how to see the absence of the i and everything else

7/29/2019 How to See the Absence of the I and Everything Else

1/34

HOW TO SEETHE ABSENCE OF THE I

AND EVERYTHING ELSETHE HEART SUTRA

MAITRIPA COLLEGEPORTLAND, OREGON

SEPTEMBER 79, 2012

WITH VEN. ROBINA COURTIN


2/34

2!


3/34

3!

Contents

1.The Heart Sutra of thePerfection of Wisdom 5

2. How Ignorance Graspsat the I 7

3. You Cannot Find the IAnywhere 11

4. Preparing the Mind to

See Emptiness byUnderstanding Karma: an

Example of Dependent Arising:the King of Logic to Prove

Emptiness 21

5. Preparing the Mind toSee Emptiness by

Understanding Ego-grasping and

the Other DelusionsIt Gives Rise To 27

6. Dedicate in Emptiness 34


4/34

4!

Produced for the students and community

at Maitripa College, Portland, OR, for a

course with Robina Courtin, September 7

9, 2012.

Maitripa College is affiliated with FPMT.

maitripa.org

With gratitude to Lama Yeshe Wisdom

Archive for the use of How Ignorance

Grasps at the I and You Cannot Find the

I Anywhere.

lamayeshe.com

And to FPMT for The Heart Sutra.

fpmt.org

Cover: Lord Buddha and Sharitputra from

elephantjournal.com


5/34

5!

1. The Heart Sutra of thePerfection of Wisdom

Homage to the Holy Perfection of Wisdom!

COMMON PROLOGUE

Thus did I hear at one time. The Bhagavanwas dwelling on Mass of VulturesMountain in Rajagriha together with agreat community of monks and a greatcommunity of bodhisattvas.

SPECIAL PROLOGUE

At that time, the Bhagavan was absorbedin the concentration on the categories ofphenomena called Profound Perception.

BUDDHA BLESSES THE MINDS OF

SHARIPUTRA AND

AVALOKITESHVARA

Also, at that time, the bodhisattvamahasattva arya Avalokiteshvara lookedupon the very practice of the profoundperfection of wisdom and beheld thosefive aggregates also as empty of inherentnature.

SHARIPUTRAS QUESTION

Then, through the power of Buddha, thevenerable Shariputra said this to the

bodhisattva mahasattva aryaAvalokiteshvara: How should any son ofthe lineage train who wishes to practicethe activity of the profound perfection of

wisdom?

AVALOKITESHVARAS BRIEF

ANSWER

He said that and the bodhisattvamahasattva arya Avalokiteshvara said thisto the venerable Sharadvatiputra.Shariputra, any son of the lineage ordaughter of the lineage who wishes topractice the activity of the profoundperfection of wisdom should look upon it

like this, correctly and repeatedlybeholding those five aggregates also asempty of inherent nature.

AVALOKITESHEVARAS EXTENSIVE

ANSWER

Form is empty. Emptiness is form.Emptiness is not other than form; form isalso not other than emptiness.

In the same way, feeling, discrimination,compositional factors, and consciousnessare empty.

Shariputra, likewise, all phenomena areemptiness; without characteristic;unproduced, unceased; stainless, notwithout stain; not deficient, not fulfilled.

Shariputra, therefore, in emptiness thereis

No form, no feeling, no discrimination, nocompositional factors, no consciousness;!No eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no

body, no mind;!No visual form, no sound, no odor, notaste, no object of touch, and nophenomenon.

!There is no eye element and so on up toand including no mind element and nomental consciousness element.

There is no ignorance, no extinction ofignorance, and so on up to and includingno aging and death and no extinction ofaging and death.

Similarly, there is no suffering,

origination, cessation, and path;

There is no exalted wisdom, noattainment, and also no non-attainment.

Shariputra, therefore, because there is noattainment, bodhisattvas rely on anddwell in the perfection of wisdom, themind without obscuration and withoutfear. Having completely passed beyond

error, they reach the end-point of nirvana.

All the buddhas who dwell in the threetimes also manifestly, completely awaken


6/34

6!

to unsurpassable, perfect, completeenlightenment in reliance on theperfection of wisdom.

THE MANTRA OF THE PERFECTION

OF WISDOM

Therefore, the mantra of the perfection ofwisdom, the mantra of great knowledge,the unsurpassed mantra, the mantra equalto the unequaled, the mantra thatthoroughly pacifies all suffering, should

be known as truth since it is not false. Themantra of the perfection of wisdom isdeclared:

TAYATA OM GATE GATE PARAGATEPARASAMGATE BODHI SOHA

[TAYATA OM GO! GO! GO EYOND! GOPERFECTLY BEYOND! GO TOENLIGHTENMENT! SOHA]

Shariputra, the bodhisattva mahasattvashould train in the profound perfection ofwisdom like that.

BUDDHAS APPROVAL

Then the Bhagavan arose from thatconcentration and commended the

bodhisattva mahasattva aryaAvalokiteshvara saying: Well said, wellsaid, son of the lineage, it is like that. It islike that; one should practice the profoundperfection of wisdom just as you haveindicated; even the tathagatas rejoice.

EVERYONE REJOICES IN THE

BUDDHAS WORDS

The Bhagavan having thus spoken, thevenerable Sharadvatiputra, the

bodhisattva mahasattva aryaAvalokiteshvara, those surrounding intheir entirety along with the world ofgods, humans, asuras, and gandharvaswere overjoyed and highly praised thatspoken by the Bhagavan.

This completes the rya-bhagavat-

prajpramit-hridaya-stra.Translated from the Tibetan by GelongThubten Tsultrim (Geroge Churinoff), the first

day of Saka Dawa, 1999, at TushitaMeditation Centre, Dharamsala, India.Amended March 7, 2001, in the New Mexicodesert. Published by FPMT.


7/34

7!

2. How Ignorance Grasps atthe IBy Lama Thubten Yeshe

THE MOUNTAIN OF SELF

Our conception of ego instinctively feelsthat Im somewhere around here; ThubtenYeshe is somewhere here. Where isThubten Yeshe? My egos instinctiveinterpretation is that Im here, somewherein my body. Check for yourself. See whatcomes up in your mind when you think ofyour name. The huge mountain of yourself will arise. Then check exactly wherethat mountain of me can be found.Where are you? Somewhere around your

body. Are you in your chest, in your head?You feel this instinctively. You dont

have to study philosophy to learn it; youdont have to go to school; you parentsdidnt teach you. Youve known this since

before you were born.Buddhism describes two kinds of ego

identity: kun-tag and lhen-kye.it comes at conception.

LEARNED GRASPING AT SELF

Kun-tag means the sense of self thatsphilosophically acquired. Its somethingthat you learn through outside influencefrom teachers, friends, books and so forth.This is the intellectually derived ego. Canyou imagine? You can even acquire an egothrough reading. This one is easier to

remove, of course, because its moresuperficial. Its a gross conception. Thesimultaneously born sense of self is much,much harder to get rid of.

INNATE GRASPING AT SELF

The one Im talking about is lhen-kye, thesimultaneously-born one; the one thatexists simply because you exist. It was

born with you; it needs no outside

influence for its existence. Like the smellthat comes with a pine tree, theyre one.The pine tree doesnt grow first and then

the smell comes later. They come together.Its the same with the innate sense of ego;

This instinctive conception of ego isreally convinced that around my body iswhere youll find Thubten Yeshe.Someone looks at me and asks, Are you

Thubten Yeshe? Yes, I reply, ImThubten Yeshe. Where is Thubten Yeshe?Around here. Instinctively, I feel Im righthere. But Im not the only one who feelslike this. Check up for yourself. Its veryinteresting.

MY NAME IS NOT ME

Until I was six years old, I was notThubten Yeshe. That name was given tome when I became a monk at SeraMonastery. Before that time, nobody knewme as Thubten Yeshe. They thought I wasDndrub Dorje. The names Thubten Yesheand Dndrub Dorje are different; differentsuperstitions give different kinds of name.I feel my name is me, but actually, it isnt.Neither the names Thubten Yeshe norDndrub Dorje are me. But the moment Iwas given the name Thubten Yeshe,Thubten Yeshe came into existence. Before

I was given the name, he didnt exist;nobody looked at me and thought,Theres Thubten Yeshe. I didnt eventhink it myself. Thubten Yeshe did notexist.

But when one superstitious conceptionnamed this bubble, my body Yourname is Thubten Yeshe my superstitiontook it: Yes, Thubten Yeshe is me. Its aninterdependent relationship. Onesuperstition gives the name Thubten

Yeshe to this bubble of relativity and myego starts to feel that Thubten Yeshe reallydoes exist somewhere in the area of my

body.

THUBTEN YESHE IS MERELY A NAME

The reality, however, is that ThubtenYeshe is merely the dry words applied tothe bubble-like phenomenon of these fiveaggregates. These things come together

and thats it: Thubten Yeshe, the name onthe bubble. Its a very superficial view.The egos instinctive feeling that Thubten


8/34

8!

Yeshe exists somewhere around here isvery superficial.

You can see that the relative reality ofThubten Yeshe is simply the name thats

been given to this bubble of energy. Thatsall Thubten Yeshe is. Thats why the great

philosopher and yogi Nagarjuna and thegreat yogi Lama Tsongkhapa both saidthat all phenomena exist merely in name.As a result, some early Western Buddhistscholars decided that Nagarjuna was anihilist. Thats a conclusion that could bereached only by someone who doesntpractice and spends all his time dealing inconcepts and words.

If I were to show up somewhere andsuddenly announce, Youre all merelynames, people would think I was crazy.But if you investigate in detail the mannerin which were all merely names, it

becomes extremely clear. Nihilists rejectthe very existence of interdependentphenomena but thats not what Nagarjunadid. He simply explained that relativephenomena exist but that we should viewthem in a reasonable way. They come,they go; they grow; they die. They receive

various names and in that way gain adegree of reality for the relative mind. Butthat mind does not see the deeper natureof phenomena; it does not perceive thetotality of universal existence.

RELATIVE AND ABSOLUTE EXIST

SIMULTANEOUSLY

Phenomena have two natures: theconventional, or relative, and the absolute,or ultimate. Both qualities exist

simultaneously in each and everyphenomenon. What Ive been talkingabout is the way that bubbles of relativityexist conventionally. A relativephenomenon comes into existence when,at any given time, the association ofsuperstition and the conception of egoflavors an object in a particular way bygiving it a name. That combination theobject, the superstition giving it a name

and the name itself is all thats neededfor a relative phenomenon to exist. Whenthose things come together, theres your

Thubten Yeshe. Hes coming; hes going;hes talking. Its all a bubble of relativity.

THUBTEN YESHE IS A BUBBLE

If right now you can see that ThubtenYeshes a bubble, thats excellent. It helps

a lot. And if you can relate yourexperience of seeing me as a bubble toother concrete objects you perceive, it willhelp even more. If you can see the heavyobjects that shake your heart and makeyou crazy as relative bubbles, theirvibration will not overwhelm you. Yourheart will stop shaking and youll cooldown and relax.

If I were to show you a scarecrow andask if it was Thubten Yeshe, youdprobably say it wasnt. Why not? Becauseits made of wood. Youd have a readyanswer. You can apply exactly the samelogic to the argument that this bubble of a

body is not Thubten Yeshe either.I believe very strongly that this is me

because of the countless times from thetime I was born up to now that my ego hasimprinted the idea this is me on myconsciousness. Me. This is me. This

bubble is me, me, me. But this bubbleitself is not Thubten Yeshe.

THUBTEN YESHE IS NOWHERE TO BE

FOUND

We know its composed of the fourelements. However, the earth element isnot Thubten Yeshe; the water is notThubten Yeshe; the fire is not ThubtenYeshe; the air is not Thubten Yeshe. Theparts of the body are not Thubten Yeshe

either. The skin is not Thubten Yeshe; theblood is not Thubten Yeshe; they bone isnot Thubten Yeshe; the brain is notThubten Yeshe.

The ego is not Thubten Yeshe.Superstition is not Thubten Yeshe. Thecombination of all this is not ThubtenYeshe either if it were, Thubten Yeshewould have existed before the name had

been given. But before this combination

was named Thubten Yeshe, nobodyrecognized it as Thubten Yeshe and Ididnt recognize it as Thubten Yeshe


9/34

9!

myself. Therefore, the combination of allthese parts is not Thubten Yeshe.

If we call the scarecrow Thubten Yesheand then analyze it to see exactly whereThubten Yeshe can be found, we cant findThubten Yeshe in any of the parts or on all

the parts together. This is easy tounderstand. Its exactly the same thingwith the bubble of my aggregates. Neitherany single constituent part nor the wholecombination is Thubten Yeshe. We alsoknow that the name alone is not ThubtenYeshe. So what and where is ThubtenYeshe? Thubten Yeshe is simply thecombination of superstition flavoring anobject with the words, Thubten Yeshe.Thats all that Thubten Yeshe is.

BEYOND THE NAME, THERE IS NO

THUBTEN YESHE

Beyond the name, there is no real ThubtenYeshe existing somewhere. But thesimultaneously-born ego doesntunderstand that Thubten Yeshe existsmerely as an interdependent combinationof parts. It believes that without question,around here, somewhere, there exists a

real, independent, concrete ThubtenYeshe. This is the nature of thesimultaneously-born ego. Therefore, if wedo not remove conceptions like,Somewhere in this bubble, Im ThubtenYeshe, we cannot release the ego.

The conception of ego is an extrememind. It holds very concretely the ideathat somewhere within this bubble of thefour-element combination body thereexists a self-existent I. That is the

misconception that we must release. If theego mind assessed the situationreasonably and was comfortable andsatisfied perceiving that superstitiongiving the name Thubten Yeshe to thisinterdependent, four-element bubble wasenough for Thubten Yeshe to exist, thatwould be a different story. But its notsatisfied with that. It cannot leave thatalone. It wants to be special. It wants

Thubten Yeshe to be concrete. Its notsatisfied with Thubten Yeshe being a merename on a collection of parts. Therefore, it

conceives an imaginary, unrealistic,exaggerated, concrete self-entity.

Excerpted from Lamas commentary on

the yoga method of Divine Wisdom

Manjushri, Manjushri Institute,

Ulverston, Cumbria, England, August1977. Edited from the Lama Yeshe Wisdom

Archive by Nicholas Ribush. Published in

the June 2001 issue ofMandala.


10/34

10!


11/34

11!

3. You Cannot Find the IAnywhereBy Lama Zopa Rinpoche

Lets concentrate for a few moments onwhat Im saying. [Silence.] We believe, Iam here, in this building. We believe, Iam in America, Soquel, Land of MedicineBuddha, Land of Medicine Buddha, Landof Medicine Buddha! Im in this gompa,Im in Vajrasattva retreat, Im on thiscushion, Im in pain! Im tired! Im sleepy!Im exhausted from a long day! What is hetalking about? What is he mumblingabout? Anyway, thinking like that.

We think theres a real one, a real I, areal me, here doing Vajrasattva retreat, orlistening to teachings. Here, sitting on thischair, or on this cushion a real melistening to teachings. Now, I is your label;me, I.

You point to your body and label it I: Iam going out. You dont pick up a book

and point to it and say, I am going out!No. You point to your body and apply thelabel, I am going out.

And as your mind does the activity ofthinking, you label, I am thinking.

As your mind meditates, I ammeditating. By first thinking what kind ofactivity your mind is doing for example,its wandering you say, I amwandering. I am not meditating. Areyou meditating now?

No. You check the mind, then yousay, I am wandering, or, if it ismeditating, being transformed into virtue

by analytical or fixed meditation, you say,I am meditating; you call, or label, it, Iam meditating.

In exactly the same way as in thisexample, when you say I, instead ofpointing here [at your chest], point at thistable; label I on this table.

So now, you have labeled I on the table,but where is that I on the table?You cannot find I on the table. Even

though you label I on the table, you cannotfind it anywhere, on any corner of thetable, inside the table, above the table you cannot find I anywhere. Not only that,

but this corner of the table is not I, thisother corner is not I no part of the table

is I. Even all the parts of the table togetherare not I.

So now, like this, its exactly the same,exactly the same, even though our mindconstantly labels I on this association of

body and mind [Rinpoche pointing to hischest], constantly, twenty-four hours aday, labels I on this association of bodyand mind, exactly as in the example whereyour mind labels I on the table even ifyou label I on the table, you cannot find Ion the table the table is not I, nor is I onthe table, inside the table, or anywhereelse; you cannot find I on any part of thetable, and even the whole thing is not I in the same way, I cannot be foundanywhere on the association of body andmind. If you look for your I, you cannotfind it, from the ends of your hair to thetip your toes your little toes, your bigtoes nowhere can it be found. You

cannot find your I anywhere. It is neitherinside your nose nor on the tip of yournose! Im joking!

Anyway, I is nowhere to be found, noteven inside your body.

Normally you believe I to be inside, buteven if thats what you normally believe,apprehend that theres a real I inside the

body, theres a real me inside the body ifyou look for it, you cannot find it. Whenyou start to analyze, it cannot be found.

Where is it exactly? Look for it. Where is itexactly, inside the body? Where is itexactly, inside the chest the part of the

body where we normally believe the I toreside? Its somewhere there, within the

body. We dont think that the I is outside we think that its inside, inside the chest.But if you try to identify exactly where theI is located, it cannot be found. There is noparticular location. You cant find it. If you

look for the I, you cannot find it or itsparticular location.Even though you normally believe that

the I is there, somewhere inside your


12/34

12!

body, inside your chest, if you really checkinside where it is, its exact location, youcannot find it.

SUBTLE DEPENDENT ARISING

When you think that the nature of the I is

dependent arising, subtle dependentarising, the real I that appeared to you atthe beginning and that you apprehend,disappears. It immediately becomesempty. It becomes empty, as it is empty inreality. If that real I that appeared to youwere true that you believed at the

beginning to really be there if that weretrue according to the way in which itappears, the way in which you believe ifthat were true, then even after analysis itshould still be there. Even after youranalysis of its dependent arising, it shouldremain. You should be able to find it. Butit is not there.

Even when you meditate on thechakras, a real I seems to exist, but there isno real I existing in this body the way itappears to exist, the way you apprehend,or believe, it to exist. That I is not there,neither on the body nor inside the body.

The body is not I; nor is the mind. Eventhe association of body and mind is not I;these aggregates are not I.

Without going through theMadhyamaka or lam-rim analyses ofemptiness for example, if the aggregatesare I, then what happens, what illogicalconsequences arise? If the body is I, whatillogical consequences arise? If the mind isI, what illogical consequences rise? without going through all those detailed

analyses, what I have just mentioned givesyou an idea of how the aggregates are notI. From that, you can understand, or getthe idea of, the rest.

SUBJECT & OBJECT CANNOT BE ONE

Even this association of body and mind isnot I. As the texts state, the aggregates this association of body and mind arewhat is received.

They are what is received, and I is thereceiver. I received these aggregates thistime; I is the receiver. I is the subject whoreceives these aggregates, who has

received, or taken, them. The I is thereceiver. Can you say taker, that I is thetaker? Like take-away food! I is to be takenaway, like take-away food! I is to be takenaway. Anyway, Im joking...well, there is away in which this can be true.

In Tibetan, we say nye-wa lang-cha lem-pa-ko. Nye-wa lang-cha: what is to be taken,the aggregates. The aggregates are what isto be taken, and I is the taker, who takesthem. I is the subject and the aggregatesare the object, what is to be taken. I is thetaker of the aggregates. Nye-wa langcha,and lem-pa-ko; lang-cha is what is taken andlem-pa-ko is the taker.

So, there are two. The I created thecause of these aggregates; the continuity ofthis I created the cause of theseaggregates, this samsara. Then this I hasreceived, or taken, these aggregates. So theaggregates are what is to be taken and I isthe taker. Subject and object. Therefore,they are not one. Therefore, the aggregatesare not I, cannot be I, the subject.

Because aggregates are what is to betaken the object. I is the taker of thatobject. So they cannot be one.

Similarly, an ax and the tree it cutscannot be one. One is the object, the otheris the subject, so they cannot be one. Thecutter the ax and what is to be cut thewood cannot be one. The wood that is to

be cut is not the cutter, the ax.

POSSESSOR & POSSESSION CANNOT

BE ONE

In that way, theres one reason. The otherreason is similar. [We say] My

aggregates, my aggregates, myaggregates. Even from the common,language point of view, my aggregatesshows that the aggregates are thepossession, and my, or I, is the possessor.My aggregates, my mind, my body.Even normal language shows that thesetwo are completely different; twocompletely different phenomena. They arenot one. They are totally different

phenomena. My aggregates, my body,my mind shows that they arepossessions, and from that it follows thatmy, I, is the possessor.


13/34

13!

Again, through that reason, you can seethat theres no way in which thepossession, that which is possessed, can bethe possessor, I.

There is no way. The two are totallydifferent phenomena. They dont exist

separately, but they exist differently.

THE LABEL & THE BASE CANNOT BE

ONE

Perhaps another thing to mention is this.The aggregates, the association of the

body and mind, is the base to be labeled,and I is the label to be applied what the

base is to be labeled with. Again inTibetan, I is dagch, the label to beapplied, and the aggregates are dag-shir,what is labeled, the base to be labeled.The aggregates are the base to be labeled,and I is the label, what is labeled on the

base. Thus again here, one is the base, theother is the label. Two totally differentphenomena; two totally differentphenomena. They dont exist separately,

but they exist differently.If they did exist separately, it would

help a lot if you were a criminal!

It would help a lot. Because then youcould say, It wasnt me that did it; it wasthe body. I didnt do it! Or you could say,This mind did it, not me! You couldhave many arguments! In court! Youcould argue in court, I didnt do it the

body did it; the mind did it. If what youdid was criminal or something for whichyoud get punished, you could say, The

body did it; the mind did it. I didnt do it.But if it was a situation where you had

something to gain, then you could say, Idid it!

Say your body did something thatnormally brings millions of dollars, butnobody saw it. If your I had no relation toyour aggregates, you could say, I did it!Since doing the action that brings millionsof dollars didnt depend on the body orthe mind doing it, you could take thecredit, I did it. I should get the money!

You could argue like that. If there weresomething good to gain, something thatyou like or want to acquire, you could say,I did it. But if what youd done were

criminal or subject to punishment, youcould say, It wasnt me!

Anyway, Im saying that if the I existedseparately from the aggregates, it could bevery helpful. You could do that. Maybeyou could still argue, I didnt do it

because I cannot find the I anywhere. Icannot see the I, so how could I have doneit? Im joking!

What Im trying to say is that since theaggregates are the base to be labeled and Iis what is labeled on them the aggregatesare the base and I is the label they aretwo totally different phenomena.Therefore, they are not one; the aggregatesare not I.

THE MIND IS NOT THE I

Similarly, the mind is not I. Its the same you can use all those reasons that Imentioned regarding the aggregates, withthe mind, to understand that the mind isnot I. Your mind is not you. My mind,your mind that shows it is not you. Yourmind is not you; my mind is not me.

If something that the I possessed had tobe I, were the I, then everything you

possessed would be you. Your car wouldbe you. Your kaka would be you!

Its exactly the same with the table, as Imentioned before. You can find the Inowhere on these aggregates. Neither arethe aggregates the I.

Exactly the same. Even though youlabel I on the table, you cannot find I onthe table. The table is not I. Exactly as youcannot find your I on the table eventhough your mind labels the table I,

exactly like that, even though your mindlabels I on the aggregates, you cannot findI anywhere on the aggregates. Neitherthat, nor are the aggregates I.

When you get a feeling that theaggregates are not I, when you cannot findI on the aggregates, this understandingmakes very clear what is the base andwhat is the label; you are able todifferentiate. Now you are able to

differentiate between the base and thelabel. After this analysis, you are able todifferentiate what is the base and what isthe label I.


14/34

14!

Before, it was unclear to your mind;these two things were unclear. HisHoliness the Dalai Lama would say thosetwo are mixed up, as if the table weremixed into the base, as if the table wereinside the base.

His Holiness Ling Rinpoche used to saythat the definition of the object to berefuted is the appearance of the base andthe label as undifferentiable.

For your mind, in your view, the baseand the label for example, the base to belabeled table and the label table itself are undifferentiable. His Holiness LingRinpoche explained during a commentaryon the Seven Point ThoughtTransformation at Drepung Monasterymany years ago that this is the object to berefuted.

You are unable to differentiate betweenthe label and the base. Your mind is veryconfused. Your mind is in a state ofconfusion. What appears to your view isthat these two the base, the aggregates,and the label, I, are undifferentiable. Now,through this analysis, you can see clearlythat they the label, I, and the base, the

aggregates are two totally differentphenomena.

WHEN THE REALIZATION OF

EMPTINESS OF THE I IS REAL, IT IS

SO POWERFUL

Now, even if you have one hundredpercent understanding, or recognition,that the base, the aggregates, is not I, thatthe I exists nowhere, I would not call thathaving realized emptiness. In other words,

you understand through the four-pointanalysis, the analysis of the four vitalpoints, that if the I is inherently existent, itshould exist either as oneness with theaggregates or as completely separate fromthem; it has to be pervaded by being eitheroneness with the aggregates or existingseparately from the aggregates. But simplyunderstanding that the inherently existentI is neither oneness with the aggregates

nor does it exist separately from them having a clear idea that the aggregates arenot one with the I but also dont existseparately from the I this awareness

alone, the ability to distinguish betweenlabel and base, is not the realization ofemptiness. Even if you had this awareness the ability to distinguish label from base even if the difference between the baseand the label had become clear for your

mind, still I would not say that you hadrealized emptiness.

When you realize emptiness not justthat there is no I, not just the feeling thatthere is no I you should feel somethingvery intensive. It should be very muchmore than that. Your understandingshould be something very intensive. Not

just the feeling that there is no I. Thefeeling should be something very deep;the feeling there is no I should be veryintensive, very deep. You should feel asyou would if youd had a vision that youhad received a million dollars, thatsomebody had put a million dollars intoyour hands, and you had totally, onehundred percent believed that youactually had all that money and thensuddenly realized it was just ahallucination! Its gone! Like that,suddenly you realize that its not there, it

has totally gone.What you have believed, were one

hundred percent convinced of, and sostrongly clung to, grasped at, is suddenly,totally non-existent.

Theres nothing to grab onto, nothingto hold onto. Suddenly, its totally non-existent. Nothing of what you have beenholding onto, cherishing as if it reallyexists, is truly there. Nothing of what, sofar, you have never had any doubt about,

have been grasping at continuously,holding onto like a cat grabbing a mouse all its claws clutching tightly together nothing of that I exists. Suddenly, thatabout which you have never had anydoubt since beginningless rebirths evensince this morning or since you were borninto this life suddenly, it doesnt goanywhere. Suddenly, theres nothingthere. Maybe its gone to the beach! Or to

the mountains! To a retreat center!Anyway, it doesnt go anywhere.Just there! Suddenly! You realize there

is nothing there. Suddenly, it is not there.


15/34

15!

You realize that its totally non-existent.Totally non-existent.

Theres nothing to hold onto. Its lost.Totally lost. Just right there where it was totally lost. Not that its gonesomewhere, but right there, it has become

totally lost. Theres nothing to hold onto.You feel something very intensive notspace, but empty, like space. During thattime, theres no dual view, theres no thisis I and that is emptiness; no here is thesubject, perceiver, realizer and there is theobject, emptiness. Its not dual; non-dual.At that time, the view that should appearshould be non-dual, not this I ismeditating on emptiness, seeingemptiness. Oh, that is emptiness.

Instead, there should be a veryintensive understanding, seeing veryintensively that . . .the I is empty. Its not

just thinking that theres no I; its not justthat. Its not like, after searching for thetable, the labeled table, the general table not the inherently existent table but thegeneral table, the labeled table looking tosee if any part of the table is the table itsnot that or if perhaps the whole

collection of parts together is the table its not that either and only after all that,then thinking that the table does not exist.Its not that kind of experience. Nor is itlike analyzing the body to find if the I isinside the body or on the aggregates, orunderstanding that the aggregatestogether are also not the I, then, after allthat analysis, at the end, coming to theconclusion that theres no I.

Because you cannot find it, thinking

that there is no I. Its not just that.

WHEN YOU SEE EMPTINESS, THERE

IS EITHER UNBELIEVABLE JOY . . .

The right way of perceiving that the I isempty is an extremely deep, intensiveexperience, but there are basically twokinds of experience you can have. You canfeel incredible, that you have discoveredthe most precious thing, such as a wish-

granting jewel. Or like a person who hasbeen looking for or waiting to meet a dearfriend for many, many years praying,wishing, to meet that person for many

years and then, after all these manyyears, suddenly meeting that friend. Orlike youve been waiting to get a billiondollars for a long time and then suddenlyyou get the money. In other words, whenyou see emptiness, you feel unbelievable

joy; incredible joy that makes you cry.

. . . OR UNBELIEVABLE FEAR

The second kind of experience is one ofunbelievable fear, incredible fear. Not justany kind of fear. Not just the fear of beingattacked by somebody; not that kind offear. Its a very deep fear; something deepinside your heart, in the very depths ofyour heart. A very deep fear. The otherfear is not fear of losing the I somethingis going to happen to this I, but its notlosing the I. The ordinary is fear that thisreal I is going to receive some harm, buthere, something that youve believed in not only from birth but from

beginningless rebirths up until now something that youve believed in onehundred percent, only now, only now yourealize that its not there. Only now yourealize that its totally nonexistent.

This can cause an incredibly deep fearto arise.

As I often say, even when you reciteThe Heart Sutra, when you say the words,No ear, no nose, no tongue...no ice cream!No coffee, no chocolate, no cigarettes, nodrinks...! if fear comes into your heartwhen you say no this, no that, if feararises, thats a good sign. Fear arisingmeans your recitation ofThe Heart Sutra,The Essence of Wisdom, is hitting, or

touching, the root of samsara, hurting it.Your recitation ofThe Heart Sutra hastouched the root of samsara, ignorance;has hit it.

Your recitation ofThe Heart Sutra, yourway of thinking when you recite TheEssence of Wisdom, is fitting like an arrowor a bomb. As an arrow hits its target, as a

bomb or a torpedo hits its target, theenemy at which you aimed, like that, your

recitation ofThe Heart Sutra, thoseteachings on emptiness, your way ofthinking, your meditation, has hit itstarget, the object of ignorance, the


16/34

16!

inherently existent I the I that isapprehended by simultaneously-bornignorance. You have hit the target youresupposed to hit. The target that you aresupposed to hit with the arrow or bomb ofyour recitation of the words ofThe Heart

Sutra and thinking on their meaning is theobject to be refuted, the inherently existentI.

Fear in your heart means that you havehit the target.

The texts explain that it is highlyintelligent practitioners who have theexperience of incredible, blissful joy, tearsrunning down their cheeks, and feel as iftheyd found an unbelievably precious

jewel, and less intelligent practitionerswho feel fear when they realize emptiness.At that time, you should not try to escapefrom this fear trying to do so is yourgreatest obstacle to realizing emptiness.Instead, you must realize that this is theone time, the one opportunity, to realizeemptiness the only wisdom that candirectly cut the delusions, the root ofsamsara, the gross and subtle defilements,

bringing liberation from samsara and full

enlightenment. Knowing this, you mustgo through the fear; you must completeyour experience. Go through the fear likecrossing a river.

Otherwise, if you block your ownprogress the one time that you have theopportunity of realizing emptiness, if yourun away from that, like running awayfrom teachings, from meditation courses,especially my meditation courses ofcourse, those are good to run away from!

if you run from the fear that arises whenyou realize emptiness, that is no good atall.

BUT DONT BE AFRAID THE I WILL

DISAPPEAR; THERE IS ALWAYS

CONTINUITY OF THE LABEL I

However, you never have to worry aboutthe I ceasing, because the I never ceases.The I that is the label never ceases. The I

never stops, never ceases. Why is therealways continuity of the I, the label? Whyis there always continuity of the self?Because there is always continuity of

consciousness. Even after enlightenment,the consciousness continues forever.

Even though the body might change one body stops, another body is taken the continuity of consciousness is alwaysthere, even after enlightenment. Therefore,

the continuity of the I never ceases. Italways exists because the base, thecontinuity of consciousness, always exists.

Therefore, thinking, Im going tocease, Im going to become non-existentis totally wrong.

When that feeling arises, theappearance of losing or having totally lostyour I, you shouldnt be worried that thatappearance means youre falling intonihilism. Because of that appearance, youshould not be worried that you are fallinginto nihilism just as you should not beworried that the I is becoming non-existent. There are two things one is thefear of falling into nihilism; the other is theworry, I am becoming nonexistent.

You should not be scared of thosethings. If you do get scared, youll blockyourself from realizing emptiness; this oneopportunity to realize emptiness will have

arisen and youll have blocked it yourself.A very clear commentary on the

Mahamudra by Ketsang Jamyang (Im nothundred percent sure thats his name),which is regarded as a very effectiveteaching, explains why this appearance ofthe self becoming non-existent happens. Ithappens because it has to happen.Furthermore, it is a sign that there is noinherent existence on the I, the merelylabeled I. There is no inherent existence on

that I, and the experience of its becomingnon-existent shows, proves, that. Whenyou have this experience, you see theMiddle Way, the Madhyamika, view. Yousee the Middle Way, devoid of the twoextremes of nihilism and eternalism.

REALIZING EMPTINESS IS THE FIRST

STEP TOWARDS LIBERATION

I would say that realizing that the object of

ignorance the concept of the inherentlyexistent I is empty, realizing theemptiness that is the negation of the objectto be refuted, is the first step towards


17/34

17!

liberation.Im not saying that by that alone you

have entered of the five paths toliberation the path of merit. Im notsaying that. But its like youve taken astep towards liberation, because that

wisdom is the main thing that directlyceases the defilements.

CONCLUSION: THE I EXISTS BUT

NOT HOW WE THINK IT DOES

Just to conclude now before we all go tosleep! as I mentioned before, how whenyou label I on the table, its not there inexactly the same way, when the mindlabels I on these aggregates, its not thereeither. The aggregates are not the I; the I isnot there. I exists, but its not there. The Ithat is labeled by your mind exists, but itsnot there. Even that is not there. Even that.Besides the real I that you believe to residein the heart, inside your body, not beingthere, even the I merely labeled by yourmind, which does exist, is not there either.Im not saying its not here [in this room],Im saying its not there [on youraggregates].

So now, the I that is merely labeled bythe mind exists. That is here, that exists,

but even that cannot be found on theseaggregates, on the base of the aggregates.It doesnt exist on these aggregates. Themerely labeled I exists because the base,the aggregates, exists. In the same way,the base, the aggregates, which are merelyimputed, exists, but it doesnt exist on thegathering of the five aggregates; it doesntexist there. The merely labeled aggregates

exist, but they dont exist on the collectionof the five aggregates. They dont existthere; they cannot be found there. So thatsclear. The merely labeled aggregatescannot be found on the collection of thefive. They dont exist there.

In exactly the same way, for eachaggregate for example, the aggregate ofform, the general aggregate of form itsexactly same. The same logic applies. The

merely labeled aggregate exists but itdoesnt exist on that base. Empty. Itdoesnt exist there; its not there, notexistent on this base. The aggregate of

form does not exist on the collection of thelimbs, either in all their parts or on thewhole collection together. So theres noquestion about the inherently existent, realaggregate: it doesnt exist anywhere.

The real one appearing from there the

aggregate, the general aggregate of form exists nowhere. Similarly, if you go to theparts of the limbs, to the arms, head, legs,stomach, and so forth, all those merelylabeled ones exist, but they dont exist ontheir own bases. Even the merely labeledhead cannot be found on the collection ofits parts, the brain and everything else. Ifyou look for head, it cannot be foundthere.

Like that, its the same for the arms, thelegs, the main body everything down tothe atoms that which is merely labeledexists, but it doesnt exist on its own base.Even the merely labeled atom exists, but itdoesnt exist, cannot be found, on thecollection of the particles of the atom. Andits the same for even the particles of theatom they cant be found on their own

base either.Thus, everything from the I down to

the particles of the atoms, or, from thegeneral aggregate of form down to theparticles of atoms, which appears assomething real, is not there. Its totallyempty; every single thing is totally empty.What appears to your view, yourhallucinating mind, seems to besomething real, from there but its notthere.

Starting from the real I down to the realparticles of the atoms, what appears is not

there; its totally empty not space, butlike space; totally empty, non-existent.

That was form. How about theaggregate of feeling, that which is labeledon the thought, the mental factor thatexperiences pleasure, indifference andsuffering? Its the same with the aggregateof feeling the merely labeled aggregateof feeling exists, but cannot be found on its

base. Its also the same with the aggregate

of cognition, which discriminatesphenomena as bad or good, as this andthat, as friend and enemy, fat and skinny,long and short, and so forth. The merely


18/34

18!

labeled aggregate of cognition exists because its base exists but it doesnt existon that base. So thats the same. Then, ifyou analyze the pleasant feeling, thesuffering feeling, the indifference, youcannot find those feelings on their base.

Similarly with the aggregate of cognition you can do the same analysis, but neithercan cognition be found on its base, eventhough merely labeled cognition exists.

Its also the same thing with theaggregate of compounded phenomena.

Its also labeled, merely imputed,because its base exists. Subtracting feelingand cognition from the fifty-one mentalfactors, the rest are called the aggregate ofcompounded phenomena, labeled that,

but that aggregate cannot be found on thatbase.

Finally, its the same with the aggregateof consciousness. Merely labeledconsciousness exists, but it cannot befound on its base, like a carpet on thefloor. The merely labeled consciousnessdoesnt exist like that. The mind, whichknows phenomena, which does thefunction of continuing from one life to the

next, perceiving merely the essence of theobject, that knowing phenomenon, she-pa,

because that mind exists, your mind labelsit nam-she, consciousness. But using thesame analysis I mentioned before, neitherthat consciousness nor the split seconds ofconsciousness can be found on theirrespective bases.

Therefore, starting from the I down tothe split seconds of consciousness, eachaggregate form, feeling, cognition,

compounded phenomena andconsciousness, down to the split secondsof consciousness everything that appearsto our mind, to our view, as real, assomething real existing from there, istotally non-existent. Normally, aftermaking all this analysis, you shouldmeditate on this emptiness; let your minddwell in it for a while. Looking ateverything as empty, let your mind stay in

that state of emptiness for as long aspossible. Thats extremely good, veryeffective.

DWELL IN THIS EMPTINESS OF NON-

EXISTENCE FROM ITS OWN SIDE

So thats reality; thats how things are.This is reality, so lets place our minds inthis state for a while. Concentrate for alittle bit on this conclusion that the whole

thing is totally empty. Everything fromthe I down to, and including, the particlesof the atoms and the split seconds ofconsciousness is totally empty from itsown side.

[Long meditation.]The final thing is that its totally non-

existent from its own side. Its totallynon-existent, but non-existent from itsown side. So the second part of thatexpression makes the way of thinking orthe experience correct seeing it as not

just empty, non-existent, but empty, non-existent, from its own side.

Like this, the nature of everything elsein existence forms, sounds, smells, tastes,tangible objects, hell, enlightenment,samsara, nirvana, happiness, suffering,lifes gains and losses, virtue, non-virtue,everything is totally empty, non-existent.But, non-existent from its own side.

WHILE EVERYTHING IS EMPTY,

THEY DO EXIST MERELY LABELLED

BY MIND

So, while things are empty everything istotally empty from its own side theyexist. They exist in mere name, by beingmerely labeled by the mind which alsoexists in mere name. Things exist asmerely labeled by the mind, which itselfalso exists in mere name. Everything is

unified with emptiness and dependentarising, as Guru Shakyamuni Buddharealized and Lama Tsongkhapa praisedhighly. Lama Tsongkhapa himself alsoactualized this emptiness which isunified with dependent arising, subtledependent arising this right view, thiswisdom, which is the only one that can cutthe one particular root of samsara: theignorance, the hallucinating mind that

while theres no I on these aggregates,including the inherently existent I through negative imprints left on themental continuum, projects on to these


19/34

19!

aggregates the appearance of aninherently existent I and then believes it to

be true; the ignorance that believes thisinherently existent I is true, that it reallyexists.

This particular root of samsara the

ignorance that apprehends the I, which ismerely labeled by the mind, as existingfrom its own side, as not merely labeled

by the mind can be cut only by thisspecific wisdom, only by this right view,this wisdom, this right view. Only bygenerating that can you be totallyliberated from samsara, from the entireocean of sufferings of samsara, which aredivided into three suffering of pain,suffering of change and pervasive,compounded suffering. Within samsara,there are the specific sufferings of eachrealm and the general sufferings ofsamsara, such as the six, the four and thethree.

The specific sufferings of the six realmsinclude those of the eight hot hells, theeight cold hell sufferings and the six orfour neighborhood sufferings.

The sufferings of the hungry ghosts

the heavy suffering of hunger and thirst,and on top of that the suffering of heat,cold and exhaustion. The animalsufferings extreme stupidity, being eaten

by one another, being tortured, heat andcold. Human beings eight types ofsufferings the sufferings of rebirth, oldage, sicknesses and death; the inability tofind desirable objects; even if found, theinability to find satisfaction in them; andon top of that, the fear and worry of

separating from them; and finally, the fivetypes of sufferings of the aggregates. Thesufferings of the sura and asura realmsinclude the heaviest sufferings of thedevas the five signs of impending death,always fighting with and gettingcontrolled by other, more powerful, devasand getting banished.

It is only with this wisdom, thisparticular right view, the Prasangika view,

that you can be totally liberated from theoceans of samsaric suffering all thespecific sufferings of each samsaric realm,and the three, four and six general

sufferings of samsara. By ceasing the cause delusion and karma you can achievethe sorrowless state of total liberationfrom samsara, and only with this wisdom,the Prasangika view, can you alsoeradicate the subtle defilements, achieve

full enlightenment and be able to doperfect work for all sentient beings,leading them to enlightenment as well.

Id better stop here, otherwise we wontfinish until tomorrow morning!

To escape from this hallucination, to beliberated from this hallucinating mind, wetake refuge and keep precepts. Refuge isthe very foundation of theBuddhadharma, the gate through whichwe enter the Dharma path.

We take refuge and vows to makecertain that we practice, to make sure thatwe devote ourselves to actually practicingDharma. That is the fundamental reasonfor taking refuge and vows. In order toliberate others from the hallucinatingmind, ignorance, first we ourselves haveto be liberated from the hallucination,from the hallucinating mind, from allthese sufferings that we have been caught

in since time without beginning, forbeginningless lifetimes. Thus, refuge andprecepts are the basic means, the veryfoundation of the path, for liberating bothourselves and others from thehallucination, from the hallucinatingmind, from all suffering, and gaining theultimate happiness of the highest, fullenlightenment.

Teachings of Lama Zopa Rinpoche given

during a Vajrasattva retreat at Land ofMedicine Buddha, California, in 1999.


20/34

20!


21/34

21!

4. Preparing the Mind to SeeEmptiness by UnderstandingKarma: an example ofDependent Arising, the King

of Logic to Prove Emptiness

Everything every sentient being does, saysor thinks is necessarily a karma, an action,which will necessarily ripen in a result inthe future. In fact, karma action meansintention and is thus a function of themind; the body and speech then carry out

the wishes of the mind. Negative actionsripen as suffering and positive actionsripen as happiness. If the seed is planted,it will ripen as a fruit; and if the fruit hasripened, necessarily a seed was planted.And all seeds expand in that they bearmany fruits.

Karma ripens in four ways:1. The Fully Ripened Result, which is

the type of rebirth our consciousness will

take when it leaves a previous body at thetime of death.2. The Action Similar to the Cause: all

the words, thoughts and actions we do inany one life are due to the habit of havingdone them before.

3. The Experience Similar the Cause:all the things that other people or beingsdo to us, or all the things that happen tous.

4. Environmental Karma: even the way

the world is for us: polluted, beautiful,earthquakes, etc; all this is due to thecollective karma of the sentient beingswho experience that environment.

For the Fully Ripened Result, thethrowing karma that is the main causefor this lifes body, there have to be fourconditions in place at the time of theaction for it to become the karmic actionthat throws us into the next life. Letssay there is the negative karma of killing:first, there is the intention to kill that ant,and within intention there are severalother points, the most important of which

is motivation and lets face it, 99% of thetime that we kill its with a negativemotivation. Then there is the object, the anthas to be there, alive. Then there is theaction of killing; and finally the completionof the action, the death of the ant before

oneself. If this karma is left in the mind,from the very moment it is planted, justlike any seed, it will expand, get bigger.Even after a few days, it is huge, whichmeans the fruits will be many.

So, its left in the mind and is notpurified. Eventually it will definitely ripenas a future rebirth in a lower realm (whichrealm depends on many conditions). Butnot just one rebirth; one seed gives rise tomany fruits.

Theres this woman I knew at Kopan.She came to my room one day crying afterhearing Rinpoche teach about the lowerrealms. Her dear son had died five years

beforehand at the age of 29. Hed been aprofessional fisherman, and he died whilescuba diving. I suggested she talk toGeshe Lama Konchog about it.Surprisingly, he told her exactly where herson was now (the lamas rarely do that, so

it must have been beneficial for her to hearit). She just mentioned his name and hesaid, First he was born in the animalrealm, and now hes in the hell realms.

So, there he was, this nice man: good,kind, intelligent, moral. But he had thekarma to kill thousands of fish and to notsee that he was harming sentient beings.And thats the point about karma: Fromkilling in past lives he had been born inthe lower realms. That karma got finished

eventually and his karma to be bornhuman ripened again. But the problem isthat the karma of killing left thepropensity to kill still in his mind, andeven though he got a good rebirth again,he was attracted to killing fish. His mothersaid he always loved the river and evenuse to call himself Salmon. The habit tokill was still there. And killing in the pastcaused him to die young in this life.

This is one of the worst aspects ofkarma. Due to past actions, the propensityto keep doing the same actions is there;and we cant even see that they are


22/34

22!

negative. Because of the habit, the feelingthat the doing of the action brings in ourmind is pleasure, so of course we think itis good. Thats what is so terrible. Wereally are locked in the vice of karma. Wecan see how miraculous it is for good

karma to ripen. So: killing causes a lowerrebirth. It leaves imprints in the mind tokeep doing the same action. It causes us to

be killed or to die young.The karmic cause for the next rebirth

ripens at the time of death. Whicheverseed is strongest is the one that ripensfirst. Which is why it is so vital to diepeacefully, without regret, withawareness, with acceptance. The majorityof people die with fear, mainly becausethey have never thought of death. So evenfor this reason alone, it is likely that anegative seed will ripen, because fear is afunction of ignorance, and ignorance is themain delusion, and delusion activatesnegative karmas to ripen.

And there are literally countless karmicseeds sitting there in our mind now,latent, waiting for the appropriateconditions to activate them. Which is why

conditions are so vital. If youd told aSerbian man, for example, five years agothat he would become a multi-rapist andmurderer, he would have laughed at you.There he was, living in Bosnia,surrounded by Muslims, but leading hislife the best he could. But one day, warstarts, and becomes the condition for thosekarmic seeds to murder and rape Muslimsto ripen.

So many times when people kill, they

dont really mean to, and its not becausetheyre bad people. Its just conditions.The karmic seed was there on their minds(and they dont know about it), and oneday a person comes into their life whomthey have the karma to kill because thatperson had harmed them in a past life,and boom, killing happens. They are assurprised as everyone else that ithappened. They didnt plan it. Karma

ripened, thats all.And another aspect: I rememberhearing in a teaching by Rinpoche that theKalachakra Tantra describes the intimate

relationship between external activity andinternal karma. Because everything iscaused by karma: that earthquake is thekarmic result of the sentient beings whoexperience it; they caused it. That airplanecrash; that war. Everything. Rinpoche said

that basically the entire external universeis made up of the four elements: earth, air,fire and water: this body, the mountains,the flowers, whatever. They are justdifferent quantities of the four, if you like:the ocean is mostly the element of waterwhereas the mountain is mostly earth, andso on. Anyway, when the mind isdisturbed deluded this disturbs the

balance of the body elements, whichcauses the body to be sick. And this inturn causes the imbalance of the externalelements: floods, volcanoes, theenvironment, whatever. They call thisenvironmental karma. Of course, it allhappens over eons. But you can see howdelusion now is a condition for karma toripen. Equally, if sentient beings arepurifying, this can be a condition for akarma to be averted or to ripen lessseverely.

Literally, everything is our karmicappearance. We cause it all. There is notan atom of this universe that is not theresult of the karma of the sentient beingswho experience it. Nothing exists outthere, from its own side. Everythingdepends upon sentient beings minds. AsLama Yeshe said, hell is not some placeout there where this heavy guy is saying,Ha, ha, Im waiting for Thubten Yeshe.No, it is made up by our own minds; our

previous actions create it.You can see how understanding

emptiness helps understand karma.It can be said that there is not one

single event in the universe that israndom; everything has to do withsentient beings karma. And every beingwe meet, every human, ant, dog, bird,whatever that is not random either. Wehave met each of them before and

experience at that moment the karmicresult of a particular past association. And,of course, each feeling we experience inrelation to each sentient being we meet is


23/34

23!

the direct result of a past action towardsthat sentient being.

Each of our moments of mentalexperience in one day, for example, would

be labeled either pleasant, unpleasant orindifferent, wouldnt it? There are no

other choices. We either have a happyexperience, an unhappy one or anindifferent one, and every instant would

be covered by these three. Well, themental factor (as the various states ofmind are called) that experiences pleasure,pain or indifference is called feeling. Inthe teachings about mind, feeling is oneof the so-called always-present mentalfactors: every moment we are alwaysexperiencing some feeling or other, andeach of them is in response to contactingan object through our senses (and inresponse to thoughts, too)

We see a scorpion, for example:immediately an unpleasant feeling arises.The extent of that unpleasant feeling fear, revulsion, the wish to kill it,whatever is equal to the past harm wedid that particular scorpion during a pastlife. Even more specifically, that

unpleasant feeling is the fruit of our ownseed planted in the mind at the time ofsome interaction with that sentient being.So, quite literally, our own karmic actioncan be said to be the main cause for ourown suffering now. It looks like thescorpion is the main cause for the fear, therevulsion, but its not; its only a condition.

It is said that the causes of samsara are1. karma and 2. delusion. The action ofharming the scorpion (when it was our

mother, a friend, an animal, whatever) in apast life is the direct cause of even meetingthat scorpion now and the cause of theunpleasant feeling; thats the karma part.And the ignorance, attachment, aversionand the rest in our mind at this momentare the delusion part.

Which shows us there are two things todo: 1. purify the karmic seeds, and 2. getrid of delusion. Practice consists of both,

of course, but the main thing we must do,because karma is so extensive and deepand its ripening so unexpected, is work ongetting rid of delusion. If we can do that

then we can really purify karma quickly.So there you are in prison, which inconventional terms (and karma is simplyconvention) gives rise to unpleasantfeelings, is called suffering. This is due toyour past karma and you cant have much

control over that now. But how you dealwith it, whether with delusion or withvirtue, this is definitely within yourcontrol. And thats what really purifies.(Of course, delusion is due to karma too,

but thats another angle on it.)So, we can see how fortunate we are to

have virtue within our mind as an optionin the face of suffering. Suffering iscoming all the time, to all sentient beings,so nothing special about that. But havingvirtue in the mind as a way of dealingwith that suffering: that is so fortunate.

Rinpoche said in a teaching one time: aperson who has totally uprooted anger,for example, from their mind would notsee an enemy. In other words, when youare totally free of aversion, gone fromyour mind completely, upon meeting thescorpion there would be no aversion in themind. You would not label it enemy. You

would know it was a scorpion, you wouldknow it would sting you, you would feelthe sting, but you mind would not labelenemy. Enemy is a fabrication of our ownmind. You would see a suffering sentient

being, an object of compassion. Which iswhy Ribur Rinpoche, for example, wasable to transform suffering into pure

joy.So, having met a person before causes

us to meet them again. How we treated

them in the past causes us to see them asfriend or enemy now. And havingattachment and aversion in the mind nowperpetuates it. This is the wheel ofsamsara. Which is why its vital to stop

believing in our karmic appearances.Because two people have been kind toeach other in the past, they see each otheras nice now. But attachment is usuallywhat instantly takes over after the arising

of the pleasant feeling, and then it buildsup its story, its fantasy about the beautifulperson and is convinced that the person isthe cause of the pleasant feeling. The more


24/34

24!

pleasant the feeling, the stronger theattachment, which becomes the cause ofsuffering, not more pleasure, which iswhat the mind thinks. So, practice is to cutthe karmic appearances, to stop believingin the real object out there existing in and

of itself as a cause of our pleasure.Rinpoche has said that its bad enough

that, due to karma, someone appears self-existently beautiful to our mind, oursenses; the real problem is that we believethat picture to be true. Thats what keepsus bound in samsara.

A person who is able to see a beautifulperson and know that they do not exist asinherently beautiful, that that appearanceis simply due to karma, is a person who isqualified to use the pleasure that arises intheir mind on the path to enlightenment.Which is why Lama would say, The morepleasure, the better, dear! (Lama wasfamous for calling everyone dear.) Butits obvious that this is the most difficultpractice, isnt it? To even begin todistinguish between the pleasure and theattachment is unbelievably difficult.

It is very interesting, this evolution ofspecies. The Buddhist explanation of it ismost interesting. I remember in particularone program about nature by anEnglishman, Attenborough, who is verywell known in England. He wasdiscussing a particular group of ants inAfrica and their habitat, their anthill, andexplaining how amazing they were. Forexample, he pointed out, their home,which was maybe ten feet tall, had many

levels, where different ants did differentthings; how skillful they were. And howtheir basement, if you like, was kept at avery precise temperature for this reasonand that. He said that these ants hadevolved in their sophistication over theyears and was truly awestruck at theirtalents.

The Buddhist view could be, in a sense big deal! Ants in their nature do not

have the mental capacity to calculatetechnological things, but the fact that theyseemed to do these things by instinctshows that the karmic imprints to do them

are strongly in their minds and thatthese imprints are from human lives,when that mental capacity was evident.These busy creatures, all following theirinstincts, were simply reincarnatedhumans who obviously had developed

very sophisticated technical skills look attodays world! but because these skillshad been developed and carried out ashumans in conjunction with hugeattachment and grasping and the rest,these delusions had caused them to be

born as lower creatures who neverthelesskept the imprints of their technicaltraining. There were these birds too, forexample, who did this elaborate dance for8 or 9 hours, non-stop, in order to attract amate: all I could see was highly skillfuldedicated dancers overwhelmed withattachment, no thought of altruism.

Attachment and anger and the rest, andthe actions done on the basis of them designing buildings, dancing, etc are thecauses of lower rebirths, according toBuddha. But the same actions done fromthe perspective of wanting to benefitothers, of altruism, would leave virtuous

imprints in the mind that would cause ahuman rebirth, or even enlightenmentitself if theyre done on the basis of

bodhicitta.So, according to this scenario, we can

see how certain species would evolve but the real point, from Buddhismsperspective, is that theyre not reallyevolving: again, big deal, so an ant cando clever things. Cleverness in itself is novirtue. The cause of an ant life the

karmic seed that ripened at the time of theprevious death of that sentient being isnecessarily a non-virtue. The various otherthings that happen to the ant and what itdoes, its tendencies to kill or buildtemperature-controlled basements, etc., allcome from previous imprints in itsconsciousness, created when it washuman/animal/spirit, whatever.

So, you could say that insects are

evolving, becoming more sophisticated human traits, if you like; and we can alsosay that humans are degenerating,


25/34

25!

becoming more violent, angry, deluded,attached, etc lower realm traits.

The real meaning of evolution, inBuddhist terms, is in terms of thedevelopment of kindness, wisdom,patience, compassion, and the rest. An

intelligent mind is not one that merely cando technological things, but is one that candistinguish between right and wrong andcan, eventually, perceive the true nature ofreality.

We can see how karma operatessimilarly with humans: due toextraordinarily virtuous past actions, thekarmic imprint that ripens at the time ofthe previous death was necessarily avirtue, which causes the being to go to ahuman womb. But look at some of thetendencies of us humans: negative,violent, angry, destructive, etc. We can seethat many of these could even be calledanimal-like from much habituation thesetendencies are carried into the human life,

just like the human tendencies an abilityto achieve things technologically, orkindness, whatever are carried into thelife of an animal.

There is what is called throwing karma,which is the seed that ripens at the time ofdeath that throws the being into theirnext womb/egg/whatever; and then theother karmas that ripen in terms of habits,on the one hand, and experiences, on theother. Past killing, for example, if ripeningas a throwing karma, causes rebirth as ananimal, a suffering spirit, a hell being.Then, if one has the throwing karma to be

born a human, other karmas can ripen in

that life from past killing as an experienceof being killed, and as the habit tocontinue to kill.

So, killing, for example: 1. ripenedresult: a lower rebirth, thrown by thekarma ripening at the time of death, 2. theexperience similar to the cause: beingkilled or dying young or being sick orunhealthy; and 3. the action similar to thecause: the habit to kill; and 4.

environmental result: food and medicineetc. that cause ill-health not health.Theres the lion, for example, who has

the ripened result of a lower rebirth, and

within that rebirth the habit to continue tokill and, most likely, the experience of

being killed. Thats the story of mostanimals lives, in fact! Or the human, whohas the ripened result of virtue, but withinthat life has the habit to kill or experiences

being killed. Look around. Theres hardlya human on this planet who doesnt killsomething.

All this is why the purification practiceknown as the Four Opponent Powers is soimportant for a Buddhist. Its in thecontext of the practice called Vajrasattva.

The various realms that Buddhismasserts, such as spirit and hell, are

basically different dimensions; you cantjust climb on an aeroplane and go there.But if you were to die now as a humanright here, say, due to karma, the next splitsecond our consciousness could be in ahell realm. A realm is a mental experience,mentally created by our own minds. Thishuman realm is the collective karmiccreation of the minds of all the beingslabeled human; ditto animals, spirits, etc.

The Dalai Lama has said that, sure, thebig bang makes sense in Buddhist terms,

but there must have been infinite bigbangs, not just one, because you cannotposit a beginning of everything; this isliterally an impossibility. Becauseeverything is cause and effect, then nomatter how far back you go with yourmemory 47 eons, lets say and say, ahha, there was the beginning. No, how canthat be? Because if 47 eons ago there wassomething, then it necessarily had to comefrom something the moment before.

Chicken and egg.The Buddhist view is that the universes

are made up of physical matter whichboils down to the four elements andmental consciousnesses. And there is avery subtle wind energy that is the basis ofall the four elements, which is what allphysical matter are made of. This subtlewind energy exists and then, due to thecollective karma of sentient beings, it will

begin to form into a particular universe,this one, lets say. This universe is thekarmic creation over eons and eons ofthe collective karma of all of us who


26/34

26!

experience it. And it will eventually cease,again according to the collective karma ofhumans.

There is nothing in any universe that isnot created by the karma of the sentient

beings that experience them. They dont

exist from their own side, by the power oftheir own physical elements, and nor arethey creations of some superior being.

All of which is why, for a Buddhist, thephysical universe, although indeed totallyfascinating and amazing, is secondary tothe inner universe. When we discover thenature of our consciousness we willdiscover the nature of the universe andthat is not meant as a trite clich but aprofound truth.

Other than the consciousnesses ofcountless beings, in and of samsara thereis no other conscious force, according toBuddhism. What holds things together inharmony is, quite literally, the past karmaof virtue. What causes the elements toexplode apart and cause chaos whetherits wars or volcanoes is, quite literally,the past karma of non-virtue. If we want

to find a creator then its the karma ofsentient beings.

Of course, there are the consciousnessesof enlightened beings, who have beenordinary at some point and have nowgone beyond samsara. They pervade theuniverse; are omniscient, allcompassionate, all powerful. But theydont create universes. Universes are thepolluted creation of the karma of ordinary

beings.

If we were all enlightened there wouldnot be an atom of anything physical; therewould not need to be because there would

be no suffering sentient beings, becauseuniverses are the abodes of sentient

beings, created by their past karmicactions. (Sentient beings are ordinary,deluded beings, locked into the cycle ofrebirth and suffering; enlightened beingsare those who have gone beyond suffering

and cyclic existence).If we want to find a creator, its ourown mind. Everything is made up by ourmind, Lama Zopa says, including the

physical universe. As Lama Yeshe said,Hell is the manifestation of our own pastdelusions. The very subtle wind energyconjoined with the very subtle mind, afterits left the body of the past life, willmanifest as the body and mind of a hell

being, a scorpion, a human, a spirit,whatever, each in their appropriate,karmically created external universe.Nothing exists from its own side;everything is created by the mind.

Excerpted from advice to various

Buddhist practitioners in prison, by Ven.

Robina Courtin


27/34

27!

5. Preparing the Mind to SeeEmptiness by Understandingthe Delusions that Ego-grasping Give Rise To

By Robina Courtin

BEING OUR OWN THERAPIST

According to the Buddhas model of themind, psychological states fall into threecategories: positive, negative, and neutral.Leaving aside the neutral, the positivestates, which are at the core of our being,

are necessarily the cause of own wellbeingand happiness, and the basis of ourcapacity to benefit others. The negative,which are not at the core of our being andthus can be removed, are necessarily thecause of our unhappiness and the basis ofour harming others.

The key job, then, is to develop the skillto look inside, to be introspective, in aclear and disciplined way, so that werequalified to do the actual job of changing

our emotions, of distinguishing betweenthe positive and negative. To become ourown therapist, in other words, as LamaYeshe puts it.

Not an easy job. First of all, were noteducated to look into our minds. Second,we only notice were angry, for example,when the words vomit out of the mouth;or that were depressed when we cant getout of bed one morning. Third, even if we

do look at our feelings, often we cant tellthe difference between the positive andthe negative: theyre mixed together in a

big soup of emotions and a pured soupat.

And one of the biggest obstacles is thatwe dont think we can change them:theyre so concrete, so real: Im born thisway, what can I do about it? We sofiercely identify with the neuroses,

believing that theyre the real me. We even

think theyre physical. And anyway, whowants to look into their mind? Its not myfault, is it? I didnt ask to get born! This is

how we all are! What am Isupposed to doabout it?

Everything conspires against our doingthis job.

NEGATIVITY IS NOT INNATE

To give ourselves the confidence to evenstart, we need to think about how thenegative states of mind are not at the coreof our being, they do not define us, theyare not innate, and thus can be removed.This flies in the face of our deeply heldassumption one thats reinforced by allcontemporary models of the mind thatthe positive and negative have equalstatus; that theyre natural; they just arewho we are. If you ask your therapist formethods to get rid of all anger, jealousy,attachment and the rest, theyll thinkyoure insane!

We can be forgiven for thinking thenegative, neurotic, unhappy emotions areat the core of our being: they certainly feellike it! We identify totally with them,follow them perfectly, truly believing thisis who I really am. This is the irony of ego.

NEGATIVE STATES OF MIND AREDISTURBING AND DELUSIONAL

So, if the negative, neurotic emotions arethe source of our pain and the positiveones the cause of our happines, then wed

better learn to distinguish them. This is thevery essence of the job our being our owntherapist.

What are negative states of mind? Theyhave two main characteristics (which thepositive ones necessarily lack) and these

are indicated by two commonly usedsynonyms: disturbing emotions anddelusions.

Disturbing Even though we can seethat anger is disturbing to oneself justlook at an angry person: theyre out oftheir mind! we fiercely live in denial ofit; or we deflect it, so determined are we to

believe that the external catalyst is themain problem. My friends on death row in

Kentucky told me that they receive visitsfrom an old Catholic man who, after thirtyyears of grief and rage after his daughterwas murdered, finally realized that the


28/34

28!

main reason for his suffering wasnt hisdaughters murder but his rage, his anger.

Delusional The other characteristic thatthese unhappy states of mind possess isthat theyre delusional. Wed be offendedif someone accused of that, but thats

exactly what Buddha is saying. The extentto which our minds are caught up inattachment, anger and the rest is theextent to which we are not in touch withreality. Hes saying that were alldelusional, its just a question of degree.

In other words, anger, attachment andthe rest are concepts, wrong concepts. Itseems like a joke to say that thesepowerful emotions are based in thoughts,

but thats because we only notice themwhen they roar up to the surface asemotion.

Perhaps we can see the disturbingaspect of them, but rarely the delusional.

They are distorted assessments of theperson or the event that we are attached toor angry with; theyre elaborations,exaggerated stories, lies, misconceptions,fantasies, conceptual constructions,superstitions. As Rinpoche puts it, they

decorate on top of what is already therelayers upon layers of characteristics thatare simply not there. Bad enough that wesee things this way; the worst part is thatwe believe that these stories are true. Thisis what keeps us locked inside our ownpersonal insane asylum.

Understanding this is the key tounderstanding our negative states of mindand, therefore, how to get rid of them.

EGO-GRASPING: THE ROOT OF THEPROBLEM

At the root of this, as Buddha calls it, isignorance: marigpa in Tibetan:unawareness: a fundamental unawarenessof how we actually exist. The function ofthis ego-grasping, as its appropriatelycalled, is to isolate and concretize thisuniverse-big sense of self, a deluded senseof I, a totally fabricated sense of I, whose

nature is fear: paranoid, dark, cut off,separate, alienated, and overwshelming.This instinctive, pervasive sense of an

independent, self-existent, real, solid,

definite me-ness, totally pervadeseverything there is not an instant when itis not there. Its at the deepest level ofassumption, beneath everything. It isalways there, informing everything wethink and feel and say and do and

experience and the root even of existingin samsara in the first place.

THE MAIN VOICE OF THE I IS

ATTACHMENT

Ego-grasping is the root but the delusionthat runs our lives is attachment. Theirony of ego is we actually feel empty,

bereft, and that neediness, that bottomlesspit of yearning, that hunger: thatsattachment. And its the main voice of ego.From eons of practice we come into thislife with a profound sense ofdissatisfaction, neediness; a primordialsense that something is missing, of being

bereft, lonely, cut off. Its just there, all thetime, in the bones of our being.

This attachment, this desire, being amisconception, makes the mistake of

believing, a million percent, that thatdelicious person, that gorgeous taste, that

lovely smell, that nice feeling, that idea that when I get that, when I have it insideme, then Ill feel full, then Ill be content.That is what desire thinks.

This is so hard to see how desire isdeluded. And it is not meant to be amoralistic issue. As soon as we hear thesewords we feel a bit resentful, What doyou mean Im not allowed to havepleasure? Thats how we feel. But asLama Yeshe has pointed out: were either

completely hedonistic, and grasping andshoving everything in, or werecompletely puritanical. And the irony isthat they are both coming from amisunderstanding of desire; they bothcome from ego-grasping.

Buddha is not being moralistic. He isnot saying we should not have pleasure the reality is he is saying we should havemasses of pleasure, joy, happiness, but

naturally and appropriately, and,incredibly, without relying upon anythingexternal. This is our natural state when


29/34

29!

weve depolluted our minds of theneruoses, in fact.

Right now, because of themisconception that desire has, and

because of the ignorance that drives it, wehave got the wrong end of the stick. They

think that the delicious chocolate cake,that gorgeous thing is out there, vibratingdeliciousness, demanding that I eat it nothing coming from my side at all. AsLama Zopa Rinpoche points out, we dontthink out mind plays any role at all. Wethink that its all happening from thecakes side, all the energy is coming fromthe cake.

OUR MIND MAKES IT UP

And the thing is that we dont see thisprocess! The fact is we are making up thecake attachment has written a huge storyabout cake and what it will do for us. It isa complex conceptual construction, aninvention, an elaborate view, aninterpretation, an opinion.

Were like a child, as one lama said,who draws a lion and then becomesafraid of it. We invent everything in our

reality, and then we have all the fears andthe paranoia and the depression and thegrasping. Were too much!

But we make up that cake, we make upthe enemy we made them up ourselves.This sounds pretty cosmic, but it isliterally true. This doesnt mean there is nocake there there is. And it doesnt meanthat Fred didnt punch you he did. Weneed to distinguish between the facts andthe fiction: thats the tricky part.

It is hard to see this, but this is the waydelusions function. And basically they areliars. What attachment and ignorance areseeing is simply not true. What theyreseeing simply does not exist.

There is a cake there, but what we thinkis cake and what cake actually is arehugely different. This is interesting. And

because this is hard to understandindicates how ancient it is within us.

What were seeing or experiencing,what we are grasping at delicious cakefrom its own side that will make mehappy is a total lie. It doesnt exist like

that at all. There is a cake there, it isbrown, it is square: thats valid. And this iswhats hard to distinguish the facts andthe fiction. What is actually there andwhat is not there. That is the job we needto do in knowing the way delusions work

and therefore how to get rid of them and,finally, to see emptiness.

ATTACHMENT IS THE VOICE OF THE

VICTIM

Another characteristic of attachment isthat it is the voice of the victim. We trulyfeel we have no control cake is thisincredible powerful thing, and I just haveto have it. What choice do I have? That isattachment talking. Attachment gives allthe power to the outside object. Which iswhy we feel like a baby. Thats the victimmentality. And victim mentality, the oneof hopelessness, the one of no control,thats the voice of attachment. Literally.Thats exactly how attachment functions.Attachment is giving all the power to thatobject. It sees this truly delicious divinething, which in reality our mind has madeup, and then we believe it and then blame

it.

ATTACHMENT IS NOT A FUNCTION

OF THE SENSES

We make the body the boss, as LamaYeshe would tell us. We totally followwhat the senses feel. We assume thedelicious cake is an object of the senses of course, it is; but what we think we seeisnt whats there. What appears to thesense of sight, for example, is not a

delicious cake but simply the shape andcolour of the thing. Delicious cake is astory made up by the mentalconsciousness, specifically attachment.This is a crucial point.

Lets analyze. What is beingexperienced in relation to that cake? Whatare the states of mind? One of them is thesenses indeed we smell it in the kitchen,so theres our nose sense. Then theres the

touch, the sight, we see the shape andcolor when it comes to the table; then wetouch it, the hand feels it, then theres thetaste consciousness, the one were wanting


30/34

30!

the most. So four of the five senses areinvolved in the experience of that cake.

The senses are like dumb animals. Ourtongue doesnt experience the hunger forthe cake, it doesnt leap out of our face andgrab the cake desperately; even our hand

doesnt, although it looks like it. The handgoes out to the cake, but not from its ownside. So what does? Its propelled by theneurotic need to get the cake in the mouth.The mental consciousness, in other words.The thought. It is the story about what ischocolate cake, and I need chocolate cake,all the stuff about chocolate cake that ischattering away in the mind. That iswhere the delusions exist. Attachment isnot a function of the taste. It is simply notpossible. How can it be? Our tonguedoesnt feel neurotic. Our tongue doesntfeel grasping, our tongue doesnt feel, Iwant to have more cake, and our tonguedoesnt stop functioning when we give upattachment. It is just a doorway throughwhich this bunch of thoughts, theseconcepts, this ego-grasping grasps at theexperience, isnt it? That is all. So thesenses do not experience attachment. It is

a logical fact.

WE ARE ALL JUNKIES

So of course for eons we have had themistaken assumption that satisfying thesenses is the way to get happiness. Soright now, we are totally dependent onsensory objects. We are all junkies, its justa question of degree. We cant imaginehaving pleasure unless we get that fix.That fix is any one of the objects of the five

senses. Which makes it sound quite brutal.But unless we can start to look into this

and cut through this whole way ofworking, we will never break free ofsuffering, well never becomes content,satisfied, fulfilled. Ever. Which is why, the

basis of practice, the foundation of allrealizations, is morality. Discipline. Itmeans literally practicing control over thesenses. And it is not a moralistic issue; Its

a practical one. The aim is to get as happyas possible. This is the aim.This happiness, this pleasure, is not

deluded. If pleasure were deluded, we

might as well give up now. Pleasure,happiness, joy are totally appropriate.

So wheres the problem? Why do wesuffer? Why are we frantic and anxiousand desperate, fantasing about the cake

before its even there, then shoving two

pieces in when it comes, and then beingdepressed when we eat too much? Why allthis rubbish? Because we have thesedelusions. Suffering doesnt come frompleasure, it doesnt come from the senses.It comes from neuroses in the mentalconsciousness. But right now its virtuallyimpossible for us to have pleasure withoutattachment.

ATTACHMENT TO A PERSON

Its the same with people. Lets look at theperson we are attached to, the person weare in lov

how to see the absence of the i and everything else

Documents