Buddhist Psychology; Mind and Mental Process

0:03 late than never Report an error in the passage at 0:03 Highlight the passage at 0:03

0:08 So mistaken versus wrong Report an error in the passage at 0:08 Highlight the passage at 0:08

0:21 consciousnesses. Mistaken consciousnesses are mistaken with respect to their appearing objects. So Report an error in the passage at 0:21 Highlight the passage at 0:21

0:36 all conceptual consciousnesses are necessarily mistaken consciousnesses because all conceptual consciousnesses are mistaken with respect to their appearing objects. Report an error in the passage at 0:36 Highlight the passage at 0:36

0:49 their appearing objects are mental images. than the object itself. Report an error in the passage at 0:49 Highlight the passage at 0:49

1:07 wrong consciousnesses are mistaken with respect to their object of engagement. Report an error in the passage at 1:07 Highlight the passage at 1:07

1:20 is the object itself. So wrong consciousnesses are really what create problems for us. Mistaken consciousnesses can be very useful and we actually cultivate. Conceptual consciousness is deliberately on the path. It's said that we need to understand emptiness conceptually before we can realize it non-conceptually. Report an error in the passage at 1:20 Highlight the passage at 1:20

1:55 Even the inferential realization of emptiness is something that we're striving for, but it's a mistaken consciousness. It's still mistaken, but it's not wrong. Report an error in the passage at 1:55 Highlight the passage at 1:55

2:14 So a realizing consciousness can even be a mistaken consciousness. So this is an important distinction. Report an error in the passage at 2:14 Highlight the passage at 2:14

2:25 But mistaken consciousnesses still have an element of error in them, which is why we need to ultimately go beyond them. Report an error in the passage at 2:25 Highlight the passage at 2:25

2:39 So if it's a mistaken consciousness, it's not necessarily a wrong consciousness. But if it's a wrong consciousness, it's necessarily a mistaken consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 2:39 Highlight the passage at 2:39

3:00 So a mistaken consciousness is not necessarily a wrong consciousness. For example, the inferential realization of emptiness. It's a mistaken consciousness because it's conceptual. Its appearing object is the mental image of emptiness, for a real life example. Or you can just say any thought. The thought of bodhicitta is a mistaken consciousness because it's conceptual. The thought of pizza. Report an error in the passage at 3:00 Highlight the passage at 3:00

3:40 It is a mistaken consciousness because it's conceptual and has a mental image as its appearing object. But it's not necessarily a wrong consciousness. So for the example of a thought of pizza, what is the appearing object? Report an error in the passage at 3:40 Highlight the passage at 3:40

4:01 It's the mental image of a pizza. So that's why it's mistaken with respect to its appearing object. Whereas the object of engagement of that thought is pizza. So it's not a wrong consciousness because it's not mistaken with respect to its object of engagement. Report an error in the passage at 4:01 Highlight the passage at 4:01

4:30 But for example, the example that Manlam gave about the perception of the horns of a rabbit, the object of engagement is horns of a rabbit. Report an error in the passage at 4:30 Highlight the passage at 4:30

4:44 So it's a wrong consciousness. If it's a perception of the horns of a rabbit, that means it's non-conceptual. So the appearing object would be horns of a rabbit as well. Report an error in the passage at 4:44 Highlight the passage at 4:44

4:57 So it's mistaken also. The perception of the horns of a rabbit is mistaken with respect to its appearing object and it's mistaken with respect to its object of engagement. So it's both a wrong consciousness and a mistaken consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 4:57 Highlight the passage at 4:57

5:22 If it's appearing, if we're saying eye consciousness perceiving, no, if it's a thought of horns of a rabbit, then... the appearing object would be a mental image of the horns of a rabbit. Report an error in the passage at 5:22 Highlight the passage at 5:22

5:41 so it's still mistaken. Report an error in the passage at 5:41 Highlight the passage at 5:41

6:02 Well, if it's a totally new object that exists... Report an error in the passage at 6:02 Highlight the passage at 6:02

6:22 So the example of horns of a rabbit is just the example that the Tibetans use for something that doesn't exist. But if it's something you've just never seen before and it exists, then that's not a wrong consciousness and that's not a mistaken consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 6:22 Highlight the passage at 6:22

6:40 Until your thought, then your thought labels it. Then it becomes a mistaken consciousness because it's a thought. Carol? If Report an error in the passage at 6:40 Highlight the passage at 6:40

7:04 the object is a mental thought. Say the horns of a rabbit. I mean, I can mentally think of that. And if that's the object, and then the appearing object, then the appearing object would be that mental image of my mental image. Report an error in the passage at 7:04 Highlight the passage at 7:04

7:31 I'm getting lost as to why that's mistaken. I can see why, because there isn't, I mean, how do you, If thoughts can be objects or are viewed as objects, is that true? Or when we talk about a mental image, when we talk about... When we talk about a mental image, we're actually not talking about a thought. We're talking about the object of a thought. So the mental image itself is like a picture. Report an error in the passage at 7:31 Highlight the passage at 7:31

8:04 So that is always mistaken because it isn't the object. Right. Because a thought, remember, a mental image is a permanent phenomenon, right, whereas a thought is impermanent. Did I address your question? Yeah. Okay. Report an error in the passage at 8:04 Highlight the passage at 8:04

8:27 It's a permanent phenomenon, right? It doesn't change from moment to moment, but a thought, a thought is impermanent. So the thought would be the subject or the object possessor, and the mental image would be its object. Report an error in the passage at 8:27 Highlight the passage at 8:27

8:47 The subject is the thought, the object. I Report an error in the passage at 8:47 Highlight the passage at 8:47

8:57 think Report an error in the passage at 8:57 Highlight the passage at 8:57

9:18 we understand what sense consciousnesses are. The eye, ear, nose, tongue and body. Consciousness is that perceive forms and sounds, odors, tastes and tangible objects. And we'll get into those a lot more later. I just wanted to introduce these terms. Report an error in the passage at 9:18 Highlight the passage at 9:18

9:56 So then a mental consciousness can be either conceptual or non-conceptual. So an example of a non-conceptual mental consciousness, Report an error in the passage at 9:56 Highlight the passage at 9:56

10:10 would be like a direct perception of emptiness, for example. Those are a lot less common, right? Mostly our mental consciousnesses are conceptual. I can't exactly say that, but a yogic direct perceiver is a type of mental consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 10:10 Highlight the passage at 10:10

10:31 But Report an error in the passage at 10:31 Highlight the passage at 10:31

10:37 there's another kind of obscure example that we'll go through next time of a mental consciousness that's non-conceptual. Report an error in the passage at 10:37 Highlight the passage at 10:37

10:47 And also clairvoyances. Clairvoyance is knowing others' minds and knowing past lives, etc. Those are considered non-conceptual mental consciousnesses. Report an error in the passage at 10:47 Highlight the passage at 10:47

11:05 But we'll go through that next time as well. Report an error in the passage at 11:05 Highlight the passage at 11:05

11:19 Now we'll go through another division, which is valid cognizers versus non-valid consciousnesses or cognizers. And here cognizer and consciousness are used interchangeably. Report an error in the passage at 11:19 Highlight the passage at 11:19

11:42 Valid cognizers are what we want to cultivate and obviously non-valid ones, not so much. Report an error in the passage at 11:42 Highlight the passage at 11:42

11:51 Another translation for this term is prime cognizer, which is actually I think more appropriate in this school because the definition of a valid cognizer in this school is a new incontrovertible knower. Report an error in the passage at 11:51 Highlight the passage at 11:51

12:10 What does new mean? It means that the object of the consciousness is being met with or comprehended for the first time. So for an eye consciousness perceiving this table, there are a continuum of moments of that eye consciousness perceiving the table. Report an error in the passage at 12:10 Highlight the passage at 12:10

12:33 The first moment is considered a valid or a prime cognizer and the second, third, fourth, fifth moments are not prime cognizers. Report an error in the passage at 12:33 Highlight the passage at 12:33

12:47 It's said that that first moment is more powerful and then the subsequent moments are realizing what has already been realized or knowing what's already been known. Report an error in the passage at 12:47 Highlight the passage at 12:47

13:04 And maybe an easier example to comprehend is a thought. Let's say there's this example of a friend of mine who had a wrong consciousness. She thought... That this woman had stolen something from her. She had borrowed this piece of cloth and had said she'd returned it, but my friend didn't believe her. Report an error in the passage at 13:04 Highlight the passage at 13:04

13:38 She couldn't find it and didn't believe her. And then one day she was going through her stuff and she found it. And she realized that that woman didn't in fact steal her cloth. So that first moment... Of finding it and realizing that that woman didn't steal the cloth, eliminated this misconception of this woman having stolen her cloth. Report an error in the passage at 13:38 Highlight the passage at 13:38

14:06 She had a misconception that this woman stole the cloth. So that first moment is said to eliminate that superimposition. But then subsequent moments of remembering that this woman didn't steal the cloth are induced by that first moment. Report an error in the passage at 14:06 Highlight the passage at 14:06

14:41 Yeah, you could say that. Report an error in the passage at 14:41 Highlight the passage at 14:41

14:52 So that first moment is more powerful than the other moments. And it's said that when you directly realize emptiness, it's that first moment of directly realizing emptiness that is called the antidote to the obstructions. Report an error in the passage at 14:52 Highlight the passage at 14:52

15:11 And then the subsequent moments are abiding in that realization, but they're realizing something that's already been realized. The subsequent moments within that continuum. Report an error in the passage at 15:11 Highlight the passage at 15:11

15:29 And the fact that this word new is in this definition kind of precludes subsequent cognizers from being valid cognizers. So subsequent cognizers would be, for example, the second moment onward of realizing that that woman didn't steal her cloth. The first moment of realizing that would be a valid cognizer or a prime cognizer. And the second moment onward would be a subsequent cognizer. Report an error in the passage at 15:29 Highlight the passage at 15:29

16:18 Yeah, a subsequent cognizer is considered a non-valid cognizer, which is why I prefer the word prime, because a subsequent cognizer is still a realizing consciousness, but it's not the first moment, it's not a prime cognizer. Report an error in the passage at 16:18 Highlight the passage at 16:18

16:39 So that word valid is misleading, I think, in this context. Report an error in the passage at 16:39 Highlight the passage at 16:39

16:54 No, a subsequent... No, we say... I mean, in this school we say no, it's not a... A quote-unquote valid cognizer, but it's a realizing consciousness, so it's something still that you want to cultivate, but it's not what Geshe Raptan calls an ideal mind. Maybe that's another way of thinking about it, an ideal mind versus a non-ideal mind. It's not the perfect mind. Report an error in the passage at 16:54 Highlight the passage at 16:54

17:28 because a subsequent cognizer is realizing something that's already been realized. Report an error in the passage at 17:28 Highlight the passage at 17:28

17:42 can be conceptual or it can be non-conceptual. We'll talk about that more. But it's not a remembering consciousness. But it's induced by the first So that word Report an error in the passage at 17:42 Highlight the passage at 17:42

18:12 cognizer... Cognizer, in just means a knower or a consciousness. a prime cognizer or valid cognizer, that term implies something is being realized. Report an error in the passage at 18:12 Highlight the passage at 18:12

18:32 the word cognizer itself doesn't imply that at all. If there is a new, is Report an error in the passage at 18:32 Highlight the passage at 18:32

18:49 it possible to subsequently lose that realization or that like epiphany, so to speak? and you know, I think that that's a difference between a realization and An experience. We can have spiritual experiences that come and go. Recently I heard a teacher, a Dharma teacher that talked about the difference between spiritual experiences and realizations. Report an error in the passage at 18:49 Highlight the passage at 18:49

19:16 We can have these epiphanies or spiritual experiences, but they're impermanent. We can have great experiences during retreat and then you go back to the real world. Report an error in the passage at 19:16 Highlight the passage at 19:16

19:29 The mind goes back to the way it was before. And so that's not a realization. A realization is something that's stable. Report an error in the passage at 19:29 Highlight the passage at 19:29

19:55 Yeah, well that's definitely a realization. When you directly realize emptiness, that's a realization. You haven't stabilized it yet, so that's what you do in the next path. Right, but even that first moment of directly realizing emptiness, you've removed all the, I shouldn't say removed all the superimpositions, but you will never again believe that things are not empty. Report an error in the passage at 19:55 Highlight the passage at 19:55

20:17 It's not stable in the sense of you can bring it up anytime you want, a direct realization of emptiness, but you will never believe in a conception of true existence again. So in that sense it's stable. So if somebody comes up to you and says, no, no, no, things aren't empty, things really exist, you would never believe them. Report an error in the passage at 20:17 Highlight the passage at 20:17

20:38 And it's also said that a conception of true existence will still come up, it will still arise, but... A superior in Arya will never believe in that conception. Report an error in the passage at 20:38 Highlight the passage at 20:38

20:52 When you say never again, do you mean even in future incarnations that a realization is going to... Yeah, I can't. I don't know. I really don't know how that all works. I wish I did. Okay, Report an error in the passage at 20:52 Highlight the passage at 20:52

21:12 let's move on. So incontrovertible, the word incontrovertible... It means that the cognizer has eliminated these superimpositions with regard to its object. So for example, that direct realization of emptiness, you eliminate the superimposition that phenomena are truly existent. Report an error in the passage at 21:12 Highlight the passage at 21:12

21:39 Superimposition, I guess you could say a projection, something that you put on top of what actually exists. Report an error in the passage at 21:39 Highlight the passage at 21:39

21:54 So that's where I was just talking about with regard to a conception of true existence still arises for a superior. And I'm talking from the Prasangika school, sorry. But you no longer believe in it. But these things still arise out of the habit. Report an error in the passage at 21:54 Highlight the passage at 21:54

22:17 So this word incontrovertible means that it realizes its object. Report an error in the passage at 22:17 Highlight the passage at 22:17

22:27 So for correctly assuming consciousnesses, correctly assuming consciousnesses once again have a correct view, But they're not incontrovertible, which is why we need to develop realizations. And I was reading somewhere that it said that most of us on the path have correctly assuming consciousnesses. Report an error in the passage at 22:27 Highlight the passage at 22:27

23:00 And then knower. We already talked about what a knower is. But it said in the text that this word eliminates or precludes physical sense powers from being valid cognizers. Because some non-Buddhist schools believe that sense powers are valid cognizers. And also, I think, the Vibhashika school. Report an error in the passage at 23:00 Highlight the passage at 23:00

23:24 And the physical sense powers are things like very subtle matter. For example, there's an eye sense power. It's subtle matter that's kind of on the eyeball that we can't see. And that empowers an eye consciousness to be able to see. And we'll go into that in more detail next time. Report an error in the passage at 23:24 Highlight the passage at 23:24

23:52 Okay, so there are two types of valid cognizers, direct valid cognizers and inferential valid cognizers. Report an error in the passage at 23:52 Highlight the passage at 23:52

24:05 And I emailed all these slides to people on my email list, so if you didn't get them, let me know and I'll put you on the email list. Report an error in the passage at 24:05 Highlight the passage at 24:05

24:16 So out of these seven consciousnesses again, the first three are realizing consciousnesses. The first two, direct perceivers and inferential cognizers. The first moment. moment of each of those are cognizers or valid cognizers. Report an error in the passage at 24:16 Highlight the passage at 24:16

24:37 the second moment onwards are subsequent cognizers. Report an error in the passage at 24:37 Highlight the passage at 24:37

24:50 Direct Report an error in the passage at 24:50 Highlight the passage at 24:50

24:57 valid cognizers and inferential valid cognizers are the two divisions of valid cognizers. So direct valid cognizers are a subset of direct perceivers. Report an error in the passage at 24:57 Highlight the passage at 24:57

25:21 So we'll start talking about direct perceivers in general first and then we'll get into direct valid cognizers. So the definition of an awareness that is a direct perceiver is a knower that is free from conceptuality and non-mistaken. Report an error in the passage at 25:21 Highlight the passage at 25:21

25:38 So we know what a knower is, or we've talked about it at least. Then free from conceptuality, once again means that the consciousness deals with the object directly and not by means of a mental image. Report an error in the passage at 25:38 Highlight the passage at 25:38

25:54 And non-mistaken... Report an error in the passage at 25:54 Highlight the passage at 25:54

25:58 It means that there's no erroneous element involved in that which is appearing to the consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 25:58 Highlight the passage at 25:58

26:25 Non-mistaken always refers to the subject. Report an error in the passage at 26:25 Highlight the passage at 26:25

26:35 So all conceptual consciousnesses are mistaken. Report an error in the passage at 26:35 Highlight the passage at 26:35

26:52 That's another way of saying that there's no mistake with respect to the appearing object, in more complicated words. Report an error in the passage at 26:52 Highlight the passage at 26:52

27:30 And you can say that actually, Non-mistaken, or actually it's free from conceptuality, you can say that that's not really even necessary in that definition because non-mistaken implies that it's free from conceptuality. But because of some kind of obscure position by some non-Buddhist Vaiseshikas, they had to include this in the definition. Report an error in the passage at 27:30 Highlight the passage at 27:30

27:58 It's free from conceptuality. Report an error in the passage at 27:58 Highlight the passage at 27:58

28:06 so... A question came up in my other class if direct perceiver and non-conceptual consciousness were synonymous. And they're not. So if it's a direct perceiver, it's necessarily non-conceptual. But if it's non-conceptual, it's not necessarily a direct perceiver. Report an error in the passage at 28:06 Highlight the passage at 28:06

28:30 So an example of that would be, for example... An eye consciousness that's infected with jaundice. In a person who's infected with jaundice, everything appears to be yellow. Report an error in the passage at 28:30 Highlight the passage at 28:30

28:47 Yeah, that's right. I should have used a different example because we have a nurse in the room. Report an error in the passage at 28:47 Highlight the passage at 28:47

28:57 Well, why don't we say someone who's colorblind then. another one in her pocket. I'm sorry. Report an error in the passage at 28:57 Highlight the passage at 28:57

29:09 you know, the things, um... I think that's enough Report an error in the passage at 29:09 Highlight the passage at 29:09

29:41 to Report an error in the passage at 29:41 Highlight the passage at 29:41

29:59 cover for... it's non-conceptual, it's not a direct perceiver. That's a wrong consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 29:59 Highlight the passage at 29:59

· · · silence, 1 minute

30:04 Oh, we Report an error in the passage at 30:04 Highlight the passage at 30:04

30:11 If people want to stay and discuss the homework, they are very, very welcome to do that. Because it's said that it's good to review the material within 24 hours of having heard it. Report an error in the passage at 30:11 Highlight the passage at 30:11

30:26 And then if you discuss it, you remember it a lot better. Report an error in the passage at 30:26 Highlight the passage at 30:26

30:47 slides. I printed them out really small. Let me know if you can't read it and I can print them out bigger. Report an error in the passage at 30:47 Highlight the passage at 30:47

30:58 Are there Report an error in the passage at 30:58 Highlight the passage at 30:58

31:11 any questions before we finish? Report an error in the passage at 31:11 Highlight the passage at 31:11

31:17 And we'll go into the different types of direct perceivers next time and the difference between a direct perceiver and a direct valley cognizer. So we can cook it and ask the questions next time. Bigger. Okay. Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 31:17 Highlight the passage at 31:17

31:09 so we'll just are there Report an error in the passage at 31:09 Highlight the passage at 31:09

31:33 Okay, maybe we just dedicate then. Report an error in the passage at 31:33 Highlight the passage at 31:33