Archive Result

aWheel of Sharp Weapons

Part 2

[Note: I am skipping over discussion of whether or not to include Heart Sutra with morning prayers]

This title in English doesn’t say what it says in Tibetan. The title should be “The Great Mahayana Training of the Mind Known as the Wheel of Sharp Weapons.” That is exactly what it says. In Tibetan the author is simply given as Dharmarakshita. In English you have “Attributed to Dharmarakshita.” The word attributed has meaning. In Tibetan you don’t have “attributed” or “noted.” It just says Dharmarakshita. [Reads Tibetan]

The real title comes here: “Striking at the Vital Points of the Enemy.” We talked about the enemy last night; it’s not an external but an internal enemy, the enemy we protect and cherish and bring up. We spend day and night protecting and promoting this enemy, in order to destroy ourselves and have the worst consequences we could ever have. This is the enemy we don’t know as an enemy. We know this enemy as self-cherishing and ego; these are the two most important enemies. And that also boils down to the ego itself. Self-cherishing is linked to the ego very closely. Ego will refuse to give up cherishing ego. Ego will choose me over others—not only over all human beings but all living beings, and that is the real truth of how the ego functions within us. If that is not your enemy, who else is? The consequences of cherishing the ego bring us continued suffering. That’s why, as Milarepa said:

The enemy within us is our negative emotions.

No matter how long it has been,

no matter how much I have been deserving for this,

I have suffered the consequences

and been tortured continuously for no good reason.

By the way, I received this teaching originally from Kyabje Lobsang Rimpoche when I was very young, probably nine or ten. When the late Ribur Rimpoche was here he reminded me that I received this teaching from Kyabje Lobsang Rimpoche because I was there and he remembered that. Kyabje Lobsang Rimpoche was so great and fantastic; one of the greatest masters. He remained after 1959 in Tibet, and during the cultural revolution he remained in Tibet. These are the stories I heard from Ribur Rimpoche. After the Tibetan uprising in 1959 when the Chinese Communists took over, they wanted to introduce study and education. Education, to them, meant Communist education. The word “education,” in Tibetan, is Lobjong. Lobjong means “study.” It starts with “Lob.” Lojong begins with Lo, not Lob. So Kyabje Lobsang Rimpoche was the most senior lama, by age and respect, and many people listened to him, even though Gandenji Rimpoche was still there. But Kyabje Lobsang Rimpoche was senior and respected there. So the Chinese made everybody speak a little bit, and they emphasized Lobjong. Kyabje Lobsang Rimpoche half pretended not to hear—he was really old—he said, “Yes, you have to do a lot of Lojong. Lojong is really good. You have a lot of incarnate lamas here, and you have a responsibility. When I was young I studied a lot of lojongs, including Wheel of Sharp Weapons, and including Pico overpowers poison, and Seven Point Mind Training, and Eight Verses of _____.” Kyabje Lobsang Rimpoche kept on counting almost 100 lojongs. He kept on listing them one after another. I asked Ribur Rimpoche what the Chinese leaders did. He said they sat with their heads down like this. I asked, “What did the Chinese leaders do?” He said, the Chinese leaders didn’t say anything, but sat with long faces, all the time.

So now to the Wheel of Sharp Weapons: Ribur Rimpoche told me that, I said, yes, I had this teaching the first time from His Holiness. He said, no, you had it from Kyabje Lobsang Rimpoche, and I remembered that it was actually in my own house. The second time I received it was just two years ago in New York. The lineage is according to their lineage list. Kyabje Lobsang Rimpoche probably received it from—I don’t remember who he received it from. His Holiness received it from Kyabje Trijang Rimpoche who received it from Pabongka, so the lineage goes according to the teaching lineage list of Kyabje Trijang Rimpoche. Probably Kyabje Trijang Rimpoche’s lineage list normally refers to Pabongka’s. So that is the background of the continuation of the lineage.

Now, the verse here uses the words: “Vital point.” The usual teachings will tell you that the spiritual practitioner has to try to be as expert as possible to strike the enemy within ourselves. It is important so we can develop ourselves quickly as well as easily. Our struggles may not be so difficult. Traditional teachings will tell you that the people who cut wood know at what point to cut the wood. For them it is much easier to cut wood than a lay person like me. People who know have some kind of system; they know where the water flows through, and they chop the wood there. Normally, traditional teachings will tell you not only about old wood, but will talk about the banana tree. The banana tree has a vital point where moisture comes in a little hole. If you hit that hole, the banana tree falls immediately. Just like butchers know how to butcher an animal without torturing too much, without suffering, just like that, we spiritual practitioners need to destroy the enemy within us, so we need to know the vital point of the enemy’s life strength. Then you can strike at that. So this wheel of sharp weapons will lead you to that vital point. That is why the text says “vital point.” It is not just one striking weapon but a wheel of weapons—one after another, they hit on the vital point itself.

[Reads in Tibetan verse ending “…chak tsel lo.”]

The homage being paid here is to the wrathful Yamantaka. I don’t know about the homage to the three jewels, where that comes from. To mark this Buddhist paper, Damarakshita makes homage to the three jewels. As you already know about the three jewels, I may talk just a little bit about it. What makes one a Buddhist, and one not a Buddhist? Where is the divide? If you look in traditional Buddhist teachings, Buddhist and non-Buddhists say very similar things. But what makes an individual Buddhist? There are a lot of points. If I remember correctly, in this very room two years ago, when the Tibetan Buddhist centers had a meeting, one of the remarks His Holiness made was: What makes you Buddhist or non-Buddhist? There are three different viewpoints. One says one who has accepted the four white seals or the four Buddhist logos is considered a Buddhist. Normally we say that when you take refuge in Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, you are a Buddhist. Theoretically speaking, one who accepts Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha as the perfect object of the refuge becomes a Buddhist. According to the Panchen Sonam Drakpa, the founder of two ___ of Loseling and Ganden Shatse(?): Panchen Sonam Drakpa says a Buddhist is one who accepts Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha as the ultimate, pure, perfect object of refuge. I think Panchen Sonam Drakpa goes on to say that Buddha doesn’t take refuge to Buddha himself. Therefore, unless you are prepared to say that the Buddha is not a Buddhist, then you cannot say one who takes refuge to Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha is a Buddhist. But this is a word game: you can’t say Buddha takes refuge to Buddha; it sounds funny. The Buddha might have taken refuge to Buddha before he became a Buddha. You can’t say the Buddha is not a Buddhist. So technically, one who takes Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha as the ultimate object of refuge is a Buddhist.

In order to accept Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha as the ultimate object of refuge, we need to know what is Buddha, what is Dharma, and what is Sangha. Yes, there is the historical Buddha. Scholars may tell you these are non-objective or biased people, but as Buddhists, we need to know what is the historical Buddha and the Buddha. The historical Buddha is a Buddha, but not all Buddhas are the historical Buddha. Historical Buddha, according to “Buddhism,” is not necessarily Mahayana. What happens these days is that there are some radical scholars who say Buddhism is Pali, not Sanskrit. There are Pali teachers, too, and Pali scholars, and even if you go to Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia and Thailand, even a number of them will not accept Mahayana Buddhism as true Buddhism. One time when his Holiness visited Thailand, His Holiness always wanted to function as a monk, so he wanted to eat with monks, and he was the guest of the senior-most monk in Thailand. They started serving the Dalai Lama and his retinues first. “You are the guest, you have to eat first,” they insisted, no matter how much his Holiness protested, they insisted. The real reason, I was told later, is that they don’t accept the Dalai Lama as a true monk. The true monk must be a Thai or Sri Lankan or Pali-based monk, in their opinion.

But that’s not the point. The point raised here is that we are practitioners. We are here to seek benefits. We need help wherever we can get it. We don’t care whether the Thai monks are real monks and Tibetan monks are fake monks, or vice versa. The point is that we need to be open minded. That’s what it is. Sometimes people will say Buddhism must be limited to only all three baskets, the Tripitaka. That’s absolutely a radical, ridiculous view. Honestly, for a thousand years now Buddhism has been going around everywhere—from India to China, to Tibet; it’s not that the Tibetan Buddhism went to China or Chinese Buddhism went to Tibet. Buddhism went from India to China and Tibet separately. Buddhism went from Tibet to China too. Chinese government calls this “Buddhism that came through via Tibet.” There is a huge amount of that in China.

The real true Buddhism was gone out of India during the ruling period of the Mongols. Then India invited Sri Lankan monks to re-establish Buddhism in India. Very lately, when India became independent in 1947, India restored all the traditions that came to India, and Buddhism happened to be one of them. Dr. Ambikara started the “New Buddhists,” and the great development in India has taken place after Buddhism came out of Tibet. This is a well documented historical fact. The important point here is the Buddha. The term “Buddha” is not simply limited to the historical Buddha. If that was the case, we would be doomed, because there would be no point. The material world would be absolutely right in that case. In fact, there are many, many Buddhas. So when we say “I take refuge in Buddha,” the historical Buddha is represented, but ultimately we are connecting to our own future Buddha. We will be able to nurture our own Buddha. When we take refuge to Buddha, there is causal refuge, and result refuge. Causal refuge is by taking refuge to the historical Buddha, our own future Buddha will mature.

Vasubandhu has described two types of Dharma: information and spiritual development. Spiritual development is ultimate Dharma. Information is the relative Dharma.

Four Buddhist monks are considered Sangha. It may not be politically correct, but that is the Buddhist male chauvinist tradition. Change is definitely needed; I am all for it. But we cannot change it without a Buddhist council. That is the representation. But in reality, those of us who have taken refuge to Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha and are following the positive and negative advices contained in the refuge are the relative Sangha. Your status as a sangha member is not based on your annual pledges at all. As a sangha member you need to be a role model; you need to be fit so that people will bow down and pay homage to you. Wherever you go in society, you need to be an example. Each and every one of you is so precious for others. You are the only ambassadors Buddha has in society. Take one or two steps a day in that direction, so that, when an incident occurs, you will be a Dharma person. Maintain mindfulness at all times because you are bringing 2600 years of wisdom to mankind.

Then the text reads, “Homage to the wrathful Yamantaka.” The English translation uses the word “wrathful.” But a word-by-word translation is “the great fearless Yamantaka.” Yamantaka is a yidam: a mental commitment to a fully enlightened Buddha. Translation is so difficult; you have to be very careful with it. Yamantaka refers to a particular yidam. The word yidam contains yi (mind) and dam (commitment). It is a mentally produced, mentally existing point that we hold as our own commitment. All yidams are born out of emptiness. There was not a real person called Mr. Yamantaka born in 600 A.D. in southern India. That’s not the point. It is a mental commitment; your mind produces it. Yamantaka is one of the most wrathful deities: one who destroys the Lord of Death. There are physical forms of Yamantaka: red Yamantaka, black Yamantaka, 13-deity Yamantaka, Solitary Hero Yamantaka. But when you are saying “homage to Yamantaka,” this is red Yamantaka, according to His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

The text says: “Great fearless one, who are you threatening? Not a person, not a living being, but self-cherishing and ego.” Why is Yamantaka so angry? Because he is angry at ego and self-cherishing. Why does he have so many weapons in his hands, but no guns or bombs? All the weapons are meant to strike on the vital point of ego and self-cherishing. That’s why Lama Dharmarakshita pays homage to Yamantaka. The peaceful Yamantaka is Manjushri, the wisdom of all Buddhas. Why Manjushri? Because of absolute Bodhimind.

Verse 1

When peacocks roam through the jungle of virulent poison,

Though the gardens of medicinal plants may be attractive,

The peacock flocks will not take delight in them;

For peacocks thrive on the essence of virulent poison.

Verse 2

Likewise, when heroes enter the jungle of cyclic existence,

Though the gardens of happiness and prosperity may seem beautiful,

The heroes will not become attached to them;

For heroes thrive in the forest of suffering.

This is a funny traditional Indian as well as Tibetan saying, but I’m not sure whether the saying really works in the West. Probably it doesn’t. We used to say that peacocks prepare to eat poison trees rather than medicinal plants and fruits because peacock feathers become brighter by eating poison. Just like that, when we say “heroes,” we are referring to a person, either male or female. Why do we call them heroes? They have been able to defeat self-cherishing and ego. They almost completely ignore selfish interests, and all activities of those great Bodhisattvas are totally dedicated for the benefit of a-l-l all living beings. When you look in Vajrayana or Mahayana Bodhisattva vows, you talk about males and females. But at the Sutrayana level, there is a difference between monks and nuns. In Khedrup Je’s praise of Tsongkhapa he says, “One little breath you breathe is for the benefit of all living beings.” That’s what we mean. We breathe in and breathe out, and every breath should be for the benefit of all living beings. That is the Bodhisattva’s way of living. When you reach that level, then you become a hero.

Comments on Verse 2:

The next verse says, these heroes go into the forest. That is samsara. Why is samsara called a forest? In the forest you have nice, wonderful trees and green as well as poison ivy, and all of those types are available in the forest. The forest has wonderful things, as well as the poison of attachment, hatred, anger, and ignorance. There is so much though that you cannot even see the sky—samsara is covered with all kinds of growing things. Hatred and anger grow together, attachment and obsession grow together, and ignorance and ego are growing together so strongly that you cannot see the sky of freedom. Yet, these heroes would like to be in that samsara because they can destroy one by one with each and every individual, for their purposes. That’s why it’s important here.

In samsara, you do have samsaric picnic spots. I’m not sure whether the great bodhisattvas really enjoy them. Most probably they do not enjoy the picnic spots of samsara. Yet, they will be happy to deal with the most difficult things. One time Jack Kornfield asked me, “How come those Tibetan lamas always like borderline personalities more than anybody else?” I never knew the answer. Today, I thought about that. When these particular words come, that’s probably what it means.

The saying that the peacock gets its colors from poison may be from the Sanskrit tradition. I don’t think people in the West say that. Anyway, the real message is that the great Bodhisattvas always like to come back in Samsara in many different forms—in the form of some very well respected and well behaved master, great monk, great nun, in that form, or also, sometimes as an absolutely crazy yuppie. Even the Bodhisattvas are reported to come back as military generals, and, as a matter of fact, if you read Sebo (?) Rimpoche’s Quick Return(?) written by the Dalai Lama, he puts in the verse, “You may come back as a military general some day.” Or even as a bird: there is a story of a blue necked bird. This is the great bodhisattva’s way of coming back to samsara. Quite honestly it is not what we expect. It can happen in some crazy, naughty way. I’m not trying to give you an excuse as to why some incarnate lama is behaving in a crazy way. But the reality is that it happens. The reason these Bodhisattvas are living more in samsara than nirvana is compassion, love, and caring. That’s why love and compassion are so important. Remember the unguli mala story—the guy who has killed 999 people by severing their heads, and walks around with their thumbs on a mala because of a non-virtuous master who told him, “If you can kill 1000 human beings in a week and come back to me with their thumbs, I will liberate you.” So the guy killed 999 human beings. Everybody ran away, except his own mother. He hesitated about killing his own mother. If he is forced to, he will; his mother can’t give up on him, so from a distance she watched, and he saw her, and she ran away. This is a mother’s love to her children. The mother has fear and a threat of her own life, but still she cannot give up her own son who just killed almost 1000 human beings and is wearing their bloody thumbs around his neck. Just in that way, for the hero Bodhisattvas, love for all human beings makes them choose samsaric suffering places more than picnic spots. That’s why they’re called heroes.

As a matter of fact, those great heroes may see those picnic spots as suffering. The peacock did not fall in love with the medicine of the beautiful garden. Just in the same way, you will not develop obsession and attachment to samsaric picnic spots. If you do so, you will get tremendous problems. Your Bodhisattva vow cannot be broken by pain and suffering, but it can be broken by attachment. Attachment is one of those emotions that may, in very special cases, assist an individual to become liberated. But in general, attachment is also capable of breaking your Bodhisattva vows. That’s why hero Bodhisattvas will always come back in a place of suffering. One can take tremendous advantage of suffering. Number one, the understanding of suffering is of tremendous benefit. Number two, suffering itself has one good quality—only one good quality. Kyabje Ling Rimpoche always said that the good quality of suffering is you can always get rid of it. Even Buddha gives the teaching of the Four Noble Truths. First principle is suffering. The purpose of giving the truth of suffering is to understand it and, thereby, get rid of it. The purpose of the first noble truth is to recognize; the purpose of the second Noble Truth is to get rid of it. Number two is that in certain cases our mind is very harsh. There are certain spots where the heart can become gentle or fragile. There are two points: the point of joy and happiness, and the point of suffering. When the individual is having a tremendous amount of suffering, it opens up the mind. For some people, it makes more heartaches.

I have an interesting story to tell you here. There was a woman by the name of Lady Lalo. She was a very devoted person and a wonderful woman. I think her husband died; he was a cabinet minister. Then she had a lover. The lover was the person who tried to establish democracy in Tibet earlier. He was somehow arrested, and they took out his eyeballs. She got so mad and so hardened. Until now I’ve been doing prayers and making offerings to all four Tibetan traditions, to all different monasteries. I’m now fed up. She went to a temple in her house at night. She did her morning business right on the offering table. She locked the door and said, “From now on, this is locked, I’m so fed up with everything.” She became very disheartened and didn’t open the door for a long time. Later, in her old age, she met Pabongka, who was able to open her up, and she was able to practice again. In my memory, she was the first woman who sponsored the Dalai Lama to give the first Kalachakra initiation in Tibet. She was making a mandala offering, and all of her jewels fell down everywhere. Sometimes, hardship hardens the mind, but other times, the mind can be softened.