Archive Result

19860405GRJHNLSAS 4

But suppose a king and a queen had a son and they lost him, he had gone somewhere else. Then he is in reality a true prince, but nobody will call him prince, so he will not be acknowledged as a prince. Even though there is a true object, there is no true labeling. So the labeling, the mind that labels and the object that is labeled have to be correct. It should not have a contradiction from a true mind. If there is contradiction, it will go like ‘pffff’.

Everything is dependent on the existence of the combination of body and mind, and labeling. Now take me, Gelek. How does Gelek exist? Gelek simply exists by just the combination of Gelek’s body and Gelek’s mind and on top of that somebody calling him Gelek. So by combining the label, and just the combination of body and mind of Gelek, Gelek exists. If you go and search beyond that: ‘Where is Gelek? Which part is it, is it the head, the legs the ear, the nose?’ If you go and search, you will never, never, never find him, because he is not there. He only exists just on the combination of body, mind and labeling together; beyond that you cannot find him.

When you take my head off, when you take my legs off, when you take my arms off, when you tear me into two or three parts and then look at it and say: ‘Where is Gelek?’ there is no Gelek. That doesn’t mean you have understood the emptiness of Gelek. You simply found that Gelek does not exit from his true nature.

If Gelek would exist from his true nature without depending on the combination of the body, the mind, and the name, then when you would take the name apart, the body apart, the mind apart, you still should be able to point out: ‘Here is Gelek, this is the body – let it go, this is the mind – let it go, this is the name – let it go, here is the person!’ But you never, never can point it out. That is the sign the person does not exist from his own true nature.

Yet I do exist, I am talking. So, how am I existing? Simply just by the combination of my body and my mind together and on top of that you label me Gelek. So Gelek is here, functioning on the relative level. When you look for Gelek, from my side I exist, I produce the body, I produce the mind and here is the combination of it. From your part you label it: ‘Here he is’. First your mind label him, and then you perceive him. So Gelek perfectly exists, perfectly functions. Beyond that you can’t find him. You get me?

Audience: If I don’t label you, you are still there?

Rinpoche: No. If nobody labels me Gelek, how can Gelek be there?

Say, you have built a new house. You divide the house into four different rooms. From the point of the house just simply rooms exist. Then you will label them: ‘This the bedroom, this the living-room, this the kitchen’ etc. After you labeled them, you will acknowledge this as bedroom, this as living-room, this as the kitchen. The kitchen exists, the bedroom exists and the living-room exists, whether there is furniture or no furniture in it. Before the owner labeled them, there were some rooms of which you didn’t know what is what. Did the bedroom exist? You say: ‘It should be existing, but I don’t know.’ The sitting-room also should be existing but you didn’t know. Or the sitting-room and the bedroom may not exist at all. The owner could have made everything storeroom, who knows. So the bedroom and the sitting-room are existing just because there are walls and a roof and somebody labeling them that way.. Just on the walls and the roof and somebody labeling it as sitting-room, it becomes a sitting-room. And it functions as a sitting-room, it is a perfect good sitting-room. You get it?

The object to be refuted

When you look at yourself and you just say ‘I’, that I is the bases of all functioning and is called the relative I. That is the I which has come from a previous life, which is staying here and which will go to a future life. But when you go beyond that and try to find more, and you find some true existing I, something more powerful than just that normal ordinary I, a powerful, solid something, it is the I which is to be refuted. We call it the object to be refuted.

I give you an example. Say it is slightly dark, not very clear. There is a multi-colored rope laying on the path. You see it from a distance and you say: ‘Oh, there is a snake.’ Now, when you said: ‘There is a snake’ you have labeled the rope as a snake. The second mind will acknowledge a snake: ‘Ah, there is a snake, be careful!’ The third mind is that you get scared: ‘Really, there is a snake. It may bite!’ Now what has happened? Three levels: first there is just the labeling mind, second there is the mind which projects it as a snake, third there is the mind which perceives it as a snake. The fourth mind comes when you are really scared; it will further acknowledge it as a snake and make that thought solid and strong.

Another example. Suppose you are standing here in public and I will call your name: ‘Hey So and so’. ‘Ah, somebody is calling me’. You acknowledge it. So, you say: ‘What is it?’ ‘Hey, you thief!’ ‘Me, a thief?!’ Immediately your voice goes up: ‘How dare you to call me a thief?!’ Right? There you perceived that I which is strong and solid, functioning from its own nature. When it goes stronger and stronger, deeper and deeper, it says: ‘When you call me a thief... wow...brrrr!’ Something like that. There is something solid inside you and you also project something solid. That solid something also you perceive.

The object I or self which is to be refuted, is not the ordinary self, but is that strong sort of independent-on-anything I, that I which is a dictator from behind. Not the mind, but the mind that perceives that, is what has to be refuted. When you look deeper and deeper and deeper into yourself, how can that I be possibly there?

This requires deeper and deeper thinking. And after some time you will find a mind, that says: ‘Hey, is I not there?’ It is like you lost something, something huge and you feel totally empty, gone. Deep down you feel: ‘I am totally gone.’ You get it? That very moment is your beginning of finding the self-lessness. That self which one is -less of, is actually not a self itself, but a mind which is perceiving the self in such a manner. The object of the mind which perceives the self in such a way, that is what is to be refuted.

I forgot to tell you a very important thing; I jumped off it. When you are called, you not just simply acknowledge the name, but there is more. There is something solid which is the base of the person who enjoys, or who suffers. Really a solid something you project. What you projected you will perceive by your mind. The mind which perceives that projection is sometimes called the ‘simultaneously born fearful view’. It is called fearful because from that view you are starting every trouble. It is simultaneously born, because it doesn’t need any preparation, it just pops up of its own.

How fearful it is doesn’t depend on the I itself, but on the perceiving. So the actual self that one has to be -less of is the self of the perceived projection. When you lose that projection, then you’re beginning to see the true mind.

Absolute and relative existence

Refuting the projected I will not refute the I as the basis of all functioning. Because I do function. I function on the relative level. In absolute reality I do not exist. If I would exist in absolute sense I would have been existing without depending on anything else. But I don’t. Therefore I do exist only on the relative level and I do not exist on the absolute level.

If I exist on the relative level, it is good enough to be able to exist.

If I function on the relative level, it is good enough to be able to function.

If I do not exist in absolute sense, it is not good enough not to exist.

If I exist relatively, it is good enough to exist. That is the main point. I am sure you are familiar with that. If a person is existing relatively, that is good enough to be existing. If a person functions relatively, that is good enough to be able to function. For example, look into the mirror. You do not exist in the mirror, however you can remove your make-up by looking in the mirror, so it is good enough, it works, it serves the purpose. Similarly existing relatively is good enough to be able to exist. Because relatively you have to find cause and effects, you have to find the person functioning. But in absolute sense the person does not exist at all, so that is not good enough. You get it? No? Alright. If you exist relatively, it is enough. If you do not exist absolutely, it doesn’t matter; you still exist. You don’t have to exist absolutely, relatively you can function. Like in the mirror; you do not exist in the mirror but you can function.

This way you can see how people can function on two truth-levels: the truth of the absolute level and the truth of the relative level. That is why Buddha has introduced not only the four noble truths, but also the two truths: the absolute truth and the relative truth. On the relative truth-level you function, you cause your karma to give results, you function – fine, perfect, wonderful; in absolute sense you do not exist. If we would exist truly absolutely, then cause and effect could not function, because I would not be able to change at all. If something is absolutely solidly existing, how can you change? You cannot. So things become changeable only because you do not exist in absolute sense. When changeable, karma can function. You can create different causes, so you can have different results.

So the emptiness functions as a base for karma, as a base for every dependent arising. Yet, that dependent arising, that functioning of karma, when you look for it in absolute sense, you cannot find it, it is zero.

Conclusive remarks

This is the rough idea of selflessness. The more and more you read about it, the you hear it, the more you think about it, the more you will begin to connect with it and you pick it up more and better. Really. This is an important point. I don’t think that by talking alone this can be clear and understanding can be produced. If it does, it means something is wrong. It can’t be. It has to be gained. Gradually you get into it deeper and deeper. That is why some people chose to call it : ‘Even if you want to say it, you cannot say it....’ Meditation on emptiness is absolutely incredibly difficult. Because the object of the meditation is the emptiness itself. So first and foremost you have to meditate on dependent arising, how dependent arising functions. And there are also different viewpoints of dependent arising. There is karmic dependence, there are a lot of other divisions dependent arising.

For the emptiness you have to think of depending on the mind which projects and the base on which you project, the combination of those. And you’ll realize that when you depend on something, you do not exist by your true nature. If you would exist by your true nature, there would be no reason for depending on other factors, like I explained in the examples of the president and the snake.

That way you can think more and more, as long as you are able to function, as long as you don’t knock down the karmic system, the refuge, and whole relative part. That cannot be knocked down; it has to be functioning. All functioning has to be carried out on the relative truth. The absolute truth has to be carried out on the zero; that is shunyata. Shunyata is zero, the empty figure. In the Tibetan word for shunyata, tong pa nyi... you put a zero. The absolute truth stands on that and the relative truth stands on the karmic functioning and everything.

Yet, if you see these as two separate paths, two separate views, again you have not understood selflessness. These are not to be understood as separate, but you should be able to understand them as a one base, one functioning, together, one helps the other, one brings the other. Dependent arising brings that the absolute does not exist. Because if something would exist from its true nature, there would be no reason the be dependent. Tsongkhapa made it further clear :

On the appearance side, the infallible relativity of dependent arising;

On the emptiness side, an understanding of the lack of true existence:

So long as these appear to the mind as separate,

One still has not achieved the insight of the Masters.

The moment you have the big gap, the separation between the emptiness of the absolute truth and the relative functioning, as long as you have that gap, you have not understood Buddha’s true teaching.

When the two understandings occur as one, without imbalance,

Then simply perceiving the unfailing (conventional reality) of dependent arising

Destroys the misapprehension of the ultimate nature of things.

At that time the sense of the view (of emptiness) is complete.

Tsongkhapa, The Three principles of the Path vs. 10-11

By meditating, after some time, when without putting off the one, you pick up the other one automatically, together. Then while you will see the karmic functioning – the causes and results – you will also see the emptiness point of it. And when you look at the point of emptiness you will also see the relative point of the karmic functioning. If that happens you got the sign you have understood what Buddha means by: ‘Form is empty, emptiness is form!’ That one word is making all this trouble.

That is the wisdom which cuts the ignorance. And the moment this understanding of wisdom grows within the person, you have understood the selflessness, true selflessness. The moment you understand the true selflessness, that perceiving mind [we spoke about] has been totally cut out. The moment that perceiving mind is cut out, the whole of samsara is cut.

That is the time or the point where you are called arya, where you are called a special person, where you are no longer under the force of some karmic forces that push you around. This is the point where you gain control over your life. That means: how long you want to live, where you want to go, where and how you want to be reborn. That is the point where you control everything by yourself without depending on others. That is the selflessness. I hope you understood, I hope it was not too Greek.

Audience: Is the emptiness the same as the absolute?

Rinpoche: Yes emptiness is absolute. Yes, absolute is emptiness, emptiness is absolute.

Selflessness is important, but it takes very long to understand and get through it. But still, Dharmakirti has clearly said :

Even those who still have their doubts will tear existence to tatters.

By just talking and just thinking in that direction alone, the moment you develop doubt on that [independent existence], that by itself alone, not totally destroys, but sort of tears samsara into parts.

Therefore, what you people have to do is, try to gain understanding of the emptiness side simultaneously with the relative functioning, like development of bodhicitta, renunciation etc. So, the relative point and the absolute point, together.

At first don’t even try selflessness at all. First and foremost you have to try to contemplate: ‘How do I function? Who is the I? Where is it? How is it? How does I bring my? How does my bring my friend? How does my friend brings my enemy? How does my friend bring attachment? How does my enemy bring anger? How it functions? And then you go back: ‘Hey, what is the so-called my friend, my enemy? Where is that my? Which or what is that my? And then you begin to look and you say: ‘What is that I? Where is it? Who is it? What is it? How it looks like? On what level it functions? What is that me? This is how you gradually get into it.

If you do so, one day definitely you’ll find that empty, and you’ll find that that very big I has gone somehow. And you feel totally lost, gone. Even the fear of being not there will have developed. That is the sign of the beginning of going in the proper direction of finding the selflessness.

That can be further developed and then you’ll understand the functioning of the relative. And when you further develop the relative functioning you can see the absolute, zero point. And then, you must be able to combine them together on a person, on me. So when that happens, that’s it. That is what you need. It is a very high level, but that is what happens.

I also believe and not only I believe, but it is true and it is said so too, that by meditation alone, or by working alone, by study alone, you can’t develop this at all. Full stop. It also simultaneously the accumulation of the merit, praying, and getting blessings.

Also the understanding needs further developed by: first hearing-understanding, then thinking, then meditating. And when all of them come together, it can click: ‘That’s it!’ It is the chance of clicking that you have to wait for.

That is it. Thank you so much.