can we all, like, are we all sitting in the room having a class together or not? You know, if it's all kind of coming, or do we just all share that collective karma? And I think that's how the Mind Only School gets off the hook. You know, they say for any given people in a room experiencing the same approximate reality, we all share the same karmic seed that's giving rise. Report an error in the passage at 1:05:02 Highlight the passage at 1:05:02

1:05:25 But then it gets a little sketchy. You know, it gets kind of sketchy that way. So that's exactly one of the big debates against the Mind Only School is like, look you guys, then it gets really weird. You know, how can you have any kind of consensual reality, even very basic? Like the fact is, sure, we all have different perceptions of, you know, our shared reality of this room, dependent on our karma, but how can there even be like this room show up for all of us? Report an error in the passage at 1:05:25 Highlight the passage at 1:05:25

1:05:54 You know, if it's all really dependent on our different... So you've gone right to the heart of the crux of the debate against that school. But you can still see how interesting it is to start operating from that standpoint and see how we help create our reality. Yeah, Jacob. Report an error in the passage at 1:05:54 Highlight the passage at 1:05:54

1:06:15 Maybe this is better held for an actual debate session about these two schools, but I was just thinking as you were explaining this mind-only school that isn't that part of how... Things are said to function anyway. I mean, the reason why we're here in the human realm to begin with is because we're creating the cause to be here. Report an error in the passage at 1:06:15 Highlight the passage at 1:06:15

1:06:35 We're experiencing the karma to be in this realm to begin with. So in a sense, we do share reality. We do share a consequence with each other that helps create the realm that we're experiencing together. Right, right. Exactly, exactly. So that would be kind of how they would probably... In middle school would say that too. The fact that we're experiencing a human realm is because of our karma, to be experiencing a human realm. Report an error in the passage at 1:06:35 Highlight the passage at 1:06:35

1:07:02 Do the other realms exist in some other place? Or is it possible that a being with a certain karma could be right here in this room experiencing it as a hell realm with a burning iron ground? Here we are, nice chandeliers, Victorian frou-frou, like wallpaper. You know, because we happen to be in the human realm. But other beings could be existing and probably are in this room right now with a completely different karmic experience. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:02 Highlight the passage at 1:07:02

1:07:30 So that's the way that the realms are created by karma. Master Shantideva, guide to the bodhisattva's way of life. You know, there's this famous verse. And he says, what do you think? You know, Acme Hell Realm Construction Company created the hell realms? It was created by your mind. And this is why the Buddha taught this school. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:30 Highlight the passage at 1:07:30

1:07:49 You know, to emphasize for the people who thought that they were helpless victims of reality, to really emphasize how things, yes, they're created by mind. You know, we experience things created by our mind, created by our karma. And in this, you know, in Master Shantideva, you know, the hell realms are created by mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:49 Highlight the passage at 1:07:49

1:08:09 The main sūtra that the Mind Only School is based on is this sūtra called the Sūtra Unraveling the Thought of the Buddha. And it's really emphasizing how things are created by mind to pull the rug out from under our eternalism, right? Like thinking that things are so solid and so self-existent and just coming at us. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:09 Highlight the passage at 1:08:09

1:08:28 If we start to work with this level, it really pulls the rug out from under our... You know, eternalist view. They say that the middle way, you know, there's always this word middle way in Buddhism, it's like a razor's edge between eternalism, thinking that things are self-existent, just kind of coming at us, and nihilism, thinking, oh, nothing exists, you know, the hotel towel thing, nothing exists, nothing matters. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:28 Highlight the passage at 1:08:28

1:08:52 It's a razor's edge and it's a very fine line. Most people tend towards eternalism. So Lord Buddha taught... The sūtra unraveling the thought taught the mind only school to pull the rug out from under that thing and to show us, yeah, you have to be responsible for your actions because mind creates your reality. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:52 Highlight the passage at 1:08:52

1:09:17 So watch your morality, watch your karma. Last year at Land of Medicine Buddha... This is a little aside, but I thought it was so interesting and relates to this, how karma and emptiness relate to each other. Chodan Rinpoche, last year at Land of Medicine Buddha, somebody asked the question, how do you know whether a teacher is valid? Report an error in the passage at 1:09:17 Highlight the passage at 1:09:17

1:09:34 They were talking about guru devotion, like how do you know whether you have a valid teacher? And he gave this very interesting answer. He said something like, because they teach karma and emptiness, the relationship between karma and emptiness. And I thought that was such an interesting answer. To show how emptiness should reinforce your faith in cause and effect. Because mind creates our reality. Report an error in the passage at 1:09:34 Highlight the passage at 1:09:34

1:10:00 And karma creates our perceptions. And there's this famous example in the sūtra. You have a glass of liquid. A glass of liquid. You have three beings sitting around. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:00 Highlight the passage at 1:10:00

1:10:20 Experiencing this glass of liquid. You have a human being experiencing black tea with soy milk and maybe a little agave nectar, I'm not quite sure. Black tea with soy milk. You have a being with worse karma and they are experiencing, known as a hungry ghost or craving spirit, and they're experiencing pus and blood. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:20 Highlight the passage at 1:10:20

1:10:44 Where Tenzin Chogky... Mundane human realm existence is experiencing black tea with soy milk. You know, Prada would be experiencing this as pus and blood because they have karmic obscurations to be able to experience nice food and drink. Because of their karma, you know, they create an experience of pus and blood here. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:44 Highlight the passage at 1:10:44

1:11:04 Would that be in the same way that the prisoners you were speaking of last night would take me as a threat if I was to look up them sort of strange? Absolutely, absolutely, right? And then it being with better karma in the Deva realm experiences this as some kind of blissful nectar because of their karma, because of their mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:04 Highlight the passage at 1:11:04

1:11:24 And this is what the Mind Only School is saying, to just emphasize, hey you guys, guess what? You know, it's not just random, it's not just coming at you. You create your reality by your mind. If you're kind, I have another inmate. You know, the one inmate experiences everything as a threat and goes around with a chip on his shoulder and he's in a hell realm. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:24 Highlight the passage at 1:11:24

1:11:44 I have this other inmate that I gave the practice of, you know, he's talking about how boring it is in prison. We're talking about the truth of suffering and there's this one list of six characteristics by Buddha Maitreya and it talks about how you have to repeat the pattern over and over and over again. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:44 Highlight the passage at 1:11:44

1:12:02 And it's just unbelievably tedious. And he raises his hand and he goes... You think it's boring out there, man? It's really boring in here. He's like, you know, you're in the same cell with your cellmate. They open the gate, you go in the exercise yard. The same guys are trying to kill you. You know, you go back and you've got the guard harassing you and then the same horrible food every day. It's really boring. It's like, how do I stand it? Report an error in the passage at 1:12:02 Highlight the passage at 1:12:02

1:12:24 And I didn't know what to say to him. I don't know what it's like in prison. Every once in a while you feel like you're channeling, mostly when you're totally clueless. So in my mind I'm like, okay, it's holiness. I don't know, you know, Lama Tsongkhapa, help me out here because I don't know what to say. And I said, make every day a contest. How many people can you make happy today? Report an error in the passage at 1:12:24 Highlight the passage at 1:12:24

1:12:43 Play a game with yourself every single day, you know? How many people can you make happy? It's not going to be boring anymore at all. He was like... That was the right thing. And I'm like, oh my God, you know, I don't know what I'm saying. He's like, oh, that I can do. That I can do. You know, two weeks later, I go into the prison. Report an error in the passage at 1:12:43 Highlight the passage at 1:12:43

1:13:01 He walks in. Oh, you know, he's totally pushed out. And I go, so, how's it going with the tedium? He's like, I tried that thing you said. It's so awesome. He goes. I'm just this kind of wimpy, skinny guy. Like, I'm not a threat to anyone. So I decided I'm going to be the guy that all the, you know, there's all these big, tough guys in prison. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:01 Highlight the passage at 1:13:01

1:13:22 You know, I've got some in my class, like tattoos on their foreheads, you know, like that. He goes, I'm going to be the guy that those guys can talk to because I'm no threat to anyone. So I see one of those guys. He looks like he's angry. I'm just going to go up and... Talk to him. I'm going to be that guy and that's what I'm going to do to make people happy. It is like so totally working for this guy and he just gets more and more blissful. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:22 Highlight the passage at 1:13:22

1:13:46 So here he is in prison, which before he was experiencing his total tedium. Now, because his whole motivation... is about being kind and making people happy. You should see this guy, I saw him last month and it was about two years after giving him this like channeled instruction from Lama Zopa and he's like, remember that thing you said? Report an error in the passage at 1:13:46 Highlight the passage at 1:13:46

1:14:07 Wow, like it's, you know, life is great and here he is and the guy next to him because of his karma is like, you know, like a pit bull, just everything is a threat, just, you know, perceiving everything is just a hell realm and threatening. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:07 Highlight the passage at 1:14:07

1:14:25 So Lord Buddha was on to something. And by the way, Lord Buddha taught all these schools because they helped us. And they suited different people's minds. Who taught the four philosophical schools? Lord Buddha. Why? Because they help. And different people are suited for different levels of philosophical thought. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:25 Highlight the passage at 1:14:25

1:14:46 Which is why you work your way up gradually. And if I'm stuck at middle way autonomy and I still think that things are kind of halfway coming at me, It's all right, you know, because at least part of it is on the basis of my mind and my karma. So that's why it's good to work your way up and not just jump to the highest school, especially if it makes you think you can steal the hotel towels, that nothing exists and you can do whatever you want. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:46 Highlight the passage at 1:14:46

1:15:10 Then you really need to back off. One more question, then I think we'll take a break. So, you know, in the teachings they talk a lot about Tonglen and its value of that. And so is it from this perspective, it's because whatever negative actions or suffering you experience were karmically created by you anyway, by your mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:10 Highlight the passage at 1:15:10

1:15:27 So if you continue to blame it on external circumstances or continue to hold a negative mind, then you're going to create the causes to experience that again. Then if you practice Tonglen, basically you create the causes to let that karma finish out and then create good karma for you in the future. Is that? Well, it's a way of just, it's a way. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:27 Highlight the passage at 1:15:27

1:15:45 It's a way of sort of practicing thought transformation with what's arising in the moment. And then it also creates, you know, it's the cause for great compassion, which is the cause for bodhicitta. So the main reason for practicing Tonglen is to actually, as one of the tools for generating bodhicitta, which is non-negotiable if you want to become a fully enlightened being. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:45 Highlight the passage at 1:15:45

1:16:07 But yes, in the moment, even, you know, part of it is to create the cause for bodhicitta. even in the moment, it really changes the The way that you relate to certain circumstances so you can use it as a thought transformation technique in the moment and then as a cause for generating the great compassion that will then lead to bodhicitta. Report an error in the passage at 1:16:07 Highlight the passage at 1:16:07

1:16:28 So there's a whole kind of context for practicing Tonglen. But even in the moment, just exchanging your thought of cherishing yourself. With cherishing others, reduces your suffering even right now, even before generating bodhicitta, which is kind of the long-term effect. In the short term, just getting out of your self-absorbed, me-first, self-pity place for even a microsecond. Report an error in the passage at 1:16:28 Highlight the passage at 1:16:28

1:16:50 I mean, my God, you know, we've been stuck there since the beginning of this time. So just shifting that perspective, even in the moment, opens up so much more space. And practicing Tonglen, especially when you're... experiencing a suffering in the moment you know realizing how many other there's what six and a billion people on the planet if i'm having a really bad migraine what are the chances that millions of people in this very second are experiencing Did you have something to tell us? Report an error in the passage at 1:16:50 Highlight the passage at 1:16:50

1:17:33 on. Okay. I may be mistaken here, but it seems like the idea that an object and a perception have the same karmic seed is almost identical to the idea of imputation as being so important to perception. But did you say that only the Madhyamika except the imputational? Yeah, exactly. And it's very, It's very subtle, isn't it, the difference? You can see how by studying these different schools gets you closer and closer and closer to the middle way consequence school. Report an error in the passage at 1:17:33 Highlight the passage at 1:17:33

1:18:08 Because the middle way consequence school says, yes, there are external objects, but then the way I'm perceiving them is dependent on my karma. Instead of saying they arise from the same karmic seed, that my perception of Tai and Tai come from my karma, like, sorry Tai, you don't have a mind stream, you don't have anything to do about it. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:08 Highlight the passage at 1:18:08

1:18:27 Middle-way consequence school would say, yes, there are external objects, but then my perception of you is dependent on my karma. So you can see it gets very, very close, and it's very subtle sometimes, the differences. So we shouldn't diss the middle-way school, or I mean the mind-only school, and say, oh, how ridiculous. We should say, wow, you know, they were onto something, and it really pulled the rug out from under a lot of that solid view of how things exist. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:27 Highlight the passage at 1:18:27

1:18:54 And if we even worked with that for a while... You know, we would really undercut a lot of our suffering. Now, just one little final thing before we take a break. The illustration of the person, according to the mind-only school, right? Because we said, how do they think the self does not exist? But then, what do they say that the self is? So the illustration of the person, according to the mind-only school, is called the storehouse consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:54 Highlight the passage at 1:18:54

1:19:22 Alaya Vijnana is the Sanskrit word for it. And that is a separate consciousness that holds all the karmic seeds. So that's what they say goes from life to life. That's the illustration of the person. That which goes from life to life and holds the karma, according to that school, is a separate consciousness embedded with karmic seeds. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:22 Highlight the passage at 1:19:22

1:19:47 That's its function. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:47 Highlight the passage at 1:19:47

1:19:52 It's just that. It only just has that function to store the karmic seeds and to go from life to life. But does it exist in the aggregate somewhere? Well, according to the Middle Way Consequence School, the consciousness aggregate has six components, right? The five sense consciousnesses and mind. According to the Mind Only School, there's two more. So there's eight consciousnesses. There's the storehouse consciousness and the mental affliction consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:52 Highlight the passage at 1:19:52

1:20:18 So the storehouse consciousness is one of the eight consciousnesses as it is explained in that school. And again, it's just a different way of conceiving how mind works. There's nothing inherently existing about the storehouse consciousness either. It's just a different imputation on a function of that which holds the karmic seeds and goes from life to life to life. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:18 Highlight the passage at 1:20:18

1:20:40 So that's the illustration of the person according to the mind only school. Yeah. Yeah, it's helpful for what you just said, that even the concept or the explanation of the storehouse consciousness is an imputation. Because I thought all the schools, and I'm not familiar with the distinctions, but I thought what I'm usually hearing is that there is a subtle most mind and that your karmic seeds do travel for a way of saying it with your subtle most mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:40 Highlight the passage at 1:20:40

1:21:07 And that's why you carry karma from lifetime to lifetime. So it's not like this concept of the storehouse consciousness. It's so far off, is it, from the concept of the subtle most mind? It's just how, it's the type of label and concept we put on it. It's saying that that's what the self is, which the middle way school, and we're going to get there after our break, the middle way school says, no, no, that's not the self either. Report an error in the passage at 1:21:07 Highlight the passage at 1:21:07

1:21:30 There's something else that's the illustration of the person according to the middle way school. But you can see how all of these concepts... A rose. There's got to be something that goes from life to life holding the karma, right? And so according to the Mind Only School, they say, oh yeah, there's this thing called the Laya Vijnana, the storehouse consciousness, and that's that thing that goes from life to life holding the karmic seeds. Report an error in the passage at 1:21:30 Highlight the passage at 1:21:30

1:21:53 Okay, so you're right. It's not that different. Just like seeing that the thing and my perception come from the same karmic seed isn't that different from saying, yes, there's external objects, but my conceptual imputation makes them what they are. So it's very subtle when you work your way up. Yeah, that's helpful. And we'll talk more about the middleweight consciousness and the fact that they don't think that this is the self. Report an error in the passage at 1:21:53 Highlight the passage at 1:21:53

1:22:17 And just real quick, when you say the mind-only school, were you talking about the top half? It wasn't just the first lower school, was it? Let's go back to that. Report an error in the passage at 1:22:17 Highlight the passage at 1:22:17

1:22:30 So that's this one. Okay. Okay, that's this one. Mind-only chitta mantra. So it is a higher school. Of the higher schools that agree that both persons and phenomena are selfless, it's the first one of those. Okay, thank you. Okay, let's take a well-deserved... What time is lunch? Well, wow. Usually it's 12.30. Report an error in the passage at 1:22:30 Highlight the passage at 1:22:30

1:22:55 12.30? Okay. Is 10 minutes enough? Is that enough? Okay, come back in 10 minutes and then maybe what we'll do is just have a meditation on... What we've done so far and then launch into middle way autonomy and consequence more this afternoon. It's been the whole afternoon on that and some more meditation. But let's take a ten minute break and I'll ring the gong when we're getting to the point of coming back. Report an error in the passage at 1:22:55 Highlight the passage at 1:22:55

1:23:25 And lunch will probably be more like maybe 12.45 to be realistic. around 40 times. Yeah, I'll be consoled. Okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:25 Highlight the passage at 1:23:25

1:23:57 Yeah, that's working fine. Now it's working fine. Okay. Well, for me the Chita Matra, understanding of emptiness, intuitively makes an awful lot of sense, the most sense really to me. It's a great expressive matrix of humanity and animal world and it's very useful in understanding social relationships. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:57 Highlight the passage at 1:23:57

1:24:26 So from a sociological point of view, it just intuitively makes a tremendous amount of useful sense. It's wonderful for teaching. But then as soon as I start to think about the higher, what's called the higher, I think they're all actually, to me they seem all rails on the same path to enlightenment. Report an error in the passage at 1:24:26 Highlight the passage at 1:24:26

1:24:45 It doesn't really matter which rail you're on. Why do you want to argue about whether you... Anyway, maybe some of you get there a little faster. But you're arguing about different rails going the same direction. But it seems useful in terms of my present life. Report an error in the passage at 1:24:45 Highlight the passage at 1:24:45

1:25:02 It's more of an intuitive usefulness rather than... I don't really intellectually know how to practically use the other in terms of understanding. Our social existence. And I think that's fine. I think that's really fine to work with. Because like you say, it's like they're rungs on a ladder. You know, rungs on a ladder kind of going up to a higher philosophical view, which is defined by the Tibetans as the middle way consequence school. Report an error in the passage at 1:25:02 Highlight the passage at 1:25:02

1:25:30 But each rung gives you more perspective than standing on the ground. Like for most of us, we're just totally standing on the ground. Without any kind of higher perspective at all. So anywhere you are, working on those rungs of the ladder will really help. And I think, you know, if it really helps you in that moment to kind of cut through that solid perspective about the way things exist, to hang out at the Mind Only School perspective for a while and work with that, great. Report an error in the passage at 1:25:30 Highlight the passage at 1:25:30

1:25:59 You know, for sure, it's going to absolutely undercut. The source of delusions. Now, according to the Middle Way Consequence School, to have a direct realization of emptiness, the direct realization of emptiness that you have is the lack of inherent existence, which we haven't really talked about yet. Report an error in the passage at 1:25:59 Highlight the passage at 1:25:59

1:26:16 And that got back to Morgan's question, is that the same for everybody? You know, no matter what school they've been studying, is that direct perception the same in the middle way consequence school would say yes. But for most of us, we're a pretty long way from that direct realization of emptiness that cuts through saṃsāra at the root. Report an error in the passage at 1:26:16 Highlight the passage at 1:26:16

1:26:34 We're just looking for techniques to help us work with our delusions, you know, and like help us loosen that solid grasping at self as objects and that solid standing on the ground level. So any level. Will help us. So I think if the Mind Only School makes sense to you and really helps you cut through your delusions and change your behavior, God bless, like go for it. Report an error in the passage at 1:26:34 Highlight the passage at 1:26:34

1:26:59 You know, that's fantastic. And still keep open-minded about the other school and just keep kind of working to push. But I think we often... Jump too far ahead with incomplete understanding and then often that will lead to that thing of like, oh, nothing matters. Oh, if everything is just my projection, then anything could be anything and nothing really matters and I could just like make up my reality. Report an error in the passage at 1:26:59 Highlight the passage at 1:26:59

1:27:22 No, it's not like that. You know, I think without understanding we can often jump to that level. But even, for example, I said in the Vaibhashika school, you know, Western Vipassanā, Theravāda, they work a lot with the meditation on the four foundations of mindfulness to lead to a direct perception of subtle impermanence. Report an error in the passage at 1:27:22 Highlight the passage at 1:27:22

1:27:41 That's an incredible high realization. Middle way consequence would not say that that's a direct realization of selflessness, but for sure to have a direct realization of subtle impermanence and to have any kind of experience of subtle impermanence. Loosens that grasping, you know, so I think working with these different meditations, for sure, incredible, you know, great, great benefit. Report an error in the passage at 1:27:41 Highlight the passage at 1:27:41

1:28:07 Anything that loosens that grasping that makes you see the relationship between, you know, karma and dependent origination and helps you work on your morality and change your behavior. At whatever level. So I think that's fine. I think that's fine. You know, and like Ty was saying, it's so subtle, the difference between that view and middle way consequence. Report an error in the passage at 1:28:07 Highlight the passage at 1:28:07

1:28:29 Really subtle. And you can see how it, you know, one helps you get an insight into the next higher level, which is why we're spending all day doing this class. Any other questions or comments before we do? Yeah. Can you pass wherever it is? Report an error in the passage at 1:28:29 Highlight the passage at 1:28:29

1:28:55 I understood that you said that Lord Buddha had already teached all these four schools, five schools, and for me this is really new. I thought that all these schools had developed in Tibet later. Report an error in the passage at 1:28:55 Highlight the passage at 1:28:55

1:29:17 I was just wondering where can I find it? Is it in the Abhidharma or where? Yeah, the basis of these different schools, when I said Lord Buddha taught all these schools, not as such, you know, he didn't give them these labels, right, necessarily, you know, he didn't say, okay, now for you Vaibhashaka guys, I'm going to teach Vaibhashaka, now we're going to teach mind only, but they're all based on sutras. Report an error in the passage at 1:29:17 Highlight the passage at 1:29:17

1:29:43 That the Buddha taught. And then the ideas developed on the basis of certain things that the Buddha taught in the sutras. Not necessarily in Tibet, but in ancient India and the great monastic universities like Nalanda and Vikramashila. These different schools, like the 18 sub-schools first of Vaibhashaka first developed and then the other schools. So they were viewed as separate specific schools subsequent to the time of Lord Buddha. Report an error in the passage at 1:29:43 Highlight the passage at 1:29:43

1:30:11 But when I said Lord Buddha taught them all, they're all based on different sutras. of the Buddha and on Abhidharma texts and so forth that all go back to the three baskets, specifically Sūtra and Abhidharma taught by Lord Buddha. So all these ideas were put forth to Lord Buddha. You know, appropriate to the trainees. Most of the sutras, often we'll get these quotes from sutras, just sort of some quote out of the blue. Report an error in the passage at 1:30:11 Highlight the passage at 1:30:11

1:30:39 But if you look at the context, most sutras that Lord Buddha taught were in response to a question asked by a specific individual. And one of the great capabilities of an enlightened being is being able to teach completely appropriate to the level of the trainee, right? So it was all contextual. And we sometimes take these like one little stanza out of context, but the whole thing was contextual. Somebody came to Lord Buddha. Report an error in the passage at 1:30:39 Highlight the passage at 1:30:39

1:31:06 Often it was a disciple of one of the non-Buddhist schools to debate with the Buddha and to debate certain philosophical points. Sometimes it would be a disciple of the Buddha asking for clarification about a certain question and then the Buddha would give a discourse appropriate to the level of the trainee. Report an error in the passage at 1:31:06 Highlight the passage at 1:31:06

1:31:26 Then later on, when the great monastic universities started and people really started studying the sutras, they would pull out these thoughts of lord Buddha from the different sutras and then this the schools would be developed you know a certain philosophical school that ascribed to a certain level of teaching of lord Buddha but they were all appropriate because we all need different things you know for the people for whom the middle way consequence school is going to pull out the rug from under their faith They say that Nagarjuna didn't... Report an error in the passage at 1:31:26 Highlight the passage at 1:31:26

1:32:04 The new idea about Buddhism, I thought always Nagarjuna brought something really new into the world and was like almost a new Buddha. Yeah, and according to Tibetan Buddhism, what Nagarjuna did was start revealing certain teachings of Lord Buddha that had not been revealed because the time, you know, or had only been revealed to certain disciples. Report an error in the passage at 1:32:04 Highlight the passage at 1:32:04

1:32:32 Paramita's scriptures were taught by Lord Buddha but weren't appropriate for the minds of all trainees so they're not the ones that appear, for example, in the Pāli Canon and weren't taught publicly to all the trainees. So according to the Tibetan tradition, what Nagarjuna did was just reveal certain scriptures that had been taught by Lord Buddha. It's not that he was coming up with some whole... Report an error in the passage at 1:32:32 Highlight the passage at 1:32:32

1:32:56 brand new ideas on his own. According to the Tibetan school, the Prajan Parmitas Sutras were all taught. Yeah, Report an error in the passage at 1:32:56 Highlight the passage at 1:32:56

1:33:20 you're welcome. Okay, anything else? Okay. and then kind of kept hidden because they would be so easily misunderstood by people it would lead to the hotel towel incident all over the place and undermine people's faith in the law of cause and effect and that's why they weren't taught publicly at the time of Lord Buddha you know Report an error in the passage at 1:33:20 Highlight the passage at 1:33:20

1:33:24 So what I wanted to do is just work a little bit with these two levels in meditation before we go on to the highest level. Now, later on this afternoon I'm going to introduce, speaking of Nagarjuna, once again a bodhisattva just segues us into the next section. One of the ways of meditating on emptiness taught by Arya Nagarjuna is called the four-point analysis. And the first point of the four points is... Report an error in the passage at 1:33:24 Highlight the passage at 1:33:24

1:33:53 Identifying what's called the object of refutation, you know, the Gokchas, the Tibetan term, the object of refutation, which is a fancy way of saying that false self that we've always thought existed, you know, before it's like the bullseye thing, you know, before you can aim and shoot your arrow at the middle of the bullseye, you have to be really clear about the target, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:33:53 Highlight the passage at 1:33:53

1:34:16 And before we can break down that false sense of self, we first need to identify What it feels like to us. What's our innate sense of self? Is it one of these? Is our innate sense of self the Christian soul idea? Is our innate sense of self the driver thing? What is that sense of self that we have? That's the first step. Report an error in the passage at 1:34:16 Highlight the passage at 1:34:16

1:34:42 So what I wanted to do before our lunch break is just work a little bit with this in meditation and then this afternoon we're... I'm going to delve into the two highest schools and the subtle differences between them and also do more meditation. I want to introduce you to at least two meditation techniques that then you can take home and use on your cushion to just try and get clear and penetrate and really work along with your study in meditation to break that down. Report an error in the passage at 1:34:42 Highlight the passage at 1:34:42

1:35:13 Okay, but we'll just do kind of a brief meditation on, you know, the Gakcha, the object of refutation to just try and identify how it seems to us that the self does exist. So let's just sit in our meditation posture, back straight, head tilted slightly forward and Report an error in the passage at 1:35:13 Highlight the passage at 1:35:13

1:35:41 just turn your attention to your breath for just a minute. Report an error in the passage at 1:35:41 Highlight the passage at 1:35:41

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:36:39 And so now first think of the sense of self that you have. The concrete, solid feeling that there's some you that exists somewhere within your body and mind. The real you. When you think of yourself, one of the ways you can tune into this is say your name to yourself in your mind. And what feeling comes up when you say your name? Report an error in the passage at 1:36:39 Highlight the passage at 1:36:39

1:37:10 What is that solid? Concrete sense of self. Report an error in the passage at 1:37:10 Highlight the passage at 1:37:10

1:37:18 Try and get in touch with that object of refutation. Another technique that's recommended is think of a time that the sense of self comes up very strongly. When you're afraid, when you're falsely accused, someone accuses you of doing something you didn't do, you think, I didn't do it. Me? No, not me. Report an error in the passage at 1:37:18 Highlight the passage at 1:37:18

1:37:44 Just spend a couple of minutes just trying to get in touch. When you say your name to yourself, when you think of being falsely accused or afraid or very angry, what sense of self comes up for you? Report an error in the passage at 1:37:44 Highlight the passage at 1:37:44

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:39:03 That sense of self, does it seem like the permanent, partless, independent one? Is it that one that doesn't depend on production and disintegration, that doesn't change moment to moment? Does it feel like that? The one that's partless, some little chip inside of you, the little piece of Ātman chipped off of Brahman or the Christian idea of soul, that Report an error in the passage at 1:39:03 Highlight the passage at 1:39:03

1:39:42 real me that exists inside Czech. Does it seem like that permanent, unitary, independent one? Or Report an error in the passage at 1:39:42 Highlight the passage at 1:39:42

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:40:39 does it seem like the substantially existent, self-sufficient one, that driver? The master that controls your body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:40:39 Highlight the passage at 1:40:39

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:41:22 If it feels like that one, where is it? Where does it exist? Report an error in the passage at 1:41:22 Highlight the passage at 1:41:22

1:41:33 Is it in your chest? In your brain? In your eyes? Is it somewhere in your body? Report an error in the passage at 1:41:33 Highlight the passage at 1:41:33

1:41:44 Where is it? Report an error in the passage at 1:41:44 Highlight the passage at 1:41:44

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:42:28 If it exists somewhere in your body, where does it exist? Which part of your body is it? Report an error in the passage at 1:42:28 Highlight the passage at 1:42:28

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:43:26 If it exists somewhere in your mind? Where is it? Is it your brain? Report an error in the passage at 1:43:26 Highlight the passage at 1:43:26

1:43:42 Is it your thoughts? Your consciousness? Some part of your thoughts? Report an error in the passage at 1:43:42 Highlight the passage at 1:43:42

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:44:46 Can you find that me that came up for you? Can you find that self anywhere within your body and mind? Report an error in the passage at 1:44:46 Highlight the passage at 1:44:46

1:45:19 Is that sense of self somehow separate from the body and mind? Can the self exist apart from the body and mind? Separate. If your body and mind are in one place, could the self exist somewhere else? Is it completely separate from the five aggregates? Report an error in the passage at 1:45:19 Highlight the passage at 1:45:19

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:46:37 Now consider for a minute the view that what we call me, what you call I, me, is just a label, just a concept that you put on the constantly changing continuum of body and mind. Your body and mind. Are not permanent. They're constantly changing. But there's a continuum. And on top of that continuum of body and mind, you have a concept, a label, me. Report an error in the passage at 1:46:37 Highlight the passage at 1:46:37

1:47:17 So consider that possibility. Instead of existing in the way it seems to exist, this is the way the self does exist. It's merely labeled on the continuum of ever-changing moments of body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:47:17 Highlight the passage at 1:47:17

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:48:28 How would your life be different if you lived with a sense of this, realizing that every moment could be fresh, that you don't have to drag around this solid, concrete sense of self. There's all this space. The sense you have of me is just merely labeled on this ever-changing continuum. Report an error in the passage at 1:48:28 Highlight the passage at 1:48:28

1:48:59 There's so much openness there. You're not solid, concrete, frozen. In time, carrying around this sense of self, but it's merely labeled on ever-changing moments of body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:48:59 Highlight the passage at 1:48:59

1:49:28 Think of the potential there. Every moment can be fresh. You don't have to drag around this fixed self-concept. Report an error in the passage at 1:49:28 Highlight the passage at 1:49:28

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:50:20 Think of how this view of how the self exists could liberate you to your fullest potential. Make you realize the potential to change into a fully enlightened being. There's no solid self stuck in delusion, stuck in saṃsāra, but you can actually transform into a fully enlightened being because of the potential, because we're merely labeled on a continuum of ever-changing moments of body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:50:20 Highlight the passage at 1:50:20

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:51:37 And think especially of how this will feel at the time of death. If you realize that there's nothing solid and permanent that you were losing, that was ending, but merely a continuum that was just changing form. Let's Report an error in the passage at 1:51:37 Highlight the passage at 1:51:37

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:52:34 dedicate the energy from our morning session, investigating selflessness according to the different schools, Report an error in the passage at 1:52:34 Highlight the passage at 1:52:34

1:52:46 thinking that by understanding selflessness we're able to undermine the ignorance that gives rise to our... Delusions which then causes us to engage in karmic action. So by really understanding this, this is the key to cutting saṃsāra at the root so that we don't have to perpetuate our unenlightened existence, that we can become liberated from this cycle. Report an error in the passage at 1:52:46 Highlight the passage at 1:52:46

1:53:18 So let's dedicate the energy towards getting a deeper insight into the ultimate nature of reality so that we can undercut. The root of cyclic existence. Report an error in the passage at 1:53:18 Highlight the passage at 1:53:18

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:54:03 So this afternoon what we'll do is talk about the middle way school and we'll also talk about how things do conventionally exist. After pulling the rug out from under you completely, we'll put it back a little bit again and show you how things do conventionally exist to counteract The thing that people sometimes go to this place of like, oh, then this means anything could be anything and nothing matters and all of that. Okay, so there are also criteria for how things do conventionally exist. Report an error in the passage at 1:54:03 Highlight the passage at 1:54:03

1:54:38 And we'll talk about that. And then we will also just touch on the 12 links of dependent origination to show how the whole thing hangs together. Because that's a really essential... Report an error in the passage at 1:54:38 Highlight the passage at 1:54:38

1:54:52 Peace to understand that we can use in our practice. You know, again, the whole point of this is to reduce our suffering. It's not to give Jeffrey Hopkins and Guy Newland a job. You know, it's really to eliminate our suffering. So looking at the 12 links of dependent origination will really help. Let's see how all of this hangs together. And then I also would like to do meditation on the emptiness of the self in relation to the five aggregates, which is the instruction Lama Zopa gave me for retreat using the Heart Sūtra, because this is a practice that you can do every day that I found personally really powerful. Report an error in the passage at 1:54:52 Highlight the passage at 1:54:52

1:55:27 I think that was one of the most powerful. Parts of my retreat for a couple of weeks, I just did this meditation with recitation of the Heart Sūtra. It was very cool. So we'll do that. And we'll have plenty of time for more discussion and questions. It's quarter to one. Is an hour and 15 minutes long enough? Can we come back at two? That gives you enough time. And walk around the block, get the blood flowing. Report an error in the passage at 1:55:27 Highlight the passage at 1:55:27

1:55:52 The two o 'clock session tends to be quite, you know, comatose. So have some caffeine if you partake of... It's such a thing and get the blood flowing and we'll come back at 2 o 'clock. Okay, great. Thank you. Enjoy your lunch. Report an error in the passage at 1:55:52 Highlight the passage at 1:55:52

1:56:14 Is the flip chart sagging? It looks like it's kind of collapsed. Oh, is it? Okay. This is kind of fun. That's it. Report an error in the passage at 1:56:14 Highlight the passage at 1:56:14

1:56:28 Can everybody still see? Can you still see? Is it all right? Okay. I'll send it. It's kind of. Report an error in the passage at 1:56:28 Highlight the passage at 1:56:28

1:56:37 The reality of impermanence. Okay, so first of all, are there any questions that have emerged? Sometimes people discuss over lunch and things come up. So, oh, that's probably a good idea. It's so loud. Anything come up that you have questions about? What's that? Is it on? Okay. Any other questions besides whether or not the microphone is on? Report an error in the passage at 1:56:37 Highlight the passage at 1:56:37

1:57:09 Okay. So we'll go ahead and continue with the middle way school and spend the rest of today pretty much on this school. So we've got two divisions of the middle way school that again is considered, especially the middle way consequence school, the highest school according to Tibetan Buddhism. And again, depending on, you know, if you happen to go to other teachings of either Western Vipassanā, Zen tradition and so forth, you will hear different views of what selflessness is and not to get confused. Report an error in the passage at 1:57:09 Highlight the passage at 1:57:09

1:57:48 You know, they're coming from different what's called tenant systems. According to many Tibetan Lamas, for example, the Zen, most Zen teachings are based on the mind only school of tenants and the mind only school of... Selflessness. So if you've studied, you know, a lot of people have done Zen practice and then they start delving into Tibetan Buddhism or as I mentioned before, Vipassanā with the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, that would be more of a Vaibhashaka school. Report an error in the passage at 1:57:48 Highlight the passage at 1:57:48

1:58:19 And so not to get confused if selflessness is presented differently. It will be, you know, and that's one of the things of getting familiar with these schools so you can partake of the different meditation techniques without a lot of confusion. Also some people are very interested in Hatha Yoga and then sometimes they'll start to study the philosophy behind different yoga systems which is often the Samkhya or Vedanta schools which isn't even a Buddhist school so they'll be teaching you that there is a substantially existent. Report an error in the passage at 1:58:19 Highlight the passage at 1:58:19

1:58:54 So don't get too confused about the different philosophies. Okay, so let's review real quickly where we're up to now. We have the two lower schools, the Vaibhashika and Sao Chantika. All but five of the 18 sub-schools of this and everybody else refutes that permanent, independent, unitary self. That's usually a learned view. Report an error in the passage at 1:58:54 Highlight the passage at 1:58:54

1:59:22 Learn from your religion, your philosophy. That would be like the Hindu view of Ātman, the Christian idea of soul. These two schools also refute, and everybody else, refutes the substantially existent self-sufficient one. That one that exists independent of the aggregates. It's something else that's kind of running the show. The mind and body, operating the mind and body. Report an error in the passage at 1:59:22 Highlight the passage at 1:59:22

1:59:49 Something independent of the aggregates. are refuted by those schools. These schools believe that the illustration of the person, what the self is, those are the views of self that are refuted. What do they say that the self is? Those schools say some combination of the aggregates or the mental consciousness aggregate. Report an error in the passage at 1:59:49 Highlight the passage at 1:59:49

2:00:14 The continuum of the five aggregates, there's different views in these different sub-schools. But they do say there is a self that exists. There is a self. It's just not the two views that they refute. They say that there is a self. Often in these schools, it's the mental consciousness aggregate as the real self. Report an error in the passage at 2:00:14 Highlight the passage at 2:00:14

2:00:37 And then we got up to the mind-only school, which also... Now here's where we have a little subtlety because we said the higher schools say that there's a selflessness of persons and a selflessness of phenomena. Apart from the Prasangika school, these are two different things. So mind only says the selflessness of persons is the same. Report an error in the passage at 2:00:37 Highlight the passage at 2:00:37

2:01:05 The lack of being that substantially existent self-sufficient person independent from the aggregates. No, they also believe that phenomena are devoid of some impossible way of existing. What do they say about phenomena? It's devoid of being anything but arising from one karmic seed. That's the thing where you get the object and the perception of the object arises from one karmic seed. Report an error in the passage at 2:01:05 Highlight the passage at 2:01:05

2:01:35 And that's what the selflessness of phenomena is in this school. It doesn't exist independent of having arisen. The external objects don't exist independent or devoid of arising from the same karmic seed as the perception. So that's the way that phenomena exist according to that school. So you can see we're getting closer and closer and closer to the view of middle way consequence that we touched on last night. Report an error in the passage at 2:01:35 Highlight the passage at 2:01:35

2:02:06 So what is the middle way autonomy school? Say about the way persons exist and the way phenomena exist. They also say that persons are not substantially existent and self-sufficient. Same view. What do they say about the way phenomena exist? Getting really, really close now. What they say is phenomena are inherently existent but not truly existent. Report an error in the passage at 2:02:06 Highlight the passage at 2:02:06

2:02:39 And this gets really tricky. This is really subtle. What they say is this. They say, you know, the external phenomena do not exist apart from the consciousness doing the labeling. But there's something from the side of the object that makes it what it is. So it's about 50-50, right? This does not exist as a cup. Report an error in the passage at 2:02:39 Highlight the passage at 2:02:39

2:03:10 Without my consciousness labeling cup, but there's something from the side of the cup that makes it a cup. That's the part that's inherently existent. There's something from the side of the object that is hinting to me cup, right? But then I need my consciousness meeting that hint halfway before I can validly label this a cup. Report an error in the passage at 2:03:10 Highlight the passage at 2:03:10

2:03:38 And then that's what makes it a cup. So it's not truly existent, meaning that it doesn't exist apart from the consciousness labeling it, but it's inherently existent, meaning there's something findable in that object that makes it what it is. This gets really subtle and very tricky. So this object is out there. It's not a cup yet because my mind hasn't labeled it yet. Report an error in the passage at 2:03:38 Highlight the passage at 2:03:38

2:04:02 So there's an external object. This school says... The external object doesn't depend on the same karmic seed as my perception, per se. But what's happening is, very close to that, very close, and we're just one little level up. That object out there is saying to me, hey, don't I look like a cup? Aren't I kind of cup-ish? Don't you think I'm a cup? Report an error in the passage at 2:04:02 Highlight the passage at 2:04:02

2:04:27 So it's like 50 % is giving me all of these cup-ish signals. From its side. And then I go, oh wow, you know, that looks like a cup. I respond with 50 % of my mental labeling. And that's how the cup exists, according to that school. So there's something from the side of the object that makes it what it is, but it's not that thing until my consciousness meets it halfway and labels. Report an error in the passage at 2:04:27 Highlight the passage at 2:04:27

2:04:56 Really interesting. Okay, so inherently existent but not truly existent. You know, this is just language. Yeah, Jacob. Yeah, so can you, Ty, can you grab? Report an error in the passage at 2:04:56 Highlight the passage at 2:04:56

2:05:13 I'm just wondering if I could get a little bit more clarification on what that something coming from the cup might be. You know, is it characteristics? Is it shape? Is it function? Is it form? Is it... Right. What are those things? Right. And it's sort of all of those things. The reason the Sva Tantrika school says this is, they say, you middle way consequent school people go too far. Report an error in the passage at 2:05:13 Highlight the passage at 2:05:13

2:05:38 If something only exists on the basis of your concepts and your mental imputation, then anything could be anything. Everything falls apart. How can you posit even cause and effect? how can you you know everything is just some random hallucination You guys go too far. So there has to be something from the side of the object that makes it what it is. Report an error in the passage at 2:05:38 Highlight the passage at 2:05:38

2:06:05 Yeah, they're saying, hey, if it's all dependent on your imputation, call this a cup, call the keys a cup, call the paper. Anything could be anything. Let's steal all the hotel towels. Why not? You know, because cause and effect falls apart. Everything falls apart. So they say there has to be something. Report an error in the passage at 2:06:05 Highlight the passage at 2:06:05

2:06:24 Please give us just a little something to grasp onto. Just a little ground under our feet. There has to be something coming from inside making it what it is. Hinting at you so that then you can respond by labeling. I think I understand. First you have to have a concept. Like you were explaining earlier how our concepts work. Report an error in the passage at 2:06:24 Highlight the passage at 2:06:24

2:06:53 You have to have, you know, a cup is something of a certain size. It has a bottom. It has a this and a that. And so you create this concept and bottom is a concept and a certain size is a concept. But it's a concept of concepts. Yeah. And then some kind of phenomenon comes along and it fits into that keyhole, which makes it what it is. Report an error in the passage at 2:06:53 Highlight the passage at 2:06:53

2:07:14 Now that's middleweight consequence. That's middleweight consequence school. We're not quite there yet. Okay, this is slightly different. Very, very, very subtle. They say that it's inherently existent because there's something existent in the object independent of my mental labeling that makes it the cup. Report an error in the passage at 2:07:14 Highlight the passage at 2:07:14

2:07:35 And then I come along with my concepts and voila, 100 % cup. 50 % coming from the side of the object. I guess I'm not seeing how there's a basis for that. Good. You're a middle way consequence person. Perfect. Right on, you know. Good. And it's subtle. It's so subtle. And we'll get to middle way consequence in the middle. So subtle the difference between that and middle way consequence. Because it's just saying, without there being something from its own side, making it what it is, you could say anything could be anything. Report an error in the passage at 2:07:35 Highlight the passage at 2:07:35

2:08:10 In the middle way consequence, people say there is nothing at all from its own side. That makes this a cup. And that gets interesting and we'll get there. Okay, so nothing whatsoever, not one iota of inherent existence, say the middle way consequence people. Report an error in the passage at 2:08:10 Highlight the passage at 2:08:10

2:08:30 I want to know the basis for this school's view. I want to understand why they say that because I don't yet. Yeah, yeah. Well, they're just saying that because otherwise they say... You fall into the extreme of nihilism. They're saying the middle way consequence people fall into nihilism because by saying there's not one iota of inherent existence in that cup, why couldn't you say, say middle way autonomy people, that anything could be anything? Report an error in the passage at 2:08:30 Highlight the passage at 2:08:30

2:08:57 Okay, so they're saying there has to be something from the side of that object that makes it what it is. There has to be. Otherwise, how could you posit any kind of conventional reality at all? If it's only dependent on mental labeling, how could you posit anything, you know, that we can agree on? And we're going to go into how the Middle Way Consequence School says that things do validly exist, and then it'll maybe be more clear what the subtle difference is. Report an error in the passage at 2:08:57 Highlight the passage at 2:08:57

2:09:26 Okay, so we get that way. There's a really fat book called the Svatantrika Prasangika Distinction by one of these people I've forgotten now. It's not Guy Nuland, it's somebody else. You know, fat book that talks about the differences between the very, very subtle differences between these two schools. But the basis is they're saying it has to come from its own, you know, things have to be inherently existent. Report an error in the passage at 2:09:26 Highlight the passage at 2:09:26

2:09:52 They have to be what they are from their own side. And then you label it. And that's fine. But if it weren't like that, anything could be anything. And we'd just be all like completely psychotic, you know, labeling, you know, trying to make phone calls with bananas or whatever, you know, just thinking that anything was anything. Report an error in the passage at 2:09:52 Highlight the passage at 2:09:52

2:10:10 And then cause and effect would fall apart. So their argument with the middle way consequence people is, if you guys are right, there's no basis for cause and effect. But the middle way consequence people, you know, have their view of how things do. Validly exist. And there's specific sutras and texts that the Middle Way Autonomy School is based on. Report an error in the passage at 2:10:10 Highlight the passage at 2:10:10

2:10:34 And you can get into that further in your further study. There was somebody else. Yeah. I was just wondering why then is the Middle Way Autonomy School considered one of the higher schools with selflessness a phenomenon? So there must be in their view that even though there is this hint of something there, that there is selflessness of that. Report an error in the passage at 2:10:34 Highlight the passage at 2:10:34

2:11:01 But I can't quite see where that is. Yeah, it's not the complete selflessness that the middle way consequence school. You know, we're brainwashed because most of our teachings in Tibetan Buddhism come from this school. So everything seems like reification to us, doesn't it? Because we're very brainwashed by... Report an error in the passage at 2:11:01 Highlight the passage at 2:11:01

2:11:22 The Lamrim, which presents things from the Middle Way Consequence School. So we go, well, wait a minute, that really feels like inherent existence to me. And they'd say, yeah, it is, you know, but what it is, is you're saying that at least it depends on your consciousness doing the labeling, right? At least here it depends on the phenomena arising from the same karmic seat. So you can see how at least there's some engagement in co-creating reality. Report an error in the passage at 2:11:22 Highlight the passage at 2:11:22

2:11:50 It's not just coming at you 100 % without your perception playing a role at all. This is saying the way your mind plays a role is that your perception of the object came from the same karmic seat. This is the way your mind is playing a role is meeting the object. You know, 50-50 hinting at what it is, but then your mind has to meet it halfway for it to exist the way it is. Both of those are tearing holes in... Report an error in the passage at 2:11:50 Highlight the passage at 2:11:50

2:12:18 You know, way back pre-Vibachica, here I am randomly moving through life, a helpless victim, everything's happening to me, I'm so solid, I can't change, it's all coming at me. You know, so even that is really, but we've been totally brainwashed by the Middle Way Consequence School already, and we think that's really inherently existent. Report an error in the passage at 2:12:18 Highlight the passage at 2:12:18

2:12:40 It is. It is, compared to the view that there's not one iota of anything. Existing from its own side at all. But you can see how, like when I got here, I go, oh, that's what I think. You know, that's when I made my confession to Venerable René. Oh, wow. I'm a middle-way autonomy person. He says, very good. You know, that's great. Go ahead and practice there because it's better than way back yonder where... Report an error in the passage at 2:12:40 Highlight the passage at 2:12:40

2:13:05 We usually are, you know, not even on any rung of the ladder at all. We're standing on solid ground and everything's so concrete. He'll say, this is great. Hang out there for a while and work on your view. Because I was saying, but anything could be anything. And he goes, that's why this Mount Dantra Gasset, half of it has to come from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 2:13:05 Highlight the passage at 2:13:05

2:13:23 But we've been completely brainwashed because that seems really wrong. You know, it seems very eternalist to us. Was there somebody over there? Something else? Did you have something, Rose? Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 2:13:23 Highlight the passage at 2:13:23

2:13:37 I get stuck also because I think as soon as I label something, so there is a concept behind, there is already conceptualized and it comes from me. So I think I'm more in this mind only state. Yeah. yeah. You know, how do they, is there a possibility to meet? Report an error in the passage at 2:13:37 Highlight the passage at 2:13:37

2:14:09 Some things which is not labeled yet. Okay, we'll go through that process of how things... We'll go through that process when we get to the middle way consequence, you know, of how the whole thing works. That we label something and that it validly exists. We'll go through that. Yeah, yeah. Anything else on middle way autonomy? Report an error in the passage at 2:14:09 Highlight the passage at 2:14:09

2:14:35 I think, Jacob, to get that book appearance in reality, which goes into it in a lot more detail of where that comes from, but the short answer in the time that we have left this afternoon is to refute the middle way consequentialists. They think that the conclusion would be anything could be anything. There's got to be something coming from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 2:14:35 Highlight the passage at 2:14:35

2:15:00 And Bhava Viveka, there were these five great disciples of Varyanagarjuna, including Bhava Viveka, who was the originator of the texts upon which the Middle Way Autonomy School is based. And then some of the other disciples, and there were all disciples of Varyanagarjuna. And then Buddha Pahlita and Chandrakirti refuted Bhava Viveka. Report an error in the passage at 2:15:00 Highlight the passage at 2:15:00

2:15:24 And these were the main people who were arguing. Bhava Viveka holding the middle way autonomy school tenets and Buddha Palita and Chandrakirti especially of the middle way consequence, all of whom were disciples of Arya Nagarjuna. So Nagarjuna taught them and even they came up with different ideas. So this you can read in some of the references about what the subtle arguments are. Report an error in the passage at 2:15:24 Highlight the passage at 2:15:24

2:15:50 And both of them thought they held the highest view. Bhava Viveka was convinced that he held the highest view taught to him by Arya Nagarjuna and Buddha Palita was too. So it's interesting when you get into the original thing that gave rise to these views and the arguments there. Okay, so then here we are. Report an error in the passage at 2:15:50 Highlight the passage at 2:15:50

2:16:13 Middle way consequence. Oh, by the way. Okay. Report an error in the passage at 2:16:13 Highlight the passage at 2:16:13

2:16:17 The Svatantrika school, what do they say the illustration of the person is? How does the self exist according to them? They say that it's the consciousness aggregate. And this gets back to what Chris was saying last night. Isn't the consciousness the self? Because that's what goes from life to life. And it's very convincing, right? Even all the way up to Middle Way Autonomy school, they're saying, yeah, that's the self. Report an error in the passage at 2:16:17 Highlight the passage at 2:16:17

2:16:43 The mental consciousness aggregate. That's what goes from life to life. That's what carries the karmic imprints. Yeah, that's what the self is. The self isn't all these other ones, you know, that unitary partless one. It's not that substantially self-existent one, but it is the mental consciousness aggregates. Report an error in the passage at 2:16:43 Highlight the passage at 2:16:43

2:17:01 That's what the self is. Okay, so now here we go. Middleway Consequence School. It says there's not even one iota of self-existence in anything. Everything is merely labeled by mind, independence on a valid basis of imputation. Report an error in the passage at 2:17:01 Highlight the passage at 2:17:01

2:17:25 So not one iota of cupness. This cup is not hinting to me. Look at me. Don't I kind of look like a cup? Wouldn't you love to label me a cup? Wouldn't you love to think about me as a cup? You know, aren't I cupish? What happens in the middle way consequence school is I have a concept. You know, my concept is a generic image, a dunci in Tibetan, generic image, meaning generality, universal. Report an error in the passage at 2:17:25 Highlight the passage at 2:17:25

2:17:55 These are some of the ways that this word dunci is translated. You know, so I'm walking around with a mind full of generic images, you know, concepts. Report an error in the passage at 2:17:55 Highlight the passage at 2:17:55

2:18:08 Floating around in there is a concept of cup. I meet a cylinder with a bottom and a handle that's small enough and big enough, you know, within a certain range of size that I can hold it with an open top that I can drink liquid out of. I meet up with this raw data in my world somewhere. My mental image of cup gets triggered. Report an error in the passage at 2:18:08 Highlight the passage at 2:18:08

2:18:38 By that raw data. So I label this innocent little green cylinder. I label it cup. It wasn't a cup until I came along and labeled it cup. It was just a little green cylinder with a bottom and an open top holding some tea. Report an error in the passage at 2:18:38 Highlight the passage at 2:18:38

2:18:59 Yeah, it wasn't greener cylinder either. You know, and there's levels to that. Okay? Hang on. Wait, wait, wait. Okay, so I come along, so this green cylinder, which isn't green or a cylinder, there's the layers of the onion, you keep going down, okay, but on the grossest level, you know, it's a green cylinder with an open top. Report an error in the passage at 2:18:59 Highlight the passage at 2:18:59

2:19:22 I have a concept cup. This appears in my visual field. I lay the label cup on it. I lay my trip on it. No problem. So far. Okay. But what happens is it looks like it's a cup there. I walk into this room and Janet very kindly brought my cup, my cup, the green cylinder down from my room and put it on my table. Report an error in the passage at 2:19:22 Highlight the passage at 2:19:22

2:19:56 You know, and so I walk in the room and I go, oh good, my cup of tea is on the table. And I see it coming from its own side. I don't say, oh, I just come in here. And all that's here is colors and shapes. And I label cup, I label table, I label clock, I label tonka, I label Judith, I label Janet. Right? I create this room with all of you in it, with the tonkas, with everything in it, by my process of mental labeling. Report an error in the passage at 2:19:56 Highlight the passage at 2:19:56

2:20:26 But it doesn't seem like that to me at all. It seems like you're all sitting here as who you are and how I perceive you when I walk in the door. And it's just me labeling. All that exists in here is colors and shapes. And then I lay all of my concepts onto those colors and shapes and create this room full of people that I recognize and objects that I'm familiar with. Report an error in the passage at 2:20:26 Highlight the passage at 2:20:26

2:20:51 And that's how I create my reality. So Middle Way Consequence School says, yes, there are external objects, but they're not what they are until my mind comes along. And labels them. And there was nothing from its side that hinted to me what it was. Right? Not one iota of inherent existence. There's nothing about this that's a cup from its own side. Not even a shred or a particle that's a cup from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 2:20:51 Highlight the passage at 2:20:51

2:21:22 It's just an innocent cylinder. It matches up with some concept I have in my head. And then I label that onto the external object. And that's what I'm doing. With everything. So everything is just merely labeled on the basis of being a valid object. Okay, a valid basis. And we're going to talk about what makes it valid in just a minute. I exist that way too. What's going on with me? Report an error in the passage at 2:21:22 Highlight the passage at 2:21:22

2:21:54 Right? Body and mind. Five aggregates. Constantly changing. Just this collection. By the way, the reason it's called aggregate, sometimes translated as heaps, is because it's this whole bundle of stuff. Each one of those five things isn't one discrete thing. Form aggregate. Whole bundle. Molecules, cells, you know, subatomic particles that I call form. Report an error in the passage at 2:21:54 Highlight the passage at 2:21:54

2:22:25 Consciousness. Whole bunch of different kinds of sense consciousness and mental consciousness. So I've got these five piles and actually when the Buddha taught the sūtra where he explained the five aggregates, he was sitting on the ground in northern India, made five piles of rice in front of him, pointed, form, feeling, discrimination, compositional factors, consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 2:22:25 Highlight the passage at 2:22:25

2:22:47 So five literal piles and bundles of stuff. So I've got that going on and then on top of that, what do I do? I have a concept, Tenzin Chogky, that I label on top of those five aggregates. There's no Tenzin Chogky findable in there anywhere. She's not even here. She's nowhere. Apart from being just a concept, a mental imputation laid on a valid basis of functioning body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 2:22:47 Highlight the passage at 2:22:47

2:23:21 according to... Middle Way Consequence School, that's how the self exists. It's not the mental consciousness. It's not any of those other things the other school exists. They call it the mere I. What's the mere I? That which is merely labeled in dependence on the aggregates. That's how the self exists, according to Middle Way Consequence School. It is nowhere findable as one of the aggregates within the aggregates or even the whole thing together, independent of that process of mental labeling. Report an error in the passage at 2:23:21 Highlight the passage at 2:23:21

2:23:55 So it's extremely subtle. And Lama Zopa Rinpoche says the way the self does exist, really, really subtle. Just a concept laid on the five aggregates. And that's called the mere I. Report an error in the passage at 2:23:55 Highlight the passage at 2:23:55

2:24:10 Okay? So very, very subtle. But you can see how, especially of these schools, we've gotten closer and closer and closer, haven't we? You know, our mental labeling plays more and more of a role. The higher we get intel here, it's everything. It plays, you know, it creates our reality completely. Report an error in the passage at 2:24:10 Highlight the passage at 2:24:10

2:24:33 Okay, so before we get into how things, what the valid basis is. For the mental labeling. Any questions about that? Have I lost everybody completely? Are you just like circuits blown? Yeah, Rose. Report an error in the passage at 2:24:33 Highlight the passage at 2:24:33

2:24:54 Could we say that all the schools without the last one are dualistic schools? You could use that language, yeah. You could use that language if you meet. I mean, there's a lot of different ways that the word dualistic can be used. So maybe define what you mean by dualistic. Because they see everything as composed. For example, there is me and there is the cup. Report an error in the passage at 2:24:54 Highlight the passage at 2:24:54

2:25:26 Yeah. There's always... Duality. There is duality in it. Yeah. And then in the last one, they neglect. They say, no, there is not even some things which can be... than the self other than But they do say there's external objects. So we have to be really careful about this word dualistic because it has so many different meanings. Report an error in the passage at 2:25:26 Highlight the passage at 2:25:26

2:26:00 So we have to be a little bit careful because this school says, yes, there are external objects. You know, no problem. It's not just consciousness. It's not just, you know, that thing that everything is just a hallucination. I'm walking around in my own private hallucination. There are external objects, but then those objects becoming what they are is completely dependent on the process of labeling. Report an error in the passage at 2:26:00 Highlight the passage at 2:26:00

2:26:25 One cannot say that there is no self in the cup and no in the person. Well, okay, selflessness. Refers to both phenomena and people. So yeah, oh by the way, that's a good point. According to this school, there's no difference in subtlety between the selflessness of persons and the selflessness of phenomena. Report an error in the passage at 2:26:25 Highlight the passage at 2:26:25

2:26:51 All the other schools differentiate between the selflessness of persons and the selflessness of phenomena. This school says it's just the same for Tenzin Chogky, it's just the same for the cup. Same level of subtlety. There's no difference at all between the subtlety. So in that way, that school does say, you know, not only is there not one iota of cupness in this green cylinder, there's not one iota of Tenzin Chogkyness in Tenzin Choki, you know, at all. Report an error in the passage at 2:26:51 Highlight the passage at 2:26:51

2:27:21 And everything is exactly the same. The other ones differentiate slightly between the selflessness of persons and the selflessness of phenomena. Okay? Yeah, Morgan. And then Ty. Report an error in the passage at 2:27:21 Highlight the passage at 2:27:21

2:27:33 So what is it specifically that when you talk about the label of the mere eye and seeing that the aggregates are, you know, obviously seeing that the eye and kind of using your heaps is associated with the aggregates. But then when you say, you know, we're the giant label maker, we go around and label, label, label. Yeah. But then when you took a step just there, maybe I didn't understand it, is you took a step that said, The mere I is labeled based off of the aggregates. But what I'm going to also say is that the aggregates are not permanent. Report an error in the passage at 2:27:33 Highlight the passage at 2:27:33

2:28:13 They're also empty. So what is doing the labeling in the end? Or is that so like the labeling of the I right now? Does that make sense? Yeah. So it's just a concept. It's just an idea. Right. So the mere I is the. The concept of self that is labeled on the basis of the aggregates, by consciousness. It's just the consciousness doing that. Report an error in the passage at 2:28:13 Highlight the passage at 2:28:13

2:28:42 It's just another thought. Remember we said there are six consciousnesses and the sixth one is mental consciousness. The object of that consciousness is thought. So the mere I is just another concept, just another mental imputation. This time, instead of having the concept cup on the basis of green cylinder with the bottom in the handle, I have the concept Tenzin Chogky based on the five aggregates. Report an error in the passage at 2:28:42 Highlight the passage at 2:28:42

2:29:11 So that's the way that self exists according to the Middle Way Consequence School is only that which is merely labeled independence on the five aggregates. So now going back to one of your points, and I forget which school it is that kind of has this karmic seed bucket. And this one runs around. What is the perception of, you know, obviously getting the mirror eye and the concept of that, but where does that come from? Report an error in the passage at 2:29:11 Highlight the passage at 2:29:11

2:29:35 Where does that come from? How would the Prasangita school, where do they say that karma sits then? It's like, well, this is a label, right? You know, I'm labeling this existing object. in the beginning? Where does that come from? Report an error in the passage at 2:29:35 Highlight the passage at 2:29:35

2:29:48 Oh, that's the root ignorance. That's the root ignorance. I mean, that's the ignorance that, you know, is at the top of all of those flow charts that lead to suffering. You know, that's the root ignorance of how things, our misapprehension of how things exist. You know, and the very root one is ignorance about how the self exists and think that we exist in... Report an error in the passage at 2:29:48 Highlight the passage at 2:29:48

2:30:11 Some way other than that. I mean, have you ever thought, oh, Morgan is only merely labeled on the ever-changing continuum of mind and body moments of Morgan? No, I'm Morgan. You know, you've got some, I mean, sorry, but you've got something inside. It's way more solid than that. Your inherent view of Morgan is not, oh, that which is just merely labeled independence on an ever-changing continuum of mind and body. Report an error in the passage at 2:30:11 Highlight the passage at 2:30:11

2:30:38 Right? There's something more solid, probably one of those previous ones, you know, probably the little driver one in there somewhere. So there's so much space in thinking, wow, the only way that I exist, right, is constantly changing, continuum. Report an error in the passage at 2:30:38 Highlight the passage at 2:30:38

2:30:56 You know, moment to moment to moment changing, impermanent, you know, continuum. Then on top of that, I just have this idea labeled. On top of that constantly changing continuum. And that's the way the self does exist. Right? So the Marimika Prasangikas say, yes, the self exists. Morgan is sitting on the cushion. No problem. But how does Morgan exist as that which is merely labeled, just a mere concept on top of this ever-changing continuum? Report an error in the passage at 2:30:56 Highlight the passage at 2:30:56

2:31:30 How does that help you? We carry around this baggage, right? Something that happened when you were six years old, right? You completely think that that's who you still are. Solid, concrete. If we got, you know, momentary labeling process on this ever-changing continuum. I mentioned before I work with these inmates. One of the things I try and do with them more than anything is get them to drop this concrete view of who they are. Report an error in the passage at 2:31:30 Highlight the passage at 2:31:30

2:32:03 They did something when they were 18 years old. They have a life sentence in prison. They have so much guilt. They have such a concrete view. They've been told, usually their whole life, because they didn't end up there because their childhood was rosy either, right? So usually their whole life they've been told they were worthless, they could amount to nothing, they were stupid, etc., etc., etc. Report an error in the passage at 2:32:03 Highlight the passage at 2:32:03

2:32:26 It's like monolithic for them, you know, this concrete view. And what I try and do so much for them, and it's just an extreme of how we all are, is like break that apart. Look, yeah, you did this thing. Yes, you feel bad. It's not who you are. You've changed so much. I try and mirror for them how much I see them change. You know, one of them wrote me a letter recently and he goes, oh, thank you so much for driving three hours to see us and finding us worthwhile. Report an error in the passage at 2:32:26 Highlight the passage at 2:32:26

2:32:56 I'm like, are you kidding? You know, they have this terrible, because they're dragging around this baggage and this self-concept based on some story. So historical, you know, so historical. It's like if we could just see, you know, where we are in the moment. But it's so concrete and monolithic for most of us. Report an error in the passage at 2:32:56 Highlight the passage at 2:32:56

2:33:19 There's this program that I've been investigating. I'm going to New Zealand for two months and they want me to work with substance abusers. It's a big problem in the community where I'm going to be going in substance abuse. So I've been, you know, trying to investigate different ways from a Buddhist framework to work. Report an error in the passage at 2:33:19 Highlight the passage at 2:33:19

2:33:35 And there's something that a friend of mine told me about, developed by two psychologists at Yale, called Spiritual Self-Schema Therapy. And it's all about changing the label. And they say as long as people label themselves addict, they can never really go into permanent recovery. You know, because they have this huge label. Report an error in the passage at 2:33:35 Highlight the passage at 2:33:35

2:33:56 And they say they gave they gave people it's this whole program. It's so fascinating. They give people, you know, substance abusers, a questionnaire and they say, mark the characteristics of addicts and the characteristic of spiritual people, you know, and then they work with trying to get the people to change the label because they found as long as there's a solid label addict, there's no way. Report an error in the passage at 2:33:56 Highlight the passage at 2:33:56

2:34:19 But if they can label themselves spiritual seeker, the whole. Concept changes. So there's so many applications to this. You know, all we are is labeling independence on an ever-changing continuum. And that's how things exist, according to Madhya Mika Prasangika. Yeah, Janet. I just wanted to say that that statement that you made about changing the labels or changing your... Report an error in the passage at 2:34:19 Highlight the passage at 2:34:19

2:34:49 Basically your mind really does work because having been addicted to cigarettes which was the hardest thing ever for me to give up. We did a self-hypnosis video. It was a long time before I did Buddhism. But one of the thoughts that I found the most helpful out of the five or six little thoughts that they gave us was I'm a non-smoker. Report an error in the passage at 2:34:49 Highlight the passage at 2:34:49

2:35:14 And that made it so much easier because even when I thought about picking up a cigarette, if I thought, well, I'm a non-smoker, why would I want to smoke? Because if I thought of myself as a smoker or, say, an addict trying to quit, then I'd always be that addict. Yeah, right, right, right. And I can see how it works. And we use it in Buddhism in the tantras. Report an error in the passage at 2:35:14 Highlight the passage at 2:35:14

2:35:42 That kind of thing. Yeah, yeah. Hey, change the label radically. Change it. Yeah, I mean, we create our reality by our labels and we can use it to our advantage. It doesn't just need to imprison us in saṃsāra. Like, let's try using it. And the thing is, okay, at the level that we are, you know, I have human being karma. Report an error in the passage at 2:35:42 Highlight the passage at 2:35:42

2:36:05 It doesn't matter how much I try and convince myself this is nectar. It's still going to be tea for me. But if I really clean up my act and start practicing properly, my karma will force me to experience this as nectar. Okay, so in the beginning we work at fooling ourselves a little bit, but this isn't just some, like, remember in the 80s affirmations and you wrote these things on post-its and stuck them to your mirror. Report an error in the passage at 2:36:05 Highlight the passage at 2:36:05

2:36:32 I am rich, I am good looking, I am whatever. Well, karma still, you know, cause and effect still works. No amount of just trying to talk yourself into something will make this, you know, experience, be experienced as nectar. But, and this is where karma and emptiness work together, because it's not self-existently tea. It's only tea. Report an error in the passage at 2:36:32 Highlight the passage at 2:36:32

2:36:54 Because I'm a human being with that karma and I put that label on that liquid that's forced on me by my karma as a human being. It could be a lot worse. It could be pus and blood. Thank goodness it's not. But it could be a lot better too. Right? So what should I do if I want to experience this as nectar? Report an error in the passage at 2:36:54 Highlight the passage at 2:36:54

2:37:14 Really be careful about my morality. Keep my vows. Treat people really well. And then my karma will force me to experience this as nectar because it's empty of inherent existence. Because empty of inherent existence. The only thing that's there is a liquid. I can label it. Not anything I want to fool myself in some kind of affirmation kind of way. Report an error in the passage at 2:37:14 Highlight the passage at 2:37:14

2:37:40 But I could create the karma to be born into a realm in which I experience the same. Liquid is nectar. But we start where we are. You know, we start where we are, knowing that our karma is forcing us to have a certain label of reality. But there's a certain amount of subjectivity. It's not infinite for us yet, but there's a certain amount of subjectivity. Okay, so we can work with it. Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 2:37:40 Highlight the passage at 2:37:40

2:38:08 I'm a little more comfortable with this concept of self and trying to challenge that it's this concrete notion. And to me, that also ties in with a lot of thoughts of identity and persona. I think it's a little easier for me to think of it that way if you accept reincarnation and the thought of karma and your subtle most mind that right now there's this persona that I'm living in made up of the five aggregates. Report an error in the passage at 2:38:08 Highlight the passage at 2:38:08

2:38:31 But I'm wondering a little bit more about how we got this way. If it's true that the middle way consequence school, that that's how reality really is, why do so many of us, and I don't even mean just in this culture and I mean throughout history, that we've... Gotten so attached to this notion of an I that we have to protect and that we have to promote. So if that's the nature of reality, then why do so many of us still, you know, kind of get bogged down into this concrete notion of an I and especially the part where, you know, you have to protect and promote it. Report an error in the passage at 2:38:31 Highlight the passage at 2:38:31

2:39:04 Right, right. And actually Morgan asked this question last night. How did it all begin? You know, where did this innate ignorance? And this is one of the questions that Lord Buddha refused to answer. What's the beginning to ignorance? The fact is, the reality is, unless we're an Arya being who's had a direct realization of emptiness and the direct realization of the nature of reality, this is where we're all coming from. Report an error in the passage at 2:39:04 Highlight the passage at 2:39:04

2:39:32 You know, any non-Arya, which is probably most of the people on the planet, and by the way, most of the other realm beings, animals and all of the other realms have this innate, Wrong view. This innate ignorance. Thinking that the I exists in a way other than any of these ways. You know, we're way back pre-Vibashika. Report an error in the passage at 2:39:32 Highlight the passage at 2:39:32

2:39:53 You know, that it's completely concrete, not at all dependent on mind, on any level of this kind of labeling. And how did we get messed up in the first place? That's one of those things the Buddha doesn't talk about. Consciousness is beginningless. Did it start out ignorant or not? This is one of those questions that gets asked in the sutras and the Buddha refused to answer. And the reason he refused to answer was because it would lead to more misunderstanding for us. Report an error in the passage at 2:39:53 Highlight the passage at 2:39:53

2:40:22 So he just decided not to answer. With our consciousness the way that it is, it would just mess us up even more. It would just create even more confusion for us. The fact is that we do have this innate ignorance and by learning and by meditating and by trying to break it down, we can start to rip that innate ignorance apart. Report an error in the passage at 2:40:22 Highlight the passage at 2:40:22

2:40:45 But it's not just us sitting in this room, it's every being who's not in Arya. Being on either the individual liberation track or the Mahāyāna track has this root ignorance. Which is the cause, by the way, of every iota of suffering that we've ever experienced since beginningless time. So I personally am really fed up with it and I really want to get rid of it in this lifetime if possible. Because it's the source of every iota of suffering that we've ever had. Report an error in the passage at 2:40:45 Highlight the passage at 2:40:45

2:41:15 That's the root. And you were talking about how the Middle Way Autonomy School, that they think it's maybe 50-50. Yeah. That there's some inherent cupness coming out of that. Yeah. And do they mean more than shape that we've attached? fetched a certain meaning to or that culturally we use an object in a certain way they mean there's more than that In our culture, cylindrical objects with handles, and this is like 21st century Western culture, you know, an Inuit in Greenland, I don't know what they drink out of, but it probably doesn't look anything like this. Report an error in the passage at 2:41:15 Highlight the passage at 2:41:15

2:41:55 So they may not label this cup. But for us, you know, so our reality is also very consensual. Valid labeling is very consensual. So we would say, yes, in our culture, you know, consensually we call such an object a cup. And that's what validly makes it a cup. And that's a very middle way consequent school. The autonomy school, there's more than that. There's something coming from its own side that makes it that independent of consensus. Report an error in the passage at 2:41:55 Highlight the passage at 2:41:55

2:42:26 It's very interesting. There's this Lama Tsongkhapa Rinpoche, this young, completely brilliant Lama, who wrote this book called What Makes You Not a Buddhist? I recommend it to everybody. It's so brilliant. When I read this book, None of it was new concepts, but the way he explains stuff just blew my mind. It's completely brilliant. He talks, when he talks about how things validly exist, and we're jumping ahead to the next subject, but I love the way he talks about it because it's kind of a new approach. Report an error in the passage at 2:42:26 Highlight the passage at 2:42:26

2:42:56 He said, things are validly what they are based on continuity, consensus and function. Really interesting. He said that's the way Nagarjuna said something else. We'll get to what Nagarjuna said in a minute. But Zongzir Kenshi Rinpoche said continuity, consensus and function. So for this cup to validly be a cup, it has to have some continuity that I can even perceive it. You know, those subatomic particles that have a half-life of like 85 micro nanoseconds or something. Report an error in the passage at 2:42:56 Highlight the passage at 2:42:56

2:43:30 You know, those that don't enter into my reality is an object to be perceived. You know, they give a little blip on one of those little bubble chamber things. But, you know, that has nothing to do with my reality. So there's some continuity. This cup is changing moment to moment to moment to moment because of subtle impermanence. The molecules, the subatomic particles, it's just this whirling, wild, you know, in motion. Report an error in the passage at 2:43:30 Highlight the passage at 2:43:30

2:43:54 Right? But it has some continuity. Even though it's changing moment to moment, there's some continuity unlike some of those other things like those subatomic particles. It also has a function of holding liquid, you know, that I can drink out of. And then due to consensus in 21st century America, that's what we call a cup. And that's why I can validly call it a cup. Report an error in the passage at 2:43:54 Highlight the passage at 2:43:54

2:44:21 Now, in 21st century America, This is not a valid basis for the label cup. You know, it doesn't have that function of being a cylindrical object from which I can drink liquid. And that's why it's not that everything can be everything. You know, that you can just decide what to label things. Oh, I'll call this a cup. Well, it's not going to do me any good because it's not going to hold liquid that I can drink out of. Report an error in the passage at 2:44:21 Highlight the passage at 2:44:21

2:44:51 So independence on those criteria is how we can validly label something what it is. But it doesn't mean that it's that from its own side at all. Even though I can validly call this a cup because of consensus, because of function, because of continuity, there's not one iota of cupness here. And this is something you really have to work with in meditation. Report an error in the passage at 2:44:51 Highlight the passage at 2:44:51

2:45:18 You know, it seems baffling. You're like, of course it's a cup. Don't be ridiculous. You've been drinking out of it all day. You know, and yeah, that's true. But it's only merely labeled on a valid basis of imputation. And the valid basis depends, as Zongzhar Kenzi Rimshe would say, on continuity, consensus and function. Report an error in the passage at 2:45:18 Highlight the passage at 2:45:18

2:45:39 And this is something you really have to work with in meditation over and over again. Yeah, Tai. Kind of backtracking here. Report an error in the passage at 2:45:39 Highlight the passage at 2:45:39

2:45:51 Just for clarity, would you say that the difference then, the only and the very subtle difference between Svatantrika and Prasangika is that in Prasangika, the actual outside, things in the actual outside world do not have characteristics, whereas in Svatantrika they have some characteristics that you then impute more onto? Report an error in the passage at 2:45:51 Highlight the passage at 2:45:51

2:46:14 Well, they have characteristics, they just don't have characteristics making them what they are from their own side. You know, this has a characteristic of being a cylinder. It has a characteristic of having a bottom and a top. But there's nothing about those characteristics that makes it a cup from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 2:46:14 Highlight the passage at 2:46:14

2:46:30 Whereas the Sva Tantrikas would say, yeah, those characteristics make it a cup. And then my mind, you know, labels it a cup. And then that's how the cup exists. Okay. Jacob and then Keith. Report an error in the passage at 2:46:30 Highlight the passage at 2:46:30

2:46:48 But then if there were characteristics that existed inherently. No, I didn't say that. I didn't say that. It sounded like you did. Nothing exists inherently. Not one iota of anything in the universe exists inherently. You would never trick me into saying that. So then I'm confused by Ty's question and your response to Ty's question about characteristics. The difference between the Svantantrika and the Prasangika is that Svantantrika would say that there's some kind of characteristics that exist. Report an error in the passage at 2:46:48 Highlight the passage at 2:46:48

2:47:25 on the side of the object that help you make them what it is yeah yeah but the prosangika has no There's no cup there from its own side at all. No characteristics of a cup. No, no, no. It has characteristics which enables me to label it because it makes it a valid basis of the label cup. But there's no cup. There's no characteristic that makes it a cup from its side. Or a cylinder or green. Report an error in the passage at 2:47:25 Highlight the passage at 2:47:25

2:47:55 Would that be true? Okay, so let's go down one level. Okay, what makes this, I say that, you know, on the grossest level, I label cup on the valid basis of green cylinder with a bottom and an open. What makes me call this a cylinder? Oh, you know, a kind of two-dimensional thing curved in this certain way is a valid basis of my label cylinder. Report an error in the passage at 2:47:55 Highlight the passage at 2:47:55

2:48:25 Okay, so on every level you can go down and down and down. What makes me call this a handle? Oh, you know, a certain part of ceramic sticking out of the cylinder that I can put my fingers through is what I label handle. So no matter how far you go down on any of the characteristics, you can't find it. Absolutely. There's nothing inherent. What's an atom? Oh, it's a concept I have about a certain kind of bundle of energy. Report an error in the passage at 2:48:25 Highlight the passage at 2:48:25

2:48:52 You know, what's a subatomic particle? Oh, it's some concept I have. You know, I mean, then it gets really sketchy, right? Because it's just some scientists, some physicists came up with an instrument that went blip. And I say, oh, electron. I don't have a bloody clue. It's just something was measurable on some instrument invented by some scientist. And then I make up all kinds of concepts and I say, oh, quarks, neutrinos, you know. Report an error in the passage at 2:48:52 Highlight the passage at 2:48:52

2:49:21 What's happening? Blips recorded on some, you know, instrument. I don't have a clue what's going on at that level. You make up theories on the basis of the data produced by some instrument. Report an error in the passage at 2:49:21 Highlight the passage at 2:49:21

2:49:38 Yeah, exactly. Right. But on every level, I mean, we'll leave that to the side because that's all. But on every level, every level is merely labeled on the basis of a valid, you know, a valid function. So I call cylinder, you know, there's a certain shape. Remember when you're a little kid and you have these little tests before you can even read and they're like, what's the triangle? Report an error in the passage at 2:49:38 Highlight the passage at 2:49:38

2:50:02 What's the cylinder? What's the circle? What's the square? What are we doing? Learning all those concepts. We're filling our mind with dunchis, with generic images, which enables me then to go, oh, cylinder. What's a cylinder? Something I learned in kindergarten on the basis of a certain shape. You know, there's no cylinder. What's green? Report an error in the passage at 2:50:02 Highlight the passage at 2:50:02

2:50:23 You know, I learn the label green. What's happening? A certain wavelength of light is being reflected from this object, you know, and I think there's green there. What's happening? Green is just some interaction between a certain wavelength of light and my, you know, eyeball and my, you know, visual cortex. Report an error in the passage at 2:50:23 Highlight the passage at 2:50:23

2:50:44 There's no green there, right? So on every level we can break it down. But we don't have to. Even on the grossest level, you can see how we're labeling on the basis of cylinder with a bottom. You know, we label color. And you have to work on it in meditation. This is where it needs to go below the neck. It's not so hard to understand this intellectually, but on your meditation cushion, it goes below the neck. Report an error in the passage at 2:50:44 Highlight the passage at 2:50:44

2:51:12 And you actually have a realization and you have some insight. Because it's really easy, relatively, to understand, oh yes, Tenzin Chogkyi is merely labeled on the valid basis of a functioning human. Five aggregates. But what happens when somebody disses me? I still get pissed off. Like, I'm sorry. You know, but it hasn't, even though I understand that, I don't have that realization yet. Report an error in the passage at 2:51:12 Highlight the passage at 2:51:12

2:51:36 So that when somebody, I mean, I had it, that moment that the two people, you know, I had a little, the veil dropped for a minute and I saw, wow, it's just his karma and it's just her karma and wow. But mostly I'm like, No, you know, how dare you? Because I have a terrible case of pride. So it hasn't gone below the neck, even though I can explain this all day, you know, till the cows come home. Report an error in the passage at 2:51:36 Highlight the passage at 2:51:36

2:51:58 So that happens on the meditation cushion that it actually changes the way that you relate to the world and cuts through your afflictions, which cuts through. The root of cyclic existence, you know, cyclic existence based on delusion and karma. And we're going to jump to the 12 links as our little grand finale of how it all hangs together in a minute to show how we create our unenlightened existence and how this will help us. Report an error in the passage at 2:51:58 Highlight the passage at 2:51:58

2:52:23 It's not just some theory. But first we'll have Keith ask his question. I have a question. No doubt to me that the prasantic consequence makes sense, I mean intellectually, but in terms of... You mentioned I really like that, getting below the neck or sitting. In trying to understand or realize emptiness, it somehow seems that it might be easier with the Chittimantra system to really understand emptiness below the neck because it just seems to fit more smoothly. Report an error in the passage at 2:52:23 Highlight the passage at 2:52:23

2:52:52 Maybe I'm wrong on that. You really like that Chittimantra system. I don't know if I like it or not because I haven't realized emptiness. I think it's fine to meditate on all of these levels until you get that realization. It will really help you cut through saṃsāra. So be my guest. If you get a direct realization of the selflessness based on the chitta mantra system, that will definitely really help you. Report an error in the passage at 2:52:52 Highlight the passage at 2:52:52

2:53:18 I think the danger is in, I mean the danger according to the Tibetans would be don't... Be fooled that that's the ultimate view and then press on from there. But I think, you know, like doing Vipassanā, four foundations of mindfulness, go for it. You know, some of my students say, oh, I want to do, you know, I want to go to Spirit Rock and do a 10-day retreat. Is that okay? And I say, absolutely. Report an error in the passage at 2:53:18 Highlight the passage at 2:53:18

2:53:43 Try for that direct realization of subtle selflessness. It will really help cut through. So I'm sorry. Just have an understanding of the different schools and don't get confused about what selflessness is according to middle way consequence. I agree with that. It just seems that the purpose is to realize emptiness. And so it would seem for maybe to do what resonates with a person, be it whatever resonates at the time. Report an error in the passage at 2:53:43 Highlight the passage at 2:53:43

2:54:10 To move with that. Sure, sure. Rather than struggle with something that doesn't really resonate with them yet. Yeah, that's why I present all these views and work your way up. You know, work your way up. And if you're really resonating with mind only, go ahead and work there. But I would say from time to time, you know, kind of bring out this view again and work with that. Report an error in the passage at 2:54:10 Highlight the passage at 2:54:10

2:54:33 But for sure to work with mind only. School view, it will help get you closer. That's why I present all of these, because if we try and jump right to middle way consequence, we don't know what the hell we're doing, frankly. You know, it's like you have some idea and you really don't know, whereas if you work your way up, and we've seen how this settler and settler and settler, you know, working your way up through the schools. Report an error in the passage at 2:54:33 Highlight the passage at 2:54:33

2:54:57 Yeah, so by all means, I give you permission. Report an error in the passage at 2:54:57 Highlight the passage at 2:54:57

2:55:03 Was there something else? Somebody else over here? No. Okay. Okay, so how do things validly exist? So middle way consequence has pulled the rug out from under us. And then it says, okay, there is a way that things validly exist. Okay, Arya Nagarjuna has three criteria. Report an error in the passage at 2:55:03 Highlight the passage at 2:55:03

2:55:29 Okay, things, how do things validly exist? As something that's validly labeled. On a basis of imputation so that anything can't be anything. You can't just decide what things are going to be and go around. You know, pretty soon they'll take you for psychiatric evaluation if you start, you know, trying to make phone calls with apples and things like that. Report an error in the passage at 2:55:29 Highlight the passage at 2:55:29

2:55:54 Okay. Nagarjuna's three criteria. The things are commonly accepted with respect to ordinary cognition. This is where consensus comes in. And it's very cultural also. It's very cultural, commonly accepted with respect to ordinary cognition. So those things that most 21st century Americans call a cup, you know, is a valid cup. Very consensual, very cultural, commonly accepted by valid cognition. Report an error in the passage at 2:55:54 Highlight the passage at 2:55:54

2:56:30 Must not be repudiated. By conventional cognition. And this eliminates things like hallucinations. The example they always give in the scripture is if you have jaundice. And you're seeing everything with this yellow tinge, you know, and you see a yellow snow mountain, right? This is ancient Tibet. Yellow, you know, a white, a mountain that's really white you see is yellow because you have some kind of visual aberration. Report an error in the passage at 2:56:30 Highlight the passage at 2:56:30

2:56:57 The other example they always give is cataracts. It looks like there's hairs all in your food, you know, falling kind of hairs because you have cataracts. Also, things like, you know how it is when you're sitting in a parking lot in your car? And then suddenly it feels like you're going forward and you slam on the brake and it's just the person next to you started backing up. So it feels like you're going forward, but you're really not. Report an error in the passage at 2:56:57 Highlight the passage at 2:56:57

2:57:23 So this eliminates things like that. Any kind of hallucinations, aberration caused by some sickness, mental illness, for example. You know, can cause us to have some view that's repudiated by conventional cognition. Yeah, yeah, it is very democratic and very consensual and very cultural. So you can see, not very solid at all, is it? Then, what conventionally exists must not be repudiated by a reasoning that investigates ultimate reality. Report an error in the passage at 2:57:23 Highlight the passage at 2:57:23

2:58:03 So what are we eliminating with this third one? What do you think? Janet, what do you think? Yeah. And what else? What specific thing that doesn't actually exist are we eliminating with this third one? What specific thing? Yeah, there's one thing that doesn't exist at all that we're especially eliminating. Report an error in the passage at 2:58:03 Highlight the passage at 2:58:03

2:58:29 Oh, the self. Yeah, you're right. Inherent existence. And the horns of a rabbit. The horns of a rabbit. Yeah, what we're repudiating with this third one is inherent existence, especially of the self. Yeah, exactly. Because the reasoning that investigates ultimate reality finds no such inherent existence. Okay, so now we've covered all the bases. Report an error in the passage at 2:58:29 Highlight the passage at 2:58:29

2:58:56 So what does validly exist? That which is accepted by ordinary cognition, that's not a hallucination and that doesn't exist inherently. So fine, cup, paper, table, Tenzin Chogky, no problem. As long as we don't see it as inherently existent and as long as we're not under the influence, you know, we're not tripping or, you know, have cataracts or having one of those things with the car backing up. Report an error in the passage at 2:58:56 Highlight the passage at 2:58:56

2:59:25 Yeah, Jennifer. So then according to... Our definition of that, how about other realms and other beings? If our ordinary cognition, conventional cognition, doesn't perceive them? Specific to the realm. Report an error in the passage at 2:59:25 Highlight the passage at 2:59:25

2:59:41 Just like 21st century America. What do Preda see? We don't see what a hungry ghost sees, but commonly accepted with respect to ordinary cognition of that being with that karma is a little disclaimer, you know, little footnote. We're not being human chauvinists here. We're not saying 21st century humans have the only valid cognition and nobody else does. Report an error in the passage at 2:59:41 Highlight the passage at 2:59:41

3:00:20 I was just going to mention that even in different time periods in different places on the planet in the human realm, there's people who look at an infected wound and see bacteria and others in a different time period in a different place would see voodoo or spirit harm or something. Yeah, exactly. And that would probably be commonly accepted with respect to ordinary cognition. But that would be a difficult one because it seems like it might be a hallucination too. Report an error in the passage at 3:00:20 Highlight the passage at 3:00:20

3:00:51 Yeah, so for us, for example, for ordinary 21st century Americans... Something that happened we would attribute to scientific reductionism. Then you've got somebody who thinks it's due to demons. Unless they're a fundamentalist Christian in the South in which culture that might be acceptable, we might start to worry if they saw demons everywhere attacking them. Report an error in the passage at 3:00:51 Highlight the passage at 3:00:51

3:01:19 Whereas for some cultures, of course. What else would it be? We don't have microscopes. Bacteria? Schmacteria. It's got to be. So yeah, this is very, yes, I mean the perception of demons would be a valid cognition in that culture. Report an error in the passage at 3:01:19 Highlight the passage at 3:01:19

3:01:40 So it gets, yeah, it's very interesting. Ty? I'm going to go ahead and continue with his because, yeah, we've been going back and forth. So the fact of the matter is, however, that, you know, like a shaman, Would try to exorcise the demon. Whereas that wouldn't be the real, in his reality, that would be, maybe I'm going, you know, what's it? Report an error in the passage at 3:01:40 Highlight the passage at 3:01:40

3:02:13 Instead of Prasangika, I'm going Svatantrika. But in his reality, it's a valid cognition. There is a demon. He's exorcised the demon. The person dies. He would maybe think, oh, another demon or I failed. Whereas a doctor could come against these people's will and give them... Medical treatment and cure the disease. And they would not ever they might even still believe, oh, that demon's still there. It was never exercised. Report an error in the passage at 3:02:13 Highlight the passage at 3:02:13

3:02:38 But the person nonetheless would become healthy. And maybe in their in their cognition, possibly they would think, well, that person looks healthy, but they must somehow not be. So they wouldn't really be healthy. But I feel like in the sense of when you mislabel something, which we all do all the time. But there's a. Report an error in the passage at 3:02:38 Highlight the passage at 3:02:38

3:02:58 consensus of ignorance which there is all the time right then still some reality then your reality there's a reality and there's your reality and you live in reality but your I got lost somewhere. Yeah, well it... Just work with this. You know, work with this. Because it's true, not everybody's, you know, in terms of those subtle things, some people believe in things like spirit possession, some people believe in viruses, some people believe. Report an error in the passage at 3:02:58 Highlight the passage at 3:02:58

3:03:28 So this isn't, you know, this is very general. This is very general. And there are going to be specific instances where even within a culture, not everybody's ordinary cognition is going to coincide for certain. Levels like that. But just think of the gross level of cups, tables, human beings, cars. And then there are going to be things that are a little bit more touchy and will require a little bit more analysis before you can say, do they validly exist or not? Report an error in the passage at 3:03:28 Highlight the passage at 3:03:28

3:03:59 But on the level of showing how this cup validly exists as a cup and not as a telephone. You know, according to these criteria. Most people in 21st century America call this a cup. It's not repudiated by conventional cognition. And there's nothing inherently existent about this. So it validly exists like that. And then there are these other more gray areas that we only have an hour to go. Report an error in the passage at 3:03:59 Highlight the passage at 3:03:59

3:04:29 So we don't really have time to go into all the gray areas. But you get the point of how things... And you can see how... Much. Which is why I like songs like Kenzie Rinpoche's thing. I really like that. You know, because he points it out. Consensus, function and continuity is how things... I like that. I like those three criteria. I'm not sure... Report an error in the passage at 3:04:29 Highlight the passage at 3:04:29

3:04:54 We should have Jack ask him because Jack's with him this weekend. We should have him ask because I really like that because I think it helps us understand more how the valid labeling process works. Okay. Yeah, Morgan. Just a quick stupid question. I don't believe that you have stupid questions, Morgan. Report an error in the passage at 3:04:54 Highlight the passage at 3:04:54

3:05:16 You completely eliminated that. So in regards to the label and not going down the rock. Report an error in the passage at 3:05:16 Highlight the passage at 3:05:16

3:05:27 down the road that things have some existence and it's kind of the 50 50 match what is what is the argument in terms of as things come into existence through dependent arising of I'm just going to say a hard drive with all this. Data. Yeah. So are you basically saying that this hard drive just has infinite kind of information once and then at some point someone associates it with a label? Report an error in the passage at 3:05:27 Highlight the passage at 3:05:27

3:06:10 Example, going to Ty's questions, like someone came up with a concept of a demon or whatever, right? And then someone told that story and then that's kind of just ignorance traveling. So what is that? What would they say the concept is? There was no cup. There's no existence of cup. No one's seen a cup before. Right, right. Report an error in the passage at 3:06:10 Highlight the passage at 3:06:10

3:06:29 Where does that sit? Yeah, and things do come into existence, but then we go down one level. And I'll give you an example from my own experience of this thing that happened. I'll never forget because it was so interesting how my mind was scrambling to find a label. I remember walking in, this is Vajrapani Institute, 1993. Report an error in the passage at 3:06:29 Highlight the passage at 3:06:29

3:06:48 You know, I walk into the dining room and a friend of mine is walking towards me holding an object in her hand. I saw, you know, the basis. Purple, kind of glistening. My mind is scrambling. I remember clearly, I'm trying to label, I'm frantically, because I have no label for this object that she's holding in her hand. Report an error in the passage at 3:06:48 Highlight the passage at 3:06:48

3:07:14 And I remember this sort of microsatica of my mind desperately scrambling to label the object. It turned out it was this big purple plum that she'd taken a bite out of. So she's hiding the shape of the plum in her hand and all I'm seeing is the bitten opening that's like kind of this shiny purple glistening thing. Report an error in the passage at 3:07:14 Highlight the passage at 3:07:14

3:07:37 And I didn't perceive plum because she's kind of holding it in a way that I couldn't see the shape or the skin or anything. My mind is like, but I still saw purple. I still saw glistening. I still saw it as inherently existent. You know, even though I didn't have a label for what the object was. And then a second later she moved her hand and I saw it's a plum and then my mind labeled plum. Report an error in the passage at 3:07:37 Highlight the passage at 3:07:37

3:07:59 But even before my mind labeled plum, it was like the level of cylinder. My mind was labeling purple, glistening, you know, solid, inherently existent object. And then on top of all of our labeling, we always have the appearance of inherent existence on top of that. You know, that root thing that is coming from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 3:07:59 Highlight the passage at 3:07:59

3:08:20 I wasn't thinking then, oh the only reason I'm perceiving purple is because some wavelength of light is being reflected in this certain way. Like I saw it as an inherently existent purple glistening object. But I noticed my mind desperately trying to scramble to label it. So even before, like, you know, yeah, at some point in history there weren't cups. Report an error in the passage at 3:08:20 Highlight the passage at 3:08:20

3:08:43 People took a little piece of bark with a certain shape. But even for that, they had the label, you know, receptacle from which I drink, right? And then it evolved and all of that. And that happens. Computers, right? They didn't exist when I was a little kid, and now they exist. So we have a mental image laptop computer, which we all have, which none of us had 50, even 40, maybe even 30 years ago. Report an error in the passage at 3:08:43 Highlight the passage at 3:08:43

3:09:08 I can't remember. You know, a while back. So things can come into existence, but the fact is... We strip it down one label. Even if you don't know what a laptop computer is, large black plastic rectangle. So it's like that. And then our minds get more and more... You know, full of labels. Because babies. Babies don't have the labels for anything. But they're still perceiving everything is inherently existent anyway. Report an error in the passage at 3:09:08 Highlight the passage at 3:09:08

3:09:37 It's not like, you know, there's this new age thing. Oh, babies are enlightened. And then they get messed up. You know? According to Buddhism, no. They come into this life with inherent wrong view. So they're still perceiving. They don't know what anything is yet. They don't have a mind full of those concepts. But because of... Report an error in the passage at 3:09:37 Highlight the passage at 3:09:37

3:09:56 Imprints of ignorance from past lives, they're still perceiving it as inherently existent. Judith, did you have something? The baby thing? Oh, okay. Yeah, so they still have these imprints from beginning of those past lives of seeing things as inherently existent, even before they have animals. You know, animals don't have language, so it's not dependent on language. It's dependent on conceptual thought. Report an error in the passage at 3:09:56 Highlight the passage at 3:09:56

3:10:23 So even animals have concepts of things, even though they might not have language and labels. We just make things a lot more complicated. Our level of how things inherently exist is sort of complicated by language, and then we get into trouble. I'm feeling like we should maybe take a break. Everybody's starting to go into a fade. And then what I want to do is, we had said we'd end up... Report an error in the passage at 3:10:23 Highlight the passage at 3:10:23

3:10:50 If we go over like 15 minutes so I can do the 12 links, would people be upset with me? Judith's giving a thumbs up. And Ty came back today just because I promised him we'd do the 12 links. And I've been leading him on and we haven't done it yet, so I promised. Okay, so let's take about a 10 minute break. Report an error in the passage at 3:10:50 Highlight the passage at 3:10:50

3:11:11 What we'll do, we'll come back and do a meditation on the emptiness of the five aggregates and the self to show you how we do that within the context of the Heart Sūtra. And then we'll finish up with the 12 links to show how everything ties together. Okay, thank you. You're a great group. I wish we had all weekend. Keep going. Report an error in the passage at 3:11:11 Highlight the passage at 3:11:11

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:12:08 So don't pay attention to this yet. This is next. We're going to meditate first. Then we're going to do the grand finale. Report an error in the passage at 3:12:08 Highlight the passage at 3:12:08

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:12:50 Okay. So what I wanted to do is a meditation on the emptiness of the five aggregates and the emptiness of the self. And this is a way that we can work with this subtle Madi Mika Prasangika view of the self-existing as that which is merely labeled independence on the aggregates. And at one point I was doing a long meditation retreat and I met with Lama Zopa Rinpoche. It's actually when he gave me my preliminary vows and gave me permission to wear robes and have the appearance of a nun, which was about a year before I went and had novice ordination with His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Report an error in the passage at 3:12:50 Highlight the passage at 3:12:50

3:13:28 It's a ceremony that you go through called the haircutting. Your mom went through this ceremony where you actually, you know, enter the homeless life. You become, you know, a renunciate, but you don't have all the form. So that took about five minutes and then he spent about three hours telling me how to meditate in this long retreat that I was in, which was great. And one of the practices he gave me was 200 recitations of the Heart Sūtra with meditation on the emptiness. Report an error in the passage at 3:13:28 Highlight the passage at 3:13:28

3:13:55 of the self and the five aggregates. And like I mentioned before, I found this a really powerful part of this long retreat that I did, this practice on the five aggregates. Also, recently I just taught a course on the Heart Sūtra at Land of Medicine Buddha that was a lot of fun. And the way the commentaries on the Heart Sūtra explain that meditation on the emptiness of the... Report an error in the passage at 3:13:55 Highlight the passage at 3:13:55

3:14:18 Thank you, Janet. Meditation on the emptiness of the five aggregates is the main meditation for people leading up to the direct realization of emptiness. So the path of... The path of accumulation, the path of preparation for those of you that have studied the five paths. It's a main meditation that will give you insight into the selflessness of persons according to the Madhyamika Prasangika view. Report an error in the passage at 3:14:18 Highlight the passage at 3:14:18

3:14:44 So I thought it would be a good one to introduce you to. So what I thought to do to give you the context is just read through the Heart Sūtra. You don't have to read. If you want to just listen to me read it, and I'll get up to the point where you do the meditation on the five aggregates, and then we'll just pause there, and I'll guide you through the meditation. Report an error in the passage at 3:14:44 Highlight the passage at 3:14:44

3:15:04 And we'll do that for maybe 20 minutes, half an hour, and then we'll just finish with a quick introduction to the 12 links of dependent origination. Report an error in the passage at 3:15:04 Highlight the passage at 3:15:04

3:15:16 So let's first just... Focus on our breath for a minute or two. Get in your meditation posture with your back straight. Chris, do you want to maybe close the doors just so there won't be the noise of people in the bookstore? Okay, Report an error in the passage at 3:15:16 Highlight the passage at 3:15:16

3:15:43 so just focus on your breath. The sensation of the air going in and out of your nostrils or your chest rising and falling. Report an error in the passage at 3:15:43 Highlight the passage at 3:15:43

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:16:21 Thus did I hear it one time. The Bhagavan was dwelling on Massive Vulture's Mountain in Rajagriha. Together with a great community of monks and a great community of bodhisattvas. At that time the Bhagavan was absorbed in the concentration on the categories of phenomena called profound perception. Also at that time the bodhisattva Mahasattva Arya Avalokiteshvara looked upon the very practice of the profound perfection of wisdom and beheld those five aggregates also as empty of inherent nature. Report an error in the passage at 3:16:21 Highlight the passage at 3:16:21

3:16:54 Then through the power of Buddha, the Venerable Shariputra said this to the Bodhisattva Mahasattva Arya Avukateshvara. How should any son of the lineage train who wishes to practice the activity of the profound perfection of wisdom? He said that and the Bodhisattva Mahasattva Arya Avukateshvara said this to the Venerable Sharidvati Putra. Shariputra, any son of the lineage or daughter of the lineage who wishes to practice the activity of the profound perfection of wisdom? Report an error in the passage at 3:16:54 Highlight the passage at 3:16:54

3:17:21 Should look upon it like this, correctly and repeatedly beholding those five aggregates also is empty of inherent nature. Form is empty, emptiness is form, emptiness is not other than form, form is also not other than emptiness. In the same way, feeling, discrimination, compositional factors and consciousness are empty. Report an error in the passage at 3:17:21 Highlight the passage at 3:17:21

3:17:51 So let's focus first on the form aggregate. Report an error in the passage at 3:17:51 Highlight the passage at 3:17:51

3:18:02 So think of your body. What is sitting on this cushion? What we are. Report an error in the passage at 3:18:02 Highlight the passage at 3:18:02

3:18:21 So what is it that we call form? What is it that we identify as form? Report an error in the passage at 3:18:21 Highlight the passage at 3:18:21

3:18:32 So feel your body, the physical part of you. Report an error in the passage at 3:18:32 Highlight the passage at 3:18:32

3:18:45 This is form, your physical substance, your body. And Report an error in the passage at 3:18:45 Highlight the passage at 3:18:45

3:19:06 let's analyze the three levels of dependent origination of form. Report an error in the passage at 3:19:06 Highlight the passage at 3:19:06

3:19:17 So first of all, form. It's dependent on causes and conditions. Report an error in the passage at 3:19:17 Highlight the passage at 3:19:17

3:19:26 Your physical body is a result of originally the substances of your parents, the sperm and egg, genetic material from your parents as a material cause, all the food that you've eaten, the nutrition first that you received from your mother in the womb, Report an error in the passage at 3:19:26 Highlight the passage at 3:19:26

3:19:53 all the food that you've eaten that's been metabolized. And have gone to form your tissues, your bones, your organs. Report an error in the passage at 3:19:53 Highlight the passage at 3:19:53

3:20:10 And then moment to moment, your body is constantly changing, constantly the causes of the air that you breathe, the food that you eat, changing into the substances of your body. So meditate first on the fact that your body is a result of causes and conditions. The air you breathe. Report an error in the passage at 3:20:10 Highlight the passage at 3:20:10

3:20:39 Planet being the right temperature to support life, the sleep you get, all of the things that go into being able to have a healthy, functioning human body. Report an error in the passage at 3:20:39 Highlight the passage at 3:20:39

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:21:27 And your body is also composed of parts, the second level of dependent origination, what we call my body. It's composed of the head, the torso, the arms, the legs. Report an error in the passage at 3:21:27 Highlight the passage at 3:21:27

3:21:46 Each of those parts are also composed of parts down to the molecules, atoms, subatomic particles. Report an error in the passage at 3:21:46 Highlight the passage at 3:21:46

3:22:00 So what we label my body isn't inherently existent, isn't existent except dependent upon its parts that all fit together and form the valid basis of the label my body. And Report an error in the passage at 3:22:00 Highlight the passage at 3:22:00

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:23:20 then on an even subtler level, Report an error in the passage at 3:23:20 Highlight the passage at 3:23:20

3:23:24 What I call my body is just a concept, a mere label on the physical matter of my body, the different parts of the body. I have a concept of human body, my body. It's just a label, a concept that I impute on the valid basis of the parts of the body, the substance of the body. Report an error in the passage at 3:23:24 Highlight the passage at 3:23:24

3:24:02 So my body exists as nothing other than a conceptual imputation on the basis of validly functioning parts, the physical matter of my body. Report an error in the passage at 3:24:02 Highlight the passage at 3:24:02

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:25:00 So my body's emptiness is the fact that it's devoid of existing as anything other than that which is merely labeled, independence on the valid physical substance, the valid... Parts. That which is merely labeled independence on the parts of the body. Report an error in the passage at 3:25:00 Highlight the passage at 3:25:00

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:26:02 Because I have a functioning body, I have sense consciousnesses. The sense organs and the parts of the brain that relate to those sense organs that allow me to have a sense perception. Report an error in the passage at 3:26:02 Highlight the passage at 3:26:02

3:26:18 So when one of those sense organs comes into contact with an object, a sense perception arises. And then the mental function of discernment kicks in. Let's say I have a visual sense perception and I immediately label blue, red, green, person, dog, chocolate cake, hamburger, Report an error in the passage at 3:26:18 Highlight the passage at 3:26:18

3:26:55 music, traffic noise, birds singing. I discern. First comes the raw sense perception, the raw data. And then I label with my discernment. Report an error in the passage at 3:26:55 Highlight the passage at 3:26:55

3:27:23 That discernment is dependent on a sense object and my sense consciousness coming into contact with that object. So it arises as a result of the causes and conditions of the object, my ability to perceive the object and then coming into contact with that object. I have a sense perception which then... Report an error in the passage at 3:27:23 Highlight the passage at 3:27:23

3:27:49 Immediately thereafter gives rise to discernment. Sometimes this aggregate is called recognition. Recognition, because I know what objects are, I recognize them. Report an error in the passage at 3:27:49 Highlight the passage at 3:27:49

3:28:02 So we can see how that discernment is dependent on the factors that give rise to sense contact. And then it follows right after the raw sense contact. Report an error in the passage at 3:28:02 Highlight the passage at 3:28:02

3:28:21 So those are the components of my mind's function of discernment. Report an error in the passage at 3:28:21 Highlight the passage at 3:28:21

3:28:48 And just the fact that I label that ability of my mind discernment is mental labeling. I single out that one factor of my mind, that one ability of my mind to differentiate between sense objects. Report an error in the passage at 3:28:48 Highlight the passage at 3:28:48

3:29:10 And then I conceptualize that as discernment. I label that. So in that way, discernment is nothing other than That which is merely labeled independence on the function of being able to differentiate between objects. That's what I label discernment, my mind's ability to perform that function. I Report an error in the passage at 3:29:10 Highlight the passage at 3:29:10

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:30:20 have feeling. As a result of sense contact, I have the mental factor of feeling, either pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. Report an error in the passage at 3:30:20 Highlight the passage at 3:30:20

3:30:35 So feeling arises in dependence on the sense contact and then the discernment of the object. I label that object friend, enemy, Report an error in the passage at 3:30:35 Highlight the passage at 3:30:35

3:30:50 something that gives me pleasure, something that makes me unhappy. So on the basis of all of those factors arises a feeling of pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. And Report an error in the passage at 3:30:50 Highlight the passage at 3:30:50

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:31:42 then that function of the mind. That factor of feeling pleasant, unpleasant or neutral, that function or factor, that one out of the 51 that singled out, I differentiate and label that feeling, the aggregate of feeling. I single that out, that aspect of my mind, that function of my mind and I label it feeling. Report an error in the passage at 3:31:42 Highlight the passage at 3:31:42

3:32:14 So it exists as nothing other than that which is merely labeled by my mind on dependence, independence on that mental function. Report an error in the passage at 3:32:14 Highlight the passage at 3:32:14

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:33:16 Compositional factors, the other 49 mental factors, all of them, just like feeling and discernment that have been pulled out and given their own category, all of them are just ways of conceptualizing different functions of mind. Report an error in the passage at 3:33:16 Highlight the passage at 3:33:16

3:33:38 Factors such as intention, attention, the different delusions like pride, jealousy, resentment, different wholesome mental factors like compassion, non-attachment, non-aversion. Report an error in the passage at 3:33:38 Highlight the passage at 3:33:38

3:34:05 And all of these are just concepts. We label on the basis of certain mental events. We differentiate and give them the label. Mental factors. And then this whole heap of 49 other mental factors we call compositional factors. So our mind is just merely creating this labeled category. And each item in the category is merely labeled on the basis of some sort of mental event. Report an error in the passage at 3:34:05 Highlight the passage at 3:34:05

3:34:46 So these give flavor to our experience. We have the raw sense data giving rise to a raw feeling of pleasant. Unpleasant or neutral and then following on that are these other secondary mental events that sort of give the flavor to our experience. And these are called the compositional factors and they're just merely labeled on the basis of those mental functions, those flavors of our experience. Report an error in the passage at 3:34:46 Highlight the passage at 3:34:46

3:35:37 And we have the consciousness itself, which is where we started. The raw sense consciousness dependent on an object. So it arises in dependence on a sense object. Report an error in the passage at 3:35:37 Highlight the passage at 3:35:37

3:35:51 Then in coming into contact with that object, the consciousness arises. Report an error in the passage at 3:35:51 Highlight the passage at 3:35:51

3:36:00 And then we label consciousness on the basis of that awareness. Report an error in the passage at 3:36:00 Highlight the passage at 3:36:00

3:36:12 In Tibetan... One of the names for consciousness or mind is Yul Chen, object holder. So consciousness is defined as that which has an object, that which holds an object. So it doesn't exist independent of holding an object. It's merely labeled independence on that function of mind, to be the object holder. Report an error in the passage at 3:36:12 Highlight the passage at 3:36:12

3:37:12 So the self... Is that which is merely labeled in dependence on these five aggregates, which are in turn empty of inherent existence. So the self is merely labeled on the basis of the component aggregates. Report an error in the passage at 3:37:12 Highlight the passage at 3:37:12

3:37:37 And each of these component aggregates in themselves are merely labeled on the basis of some function of body and mind. And that's how the self exists. Report an error in the passage at 3:37:37 Highlight the passage at 3:37:37

3:37:52 Very, very subtle is that which is merely labeled independence on the aggregates. There's no other self there, no inherently existent self, just that which is merely labeled, conceptually imputed on the basis of these empty aggregates. Just meditate on that for a few minutes. Report an error in the passage at 3:37:52 Highlight the passage at 3:37:52

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:39:38 Shariputra, likewise, all phenomena are emptiness. Without characteristic, unproduced, unceased, stainless, not without stain, not deficient, not fulfilled. Report an error in the passage at 3:39:38 Highlight the passage at 3:39:38

3:39:53 Shariputra, therefore in emptiness there is no form, no feeling, no discrimination, no compositional factors, no consciousness, no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body. No mind, no visual form, no sound, no odor, no taste, no object of touch and no phenomenon. There is no eye element and so on, up to and including no mind element and no mental consciousness element. Report an error in the passage at 3:39:53 Highlight the passage at 3:39:53

3:40:21 There is no ignorance, no extinction of ignorance and so on, up to and including no aging and death and no extinction of aging and death. Similarly, there is no suffering, origination, cessation and path. There is no exalted wisdom, no attainment and also no non-attainment. Shariputra, therefore, because there is no attainment, bodhisattvas rely on and dwell in the perfection of wisdom, the mind without obscuration and without fear. Report an error in the passage at 3:40:21 Highlight the passage at 3:40:21

3:40:50 Having completely passed beyond error, they reach the end point of nirvāṇa. All the Buddhists who dwell on the three times also manifestly completely awaken to unsurpassable, perfect, complete enlightenment in reliance on the perfection of wisdom. Report an error in the passage at 3:40:50 Highlight the passage at 3:40:50

3:41:06 Therefore the mantra of the perfection of wisdom, the mantra of great knowledge, the unsurpassed mantra, the mantra equal to the unequaled, the mantra that thoroughly pacifies all suffering, should be known as truth since it is not false. The mantra of the perfection of wisdom is declared. Report an error in the passage at 3:41:06 Highlight the passage at 3:41:06

3:41:25 Gatte Gatte Paragatte Parasam Gatte Bodhisattva Shariputra, the Bodhisattva Mahasattva should train in the profound perfection of wisdom like that. Then the Bhagavan arose from that concentration and commended the Bodhisattva Mahasattva Arya Avukateshvara saying, Well said, well said, son of the lineage, it is like that, it is like that. Report an error in the passage at 3:41:25 Highlight the passage at 3:41:25

3:41:50 One should practice the profound perfection of wisdom just as you have indicated. Even the Tathagattas rejoice. The Bhagavan having thus spoken, the venerable Sharidvati Putra, the Bodhisattva, Mahasattva, Aryal, Avalokiteshvara, those surrounding in their entirety, along with the world of gods, humans, asuras and Gandharvas, were overjoyed and highly praised that spoken by the Bhagavan. Report an error in the passage at 3:41:50 Highlight the passage at 3:41:50

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:42:54 It's nice, isn't it? Report an error in the passage at 3:42:54 Highlight the passage at 3:42:54

3:42:59 So the Heart Sūtra isn't just something that we recite at the beginning of a teaching to dispel obstacles. It's Lord Buddha's instructions on how to meditate on emptiness and to gain the realization. So this meditation on the five aggregates and the emptiness of the... And you flip back and forth. You know, we had kind of limited time, but what you can do when you have more time... Report an error in the passage at 3:42:59 Highlight the passage at 3:42:59

3:43:20 Do the emptiness of the five aggregates. Then the self, seeing how it's merely imputed on the basis of the five aggregates. Then go down and break down the five aggregates again. Then go back to the self. And you can flip back and forth several times in each session. And it's really powerful. Really pulls the rug out from under our false view of how that self exists as that concrete thing. Report an error in the passage at 3:43:20 Highlight the passage at 3:43:20

3:43:44 Because it makes the aggregates really sketchy. And then the self is nothing more than that which is imputed on these really kind of fragile aggregates that are nothing more than imputations themselves. So it's very powerful, really powerful in cutting through. Any questions about that meditation or the aggregates coming through? Report an error in the passage at 3:43:44 Highlight the passage at 3:43:44

3:44:08 Yeah, Ty, microphone. Report an error in the passage at 3:44:08 Highlight the passage at 3:44:08

3:44:18 Is there like a visualization that goes along with it or anything like that? No, this is pretty much analytical meditation. You know, it's not one of the ones. Some people are very visual and kind of translate the concepts into some sort of visual image, but this is mostly using conceptual thought to go through the analysis of the emptiness of the aggregates. Report an error in the passage at 3:44:18 Highlight the passage at 3:44:18

3:44:40 And one helpful thing is to go through those three levels of dependent origination. They say that, you know, the king, they called meditation on empty, or meditation on dependent. Origination is the king of reasonings to give you an insight into emptiness. And you can see how in the Madhyamika Prasangika, dependent origination is just sort of the other side of the coin to emptiness. Report an error in the passage at 3:44:40 Highlight the passage at 3:44:40

3:45:02 So meditating on the dependent origination on those three levels for each aggregate, dependent on causes and conditions, parts, and then conceptual imputation is a nice way to do it. So it's more using analysis rather than visualization. Yeah. Yeah, Morgan. Report an error in the passage at 3:45:02 Highlight the passage at 3:45:02

3:45:21 Just a really simple question. Howard, do you recommend that you focus on this because you need to get the calm abiding, you know, and, you know, special insights. So do you start with calm abiding or do you just recommend just say stick with this for a while? Well, you know, it's good to work on both simultaneously. Report an error in the passage at 3:45:21 Highlight the passage at 3:45:21

3:45:42 You know, we don't wait in our tradition. We don't wait until we have fully qualified calm abiding before we do any analytical meditation. Obviously, it really helps. The more single-pointed concentration you have, then you do meditation, you're able to focus. But in our tradition, what we say is our meditation, even from day one, should include three components. Report an error in the passage at 3:45:42 Highlight the passage at 3:45:42

3:46:06 Purification and accumulation of merit is one component. And you can do that. Through meditation on the seven limb prayer, for example, and the preliminary practices, also purification practices like Vajrasattva at night. So it's really good to put energy into purification and accumulation because then that eliminates the obstacles and creates the stores of merit that you're able to have realizations when you do sit down on your cushion and meditate. Report an error in the passage at 3:46:06 Highlight the passage at 3:46:06