Details
Root of The Middle Way – Session 28
Teachers:
Collection:
- Buddhist Classics and Philosophy
Location:
- Rangjung Yeshe Institute - Nepal
Features:
- Subtitles ,
- Transcripts
Excerpt
Compassion's role in practice is emphasized, along with daily meditation and ethical commitment. Excessive self-doubt is irrational after sincere analysis.
Description
Session 28 explores Chapter Twenty-Four’s verses 8-10, highlighting the interdependence of the two truths: relative and ultimate. Students struggle with this concept, but Thomas clarifies their intertwined nature. Learning correctly and gaining guidance from experienced practitioners are crucial. Students seek guidance for effective practice and the dissonance between understanding and daily life.
Related Course Info
- Root of the Middle Way – Mūlamadhyamakakārikā A course on Nagarjuna’s brilliantly sharp reasoning, taught by Dr. Thomas Doctor at the Rangjung Yeshe Institute over a month. For everyone with an interest in the way things really are.
Video
Audio
"That which originates
dependently, does not
cease and does not
arise, is not annihilated
and is not permanent,
does not come and does not go,
is not different
and not the same.
To the true teacher who
reveals this peace, the complete
pacification of constructs, to
the perfect Buddha, I bow down."
So today we just communicate and if you have anything to bring up then you are very welcome.
Student: "Yes, so, Luis, [unclear] and I, we went through the Chapter Twenty-Four and we picked some verse, so first the 8, 9 and 10, if you could…
Excellent choice! Excellent choice!
"There is more." (Laughter)
So 8, 9 and 10, so those are the verses that say: "The Dharma taught by the Buddhas is genuinely based on the two truths: the relative truth of the world and the truth of the ultimate meaning. Those who do not understand the distinction between these two truths, fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching. Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate, suffering cannot be transcended."
So two truths, to say that there are two truths of course is a hallmark of Buddhist teaching. But it's also something that we can, if we want, we can see it illustrated in many different places, many different systems of thought, many different contexts of thinking.
Because if we say that there's a way that things seem to be in a way that they actually are, then we have this framework of two truths.
And all the teachings that the Buddhas give, they are based on those, on that sort of, what to say...
based on..
they are based on that kind of distinction in terms of a way things are and the way things seem to be. Then whether there's a difference between the way things seem to be, and the way things actually are or not, that's in a way what we've been trying to understand now over the last weeks. We've been simply trying to see whether this, whatever this is, we can call it the relative conventional truth--
whether that is also reflects the way things actually are.
And then there's something with the term, samrti and kündzop, that sounds as if almost it would be impossible for the two to be the same, because there's a sense of obscuring that comes with that term, which doesn't, isn't reflected if we call it relative truth, but it can be explained into it, yeah? It's the truth that is relative to ignorance. It's relative to conventions, to mundane transactions, and to ignorance.
But is that also how things actually are? And that is what we've been investigating. So what would you say by now about that, the relative truth of the world and the truth of the ultimate meaning?
Yeah, what is your understanding of that? Because if you don't understand that, "then you fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching," yeah? Speaking to all of us, yeah?
Student: "When you ask us that question, do you understand that? I think there's so many layers in that question of asking us and that's sort of where I'm struggling, and that I think we've been talking about the past couple of days, is that we're all understanding that there are two truths, and they do seem to be completely different, but at the same time, I feel that I don't truly understand that." And also they couldn't be truly different because then there would be no connection between them. Then it wouldn't do us any good to understand anything about the relative truth, yeah? So this is something that in the sūtras also they like the Saṃdhinirmocana,
It's available on 84000 also now. I forget the title in English, but "The Definitive Explanation Sūtra," Saṃdhinirmocana, Gompa Nedrel There the Buddha explains how the two truths couldn't be distinct because five absurdities would follow, and if they would be the same, then also five absurdities would follow. So that fits very well with what we've been learning here also. Relative truth and ultimate truth are just like, are dependent origination, no? They arise in dependence. It's a perfect example of that. And so they couldn't be really the same and they couldn't be really different either. That would be like a way of using our knowledge from this particular text to the context of understanding the two truths.
So how helpful is that to say? It's somewhat helpful, but probably doesn't settle the whole issue, no? Like it's very true that you say, like, what do you understand? There's a lot of grading potentially to be done there, no?
"Online there's a question from Julia. Do you want to unmute or share?"
Student: "Hi Doctor Doctor." Hello.
"I mostly have been watching on the recording
because of the time difference, but I came tonight because I wanted to say thank you. Usually it's like the teacher points out the nature of mind, but it's not all the time. And then also from study and experience, the aggregates are empty. But this text has been cool for me, because there are moments where I don't know how, I'm not scholarly, I'm more experiential, but there are moments where the like the kalapas inside, their emptiness and the aggregate emptiness and the nature of mind, the inside and the outside for just a moment, they're like sparks. And I can see how the cognitive and the embodied sense are both empty together. And I don't know how that works from being taught this text, but it happens more now in the daily life during this class. And then I also just had a little bit of.. I heard what I think maybe is a riddle. I heard a talk by, and I think it's pertinent to the question just asked. I don't want to waste your time or any one of the classmates' time. It's a recording of a Burmese teacher and he said that, "Buddhas get born to teach the Dharma to the Śrāvakas, but the Śrāvakas don't understand the ultimate mentality or the ultimate reality--the ultimate form. But the Buddha doesn't need to teach the Dharma, but the Buddha teaches the Dharma anyway, even though the Śrāvakas can't understand the ultimate mentality and the ultimate materiality in order to become a Buddha." And so I'm wondering if that's the same question that this chapter is about?"
The Twenty-Four? "The one that was just read just now."
Yeah I think that illustrates that. Thank you for those comments. And I think that illustrates quite well what is the issue in Twenty-Four and in those three stanzas.
But it also..what you were saying could be understood..
at the face of it, it could sound like, "So there's no way to connect with the ultimate truth." And that's said somewhat differently here, no? Because in 10 it says, "Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate, suffering cannot be transcended."
It's not saying that by relying on convention, the ultimate can be shown and by realizing the ultimate you transcend suffering. But it's sort of phrased in negative terms, but nevertheless that seems to be the implication, no?
That by relying on convention.. without doing that, yeah? Like if..
so there's so much that one can say about this, no? And there's so much in the commentarial literature about this. It's a really profound and often much loved and often visited passage that in the literature comes up in very important contexts. But..
it shows..
it shows that if we.. one way of explaining what this is saying is to say that if we think that we hear about emptiness and no arising, no ceasing, and so on, and then we sort of focus on that and think, "Okay, so that's what I need to get to." Then we don't. We don't get anywhere. As a matter of fact we're just stuck at convention rather than.. we may believe that we're trying to access great profound emptiness, the ultimate nature of things, but it's not really anything else than the usual business of constructing reality. The object, agent, and action framework that we built the whole story with. Now we're just talking about ultimate reality, yeah? So instead we have to rely on convention to understand and realize the nature of convention.
And that again is what the treatise does very decisively and clearly. When we follow the progression of the treatise, no, then it takes conventions, it takes the conventions that we bring to the event and analyzes them for us almost, yeah? So that it's clear that they aren't founded on anything. So one way of understanding what convention means here, is that it's, it is that which can be cognized, that which is an object of mind, that which is an object of expression, verbal expression, and that which is an object of engagement. That's what convention is, yeah? Without relying on that type of convention, then the ultimate cannot be shown.
And unless we realize the ultimate, then this framework of object, agent, and action, and the machinery that that kind of structuring of things creates, that will continue in an unbroken fashion. And so all the suffering that comes with that structuring, trying to get what one feels one must by all means get, trying to avoid what one feels by all means one must avoid, and then acting without hesitation, because of the perception of immediate need, we kind of..
we can't help it. And even if we think about it we we come to the conclusion, I must, yeah? So with that kind of framework, then we have negative emotions and we have the engaging in karma that will condition our minds further. And so suffering cannot be transcended. So sort of an understatement, yeah? It will certainly continue and it can deepen and intensify quite a lot as well, yeah? So by instead relying on convention,
and again, yeah, taking our own conventions seriously, because, taking ourselves seriously, our own conventions seriously, and examining how much is there really to this whole story with all its myriad facets? Then we can arguably see that there's now no foundation for that. And with that understanding, then at least we can understand ourselves that then there's no reason to suffer. If the conventions that keep together this framework that seems so unavoidable and merciless in that sense, because it's not always a nice framework, it can be really destructive, yeah? So it's a merciless framework to understand that that framework actually has no foundation.
They call it liberation, no? That's not a bad term for something like that. So there is a profound relation between relative truth and ultimate truth. And they couldn't be just the same because then we would already be fine, no? Whenever I thought something, whenever I said something, whenever I did something, that would be the ultimate truth, yeah? There would be nothing that could bind in any way at all. So the two truths are not just the same because that's not really the case. And then nor are they different, because then no matter what I did within this framework, it wouldn't have any effect. And my understanding of.. I don't have access to the ultimate truth, what I have access to is convention. If the ultimate were really different than that then, yeah, it wouldn't matter however skilled I became with convention, however knowledgeable I became about convention, it wouldn't help me realize the ultimate truth. But since that is not the case, since understanding the nature of convention
makes the bounds of convention fall apart, and since unless one is.. one takes up that challenge to recognize the nature of convention, one won't realize the ultimate. So, for that reason, it is necessary to understand what the two truths are. He says in 9: "Those who do not understand the distinction between those two truths, fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching." And then therefore also, "Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate suffering cannot be transcended."
So that would be like a little bit of commentary on those stanzas. And then there's this interesting one right afterwards also. We have mentioned a few times: "When viewing emptiness incorrectly, those with little insight will be ruined, as when a snake is caught in the wrong way, or a knowledge mantra is used incorrectly." So showing something about the importance of doing it right, and learning well. If we want to learn how to handle poisonous snakes, then that's learning a skill. it's learning about snakes and it's learning about what snakes do in different situations. It's something that will take some training. And the same with using a mantra is something that needs to be done according to.. the traditional idea is that that's this kind of spell. The mantra is like a spell really here we are talking about. And if you use a magical spell, then you need to know exactly how to do it. Otherwise, instead of doing what you want, it does the opposite. So like if you want to destroy something, it will destroy yourself instead of what you intend to break down. So this highlights something we talked about many times as well, the importance of community and being with people who know from experience and who know from practice.
On that note, we can also talk about the event that will be on Saturday, where Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche will give refuge vows and bodhisattva vows, and then give the text transmission for the entire Mūlamādhyamakakārikā and some instructions. So that's the way of connecting with that whole profound community of insight and skillful means.
Beginning by receiving the commitments, we hear, no, that it's on the basis of that kind of discipline of observing vows of refuge, and having the bodhisattva outlook and commitment, that it becomes possible to really progress with this kind of insight. So there will be that opportunity on Saturday, four o'clock I think, in Nepal. It will be announced in writing soon. I think so, yeah. But there will be something sent out also to make it clear.
Student: "Will that be made available to the online as well?" Yeah, I think it will be online as well, yeah. "Thank you." Yeah, welcome.
Student: "I don't know if this is already now, but on our way, we ran into Rinpoche and he asked us to come upstairs after your teaching finishes." Right, so we'll do that also, yeah. But unfortunately I don't think we can do that online. But the event on Saturday, definitely. "Today?" Yeah, after this.
Sorry about that everyone online, but please rejoice.
Yeah? Student: "I wonder if you could talk a little bit about the the supports necessary to continue on this kind of trajectory. Obviously now maybe this is a good segue, right? There's now the opportunity to connect with a teacher and there's an opportunity to receive a reading transmission on this text. It's been said many times, you've spent decades studying this text with the monks and nuns of our Sangha. And I wonder what that means? Like I feel like the part that's missing for me now is someone to guide the analytical meditations of this text, so that I can put it into practice in a way that feels formulaic and skillful, so that there is no potential to be led to a misunderstanding. And I know reading the commentary, being able to take classes, is very helpful. But then at the same time, the more that you come to understand this, in my experience, the more overwhelming the heartbreak actually is for how much I am not living within that understanding. And how much those around me are also not living in that understanding. And so it's not just a dissonance, which I said yesterday, about the disparity between what's being presented and what I feel is being presented to my experience, but also coming to build the resource to sit in the heartbreak that's there with what it means to be operating on a foundationless foundation that is predisposed to suffering. Where that is actually the only choice, the only outcome available." [Rinpoche enters] Rinpoche: "What is the question?"
Rinpoche: "What is the question?" "What are you asking question?" "No question?" Student: "Rinpoche, I was asking a question about how to put this text into practice and how to find the necessary support to be able to not just study, but to actually practice what is being studied here?" [Rinpoche speaking Tibetan]
Insight without skillful means is ignorance.
And skillful means without insight is ignorance. And skillful means without insight. [Rinpoche speaks in Tibetan]
Thank you. The supreme-- Rinpoche: "Sorry for disturbing." Thank you, Rinpoche. So the supreme method, Rinpoche said, method without insight is ignorance, and insight without method is ignorance. So the supreme method is compassion, great compassion, karuna, mahakaruna. And the supreme insights are the insights.. there are many kinds of insight: mundane insights, supramundane insight, and unsurpassable insights. The greatest of all insights is this insight into profound emptiness beyond all conceptual constructs.
That supreme insight is something that we can approach, and it's something that we first need to understand. We need to comprehend what that is. And when we begin to get an understanding of what profound emptiness beyond all the constructs of the mind is, then it is extremely important that we don't think that that kind of learning is an end in itself, to itself. Because if we do that, if we don't make our knowledge that we gain, thereby something that we can apply in practice, if it isn't something that we can use in our life, as a way of experiencing things and being and acting, then there's actually nothing more sad. There's nothing more, no greater waste, and there's nothing more painful either than if that is the case. If the understanding of something so profound becomes just something that we have learned as yet another topic of knowledge, but nothing much more than that. So in order to really benefit from the knowledge, then it's extremely important that.. we can't avoid meditation practice. And meditation practice is something that, as beginners, we need to approach in terms of sessions. So those sessions begin with taking refuge, then developing the mind of enlightenment, then we can do visualization and recitation of a deity, and finally when there is dissolution of the deity, then we can also rest in equipoise for some time, like five, ten, twenty minutes. And then at the end of the session we dedicate the merit. But when we say that means and methods are indispensable, in the sense that without method, without means, then insight is still ignorance, then what we should understand is that the great compassion is the king of all methods, that's the royal method, to the extent that it is sufficient in itself to develop great love and compassion. So when we talk about love, usually we think about... we think about things and people and so on that we love because of something, yeah? They do something, they mean something to us, which is different from the way it is with other things and other people. So it's actually a kind of business way of thinking, and that's not at all what the great love and great compassion is about. It's a 100% sincere concern and care, loving concern for all sentient beings. So when one trains in that, then that in itself is sufficient, because that itself will gather the accumulations that we need for the path of awakening, that itself will purify the obscurations, and through that also we can recognize profound emptiness, maha shunyata. This kind of knowledge of great emptiness, it comes naturally with great compassion. So that is what we then should train in and train on a daily basis. It's a very practical process. And then Rinpoche says in terms of his own practice, when he wakes up in the morning, what he does is to recall these lines that say, "Do no evil but accomplish perfect goodness. Tame your own mind. That is the teaching of the Buddha." So he brings that to mind in his own practice when he wakes up and says, "Okay, today I'm not going to do anything harmful. I won't do anything that is negative and harmful. That's how I would like to live during this day, and I also would like to do something that can bring very wholesome and conducive circumstances together, and I would like to tame my own mind." So to make that kind of commitment on a daily basis, the moment we wake up basically, provides a very useful framework. Then we can actually go through the day in a way where we can benefit from all the skillful means and the insights that are cultivated on the Dharma path. So with.. knowledge is necessary first of all, understanding, and that understanding has to be applied in practical terms. And so to understand the relation then between insights and great skillful means, that is the key issue. And then we can go and visit Rinpoche after this session as he also mentioned now. Was there anything I forgot? Let me know, yeah?
Student: "Thomas, if you could comment on the last verse of the 24th chapter: "The one who sees dependent origination, sees suffering, its origin, cessation, and the path." It seems to be a conclusion from the chapter. And I think it connects well with what we learned in the first day, that the one who sees dependent origination sees the Dharma and sees the Buddha. So there seems to be an equate, it equates dependent origination, emptiness, and Four Noble Truths. So if you could comment on that verse?" Which one, sorry, did you say? "It's the last verse. It's the 40th verse of the 24th chapter."
Thanks.
Yeah, I think you're right, no, that to see dependent origination.. if we understand how things originate dependently, then we also know what suffering is and what creates suffering. And if we know that really well, then we also know
that there's no basis for suffering, yeah? That suffering arises in the absence of understanding the empty nature of dependent origination, no?
And so the possibility of the cessation of suffering also becomes a clear option, no? And if there's a cessation of suffering and this all is in terms of dependent origination, then there's a path as well, yeah? So the very perception of dependent origination means to understand the Four Truths as well, yeah? It's not just the two truths of appearance and emptiness. If we say that the appearance of dependent origination is the relative truth, and the empty nature of dependent origination is the ultimate truth, then it's also the same with the Four Truths: the manifestation of suffering and how that suffering develops, how it's possible for there to be no suffering at all, and what the path that can make that kind of insight and that kind of transformation take place would be like.
Anything else?
Student: "Can I speak? Am I audible? Thank you for all this and then this is the second day. Today is the second day we get to see Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche coming to this class. I think in my own way of looking at it, I think this is how he can, as a teacher, want to show up and also in a way that he wants to emphasize on how important this class is all about. I think all of us appreciate that and then we are fortunate to see him. Of course, I am seeing him on the screen from Australia, so this is my great opportunity to connect to teaching as well as Rinpoche. I was thinking about if you could also somehow shed some light on having confidence in the analysis process, because often than not we find, as we embark on the analysis using this text, we find ourselves caught up in the infinity of examining things upon things, and then, on the other hand, I find I am not able to connect to the ultimate thing that I am trying to establish in the end. So how do I establish the confidence in my analytical process? Some lights on this. Thank you so much." Thank you, that's such a good question.
That's also something we have kept in mind throughout the process, I think.
It's always possible to say 'I am not confident,' that we can always say. But we also know that there are many times when, depending on who we are perhaps, like our character, some are more inclined to be in this way than others, but we can be in a situation where actually we could very well be confident, but still we think, 'I am not confident.' Many different tasks and challenges that actually we are qualified for, but we think that we are not. So some more than others have a tendency to think like that. But I think probably we all know that from experience, what it's like to feel intimidated by something that actually shouldn't, needn't be very intimidating.
But it's a fact just to recognize that we can always.. there's nothing preventing us from saying, 'but you know, I think I still didn't really get it.' Or 'I still haven't thought carefully enough.' Or 'maybe that's just something I overlooked,' and so on. That we can do any time, no matter how much analysis we have done. So in one way, the sort of ball is in our court, or I don't know what to say, that once we have given it our best, and..
and it's not the case that there's something that we can put our finger on and say, 'this is what I don't understand.' That's why it is so important to, when we feel this way, then why do I feel this way? One big reason that we feel, 'I am not sure I really understand this yet,' one big reason that we think like that is because we are used to giving credit pretty much unquestioning to our concepts about seer and the seen, the act of seeing, movement, arising, sameness, and difference. We think that they are pretty much unquestionably relevant concepts, that really are required for us to live and function. So when something threatens that framework then, of course, it's easy to feel very confused and think, 'maybe I'm not quite there yet.' But if we have spent some time sincerely taking our own ideas seriously, and so given sincere answers to ourselves really when the questions are brought up in the text, then...
there comes a time at which, to just say this one more time, "I don't think I understand this yet, maybe there's something I've overlooked," but that itself becomes irrational. That's like a practical judgment, it's not something they can say "now you shouldn't think like that anymore." It's something we have to kind of notice ourselves. When is it becoming obsessive? You could say also, when is my thought that I still haven't understood this becoming like an obsession?
If we do it prematurely, of course, it doesn't work. But if we have understood, seen the point, so to speak, although there is no point to see and so on, if you want to criticize it, you can do like that. But if we can tell ourselves.. but if someone says, "Did you get the point, have you seen what this is trying to say?" And if we sort of respond to that and say "yes," that doesn't mean that now we are a great meditator. Forget about being greatly realized people, it doesn't even mean that we are great scholars. But it means that there is something that we have seen. Otherwise why would we say that it is like this? And then it doesn't make much sense to say, 'but maybe not.' Like I can also step into, that's a bad example maybe, because I was thinking I could step into this room and then wonder, 'did I actually do that?' That's precisely what we have been doing in this kind of exercise. But in terms of practical conventions, there is a time at which that kind of hesitation and rerunning stuff that one has already dealt with is no longer practical and relevant. So I don't know how much sense this is making, hopefully some sense. So all what I'm trying to say is that we can always tell ourselves that we didn't understand yet. But it's also possible, once we have spent a little bit of time sincerely and carefully looking at these things, to just accept that actually I have understood quite a bit. And this kind of understanding is something I can use a whole lot. So there are a lot of things that become very relevant for me to do. Perhaps it's probably relevant to study more of the same kind, no? If we like, we can now benefit much more from more comprehensive and elaborate discussions of this kind of subject matter, because we have tried to deal with the key issues and we have a sense of what the key issues are. But it's also something that we can use in our life in general and in particular in terms of our life as Dharma practitioners, which ideally our life in general and our life as Dharma practitioners shouldn't be very different from each other. So it's something that we can use all the time. Like Rinpoche said: "Do no evil, accomplish what is perfectly good, and tame your own mind." This kind of understanding and the kind of calm, and the kind of perspective that comes with having understood this. If we just allow it to be a genuine insight, we don't have to tell ourselves, 'maybe I didn't understand,' but just allow for the possibility of real understanding. Then we can perhaps become more genuine in terms of not doing harm, and in terms of doing what is helpful and so on. Good. Yes, I hope that's helpful.
And then let's go upstairs, no? And we can also have another session tomorrow if you're still up for it. Thank you very much. Student: "Is it possible to ask one more? No."
Sure. Okay. "Yeah, please, you can ask." Student: "Oh, is that me? I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. I was not able to attend many of these sessions earlier and I've missed considerable amounts and I've tried to bridge, but I had one question in terms of Nāgārjuna's... Maybe if you could clarify where karma and.. Does he teach on karma specifically? And am I missing something in terms of.. or if you could refer to me where that connection is made.." Yeah, for example. "..specifically? Thank you so much." Yeah, you're welcome. For example, in the chapter here in 24, there's a lot of effort made to show that dependent origination and emptiness is kind of what we need in order to make sense of karma. But we can also talk about that more tomorrow. "Okay. Thank you very much." You're welcome.
So today we just communicate and if you have anything to bring up then you are very welcome.
Student: "Yes, so, Luis, [unclear] and I, we went through the Chapter Twenty-Four and we picked some verse, so first the 8, 9 and 10, if you could…
Excellent choice! Excellent choice!
"There is more." (Laughter)
So 8, 9 and 10, so those are the verses that say: "The Dharma taught by the Buddhas is genuinely based on the two truths: the relative truth of the world and the truth of the ultimate meaning. Those who do not understand the distinction between these two truths, fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching. Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate, suffering cannot be transcended."
So two truths, to say that there are two truths of course is a hallmark of Buddhist teaching. But it's also something that we can, if we want, we can see it illustrated in many different places, many different systems of thought, many different contexts of thinking.
Because if we say that there's a way that things seem to be in a way that they actually are, then we have this framework of two truths.
And all the teachings that the Buddhas give, they are based on those, on that sort of, what to say...
based on..
they are based on that kind of distinction in terms of a way things are and the way things seem to be. Then whether there's a difference between the way things seem to be, and the way things actually are or not, that's in a way what we've been trying to understand now over the last weeks. We've been simply trying to see whether this, whatever this is, we can call it the relative conventional truth--
whether that is also reflects the way things actually are.
And then there's something with the term, samrti and kündzop, that sounds as if almost it would be impossible for the two to be the same, because there's a sense of obscuring that comes with that term, which doesn't, isn't reflected if we call it relative truth, but it can be explained into it, yeah? It's the truth that is relative to ignorance. It's relative to conventions, to mundane transactions, and to ignorance.
But is that also how things actually are? And that is what we've been investigating. So what would you say by now about that, the relative truth of the world and the truth of the ultimate meaning?
Yeah, what is your understanding of that? Because if you don't understand that, "then you fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching," yeah? Speaking to all of us, yeah?
Student: "When you ask us that question, do you understand that? I think there's so many layers in that question of asking us and that's sort of where I'm struggling, and that I think we've been talking about the past couple of days, is that we're all understanding that there are two truths, and they do seem to be completely different, but at the same time, I feel that I don't truly understand that." And also they couldn't be truly different because then there would be no connection between them. Then it wouldn't do us any good to understand anything about the relative truth, yeah? So this is something that in the sūtras also they like the Saṃdhinirmocana,
It's available on 84000 also now. I forget the title in English, but "The Definitive Explanation Sūtra," Saṃdhinirmocana, Gompa Nedrel There the Buddha explains how the two truths couldn't be distinct because five absurdities would follow, and if they would be the same, then also five absurdities would follow. So that fits very well with what we've been learning here also. Relative truth and ultimate truth are just like, are dependent origination, no? They arise in dependence. It's a perfect example of that. And so they couldn't be really the same and they couldn't be really different either. That would be like a way of using our knowledge from this particular text to the context of understanding the two truths.
So how helpful is that to say? It's somewhat helpful, but probably doesn't settle the whole issue, no? Like it's very true that you say, like, what do you understand? There's a lot of grading potentially to be done there, no?
"Online there's a question from Julia. Do you want to unmute or share?"
Student: "Hi Doctor Doctor." Hello.
"I mostly have been watching on the recording
because of the time difference, but I came tonight because I wanted to say thank you. Usually it's like the teacher points out the nature of mind, but it's not all the time. And then also from study and experience, the aggregates are empty. But this text has been cool for me, because there are moments where I don't know how, I'm not scholarly, I'm more experiential, but there are moments where the like the kalapas inside, their emptiness and the aggregate emptiness and the nature of mind, the inside and the outside for just a moment, they're like sparks. And I can see how the cognitive and the embodied sense are both empty together. And I don't know how that works from being taught this text, but it happens more now in the daily life during this class. And then I also just had a little bit of.. I heard what I think maybe is a riddle. I heard a talk by, and I think it's pertinent to the question just asked. I don't want to waste your time or any one of the classmates' time. It's a recording of a Burmese teacher and he said that, "Buddhas get born to teach the Dharma to the Śrāvakas, but the Śrāvakas don't understand the ultimate mentality or the ultimate reality--the ultimate form. But the Buddha doesn't need to teach the Dharma, but the Buddha teaches the Dharma anyway, even though the Śrāvakas can't understand the ultimate mentality and the ultimate materiality in order to become a Buddha." And so I'm wondering if that's the same question that this chapter is about?"
The Twenty-Four? "The one that was just read just now."
Yeah I think that illustrates that. Thank you for those comments. And I think that illustrates quite well what is the issue in Twenty-Four and in those three stanzas.
But it also..what you were saying could be understood..
at the face of it, it could sound like, "So there's no way to connect with the ultimate truth." And that's said somewhat differently here, no? Because in 10 it says, "Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate, suffering cannot be transcended."
It's not saying that by relying on convention, the ultimate can be shown and by realizing the ultimate you transcend suffering. But it's sort of phrased in negative terms, but nevertheless that seems to be the implication, no?
That by relying on convention.. without doing that, yeah? Like if..
so there's so much that one can say about this, no? And there's so much in the commentarial literature about this. It's a really profound and often much loved and often visited passage that in the literature comes up in very important contexts. But..
it shows..
it shows that if we.. one way of explaining what this is saying is to say that if we think that we hear about emptiness and no arising, no ceasing, and so on, and then we sort of focus on that and think, "Okay, so that's what I need to get to." Then we don't. We don't get anywhere. As a matter of fact we're just stuck at convention rather than.. we may believe that we're trying to access great profound emptiness, the ultimate nature of things, but it's not really anything else than the usual business of constructing reality. The object, agent, and action framework that we built the whole story with. Now we're just talking about ultimate reality, yeah? So instead we have to rely on convention to understand and realize the nature of convention.
And that again is what the treatise does very decisively and clearly. When we follow the progression of the treatise, no, then it takes conventions, it takes the conventions that we bring to the event and analyzes them for us almost, yeah? So that it's clear that they aren't founded on anything. So one way of understanding what convention means here, is that it's, it is that which can be cognized, that which is an object of mind, that which is an object of expression, verbal expression, and that which is an object of engagement. That's what convention is, yeah? Without relying on that type of convention, then the ultimate cannot be shown.
And unless we realize the ultimate, then this framework of object, agent, and action, and the machinery that that kind of structuring of things creates, that will continue in an unbroken fashion. And so all the suffering that comes with that structuring, trying to get what one feels one must by all means get, trying to avoid what one feels by all means one must avoid, and then acting without hesitation, because of the perception of immediate need, we kind of..
we can't help it. And even if we think about it we we come to the conclusion, I must, yeah? So with that kind of framework, then we have negative emotions and we have the engaging in karma that will condition our minds further. And so suffering cannot be transcended. So sort of an understatement, yeah? It will certainly continue and it can deepen and intensify quite a lot as well, yeah? So by instead relying on convention,
and again, yeah, taking our own conventions seriously, because, taking ourselves seriously, our own conventions seriously, and examining how much is there really to this whole story with all its myriad facets? Then we can arguably see that there's now no foundation for that. And with that understanding, then at least we can understand ourselves that then there's no reason to suffer. If the conventions that keep together this framework that seems so unavoidable and merciless in that sense, because it's not always a nice framework, it can be really destructive, yeah? So it's a merciless framework to understand that that framework actually has no foundation.
They call it liberation, no? That's not a bad term for something like that. So there is a profound relation between relative truth and ultimate truth. And they couldn't be just the same because then we would already be fine, no? Whenever I thought something, whenever I said something, whenever I did something, that would be the ultimate truth, yeah? There would be nothing that could bind in any way at all. So the two truths are not just the same because that's not really the case. And then nor are they different, because then no matter what I did within this framework, it wouldn't have any effect. And my understanding of.. I don't have access to the ultimate truth, what I have access to is convention. If the ultimate were really different than that then, yeah, it wouldn't matter however skilled I became with convention, however knowledgeable I became about convention, it wouldn't help me realize the ultimate truth. But since that is not the case, since understanding the nature of convention
makes the bounds of convention fall apart, and since unless one is.. one takes up that challenge to recognize the nature of convention, one won't realize the ultimate. So, for that reason, it is necessary to understand what the two truths are. He says in 9: "Those who do not understand the distinction between those two truths, fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching." And then therefore also, "Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate suffering cannot be transcended."
So that would be like a little bit of commentary on those stanzas. And then there's this interesting one right afterwards also. We have mentioned a few times: "When viewing emptiness incorrectly, those with little insight will be ruined, as when a snake is caught in the wrong way, or a knowledge mantra is used incorrectly." So showing something about the importance of doing it right, and learning well. If we want to learn how to handle poisonous snakes, then that's learning a skill. it's learning about snakes and it's learning about what snakes do in different situations. It's something that will take some training. And the same with using a mantra is something that needs to be done according to.. the traditional idea is that that's this kind of spell. The mantra is like a spell really here we are talking about. And if you use a magical spell, then you need to know exactly how to do it. Otherwise, instead of doing what you want, it does the opposite. So like if you want to destroy something, it will destroy yourself instead of what you intend to break down. So this highlights something we talked about many times as well, the importance of community and being with people who know from experience and who know from practice.
On that note, we can also talk about the event that will be on Saturday, where Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche will give refuge vows and bodhisattva vows, and then give the text transmission for the entire Mūlamādhyamakakārikā and some instructions. So that's the way of connecting with that whole profound community of insight and skillful means.
Beginning by receiving the commitments, we hear, no, that it's on the basis of that kind of discipline of observing vows of refuge, and having the bodhisattva outlook and commitment, that it becomes possible to really progress with this kind of insight. So there will be that opportunity on Saturday, four o'clock I think, in Nepal. It will be announced in writing soon. I think so, yeah. But there will be something sent out also to make it clear.
Student: "Will that be made available to the online as well?" Yeah, I think it will be online as well, yeah. "Thank you." Yeah, welcome.
Student: "I don't know if this is already now, but on our way, we ran into Rinpoche and he asked us to come upstairs after your teaching finishes." Right, so we'll do that also, yeah. But unfortunately I don't think we can do that online. But the event on Saturday, definitely. "Today?" Yeah, after this.
Sorry about that everyone online, but please rejoice.
Yeah? Student: "I wonder if you could talk a little bit about the the supports necessary to continue on this kind of trajectory. Obviously now maybe this is a good segue, right? There's now the opportunity to connect with a teacher and there's an opportunity to receive a reading transmission on this text. It's been said many times, you've spent decades studying this text with the monks and nuns of our Sangha. And I wonder what that means? Like I feel like the part that's missing for me now is someone to guide the analytical meditations of this text, so that I can put it into practice in a way that feels formulaic and skillful, so that there is no potential to be led to a misunderstanding. And I know reading the commentary, being able to take classes, is very helpful. But then at the same time, the more that you come to understand this, in my experience, the more overwhelming the heartbreak actually is for how much I am not living within that understanding. And how much those around me are also not living in that understanding. And so it's not just a dissonance, which I said yesterday, about the disparity between what's being presented and what I feel is being presented to my experience, but also coming to build the resource to sit in the heartbreak that's there with what it means to be operating on a foundationless foundation that is predisposed to suffering. Where that is actually the only choice, the only outcome available." [Rinpoche enters] Rinpoche: "What is the question?"
Rinpoche: "What is the question?" "What are you asking question?" "No question?" Student: "Rinpoche, I was asking a question about how to put this text into practice and how to find the necessary support to be able to not just study, but to actually practice what is being studied here?" [Rinpoche speaking Tibetan]
Insight without skillful means is ignorance.
And skillful means without insight is ignorance. And skillful means without insight. [Rinpoche speaks in Tibetan]
Thank you. The supreme-- Rinpoche: "Sorry for disturbing." Thank you, Rinpoche. So the supreme method, Rinpoche said, method without insight is ignorance, and insight without method is ignorance. So the supreme method is compassion, great compassion, karuna, mahakaruna. And the supreme insights are the insights.. there are many kinds of insight: mundane insights, supramundane insight, and unsurpassable insights. The greatest of all insights is this insight into profound emptiness beyond all conceptual constructs.
That supreme insight is something that we can approach, and it's something that we first need to understand. We need to comprehend what that is. And when we begin to get an understanding of what profound emptiness beyond all the constructs of the mind is, then it is extremely important that we don't think that that kind of learning is an end in itself, to itself. Because if we do that, if we don't make our knowledge that we gain, thereby something that we can apply in practice, if it isn't something that we can use in our life, as a way of experiencing things and being and acting, then there's actually nothing more sad. There's nothing more, no greater waste, and there's nothing more painful either than if that is the case. If the understanding of something so profound becomes just something that we have learned as yet another topic of knowledge, but nothing much more than that. So in order to really benefit from the knowledge, then it's extremely important that.. we can't avoid meditation practice. And meditation practice is something that, as beginners, we need to approach in terms of sessions. So those sessions begin with taking refuge, then developing the mind of enlightenment, then we can do visualization and recitation of a deity, and finally when there is dissolution of the deity, then we can also rest in equipoise for some time, like five, ten, twenty minutes. And then at the end of the session we dedicate the merit. But when we say that means and methods are indispensable, in the sense that without method, without means, then insight is still ignorance, then what we should understand is that the great compassion is the king of all methods, that's the royal method, to the extent that it is sufficient in itself to develop great love and compassion. So when we talk about love, usually we think about... we think about things and people and so on that we love because of something, yeah? They do something, they mean something to us, which is different from the way it is with other things and other people. So it's actually a kind of business way of thinking, and that's not at all what the great love and great compassion is about. It's a 100% sincere concern and care, loving concern for all sentient beings. So when one trains in that, then that in itself is sufficient, because that itself will gather the accumulations that we need for the path of awakening, that itself will purify the obscurations, and through that also we can recognize profound emptiness, maha shunyata. This kind of knowledge of great emptiness, it comes naturally with great compassion. So that is what we then should train in and train on a daily basis. It's a very practical process. And then Rinpoche says in terms of his own practice, when he wakes up in the morning, what he does is to recall these lines that say, "Do no evil but accomplish perfect goodness. Tame your own mind. That is the teaching of the Buddha." So he brings that to mind in his own practice when he wakes up and says, "Okay, today I'm not going to do anything harmful. I won't do anything that is negative and harmful. That's how I would like to live during this day, and I also would like to do something that can bring very wholesome and conducive circumstances together, and I would like to tame my own mind." So to make that kind of commitment on a daily basis, the moment we wake up basically, provides a very useful framework. Then we can actually go through the day in a way where we can benefit from all the skillful means and the insights that are cultivated on the Dharma path. So with.. knowledge is necessary first of all, understanding, and that understanding has to be applied in practical terms. And so to understand the relation then between insights and great skillful means, that is the key issue. And then we can go and visit Rinpoche after this session as he also mentioned now. Was there anything I forgot? Let me know, yeah?
Student: "Thomas, if you could comment on the last verse of the 24th chapter: "The one who sees dependent origination, sees suffering, its origin, cessation, and the path." It seems to be a conclusion from the chapter. And I think it connects well with what we learned in the first day, that the one who sees dependent origination sees the Dharma and sees the Buddha. So there seems to be an equate, it equates dependent origination, emptiness, and Four Noble Truths. So if you could comment on that verse?" Which one, sorry, did you say? "It's the last verse. It's the 40th verse of the 24th chapter."
Thanks.
Yeah, I think you're right, no, that to see dependent origination.. if we understand how things originate dependently, then we also know what suffering is and what creates suffering. And if we know that really well, then we also know
that there's no basis for suffering, yeah? That suffering arises in the absence of understanding the empty nature of dependent origination, no?
And so the possibility of the cessation of suffering also becomes a clear option, no? And if there's a cessation of suffering and this all is in terms of dependent origination, then there's a path as well, yeah? So the very perception of dependent origination means to understand the Four Truths as well, yeah? It's not just the two truths of appearance and emptiness. If we say that the appearance of dependent origination is the relative truth, and the empty nature of dependent origination is the ultimate truth, then it's also the same with the Four Truths: the manifestation of suffering and how that suffering develops, how it's possible for there to be no suffering at all, and what the path that can make that kind of insight and that kind of transformation take place would be like.
Anything else?
Student: "Can I speak? Am I audible? Thank you for all this and then this is the second day. Today is the second day we get to see Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche coming to this class. I think in my own way of looking at it, I think this is how he can, as a teacher, want to show up and also in a way that he wants to emphasize on how important this class is all about. I think all of us appreciate that and then we are fortunate to see him. Of course, I am seeing him on the screen from Australia, so this is my great opportunity to connect to teaching as well as Rinpoche. I was thinking about if you could also somehow shed some light on having confidence in the analysis process, because often than not we find, as we embark on the analysis using this text, we find ourselves caught up in the infinity of examining things upon things, and then, on the other hand, I find I am not able to connect to the ultimate thing that I am trying to establish in the end. So how do I establish the confidence in my analytical process? Some lights on this. Thank you so much." Thank you, that's such a good question.
That's also something we have kept in mind throughout the process, I think.
It's always possible to say 'I am not confident,' that we can always say. But we also know that there are many times when, depending on who we are perhaps, like our character, some are more inclined to be in this way than others, but we can be in a situation where actually we could very well be confident, but still we think, 'I am not confident.' Many different tasks and challenges that actually we are qualified for, but we think that we are not. So some more than others have a tendency to think like that. But I think probably we all know that from experience, what it's like to feel intimidated by something that actually shouldn't, needn't be very intimidating.
But it's a fact just to recognize that we can always.. there's nothing preventing us from saying, 'but you know, I think I still didn't really get it.' Or 'I still haven't thought carefully enough.' Or 'maybe that's just something I overlooked,' and so on. That we can do any time, no matter how much analysis we have done. So in one way, the sort of ball is in our court, or I don't know what to say, that once we have given it our best, and..
and it's not the case that there's something that we can put our finger on and say, 'this is what I don't understand.' That's why it is so important to, when we feel this way, then why do I feel this way? One big reason that we feel, 'I am not sure I really understand this yet,' one big reason that we think like that is because we are used to giving credit pretty much unquestioning to our concepts about seer and the seen, the act of seeing, movement, arising, sameness, and difference. We think that they are pretty much unquestionably relevant concepts, that really are required for us to live and function. So when something threatens that framework then, of course, it's easy to feel very confused and think, 'maybe I'm not quite there yet.' But if we have spent some time sincerely taking our own ideas seriously, and so given sincere answers to ourselves really when the questions are brought up in the text, then...
there comes a time at which, to just say this one more time, "I don't think I understand this yet, maybe there's something I've overlooked," but that itself becomes irrational. That's like a practical judgment, it's not something they can say "now you shouldn't think like that anymore." It's something we have to kind of notice ourselves. When is it becoming obsessive? You could say also, when is my thought that I still haven't understood this becoming like an obsession?
If we do it prematurely, of course, it doesn't work. But if we have understood, seen the point, so to speak, although there is no point to see and so on, if you want to criticize it, you can do like that. But if we can tell ourselves.. but if someone says, "Did you get the point, have you seen what this is trying to say?" And if we sort of respond to that and say "yes," that doesn't mean that now we are a great meditator. Forget about being greatly realized people, it doesn't even mean that we are great scholars. But it means that there is something that we have seen. Otherwise why would we say that it is like this? And then it doesn't make much sense to say, 'but maybe not.' Like I can also step into, that's a bad example maybe, because I was thinking I could step into this room and then wonder, 'did I actually do that?' That's precisely what we have been doing in this kind of exercise. But in terms of practical conventions, there is a time at which that kind of hesitation and rerunning stuff that one has already dealt with is no longer practical and relevant. So I don't know how much sense this is making, hopefully some sense. So all what I'm trying to say is that we can always tell ourselves that we didn't understand yet. But it's also possible, once we have spent a little bit of time sincerely and carefully looking at these things, to just accept that actually I have understood quite a bit. And this kind of understanding is something I can use a whole lot. So there are a lot of things that become very relevant for me to do. Perhaps it's probably relevant to study more of the same kind, no? If we like, we can now benefit much more from more comprehensive and elaborate discussions of this kind of subject matter, because we have tried to deal with the key issues and we have a sense of what the key issues are. But it's also something that we can use in our life in general and in particular in terms of our life as Dharma practitioners, which ideally our life in general and our life as Dharma practitioners shouldn't be very different from each other. So it's something that we can use all the time. Like Rinpoche said: "Do no evil, accomplish what is perfectly good, and tame your own mind." This kind of understanding and the kind of calm, and the kind of perspective that comes with having understood this. If we just allow it to be a genuine insight, we don't have to tell ourselves, 'maybe I didn't understand,' but just allow for the possibility of real understanding. Then we can perhaps become more genuine in terms of not doing harm, and in terms of doing what is helpful and so on. Good. Yes, I hope that's helpful.
And then let's go upstairs, no? And we can also have another session tomorrow if you're still up for it. Thank you very much. Student: "Is it possible to ask one more? No."
Sure. Okay. "Yeah, please, you can ask." Student: "Oh, is that me? I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. I was not able to attend many of these sessions earlier and I've missed considerable amounts and I've tried to bridge, but I had one question in terms of Nāgārjuna's... Maybe if you could clarify where karma and.. Does he teach on karma specifically? And am I missing something in terms of.. or if you could refer to me where that connection is made.." Yeah, for example. "..specifically? Thank you so much." Yeah, you're welcome. For example, in the chapter here in 24, there's a lot of effort made to show that dependent origination and emptiness is kind of what we need in order to make sense of karma. But we can also talk about that more tomorrow. "Okay. Thank you very much." You're welcome.
"That which originates
dependently, does not
cease and does not
arise, is not annihilated
and is not permanent,
does not come and does not go,
is not different
and not the same.
To the true teacher who
reveals this peace, the complete
pacification of constructs, to
the perfect Buddha, I bow down."
So today we just communicate and if you have anything to bring up then you are very welcome.
Student: "Yes, so, Luis, [unclear] and I, we went through the Chapter Twenty-Four and we picked some verse, so first the 8, 9 and 10, if you could…
Excellent choice! Excellent choice!
"There is more." (Laughter)
So 8, 9 and 10, so those are the verses that say: "The Dharma taught by the Buddhas is genuinely based on the two truths: the relative truth of the world and the truth of the ultimate meaning. Those who do not understand the distinction between these two truths, fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching. Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate, suffering cannot be transcended."
So two truths, to say that there are two truths of course is a hallmark of Buddhist teaching. But it's also something that we can, if we want, we can see it illustrated in many different places, many different systems of thought, many different contexts of thinking.
Because if we say that there's a way that things seem to be in a way that they actually are, then we have this framework of two truths.
And all the teachings that the Buddhas give, they are based on those, on that sort of, what to say...
based on..
they are based on that kind of distinction in terms of a way things are and the way things seem to be. Then whether there's a difference between the way things seem to be, and the way things actually are or not, that's in a way what we've been trying to understand now over the last weeks. We've been simply trying to see whether this, whatever this is, we can call it the relative conventional truth--
whether that is also reflects the way things actually are.
And then there's something with the term, samrti and kündzop, that sounds as if almost it would be impossible for the two to be the same, because there's a sense of obscuring that comes with that term, which doesn't, isn't reflected if we call it relative truth, but it can be explained into it, yeah? It's the truth that is relative to ignorance. It's relative to conventions, to mundane transactions, and to ignorance.
But is that also how things actually are? And that is what we've been investigating. So what would you say by now about that, the relative truth of the world and the truth of the ultimate meaning?
Yeah, what is your understanding of that? Because if you don't understand that, "then you fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching," yeah? Speaking to all of us, yeah?
Student: "When you ask us that question, do you understand that? I think there's so many layers in that question of asking us and that's sort of where I'm struggling, and that I think we've been talking about the past couple of days, is that we're all understanding that there are two truths, and they do seem to be completely different, but at the same time, I feel that I don't truly understand that." And also they couldn't be truly different because then there would be no connection between them. Then it wouldn't do us any good to understand anything about the relative truth, yeah? So this is something that in the sūtras also they like the Saṃdhinirmocana,
It's available on 84000 also now. I forget the title in English, but "The Definitive Explanation Sūtra," Saṃdhinirmocana, Gompa Nedrel There the Buddha explains how the two truths couldn't be distinct because five absurdities would follow, and if they would be the same, then also five absurdities would follow. So that fits very well with what we've been learning here also. Relative truth and ultimate truth are just like, are dependent origination, no? They arise in dependence. It's a perfect example of that. And so they couldn't be really the same and they couldn't be really different either. That would be like a way of using our knowledge from this particular text to the context of understanding the two truths.
So how helpful is that to say? It's somewhat helpful, but probably doesn't settle the whole issue, no? Like it's very true that you say, like, what do you understand? There's a lot of grading potentially to be done there, no?
"Online there's a question from Julia. Do you want to unmute or share?"
Student: "Hi Doctor Doctor." Hello.
"I mostly have been watching on the recording
because of the time difference, but I came tonight because I wanted to say thank you. Usually it's like the teacher points out the nature of mind, but it's not all the time. And then also from study and experience, the aggregates are empty. But this text has been cool for me, because there are moments where I don't know how, I'm not scholarly, I'm more experiential, but there are moments where the like the kalapas inside, their emptiness and the aggregate emptiness and the nature of mind, the inside and the outside for just a moment, they're like sparks. And I can see how the cognitive and the embodied sense are both empty together. And I don't know how that works from being taught this text, but it happens more now in the daily life during this class. And then I also just had a little bit of.. I heard what I think maybe is a riddle. I heard a talk by, and I think it's pertinent to the question just asked. I don't want to waste your time or any one of the classmates' time. It's a recording of a Burmese teacher and he said that, "Buddhas get born to teach the Dharma to the Śrāvakas, but the Śrāvakas don't understand the ultimate mentality or the ultimate reality--the ultimate form. But the Buddha doesn't need to teach the Dharma, but the Buddha teaches the Dharma anyway, even though the Śrāvakas can't understand the ultimate mentality and the ultimate materiality in order to become a Buddha." And so I'm wondering if that's the same question that this chapter is about?"
The Twenty-Four? "The one that was just read just now."
Yeah I think that illustrates that. Thank you for those comments. And I think that illustrates quite well what is the issue in Twenty-Four and in those three stanzas.
But it also..what you were saying could be understood..
at the face of it, it could sound like, "So there's no way to connect with the ultimate truth." And that's said somewhat differently here, no? Because in 10 it says, "Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate, suffering cannot be transcended."
It's not saying that by relying on convention, the ultimate can be shown and by realizing the ultimate you transcend suffering. But it's sort of phrased in negative terms, but nevertheless that seems to be the implication, no?
That by relying on convention.. without doing that, yeah? Like if..
so there's so much that one can say about this, no? And there's so much in the commentarial literature about this. It's a really profound and often much loved and often visited passage that in the literature comes up in very important contexts. But..
it shows..
it shows that if we.. one way of explaining what this is saying is to say that if we think that we hear about emptiness and no arising, no ceasing, and so on, and then we sort of focus on that and think, "Okay, so that's what I need to get to." Then we don't. We don't get anywhere. As a matter of fact we're just stuck at convention rather than.. we may believe that we're trying to access great profound emptiness, the ultimate nature of things, but it's not really anything else than the usual business of constructing reality. The object, agent, and action framework that we built the whole story with. Now we're just talking about ultimate reality, yeah? So instead we have to rely on convention to understand and realize the nature of convention.
And that again is what the treatise does very decisively and clearly. When we follow the progression of the treatise, no, then it takes conventions, it takes the conventions that we bring to the event and analyzes them for us almost, yeah? So that it's clear that they aren't founded on anything. So one way of understanding what convention means here, is that it's, it is that which can be cognized, that which is an object of mind, that which is an object of expression, verbal expression, and that which is an object of engagement. That's what convention is, yeah? Without relying on that type of convention, then the ultimate cannot be shown.
And unless we realize the ultimate, then this framework of object, agent, and action, and the machinery that that kind of structuring of things creates, that will continue in an unbroken fashion. And so all the suffering that comes with that structuring, trying to get what one feels one must by all means get, trying to avoid what one feels by all means one must avoid, and then acting without hesitation, because of the perception of immediate need, we kind of..
we can't help it. And even if we think about it we we come to the conclusion, I must, yeah? So with that kind of framework, then we have negative emotions and we have the engaging in karma that will condition our minds further. And so suffering cannot be transcended. So sort of an understatement, yeah? It will certainly continue and it can deepen and intensify quite a lot as well, yeah? So by instead relying on convention,
and again, yeah, taking our own conventions seriously, because, taking ourselves seriously, our own conventions seriously, and examining how much is there really to this whole story with all its myriad facets? Then we can arguably see that there's now no foundation for that. And with that understanding, then at least we can understand ourselves that then there's no reason to suffer. If the conventions that keep together this framework that seems so unavoidable and merciless in that sense, because it's not always a nice framework, it can be really destructive, yeah? So it's a merciless framework to understand that that framework actually has no foundation.
They call it liberation, no? That's not a bad term for something like that. So there is a profound relation between relative truth and ultimate truth. And they couldn't be just the same because then we would already be fine, no? Whenever I thought something, whenever I said something, whenever I did something, that would be the ultimate truth, yeah? There would be nothing that could bind in any way at all. So the two truths are not just the same because that's not really the case. And then nor are they different, because then no matter what I did within this framework, it wouldn't have any effect. And my understanding of.. I don't have access to the ultimate truth, what I have access to is convention. If the ultimate were really different than that then, yeah, it wouldn't matter however skilled I became with convention, however knowledgeable I became about convention, it wouldn't help me realize the ultimate truth. But since that is not the case, since understanding the nature of convention
makes the bounds of convention fall apart, and since unless one is.. one takes up that challenge to recognize the nature of convention, one won't realize the ultimate. So, for that reason, it is necessary to understand what the two truths are. He says in 9: "Those who do not understand the distinction between those two truths, fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching." And then therefore also, "Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate suffering cannot be transcended."
So that would be like a little bit of commentary on those stanzas. And then there's this interesting one right afterwards also. We have mentioned a few times: "When viewing emptiness incorrectly, those with little insight will be ruined, as when a snake is caught in the wrong way, or a knowledge mantra is used incorrectly." So showing something about the importance of doing it right, and learning well. If we want to learn how to handle poisonous snakes, then that's learning a skill. it's learning about snakes and it's learning about what snakes do in different situations. It's something that will take some training. And the same with using a mantra is something that needs to be done according to.. the traditional idea is that that's this kind of spell. The mantra is like a spell really here we are talking about. And if you use a magical spell, then you need to know exactly how to do it. Otherwise, instead of doing what you want, it does the opposite. So like if you want to destroy something, it will destroy yourself instead of what you intend to break down. So this highlights something we talked about many times as well, the importance of community and being with people who know from experience and who know from practice.
On that note, we can also talk about the event that will be on Saturday, where Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche will give refuge vows and bodhisattva vows, and then give the text transmission for the entire Mūlamādhyamakakārikā and some instructions. So that's the way of connecting with that whole profound community of insight and skillful means.
Beginning by receiving the commitments, we hear, no, that it's on the basis of that kind of discipline of observing vows of refuge, and having the bodhisattva outlook and commitment, that it becomes possible to really progress with this kind of insight. So there will be that opportunity on Saturday, four o'clock I think, in Nepal. It will be announced in writing soon. I think so, yeah. But there will be something sent out also to make it clear.
Student: "Will that be made available to the online as well?" Yeah, I think it will be online as well, yeah. "Thank you." Yeah, welcome.
Student: "I don't know if this is already now, but on our way, we ran into Rinpoche and he asked us to come upstairs after your teaching finishes." Right, so we'll do that also, yeah. But unfortunately I don't think we can do that online. But the event on Saturday, definitely. "Today?" Yeah, after this.
Sorry about that everyone online, but please rejoice.
Yeah? Student: "I wonder if you could talk a little bit about the the supports necessary to continue on this kind of trajectory. Obviously now maybe this is a good segue, right? There's now the opportunity to connect with a teacher and there's an opportunity to receive a reading transmission on this text. It's been said many times, you've spent decades studying this text with the monks and nuns of our Sangha. And I wonder what that means? Like I feel like the part that's missing for me now is someone to guide the analytical meditations of this text, so that I can put it into practice in a way that feels formulaic and skillful, so that there is no potential to be led to a misunderstanding. And I know reading the commentary, being able to take classes, is very helpful. But then at the same time, the more that you come to understand this, in my experience, the more overwhelming the heartbreak actually is for how much I am not living within that understanding. And how much those around me are also not living in that understanding. And so it's not just a dissonance, which I said yesterday, about the disparity between what's being presented and what I feel is being presented to my experience, but also coming to build the resource to sit in the heartbreak that's there with what it means to be operating on a foundationless foundation that is predisposed to suffering. Where that is actually the only choice, the only outcome available." [Rinpoche enters] Rinpoche: "What is the question?"
Rinpoche: "What is the question?" "What are you asking question?" "No question?" Student: "Rinpoche, I was asking a question about how to put this text into practice and how to find the necessary support to be able to not just study, but to actually practice what is being studied here?" [Rinpoche speaking Tibetan]
Insight without skillful means is ignorance.
And skillful means without insight is ignorance. And skillful means without insight. [Rinpoche speaks in Tibetan]
Thank you. The supreme-- Rinpoche: "Sorry for disturbing." Thank you, Rinpoche. So the supreme method, Rinpoche said, method without insight is ignorance, and insight without method is ignorance. So the supreme method is compassion, great compassion, karuna, mahakaruna. And the supreme insights are the insights.. there are many kinds of insight: mundane insights, supramundane insight, and unsurpassable insights. The greatest of all insights is this insight into profound emptiness beyond all conceptual constructs.
That supreme insight is something that we can approach, and it's something that we first need to understand. We need to comprehend what that is. And when we begin to get an understanding of what profound emptiness beyond all the constructs of the mind is, then it is extremely important that we don't think that that kind of learning is an end in itself, to itself. Because if we do that, if we don't make our knowledge that we gain, thereby something that we can apply in practice, if it isn't something that we can use in our life, as a way of experiencing things and being and acting, then there's actually nothing more sad. There's nothing more, no greater waste, and there's nothing more painful either than if that is the case. If the understanding of something so profound becomes just something that we have learned as yet another topic of knowledge, but nothing much more than that. So in order to really benefit from the knowledge, then it's extremely important that.. we can't avoid meditation practice. And meditation practice is something that, as beginners, we need to approach in terms of sessions. So those sessions begin with taking refuge, then developing the mind of enlightenment, then we can do visualization and recitation of a deity, and finally when there is dissolution of the deity, then we can also rest in equipoise for some time, like five, ten, twenty minutes. And then at the end of the session we dedicate the merit. But when we say that means and methods are indispensable, in the sense that without method, without means, then insight is still ignorance, then what we should understand is that the great compassion is the king of all methods, that's the royal method, to the extent that it is sufficient in itself to develop great love and compassion. So when we talk about love, usually we think about... we think about things and people and so on that we love because of something, yeah? They do something, they mean something to us, which is different from the way it is with other things and other people. So it's actually a kind of business way of thinking, and that's not at all what the great love and great compassion is about. It's a 100% sincere concern and care, loving concern for all sentient beings. So when one trains in that, then that in itself is sufficient, because that itself will gather the accumulations that we need for the path of awakening, that itself will purify the obscurations, and through that also we can recognize profound emptiness, maha shunyata. This kind of knowledge of great emptiness, it comes naturally with great compassion. So that is what we then should train in and train on a daily basis. It's a very practical process. And then Rinpoche says in terms of his own practice, when he wakes up in the morning, what he does is to recall these lines that say, "Do no evil but accomplish perfect goodness. Tame your own mind. That is the teaching of the Buddha." So he brings that to mind in his own practice when he wakes up and says, "Okay, today I'm not going to do anything harmful. I won't do anything that is negative and harmful. That's how I would like to live during this day, and I also would like to do something that can bring very wholesome and conducive circumstances together, and I would like to tame my own mind." So to make that kind of commitment on a daily basis, the moment we wake up basically, provides a very useful framework. Then we can actually go through the day in a way where we can benefit from all the skillful means and the insights that are cultivated on the Dharma path. So with.. knowledge is necessary first of all, understanding, and that understanding has to be applied in practical terms. And so to understand the relation then between insights and great skillful means, that is the key issue. And then we can go and visit Rinpoche after this session as he also mentioned now. Was there anything I forgot? Let me know, yeah?
Student: "Thomas, if you could comment on the last verse of the 24th chapter: "The one who sees dependent origination, sees suffering, its origin, cessation, and the path." It seems to be a conclusion from the chapter. And I think it connects well with what we learned in the first day, that the one who sees dependent origination sees the Dharma and sees the Buddha. So there seems to be an equate, it equates dependent origination, emptiness, and Four Noble Truths. So if you could comment on that verse?" Which one, sorry, did you say? "It's the last verse. It's the 40th verse of the 24th chapter."
Thanks.
Yeah, I think you're right, no, that to see dependent origination.. if we understand how things originate dependently, then we also know what suffering is and what creates suffering. And if we know that really well, then we also know
that there's no basis for suffering, yeah? That suffering arises in the absence of understanding the empty nature of dependent origination, no?
And so the possibility of the cessation of suffering also becomes a clear option, no? And if there's a cessation of suffering and this all is in terms of dependent origination, then there's a path as well, yeah? So the very perception of dependent origination means to understand the Four Truths as well, yeah? It's not just the two truths of appearance and emptiness. If we say that the appearance of dependent origination is the relative truth, and the empty nature of dependent origination is the ultimate truth, then it's also the same with the Four Truths: the manifestation of suffering and how that suffering develops, how it's possible for there to be no suffering at all, and what the path that can make that kind of insight and that kind of transformation take place would be like.
Anything else?
Student: "Can I speak? Am I audible? Thank you for all this and then this is the second day. Today is the second day we get to see Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche coming to this class. I think in my own way of looking at it, I think this is how he can, as a teacher, want to show up and also in a way that he wants to emphasize on how important this class is all about. I think all of us appreciate that and then we are fortunate to see him. Of course, I am seeing him on the screen from Australia, so this is my great opportunity to connect to teaching as well as Rinpoche. I was thinking about if you could also somehow shed some light on having confidence in the analysis process, because often than not we find, as we embark on the analysis using this text, we find ourselves caught up in the infinity of examining things upon things, and then, on the other hand, I find I am not able to connect to the ultimate thing that I am trying to establish in the end. So how do I establish the confidence in my analytical process? Some lights on this. Thank you so much." Thank you, that's such a good question.
That's also something we have kept in mind throughout the process, I think.
It's always possible to say 'I am not confident,' that we can always say. But we also know that there are many times when, depending on who we are perhaps, like our character, some are more inclined to be in this way than others, but we can be in a situation where actually we could very well be confident, but still we think, 'I am not confident.' Many different tasks and challenges that actually we are qualified for, but we think that we are not. So some more than others have a tendency to think like that. But I think probably we all know that from experience, what it's like to feel intimidated by something that actually shouldn't, needn't be very intimidating.
But it's a fact just to recognize that we can always.. there's nothing preventing us from saying, 'but you know, I think I still didn't really get it.' Or 'I still haven't thought carefully enough.' Or 'maybe that's just something I overlooked,' and so on. That we can do any time, no matter how much analysis we have done. So in one way, the sort of ball is in our court, or I don't know what to say, that once we have given it our best, and..
and it's not the case that there's something that we can put our finger on and say, 'this is what I don't understand.' That's why it is so important to, when we feel this way, then why do I feel this way? One big reason that we feel, 'I am not sure I really understand this yet,' one big reason that we think like that is because we are used to giving credit pretty much unquestioning to our concepts about seer and the seen, the act of seeing, movement, arising, sameness, and difference. We think that they are pretty much unquestionably relevant concepts, that really are required for us to live and function. So when something threatens that framework then, of course, it's easy to feel very confused and think, 'maybe I'm not quite there yet.' But if we have spent some time sincerely taking our own ideas seriously, and so given sincere answers to ourselves really when the questions are brought up in the text, then...
there comes a time at which, to just say this one more time, "I don't think I understand this yet, maybe there's something I've overlooked," but that itself becomes irrational. That's like a practical judgment, it's not something they can say "now you shouldn't think like that anymore." It's something we have to kind of notice ourselves. When is it becoming obsessive? You could say also, when is my thought that I still haven't understood this becoming like an obsession?
If we do it prematurely, of course, it doesn't work. But if we have understood, seen the point, so to speak, although there is no point to see and so on, if you want to criticize it, you can do like that. But if we can tell ourselves.. but if someone says, "Did you get the point, have you seen what this is trying to say?" And if we sort of respond to that and say "yes," that doesn't mean that now we are a great meditator. Forget about being greatly realized people, it doesn't even mean that we are great scholars. But it means that there is something that we have seen. Otherwise why would we say that it is like this? And then it doesn't make much sense to say, 'but maybe not.' Like I can also step into, that's a bad example maybe, because I was thinking I could step into this room and then wonder, 'did I actually do that?' That's precisely what we have been doing in this kind of exercise. But in terms of practical conventions, there is a time at which that kind of hesitation and rerunning stuff that one has already dealt with is no longer practical and relevant. So I don't know how much sense this is making, hopefully some sense. So all what I'm trying to say is that we can always tell ourselves that we didn't understand yet. But it's also possible, once we have spent a little bit of time sincerely and carefully looking at these things, to just accept that actually I have understood quite a bit. And this kind of understanding is something I can use a whole lot. So there are a lot of things that become very relevant for me to do. Perhaps it's probably relevant to study more of the same kind, no? If we like, we can now benefit much more from more comprehensive and elaborate discussions of this kind of subject matter, because we have tried to deal with the key issues and we have a sense of what the key issues are. But it's also something that we can use in our life in general and in particular in terms of our life as Dharma practitioners, which ideally our life in general and our life as Dharma practitioners shouldn't be very different from each other. So it's something that we can use all the time. Like Rinpoche said: "Do no evil, accomplish what is perfectly good, and tame your own mind." This kind of understanding and the kind of calm, and the kind of perspective that comes with having understood this. If we just allow it to be a genuine insight, we don't have to tell ourselves, 'maybe I didn't understand,' but just allow for the possibility of real understanding. Then we can perhaps become more genuine in terms of not doing harm, and in terms of doing what is helpful and so on. Good. Yes, I hope that's helpful.
And then let's go upstairs, no? And we can also have another session tomorrow if you're still up for it. Thank you very much. Student: "Is it possible to ask one more? No."
Sure. Okay. "Yeah, please, you can ask." Student: "Oh, is that me? I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. I was not able to attend many of these sessions earlier and I've missed considerable amounts and I've tried to bridge, but I had one question in terms of Nāgārjuna's... Maybe if you could clarify where karma and.. Does he teach on karma specifically? And am I missing something in terms of.. or if you could refer to me where that connection is made.." Yeah, for example. "..specifically? Thank you so much." Yeah, you're welcome. For example, in the chapter here in 24, there's a lot of effort made to show that dependent origination and emptiness is kind of what we need in order to make sense of karma. But we can also talk about that more tomorrow. "Okay. Thank you very much." You're welcome.
So today we just communicate and if you have anything to bring up then you are very welcome.
Student: "Yes, so, Luis, [unclear] and I, we went through the Chapter Twenty-Four and we picked some verse, so first the 8, 9 and 10, if you could…
Excellent choice! Excellent choice!
"There is more." (Laughter)
So 8, 9 and 10, so those are the verses that say: "The Dharma taught by the Buddhas is genuinely based on the two truths: the relative truth of the world and the truth of the ultimate meaning. Those who do not understand the distinction between these two truths, fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching. Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate, suffering cannot be transcended."
So two truths, to say that there are two truths of course is a hallmark of Buddhist teaching. But it's also something that we can, if we want, we can see it illustrated in many different places, many different systems of thought, many different contexts of thinking.
Because if we say that there's a way that things seem to be in a way that they actually are, then we have this framework of two truths.
And all the teachings that the Buddhas give, they are based on those, on that sort of, what to say...
based on..
they are based on that kind of distinction in terms of a way things are and the way things seem to be. Then whether there's a difference between the way things seem to be, and the way things actually are or not, that's in a way what we've been trying to understand now over the last weeks. We've been simply trying to see whether this, whatever this is, we can call it the relative conventional truth--
whether that is also reflects the way things actually are.
And then there's something with the term, samrti and kündzop, that sounds as if almost it would be impossible for the two to be the same, because there's a sense of obscuring that comes with that term, which doesn't, isn't reflected if we call it relative truth, but it can be explained into it, yeah? It's the truth that is relative to ignorance. It's relative to conventions, to mundane transactions, and to ignorance.
But is that also how things actually are? And that is what we've been investigating. So what would you say by now about that, the relative truth of the world and the truth of the ultimate meaning?
Yeah, what is your understanding of that? Because if you don't understand that, "then you fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching," yeah? Speaking to all of us, yeah?
Student: "When you ask us that question, do you understand that? I think there's so many layers in that question of asking us and that's sort of where I'm struggling, and that I think we've been talking about the past couple of days, is that we're all understanding that there are two truths, and they do seem to be completely different, but at the same time, I feel that I don't truly understand that." And also they couldn't be truly different because then there would be no connection between them. Then it wouldn't do us any good to understand anything about the relative truth, yeah? So this is something that in the sūtras also they like the Saṃdhinirmocana,
It's available on 84000 also now. I forget the title in English, but "The Definitive Explanation Sūtra," Saṃdhinirmocana, Gompa Nedrel There the Buddha explains how the two truths couldn't be distinct because five absurdities would follow, and if they would be the same, then also five absurdities would follow. So that fits very well with what we've been learning here also. Relative truth and ultimate truth are just like, are dependent origination, no? They arise in dependence. It's a perfect example of that. And so they couldn't be really the same and they couldn't be really different either. That would be like a way of using our knowledge from this particular text to the context of understanding the two truths.
So how helpful is that to say? It's somewhat helpful, but probably doesn't settle the whole issue, no? Like it's very true that you say, like, what do you understand? There's a lot of grading potentially to be done there, no?
"Online there's a question from Julia. Do you want to unmute or share?"
Student: "Hi Doctor Doctor." Hello.
"I mostly have been watching on the recording
because of the time difference, but I came tonight because I wanted to say thank you. Usually it's like the teacher points out the nature of mind, but it's not all the time. And then also from study and experience, the aggregates are empty. But this text has been cool for me, because there are moments where I don't know how, I'm not scholarly, I'm more experiential, but there are moments where the like the kalapas inside, their emptiness and the aggregate emptiness and the nature of mind, the inside and the outside for just a moment, they're like sparks. And I can see how the cognitive and the embodied sense are both empty together. And I don't know how that works from being taught this text, but it happens more now in the daily life during this class. And then I also just had a little bit of.. I heard what I think maybe is a riddle. I heard a talk by, and I think it's pertinent to the question just asked. I don't want to waste your time or any one of the classmates' time. It's a recording of a Burmese teacher and he said that, "Buddhas get born to teach the Dharma to the Śrāvakas, but the Śrāvakas don't understand the ultimate mentality or the ultimate reality--the ultimate form. But the Buddha doesn't need to teach the Dharma, but the Buddha teaches the Dharma anyway, even though the Śrāvakas can't understand the ultimate mentality and the ultimate materiality in order to become a Buddha." And so I'm wondering if that's the same question that this chapter is about?"
The Twenty-Four? "The one that was just read just now."
Yeah I think that illustrates that. Thank you for those comments. And I think that illustrates quite well what is the issue in Twenty-Four and in those three stanzas.
But it also..what you were saying could be understood..
at the face of it, it could sound like, "So there's no way to connect with the ultimate truth." And that's said somewhat differently here, no? Because in 10 it says, "Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate, suffering cannot be transcended."
It's not saying that by relying on convention, the ultimate can be shown and by realizing the ultimate you transcend suffering. But it's sort of phrased in negative terms, but nevertheless that seems to be the implication, no?
That by relying on convention.. without doing that, yeah? Like if..
so there's so much that one can say about this, no? And there's so much in the commentarial literature about this. It's a really profound and often much loved and often visited passage that in the literature comes up in very important contexts. But..
it shows..
it shows that if we.. one way of explaining what this is saying is to say that if we think that we hear about emptiness and no arising, no ceasing, and so on, and then we sort of focus on that and think, "Okay, so that's what I need to get to." Then we don't. We don't get anywhere. As a matter of fact we're just stuck at convention rather than.. we may believe that we're trying to access great profound emptiness, the ultimate nature of things, but it's not really anything else than the usual business of constructing reality. The object, agent, and action framework that we built the whole story with. Now we're just talking about ultimate reality, yeah? So instead we have to rely on convention to understand and realize the nature of convention.
And that again is what the treatise does very decisively and clearly. When we follow the progression of the treatise, no, then it takes conventions, it takes the conventions that we bring to the event and analyzes them for us almost, yeah? So that it's clear that they aren't founded on anything. So one way of understanding what convention means here, is that it's, it is that which can be cognized, that which is an object of mind, that which is an object of expression, verbal expression, and that which is an object of engagement. That's what convention is, yeah? Without relying on that type of convention, then the ultimate cannot be shown.
And unless we realize the ultimate, then this framework of object, agent, and action, and the machinery that that kind of structuring of things creates, that will continue in an unbroken fashion. And so all the suffering that comes with that structuring, trying to get what one feels one must by all means get, trying to avoid what one feels by all means one must avoid, and then acting without hesitation, because of the perception of immediate need, we kind of..
we can't help it. And even if we think about it we we come to the conclusion, I must, yeah? So with that kind of framework, then we have negative emotions and we have the engaging in karma that will condition our minds further. And so suffering cannot be transcended. So sort of an understatement, yeah? It will certainly continue and it can deepen and intensify quite a lot as well, yeah? So by instead relying on convention,
and again, yeah, taking our own conventions seriously, because, taking ourselves seriously, our own conventions seriously, and examining how much is there really to this whole story with all its myriad facets? Then we can arguably see that there's now no foundation for that. And with that understanding, then at least we can understand ourselves that then there's no reason to suffer. If the conventions that keep together this framework that seems so unavoidable and merciless in that sense, because it's not always a nice framework, it can be really destructive, yeah? So it's a merciless framework to understand that that framework actually has no foundation.
They call it liberation, no? That's not a bad term for something like that. So there is a profound relation between relative truth and ultimate truth. And they couldn't be just the same because then we would already be fine, no? Whenever I thought something, whenever I said something, whenever I did something, that would be the ultimate truth, yeah? There would be nothing that could bind in any way at all. So the two truths are not just the same because that's not really the case. And then nor are they different, because then no matter what I did within this framework, it wouldn't have any effect. And my understanding of.. I don't have access to the ultimate truth, what I have access to is convention. If the ultimate were really different than that then, yeah, it wouldn't matter however skilled I became with convention, however knowledgeable I became about convention, it wouldn't help me realize the ultimate truth. But since that is not the case, since understanding the nature of convention
makes the bounds of convention fall apart, and since unless one is.. one takes up that challenge to recognize the nature of convention, one won't realize the ultimate. So, for that reason, it is necessary to understand what the two truths are. He says in 9: "Those who do not understand the distinction between those two truths, fail to comprehend the profound reality of the Buddha's teaching." And then therefore also, "Without relying on convention, the ultimate cannot be shown. Without realizing the ultimate suffering cannot be transcended."
So that would be like a little bit of commentary on those stanzas. And then there's this interesting one right afterwards also. We have mentioned a few times: "When viewing emptiness incorrectly, those with little insight will be ruined, as when a snake is caught in the wrong way, or a knowledge mantra is used incorrectly." So showing something about the importance of doing it right, and learning well. If we want to learn how to handle poisonous snakes, then that's learning a skill. it's learning about snakes and it's learning about what snakes do in different situations. It's something that will take some training. And the same with using a mantra is something that needs to be done according to.. the traditional idea is that that's this kind of spell. The mantra is like a spell really here we are talking about. And if you use a magical spell, then you need to know exactly how to do it. Otherwise, instead of doing what you want, it does the opposite. So like if you want to destroy something, it will destroy yourself instead of what you intend to break down. So this highlights something we talked about many times as well, the importance of community and being with people who know from experience and who know from practice.
On that note, we can also talk about the event that will be on Saturday, where Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche will give refuge vows and bodhisattva vows, and then give the text transmission for the entire Mūlamādhyamakakārikā and some instructions. So that's the way of connecting with that whole profound community of insight and skillful means.
Beginning by receiving the commitments, we hear, no, that it's on the basis of that kind of discipline of observing vows of refuge, and having the bodhisattva outlook and commitment, that it becomes possible to really progress with this kind of insight. So there will be that opportunity on Saturday, four o'clock I think, in Nepal. It will be announced in writing soon. I think so, yeah. But there will be something sent out also to make it clear.
Student: "Will that be made available to the online as well?" Yeah, I think it will be online as well, yeah. "Thank you." Yeah, welcome.
Student: "I don't know if this is already now, but on our way, we ran into Rinpoche and he asked us to come upstairs after your teaching finishes." Right, so we'll do that also, yeah. But unfortunately I don't think we can do that online. But the event on Saturday, definitely. "Today?" Yeah, after this.
Sorry about that everyone online, but please rejoice.
Yeah? Student: "I wonder if you could talk a little bit about the the supports necessary to continue on this kind of trajectory. Obviously now maybe this is a good segue, right? There's now the opportunity to connect with a teacher and there's an opportunity to receive a reading transmission on this text. It's been said many times, you've spent decades studying this text with the monks and nuns of our Sangha. And I wonder what that means? Like I feel like the part that's missing for me now is someone to guide the analytical meditations of this text, so that I can put it into practice in a way that feels formulaic and skillful, so that there is no potential to be led to a misunderstanding. And I know reading the commentary, being able to take classes, is very helpful. But then at the same time, the more that you come to understand this, in my experience, the more overwhelming the heartbreak actually is for how much I am not living within that understanding. And how much those around me are also not living in that understanding. And so it's not just a dissonance, which I said yesterday, about the disparity between what's being presented and what I feel is being presented to my experience, but also coming to build the resource to sit in the heartbreak that's there with what it means to be operating on a foundationless foundation that is predisposed to suffering. Where that is actually the only choice, the only outcome available." [Rinpoche enters] Rinpoche: "What is the question?"
Rinpoche: "What is the question?" "What are you asking question?" "No question?" Student: "Rinpoche, I was asking a question about how to put this text into practice and how to find the necessary support to be able to not just study, but to actually practice what is being studied here?" [Rinpoche speaking Tibetan]
Insight without skillful means is ignorance.
And skillful means without insight is ignorance. And skillful means without insight. [Rinpoche speaks in Tibetan]
Thank you. The supreme-- Rinpoche: "Sorry for disturbing." Thank you, Rinpoche. So the supreme method, Rinpoche said, method without insight is ignorance, and insight without method is ignorance. So the supreme method is compassion, great compassion, karuna, mahakaruna. And the supreme insights are the insights.. there are many kinds of insight: mundane insights, supramundane insight, and unsurpassable insights. The greatest of all insights is this insight into profound emptiness beyond all conceptual constructs.
That supreme insight is something that we can approach, and it's something that we first need to understand. We need to comprehend what that is. And when we begin to get an understanding of what profound emptiness beyond all the constructs of the mind is, then it is extremely important that we don't think that that kind of learning is an end in itself, to itself. Because if we do that, if we don't make our knowledge that we gain, thereby something that we can apply in practice, if it isn't something that we can use in our life, as a way of experiencing things and being and acting, then there's actually nothing more sad. There's nothing more, no greater waste, and there's nothing more painful either than if that is the case. If the understanding of something so profound becomes just something that we have learned as yet another topic of knowledge, but nothing much more than that. So in order to really benefit from the knowledge, then it's extremely important that.. we can't avoid meditation practice. And meditation practice is something that, as beginners, we need to approach in terms of sessions. So those sessions begin with taking refuge, then developing the mind of enlightenment, then we can do visualization and recitation of a deity, and finally when there is dissolution of the deity, then we can also rest in equipoise for some time, like five, ten, twenty minutes. And then at the end of the session we dedicate the merit. But when we say that means and methods are indispensable, in the sense that without method, without means, then insight is still ignorance, then what we should understand is that the great compassion is the king of all methods, that's the royal method, to the extent that it is sufficient in itself to develop great love and compassion. So when we talk about love, usually we think about... we think about things and people and so on that we love because of something, yeah? They do something, they mean something to us, which is different from the way it is with other things and other people. So it's actually a kind of business way of thinking, and that's not at all what the great love and great compassion is about. It's a 100% sincere concern and care, loving concern for all sentient beings. So when one trains in that, then that in itself is sufficient, because that itself will gather the accumulations that we need for the path of awakening, that itself will purify the obscurations, and through that also we can recognize profound emptiness, maha shunyata. This kind of knowledge of great emptiness, it comes naturally with great compassion. So that is what we then should train in and train on a daily basis. It's a very practical process. And then Rinpoche says in terms of his own practice, when he wakes up in the morning, what he does is to recall these lines that say, "Do no evil but accomplish perfect goodness. Tame your own mind. That is the teaching of the Buddha." So he brings that to mind in his own practice when he wakes up and says, "Okay, today I'm not going to do anything harmful. I won't do anything that is negative and harmful. That's how I would like to live during this day, and I also would like to do something that can bring very wholesome and conducive circumstances together, and I would like to tame my own mind." So to make that kind of commitment on a daily basis, the moment we wake up basically, provides a very useful framework. Then we can actually go through the day in a way where we can benefit from all the skillful means and the insights that are cultivated on the Dharma path. So with.. knowledge is necessary first of all, understanding, and that understanding has to be applied in practical terms. And so to understand the relation then between insights and great skillful means, that is the key issue. And then we can go and visit Rinpoche after this session as he also mentioned now. Was there anything I forgot? Let me know, yeah?
Student: "Thomas, if you could comment on the last verse of the 24th chapter: "The one who sees dependent origination, sees suffering, its origin, cessation, and the path." It seems to be a conclusion from the chapter. And I think it connects well with what we learned in the first day, that the one who sees dependent origination sees the Dharma and sees the Buddha. So there seems to be an equate, it equates dependent origination, emptiness, and Four Noble Truths. So if you could comment on that verse?" Which one, sorry, did you say? "It's the last verse. It's the 40th verse of the 24th chapter."
Thanks.
Yeah, I think you're right, no, that to see dependent origination.. if we understand how things originate dependently, then we also know what suffering is and what creates suffering. And if we know that really well, then we also know
that there's no basis for suffering, yeah? That suffering arises in the absence of understanding the empty nature of dependent origination, no?
And so the possibility of the cessation of suffering also becomes a clear option, no? And if there's a cessation of suffering and this all is in terms of dependent origination, then there's a path as well, yeah? So the very perception of dependent origination means to understand the Four Truths as well, yeah? It's not just the two truths of appearance and emptiness. If we say that the appearance of dependent origination is the relative truth, and the empty nature of dependent origination is the ultimate truth, then it's also the same with the Four Truths: the manifestation of suffering and how that suffering develops, how it's possible for there to be no suffering at all, and what the path that can make that kind of insight and that kind of transformation take place would be like.
Anything else?
Student: "Can I speak? Am I audible? Thank you for all this and then this is the second day. Today is the second day we get to see Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche coming to this class. I think in my own way of looking at it, I think this is how he can, as a teacher, want to show up and also in a way that he wants to emphasize on how important this class is all about. I think all of us appreciate that and then we are fortunate to see him. Of course, I am seeing him on the screen from Australia, so this is my great opportunity to connect to teaching as well as Rinpoche. I was thinking about if you could also somehow shed some light on having confidence in the analysis process, because often than not we find, as we embark on the analysis using this text, we find ourselves caught up in the infinity of examining things upon things, and then, on the other hand, I find I am not able to connect to the ultimate thing that I am trying to establish in the end. So how do I establish the confidence in my analytical process? Some lights on this. Thank you so much." Thank you, that's such a good question.
That's also something we have kept in mind throughout the process, I think.
It's always possible to say 'I am not confident,' that we can always say. But we also know that there are many times when, depending on who we are perhaps, like our character, some are more inclined to be in this way than others, but we can be in a situation where actually we could very well be confident, but still we think, 'I am not confident.' Many different tasks and challenges that actually we are qualified for, but we think that we are not. So some more than others have a tendency to think like that. But I think probably we all know that from experience, what it's like to feel intimidated by something that actually shouldn't, needn't be very intimidating.
But it's a fact just to recognize that we can always.. there's nothing preventing us from saying, 'but you know, I think I still didn't really get it.' Or 'I still haven't thought carefully enough.' Or 'maybe that's just something I overlooked,' and so on. That we can do any time, no matter how much analysis we have done. So in one way, the sort of ball is in our court, or I don't know what to say, that once we have given it our best, and..
and it's not the case that there's something that we can put our finger on and say, 'this is what I don't understand.' That's why it is so important to, when we feel this way, then why do I feel this way? One big reason that we feel, 'I am not sure I really understand this yet,' one big reason that we think like that is because we are used to giving credit pretty much unquestioning to our concepts about seer and the seen, the act of seeing, movement, arising, sameness, and difference. We think that they are pretty much unquestionably relevant concepts, that really are required for us to live and function. So when something threatens that framework then, of course, it's easy to feel very confused and think, 'maybe I'm not quite there yet.' But if we have spent some time sincerely taking our own ideas seriously, and so given sincere answers to ourselves really when the questions are brought up in the text, then...
there comes a time at which, to just say this one more time, "I don't think I understand this yet, maybe there's something I've overlooked," but that itself becomes irrational. That's like a practical judgment, it's not something they can say "now you shouldn't think like that anymore." It's something we have to kind of notice ourselves. When is it becoming obsessive? You could say also, when is my thought that I still haven't understood this becoming like an obsession?
If we do it prematurely, of course, it doesn't work. But if we have understood, seen the point, so to speak, although there is no point to see and so on, if you want to criticize it, you can do like that. But if we can tell ourselves.. but if someone says, "Did you get the point, have you seen what this is trying to say?" And if we sort of respond to that and say "yes," that doesn't mean that now we are a great meditator. Forget about being greatly realized people, it doesn't even mean that we are great scholars. But it means that there is something that we have seen. Otherwise why would we say that it is like this? And then it doesn't make much sense to say, 'but maybe not.' Like I can also step into, that's a bad example maybe, because I was thinking I could step into this room and then wonder, 'did I actually do that?' That's precisely what we have been doing in this kind of exercise. But in terms of practical conventions, there is a time at which that kind of hesitation and rerunning stuff that one has already dealt with is no longer practical and relevant. So I don't know how much sense this is making, hopefully some sense. So all what I'm trying to say is that we can always tell ourselves that we didn't understand yet. But it's also possible, once we have spent a little bit of time sincerely and carefully looking at these things, to just accept that actually I have understood quite a bit. And this kind of understanding is something I can use a whole lot. So there are a lot of things that become very relevant for me to do. Perhaps it's probably relevant to study more of the same kind, no? If we like, we can now benefit much more from more comprehensive and elaborate discussions of this kind of subject matter, because we have tried to deal with the key issues and we have a sense of what the key issues are. But it's also something that we can use in our life in general and in particular in terms of our life as Dharma practitioners, which ideally our life in general and our life as Dharma practitioners shouldn't be very different from each other. So it's something that we can use all the time. Like Rinpoche said: "Do no evil, accomplish what is perfectly good, and tame your own mind." This kind of understanding and the kind of calm, and the kind of perspective that comes with having understood this. If we just allow it to be a genuine insight, we don't have to tell ourselves, 'maybe I didn't understand,' but just allow for the possibility of real understanding. Then we can perhaps become more genuine in terms of not doing harm, and in terms of doing what is helpful and so on. Good. Yes, I hope that's helpful.
And then let's go upstairs, no? And we can also have another session tomorrow if you're still up for it. Thank you very much. Student: "Is it possible to ask one more? No."
Sure. Okay. "Yeah, please, you can ask." Student: "Oh, is that me? I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. I was not able to attend many of these sessions earlier and I've missed considerable amounts and I've tried to bridge, but I had one question in terms of Nāgārjuna's... Maybe if you could clarify where karma and.. Does he teach on karma specifically? And am I missing something in terms of.. or if you could refer to me where that connection is made.." Yeah, for example. "..specifically? Thank you so much." Yeah, you're welcome. For example, in the chapter here in 24, there's a lot of effort made to show that dependent origination and emptiness is kind of what we need in order to make sense of karma. But we can also talk about that more tomorrow. "Okay. Thank you very much." You're welcome.
17:24
