Session Four

We were talking about emptiness during the last session. When it comes to the exposition of the Buddhist doctrine of emptiness one finds in the literature there are various forms of reasoning to arrive at an understanding of emptiness. Among all the different forms of reasoning, the reasoning based on an understanding of dependent origination of all things is considered to be the most effective. In order to develop the most profound understanding of the meaning of the Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination or pratityasamutpada, the works of Buddhapalita and Chandrakirti seem to be very critical, very important.

Much of my own understanding and the presentation here on the topics of dependent origination and emptiness is based on Lama Tsongkhapa’s exposition and presentation of these topics. Lama Tsongkhapa’s own presentation is very much based on the reading of Nagarjuna by Chandrakirti and Buddhapalita. This is so much so that almost every crucial point in Lama Tsongkhapa’s understanding of these concepts is substantiated by referring to the works of Buddhapalita and the various commentaries by Chandrakirti.

When I am studying Nagarjuna’s Madhyamikamulakarika I combine the twenty-third chapter dealing with the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination with the eighteenth chapter which deals with the Buddhist understanding of anatman. The eighteenth chapter principally deals with the understanding of the Buddhist doctrine of no-soul or no-self and how grasping at such an atman, the eternal principle, binds one to unenlightened existence. Elimination or overcoming of this grasping leads to liberation. The point of the eighteenth chapter is to underline the critical importance of the need to gain insight into emptiness.

The study of these two chapters is then combined with the twenty-fourth chapter in which Nagarjuna anticipates various objections from the Realist Buddhist schools. The central point of their objections is that if there is no intrinsic reality, if there is no intrinsic existence or identity to things and events then there is nothing. Therefore there could not be the Four Noble Truths. If there were no Four Noble Truths there can not be the Three Jewels. If there are no Three Jewels there can not be the Path therefore there can not be a path to enlightenment. Nagarjuna responded by reversing the criticism towards them. He stated that on the contrary if things existed with intrinsic identity or reality then the consequences laid to him would follow. If things did posses intrinsic reality then there can not be the Four Noble Truths; they could not be causal processes. The cause could not produce effects and so on. The central message that comes from the twenty-fourth chapter is demonstrate that what Nagarjuna meant by emptiness is not a mere nothingness, not a mere non-existence. His emptiness should be understood in terms of the interdependent nature of reality. Things are devoid of independent existence and they are characterized by dependent origination. It is the very fact of their dependent nature that they are absent of independent existence.

One of the recent Amdo masters of Tibetan Buddhism from the turn of the century articulated this point beautifully in verse. He said that empty here in this context does not mean absence of functionality. What then is the meaning of emptiness? It is the emptiness of real existence or absolute existence. Dependently originated does not entail intrinsic reality or identity. What is does entail is an illusion-like phenomenal reality.

When one understands the meaning of emptiness and dependent origination then one will be able to posit simultaneously within one locus the idea of emptiness and appearance without contradiction. Similarly the same master said that it is common to all philosophical schools to try to describe their own position as avoiding the extremes of absolutism by some form of emptiness and nihilism by some level of phenomenal reality. It is only when one reverses the process that one will be able to overcome all forms of clinging. This is the Madhyamika-Prasangika schools position of course. From the point of view of Madhyamika-Prasangika it is the appearance that liberates one from grasping to absolutism and it is emptiness, once one understands the true meaning of emptiness, that liberates one from falling into nihilism.

Earlier I spoke about there being a difference even within the Madhyamika School with two different understandings of the concept of emptiness. I spoke about how the Madhyamika-Svatantrika view differed from the Madhyamika-Prasangika view. The basis for accepting this difference comes from Bhavaviveka’s writing where he, one of the chief disciples of Nagarjuna, subjected the Buddhist Realist Schools to a very critical examination and argumentation. At the same time he also criticizes Buddhapalita’s reading of Nagarjuna. Through these two different criticisms directed at two different schools one can see that Bhavaviveka's position emerges from these critical processes. A sense of his position is that although absolute existence is denied, there is an acceptance of some form of intrinsic reality, objective reality to things and events. This is totally rejected by the Madhyamika-Prasangika masters like Chandrakirti.

Although Chandrakirti, Buddhapalita and Bhavaviveka are all great disciples of Nagarjuna, we feel that there is a substantial philosophical difference in their understanding of Nagarjuna’s philosophy of emptiness. Because of this difference Tibetan Buddhist scholars make two divisions within the Madhyamika School and give them the labels Madhyamika-Svatantrika and Madhyamika-Prasangika Schools. One of the bases for such a distinction is that there is a large difference between their schools adoption of methodology. In the Madhyamika-Prasangika School there is a much greater emphasis on using what is called the consequentialist style of reasoning which is more like reductio ad absurdum. Here one is not using reason to affirm something but rather one is concerned more with showing internal inconsistencies within an opponent’s viewpoint. Whereas Madhyamika-Svatantrika tends to use much more syllogistic type of reasoning to establish some form of a position.

A fundamental difference between Bhavaviveka and Chandrakirti is how one’s sensory perceptions misperceive material objects. To Bhavaviveka when a visual perception arises as far as the appearance of the objective entity is concerned, there is an element of validity there. Bhavaviveka accepts that things do posses a degree of objectivity, which is then projected on to the perception. This is totally rejected by the Madhyamika-Prasangika School of Chandrakirti. On this basis it is known that the central difference between the two Madhyamika schools is whether or not one accepts any idea or intrinsicness.

The reason why the understanding of this subtle point is important is that if one were to relate this point to one’s own personal experience then one can see that when strong emotions arise, say attachment, underlying the emotion response there is an assumption that something objective or real is “out there”. One clings to and projects on to the object desirability or undesirability, something attractive or unattractive and based on the projected qualities, one feels either attraction or repulsion. Underlying this strong emotional response is an assumption that there is something out there, some kind of objective reality, an objective entity with an absolute status. However if through one’s understanding of emptiness one realizes that there is no intrinsic reality to things and events then this will automatically give one insight that the strong emotion no matter how real and strong they seem, they are baseless. They have no valid ground, no valid basis. Once one understands that the strong emotions are based on a fundamental misknowledge or misconception then they themselves become baseless and untenable. Whereas if one’s understanding of emptiness is not thorough in the sense that it hasn’t succeeded in negating any notion of intrinsicness then one will feel that the strong emotion is valid or justified.

Once one has developed a certain understanding of emptiness be it intellectual, one will have a certain outlook or orientation towards things and events. One can then compare this to one’s own natural responses to events or objects and see how to a very large extent often one projects qualities on the world. One specially realizes that much of the strong emotions one feels arise from an assumption that is unreal and baseless. Through this way one may be able to experientially gain some kind of sense that there is a gap, a disparity between the way one perceives things and the way they really are.

From all of this the conclusion one can draw is the fact that much of one’s strong emotions, the emotions that afflict one’s mind, arise from a fundamental state of confusion. This confusion tends to apprehend things as real, things as intrinsically existent or independent. One knows that these afflictive emotions and thoughts have no valid support, either in one’s experience, in reality or in reason. In contrast one’s insight into the emptiness of things is not only grounded in reason but is also grounded in one’s experience. There is a valid support. Not only this but one’s understanding of emptiness and one’s grasping at things as real and intrinsic are directly opposite of each other. One harms the other, one destroys the other. Given that they are both opposite, opposing forces, given that one lacks any valid support or grounding whereas the other has valid grounding in one’s experience and in reason, one conclusion to be drawn is that that the more one develops an understanding of emptiness the greater the power of that insight becomes. This understanding can become deepened and enhanced. The more one sees through the deception of these emotions the weaker the force of the emotions becomes. The conclusion to be drawn is that the strong afflictive emotions and thoughts and their basis which is the fundamental ignorance are something that can be minimized and weakened. Whereas the opposite forces, the insight into emptiness, can be enhanced.

Through one’s reflections so far, one has arrived at a point where one can conceivably accept that the delusions, the afflictive emotions, and also their basis, which is the fundamental ignorance, are something one can weaken their force. The question now remains whether it is possible at all to completely eliminate, eradicate and root from one’s mind or psyche. Here I feel that perhaps reflecting upon some of the points made in Maitreya’s Uttaratantra, The Sublime Continuum may be very critical. According to this text there is an understanding that so far as the potential for knowing is concerned, it is intrinsic to one’s consciousness. It is something inherent, a natural quality of one’s mind. Whereas all the various afflictions of the mind, the pollutants, are not an essential part of one’s mind. They are separable from the essential nature of the mind. They are adventitious, glo bur gyi dri ma.

When one talks about gaining the perfect wisdom of a Buddha, one should not have a notion that one is in some sense creating qualities that are not present and come from somewhere outside. Rather one should see it more in terms of a potential that has been realized. The pollutants of the mind come in the way of the natural expression of the potential that is already inherent in one’s consciousness. It is as if the capacity to know without obstruction is here in one’s consciousness, in one’s psyche. It is the pollutants that afflict one’s mind that in some sense obscures or hinders one’s potential to express or be developed fully. Once one’s understanding of the nature of the mind is informed by the concept of the essential nature of the mind as pure luminosity, mere experience or the capacity to know then by understanding that all the pollutants of the mind are able to be removed, then one can see the idea of the total eradication or elimination of the pollutants.

This is how one can conceptualize the possibility of obtaining moksha, how the afflictions of the mind can be removed and how liberation can be obtained. In the scriptures such moksha or state of liberation is characterized in terms of four qualities or four features. First is true cessation as one has removed all afflictions from one’s continuum. It is described as true peace because it is a state of total tranquility where the individual has obtained total freedom from all the pollutants of the mind. It is also described as totally satisfying because one has reached a state of ultimate satisfaction. Finally is also described as the definite emergence as one has definitely emerged from the unenlightened process.

If that kind of goal is something very possible then how does one achieve this? Now this question becomes very important. [His Holiness in English] This takes us to the Fourth Noble Truth, the True Path. When one talks about true paths leading to liberation or moksha according to the Madhyamika explanation, the true path should be understood in terms of a direct, intuitive realization of emptiness. This is the True Path. This is the path, this direct, intuitive realization of emptiness that directly leads to the attainment of cessation.

In order to attain such a direct, intuitive realization of emptiness one must have the basis, which is a single-pointed meditative, experiential knowledge of emptiness. When the individual attains that knowledge of emptiness experientially through meditation that is said to be the beginning of the Path of Linking or Preparation. At the point where the individual has gained direct, intuitive realization of emptiness, it is said to be the Path of Seeing. However the experiential knowledge of emptiness derived from meditative practices in turn must be based on an initial, intellectual inferential understanding or cognition of emptiness. Without this there is no possibility of attaining a meditatively based experience of emptiness. The initial stage of developing the inferential cognition of emptiness is part of what is known as the Path of Accumulation. The threshold of the Path of Accumulation is the point where the individual practitioner has gained a genuine aspiration to attain liberation. This is the beginning of the path.

However in order to prepare oneself to embark on such a path, the Path of Accumulation or Linking, one must prepare the groundwork. One is now talking about practices at the beginning stage, the initial stage. The most important practice here is the Three Higher Trainings; trainings in morality, meditation and wisdom or insight. In the scriptures when the actual processes or the transition from one stage to another is described it is often discussed in terms of meditative experience.

It is important here to understand that the actual path on which the individual travels is the progressive and deepening knowledge and realization of emptiness. This is known as the wisdom aspect of the path. This wisdom realizing emptiness however must be within the context where there is a union or combination of single-pointedness of the mind and penetrative insight. This is the union of shamatha and vipasyana. The true insight into emptiness must be in terms of a union of shamatha and vipasyana. However in order to develop such true insight into emptiness where there is a union of the two of course one requires first to develop shamatha, the single-pointedness of the mind which will then allow one to channel one’s energy and concentration. Therefore single-pointedness of the mind or shamatha training becomes key. In order for the individual to have a successful training in shamatha two factors are very important. These are application of mindfulness and the application of introspection or mental alertness. Training in these two will be successful only if one’s single-pointedness of the mind is based on an ethically sound, disciplined way of life. One is of course talking about the importance of morality. This is how the Three Trainings are linked with each other.

All the practices of the Three Higher Trainings sometimes are elaborated in the Buddhist scriptures as the Thirty-seven Aspects of the Path to Enlightenment. All of these practices are common to both the Sravakayana and the Bodhisattvayana.

To sum up, if one’s understanding of the Four Noble Truths arises from such deep reflections then one will gain a deep admiration towards the Dharma which is the true refuge. One will also develop a conviction in the possibility of actualizing the Dharma within oneself. Once one has such conviction then one will be able to develop a genuine admiration of the Buddha, the master who showed the Dharma, the Path. If one is able to do this then one will be able to develop a deep admiration towards the Sangha, the Sangha members who are one’s spiritual companions on the Path. They are all engaged in this ultimate quest to actualize the Dharma or realize the Dharma within themselves. Through this way if one’s understanding of the Three Jewels based on such a profound understanding of the Four Noble Truths then when one thinks about the Three Jewels one will feel a renewed freshness. The three objects of refuge come alive. All of this explanation is to show what is meant by going for refuge in the Three Jewels.

Based on this understanding of taking refuge, we now look at another important aspect of Buddhism where there is an understanding that the foundation of the entire teaching of the Buddha is compassion. Compassion is the foundation of Buddha’s teaching. The practice of enhancing one’s heart, developing an altruistic mind, is aimed at deepening one’s understanding of compassion and enhancing the compassionate potential that exists within oneself.

Based on such profound compassion then one can develop the altruistic aspiration to seek enlightenment for the benefit of all. Here one is talking about the generation of bodhicitta. What is meant by bodhicitta? In Maitreya’s Abhisamayalamkara 7bodhicitta or this altruistic aspiration to attain enlightenment for the sake of others is described as having two motivating factors. One is genuine compassion towards all sentient beings. The second is the recognition of the need to attain full enlightenment in order to fulfill the well being, the welfare of other sentient beings.

In order to develop such bodhicitta, this altruistic mind, one needs to develop a sense of responsibility, not just mere compassion towards others but compassion with a sense of responsibility that one will take upon oneself the task to help others. This kind of sense of responsibility can only arise if one has generated genuine compassion, spontaneously arisen, which pervades all sentient beings. This is a universal compassion; it is not partial but rather universal towards all sentient beings. Such compassion is called Great Compassion, mahakaruna, to distinguish it from ordinary compassion.

However such compassion can only arise if one first of all has a genuine insight into the dukha-nature, the nature of suffering of oneself and other sentient beings. There is a true recognition of one’s state of being as suffering. Not only this but also there should be a genuine empathy or connectedness with others without which compassion can not arise. In order to have genuine compassion one needs not only the realization of the suffering nature but also a sense of connectedness with other sentient beings, a natural empathy.

As far as gaining insight into the suffering nature is concerned, reflection on the First Noble Truth, the truth of suffering, will assist one into deepening one’s insight into suffering. Not only this but for an altruistic practitioner it is important to realize that attaining individual liberation alone is not adequate. Not only is it individualistic but also even from the point of view of one’s own perfectibility, gaining liberation or moksha alone is not full enlightenment. It is not a state of full awakening.

A crucial requirement here is that in order to develop genuine compassion one needs to have a natural empathy and sense of connectedness or closeness with all other sentient beings. One of the techniques described in the Buddhist scriptures to enhance this natural empathy towards others is to develop the recognition that all sentient beings have been one’s mothers, if not one’s mother then someone who is dearest to one and then extend that perception to all sentient beings. Through this way one can develop a spontaneous, natural empathy with others.

However such natural empathy towards all sentient beings can not arise if one has fluctuating emotions towards others which are based on discrimination, viewing some as enemies, some as friends. This fluctuating emotion based on discrimination first has to be overcome. Therefore the practice of equanimity towards all becomes crucial.

There is a different technique described in Shantideva’s Bodhicaryavatara, Guide to the Bodhisattva’s Way of Life. In it he explains a way of cultivating genuine empathy towards others, not so much based on the recognition of others as one’s dearest but rather as a way of developing equality of oneself with others. Just as one wishes to be happy and overcome suffering, others too have a similar natural desire and right to be happy and overcome suffering. One develops that sense of equality then reverses perspectives putting others in one’s place and then relating to them as more dear than oneself. This kind of process of training is another technique for cultivating a natural empathy or connectedness towards others.

According to the Tibetan meditative tradition these two different techniques are combined and then meditated upon. The custom is that once as the result of one’s reflection and practice if one gains even a simulated experience of this altruistic mind of compassion one then stabilizes that or reinforces it through participating in a ceremony. In this ceremony one explicitly generates bodhicitta. This for a bodhisattva should then be followed by developing a keen desire to engage in the bodhisattva ideals, activities of a bodhisattva. Once an individual has successfully developed a keen interest and wish to engage in the bodhisattva activities of helping other sentient beings, then according to the tradition such a person must take Bodhisattva Vows from this point.

The Bodhisattva ideals or activities could be summed up in what is called the Three Precepts. One is the precept of refraining from negative actions. The second one is the precept of consciously or deliberately engaging in positive or virtuous actions. The third one is the precept of helping others. From the point of view of how causal practices lead to a resultant state, bodhisattva practices sometimes also are described in terms of the Two Accumulations, the Accumulation of Merit and the Accumulation of Wisdom. The accumulation of merit and wisdom are the two elements of the union of method and wisdom. On the Buddhist path these two aspects of the fundamental aspect of the path should always be united, they should not be separated.

It is on the practice of unifying method and wisdom where the profundity and sophistication of the Tantric or Vajrayana practices comes forth. To put it very briefly one of the unique features of the union of method and wisdom in the Vajrayana teachings is that there the practitioner first subjects all their perceptions of self and the environment into an understanding of emptiness, dissolves everything into emptiness. This very cognition or understanding of emptiness is then visualized as the form of a meditational deity. Of course this is at the imaginative level initially. Once one has this visualization of the deity, one again reflects upon the non-substantial or empty nature of the deity. What is found here is that complete within one instance of cognition both aspects of method and wisdom are together. There is a visualization of a deity yet at the same time there is an understanding or comprehension of the empty nature of the deity. Within one single instance of a cognitive act, one has both the method and wisdom complete.

Within the Vajrayana tradition, principally speaking there are four classes of Tantra. In the first two classes of Tantra there is no involvement of taking Tantric or Vajrayana Vows. It is in Yoga Tantra and Highest Yoga Tantra, Anuttarayogatantra where the practitioner takes Tantric Vows. In the Anuttarayogatantra, Highest Yoga Tantra, there are various meditative practices that are aimed at utilizing various physiological elements such as visualizing the energy channels, the energies that flow in the channels and the subtle drops. The point is that in all of these various types of meditation the key is the meditation on bodhicitta, the altruistic aspiration, and insight into emptiness. Without these two factors, no practice can be considered Buddhist practice. Even the Tantric practices as long as they are divorced from or devoid of bodhicitta and the understanding of emptiness, they are not even Buddhist practices.

However in very reliable and authentic texts belonging to Yoga Tantra, there is an understanding that the Vajrayana path could also be based on the philosophical understanding of emptiness of the Cittamatra School as well, not necessarily the Madhyamika. I feel however that in order to have a comprehensive practice of Tantra, in order to obtain the full realization of the Vajrayana path, one needs the insight of emptiness based on the Madhyamika understanding.

Just as in one of the questions the point was raised about the difficulty of continuing to practice tantra, I think it is very true that so long as one is not able to establish a firm grounding in the basic practices of the Buddhadharma even the supposedly profound practices of the Vajrayana will have no effect. Therefore the point is that it is important to understand that for a practicing Buddhist, developing an understanding and meditation on the Four Noble Truths is crucial. Meditation as a part of one’s practice becomes very critical. When talking about meditation it is important to bear in mind that one’s meditation should contain both elements of meditation, single-pointedness and analytic or penetrative.

Another important factor is determination. You should not think these developments can take place in a few days or few years. We must understand that. These developments even may take eons. So you see our determination, if you consider yourself a Buddhist and want to really practice the Buddhadharma then right from the beginning you must make up your mind that it doesn’t matter if it takes millions of billions of eons. Doesn’t matter. After all what is the purpose of our life? The meaning of existence? I think to utilize something positive. Then even if days, months or eons it is meaningful. If you are really wasting the purpose of our life then even one day too long! [His Holiness in English]

So once you determine, once you make up your mind, some kind of firm determination and clear objective then time is not important. Like Shantideva said in one of his prayers “So long as space remain, So long as sentient beings’ suffering remain, I will remain in order to serve”. That sentence really gives me some kind of inner strength and inspiration. As I mentioned before people want something quickest or best or something then I think also cheapest. I think this is wrong. That I would like to share with you. [His Holiness in English]

So that’s why I myself always recite some mantra or some visualization of certain mandalas but my daily practice, although my practice is very poor, my main emphasis is on these Four Noble Truths, bodhicitta and karuna. That is really I feel something practical. Through these practices you will get some practical benefit. Realization of big deities sometimes I think we are cheating ourselves. Almost like deceiving oneself. Therefore I think we must practice step by step with patience and determination. Once you are involved or dedicated or determined to practice then some improvement you can see year by year or at least decade by decade. Then you can see “Oh at least there is some change, some improvement!” You can see. Once you see that it also gives you some kind of new encouragement. So you see, change is not easy, not easy. [His Holiness in English]

So as Buddhist brothers and sisters that is my talk. Now the important thing is, if you consider yourself a Buddhist then please implement. Should not remain on just an intellectual level. Practice or teaching must be part of our life. Not only Buddhist but other practitioner or believer say Christian or Moslem or Jews or whatever your faith. If you accept your faith then it must be part of your life. It is not sufficient to just on Sunday say attend church and remain like that. Few moments then outside nothing there. That is not sufficient. Whether you are physically in your cathedral or not I think the teaching of your own religion must be in your heart always. That is very important. Then you get experience of real value. Otherwise just a knowledge here [points to head]. [His Holiness in English]

When you face some real problem what helps? Once the teachings become a part of your life then when real problems come, the teachings give you inner strength. Finally when we become older, old age, and incurable illness and finally death comes, then the practice really gives you some kind of inner guarantee. So that is important. After all death is a part of our life, nothing sustains. Sooner or later we have to pass death’s main gate, we have to pass through that way. Whether there is a next life or not, at that time peace of mind is a very crucial factor. How to achieve peace of mind at that moment? If you have some experience in yourself then that will provide some kind of inner strength. No one else, no deities, no gurus, no other can provide. That is why Buddha says you are your own master. That is very important. Thank you. [His Holiness in English]