Archive Result

;;20120729GRAATB30

00:00

Welcome this morning to Tibetan Buddhism with Gelek Rimpoche. I think I first owe you an apology for last Sunday. We had some technical difficulties, technical or whatever. There were some reasons. Due to that the Sunday talk was unable to be seen, but you will see it later. It was pre-recorded.

We have been talking on the basis of the Four Noble Truths. Within that we are at the Fourth Truth, the Truth of the Path. There is a very official way of explaining the Four Noble Truths and a practical way. We sort of wanted to do the official way in the beginning, but at the path level we thought the practical way will be much more important and useful. For the practical way, in Buddhist terminology, “path” really means what you do. What is the real practice? Commonly known and very practically, there are two things. One is the Theravadan path, traditionally known as Hinayana, which means smaller vehicle. That doesn’t mean it is less important, it is just that the purpose and scope is less than the other one. The way I said it may sound a little funny. Some people may say that the Theravadan path is not the path of compassion, but the path of self-liberation. That is not true. There is a tremendous amount of compassion within the Theravadan tradition, but the major goal of the Theravadan path is to liberate the individual. Actually it is the very basic, necessary foundation of Buddha’s teachings, honestly, for oneself to be liberated.

If you do not care about yourself, who else is going to care? Who is going to solve your problem? No one is going to wash your dirty laundry for you. You have to take care of it. That’s why taking care of yourself is the fundamental principle. That is the first step.

0:05

The Mahayana path, which is what Tibetan Buddhism and Zen practices, sounds like the bigger vehicle and more important. But sometimes we have a very strong pride of being bigger and superior. That is absolutely a mistake. I said that because I have been through that. Tibetans in Tibet, whatever the tradition may be, Sakya, Nyingma, Kagyu, Gelug, are all very proud of being Mahayana. Being proud is fine, but we thought we are superior to others - until we, in this case, the present speaker, came out of Tibet in 1959. We were kicked out of Tibet due to the kindness of the Communist Chinese, with a nice big kick in the butt and thrown out of the Himalayas. When I came to India it was a big eye opener. I recall being at a conference with Buddhist scholars and teachers and us. I was 20, 21 years old at that time. There was an Indian professor from Kasi (that is Varanasi), a Brahmin professor, wearing an absolutely crispy white Indian dress. Now I understand it was starched. It didn’t have any creases anywhere. Absolutely clean crystal white. He knew very well what he was talking about. He said, “You people are mahayana, great, wonderful, very high – higher than Mt. Everest. But in order to know how high Mt. Everest is, I have to know where you start, where is the ground level. When you find that then you can measure how high Mt. Everest is. And the ground is Theravada.”

In a way it is absolutely true. The traditional Tibetan teachings are such, they will say that the first step is to help ourselves. We don’t say that the first important step is within the Theravadan teachings and that you have to learn that. We don’t say that, because the essence of all that is already incorporated into the Mahayana teachings as base. Sometimes we refer to them as prerequisites or preliminaries. Many people will then think that they don’t need the preliminaries, thinking, “I am more educated and intelligent, so I don’t need the preliminaries.” But the point is that it is not a preliminary thing, but the path itself, the first grounding path.

0:10

But not knowing that we thought our path was superior. When this Professor Upadeya, the Kasi Pandit made that statement, it made a big impact on me. I began to realize how important it is that we don’t look down on the Theravadan path. Similarly, the pure, conservative Theravadan community will look at Tibetan Buddhists as not Buddhists, but something else. The Chinese Mahayana too will not consider Tibetan Buddhists as Buddhists. They will think it is a mixture of Confucianist and Taoist elements and explanations given according to whoever is the teacher, monastery and tradition. But they don’t consider that as Buddhist. No one will say it, but deep down that is their understanding. They also look at the Theravadans as just kindergarten level practice and at the Tibetan vajrayana as somehow gone crazy and that the pure Buddhism is the Chinese Mahayana Buddhism. That is how they view it.

But if you really look carefully, they are all built on top of one another. The basic foundation was built on the Theravadan teaching. Mahayana emphasizes that it is not only for you, but for everybody. Mahayana tells you that you are responsible, not only for yourself, but just as you are responsible for yourself, you are also responsible for everybody, including your community, yourself, family, relations and so forth, anyone who comes into contact with you, anyone who shares anything with you. We share the air, the ground, the water.

That reminds me of a funny commercial I saw recently. There is a two-car accident and one guy seems to be an elderly, very conservative guy, with 3 piece suit and tie. The other one is a hippie, wearing a knitted cap. After the accident the conservative one asks the hippie, “Do you have any insurance?” The hippie says, “I have State Farm.” The other guy says, “State Farm? I have that too.” So the hippie says, “Oh, then we are connected.” The other guy says, “No, we are not.” Again, the hippie says, “Yes, we are” – and the other guy, “No, we are not.”

0:15

That’s exactly how it is. We are connected because we share the air, we share the water, the ground. That’s why we are responsible for everyone we are connected with. That’s what Mahayana emphasizes. So it is all building on top of one another. Vajrayana is built on top of that. Not only you have responsibility for yourself, but everybody else and not only that, there is the urgent need to do something now. That’s how they build on top of one another. Truly, to have Buddha’s teaching complete, you have to have all these beautiful layers over layers, so much wonderful. But when you look at each piece, it is also complete in its own right. That’s why you have this traditional Indian Buddhist story:

A bunch of blind guys went to see an elephant. So they took the blind guys and had them feel the elephant. Some felt the ears, some the trunk, some the tail, some the legs. Then each of them described the elephant. One said, “the elephant is flat and huge”, he must have been touching the ears. Another said, “The elephant is round and long”, and so forth. But it is the total description of the individual experience of the elephant. Nothing is wrong with that. But that is not the whole picture of the elephant.

When you look into the Buddhist path that is exactly how I feel. Especially, being in the west for over 25 years you begin to see all this. You are out of your own cocoon and see everything and if you reflect back, that’s how it is.

0:18

So we thought of using that more practical explanation rather than the traditional ways of explaining. So there is the Theravada and the Mahayana path. We went very briefly through the Theravada path, because then in the summer retreat we got to the Mahayana path. There is no other reason to avoid talking more about the Theravada path to go to the Mahayana path. It is connected with the summer retreat and we had a beautiful summer retreat, as many of you have attended and seen. The essence of that summer retreat was the real essence of the Mahayana path. Whether you pull the Mahayana from the Tibetan Buddhist point of view or the Theravada point of view of the Chinese Mahayana point of view or from any point of view, this is the real essence of the Mahayana path.

Now we reflect back. Let me go back a little bit more. What makes you a Buddhist? What I intend to talk about is what makes you a practitioner of the Mahayana. But before I can talk about that it is important to see what makes you a Buddhist. What do you think? I want you to think a little bit. I don’t want to give you all the answers. A – I don’t have all the answers and B – I may have read about it or heard about it from somewhere, because I am old and have a little experience and because I was sort of born into this. I am equivalent to the born again Christians! I am like a born again Buddhist. But really, if you look carefully, what makes you become a Buddhist? I am really tempted to leave it there for a week for you to think about it. But then it defeats all my purposes, if I do that.

There are a number of things, actually. There are a number of things, even though there are also official party line answers. If I look back in my life, by about the age of four or five, I was named and incarnate lama. Suddenly they shaved my head and put tiny monks’ robes on. I have an old picture from when I was four. I found that picture later. I was kicked out of Tibet and then after that, the family behind went through the culture revolution, and everything was destroyed. But a few pieces were collected back and the youngest picture that I found was from when I was about four, wearing a brocade dress and monk’s robes, looking a little like one of those dolls they make nowadays. So I was called incarnate lama and this and that.

0:24

I do recollect that I did have some pride of being an incarnate lama. Well, I won’t go into detail today, there is no point. But I also had the pride of being the Panchen Lama, the second highest lama in Tibet, next to the Dalai Lama. That’s because the Panchen Rinpoche who passed away in China, was almost the same age as me, perhaps a couple of months’ difference. So I was one of the strong candidates. So I do remember of having that pride. Whether I had pride or not, if I try to see now whether I was a Buddhist at that time, the answer is really no. I didn’t know head or tail of Buddhism. Yes, I got the dress, yes, my head was shaved, yes, I was called “Rinpoche” – all of that, but nothing, nothing. Not only that, there were some very senior old monks who were not even Buddhists. You will be wondering what this is.

There was a great teacher who went and visited a big monastery. He went around and looked around with folded hands in the monks’ gathering, looked up and down and thought for a while. Later he gave a teaching there and then he said, “When I looked around I saw a lot of older, senior, respectable-looking monks who were looking down at the people.” That means when you become very senior you sit on the stage. The junior ones look up, the senior ones look down. So he said, “I saw a lot of senior monks looking down, however, their refuge to Buddha, Dharma and Sangha was left behind the door.” That means they didn’t have a refuge. They didn’t even have refuge within them. But they were dressed and had been living there for their whole life, but were not Buddhists. That is what he was telling them. He didn’t say it directly, but did it by hinting. He didn’t say, “I see a lot of old monks who are not even Buddhists.” He politely said, “Their refuge was left behind the door.” They forgot to pick it up when they went up on their stage. That is one of the reasons.

0:27

Then there was another Mahasiddha – type of guy, an adept. He was the founder of the Tibetan Drukpa Kagyu tradition. There are Sakya, Nyingma, Kagyu and Gelug and within the Kagyu tradition there are four larger and eight smaller sub-schools. One of them is the Drukpa Kagyu and the founder of that tradition was Drukpa Kunleg. He was very well respected, but as a person he moved around like a crazy person. He had a little dog and wore lay person’s robes, carrying a bow and arrow and a little knife and went around. He walked into two monasteries in Lhasa. They were at the back of my house. One was called Shede, the other Muru. He acted like crazy.

Everybody knew who he was. Everybody who walked into the courtyard of these monasteries he started shouting at, “I take refuge in Buddha”, “I take refuge in Dharma”, “I take refuge in Sangha, except the monks of Muru and Shede”. Again, this is a teaching for us. It looks like a crazy act. You could dismiss it as that. We know who he is but he is acting crazy. But he is giving us a message. By wearing yellow-red robes, by shaving your head, you don’t become a Buddhist. Honestly.

0:31

What makes you become Buddhist? There are two things. Commonly accepted it is a person who accepts that Buddha, Dharma and Sangha are ultimate objects of refuge. Really, that is the true definition of being a Buddhist. Some people think that you have to take refuge in Buddha, Dharma and Sangha, but maybe not. Buddha doesn’t take refuge in Buddha. And you can’t say that Buddha is not Buddhist, though the label Buddhism came much later. That was a British invention. It was not a traditional thing, not even in India. It was a British invention. A person who accepts from the bottom of their heart that Buddha, Dharma and Sangha are reliable objects are refuge, who you can trust and rely on is a Buddhist. That acceptance comes by reasoning, by understanding, not because you are told. That is the worst ever you can do to yourself. “Somebody told me that is a good thing to do and so I did it.” That way you don’t become Buddhist at all. But it is different if you are convinced that Buddha is a true object of refuge, because Buddha went through and had the experience of whatever sufferings we are experiencing today and he had the knowledge and know-how of how to protect and help and guide out of that suffering, he has compassion and he cares. So he had the experience, the knowledge, he cares, he has compassion. There are a number of reasons. If you are convinced of that, then even if you are an atheist, or if you are a totally conservative Judeo-Christian person or an extremist Muslim or whatever, if you have that understanding and knowledge, then whatever you maybe, you truly become Buddhist. You don’t have to be a card-carrying member, you don’t have to change your dress, or do anything, you don’t have to claim to be Buddhist – nothing. Such a person really becomes Buddhist, whoever you maybe. That is really what makes you a Buddhist.

0:35

I said there are two points. The other is to do with the four logos of Buddhists. If you accept them you are a Buddhist. Accepting here is the traditional way of saying. It is not how we say today, “I accept” – with or without reasons, or you may be compelled to say that. Here you independently think and analyze and examine and then you find that every phenomenon that is created is impermanent. Also, every contaminated thing is suffering. Every phenomenon is in the nature of emptiness. And nirvana is peace. These are the four Buddhist logos or seals. If you are convinced through your own thoughts, your own knowledge and understanding, then you become Buddhist. You may be called whatever it may be, you may be called Ayatollah or something, but you are Buddhist. Otherwise you don’t become one. Honestly.

If I don’t give you that answer it is not right. But if I do give you the answer, I may be doing a disservice for you. Similarly, what makes you called a Mahayana practitioner. I am raising the question, but I am not giving you the answer. Probably I will be here next Sunday and pick up from there. That’s what I am going to do.

Are there any questions?

0:38

Audience: I read a book about meditation. It was the Buddha’s words about meditation. At the end the commentary was about the Four Noble Truths. The commentator said, “You really don’t understand the Four Noble Truths until you understand dependent origination backwards and forwards. So where do I start? I have trouble understanding dependent origination forward, much less backward. Should I meditate, do the ritual, do mantras, keep reading?

Rimpoche: Thanks for your very practical question. Yes, the Four Noble Truths is the basic teaching of Buddha, it is also the total teaching of Buddha. All of his teachings are part of the Four Noble Truths. I guess Buddhist subjects are totally different from the subjects we are used to. We have limited subjects and each different thing has its own little categories and basic framework and we cut it out. We have mathematics and arithmetic, complicated maths and each of them has its own title and scope. Buddhist subjects are not organized in that manner at all. There will not be a single Buddhist teaching that is not part of the Four Noble Truths. If you look from that angle, not only do you have to know the Dependent Origination, but also compassion, love and self liberation – all of them. To be master of the Four Noble Truths you have to be Buddha, not just Buddhist.

0:43

I cannot say the commentary writer is wrong. But at the same time we have to bit whatever we can chew. I don’t mean you cannot bite the Four Noble Truths, but you can only bite the Four Noble Truths that you can chew. And that is good enough and complete. Remember the Indian blind people’s elephant story. Everything is true and fine. It is capable of giving results. We want the result of being a good person in life, to be right when we die, to have a good future life and ultimately to become Buddha. So every bit and part is capable of being delivered. So it is absolutely fine to bite what you can chew. The name doesn’t matter. Scholars have scholarly explanations. Simple practitioners like myself have their own explanations. Both are right. The bottom line is to be kind, to care for yourself and others and not to harm anybody. Don’t hurt anyone. Don’t be mean to anybody. The question of meanness is sometimes an issue. To me the meanness is more or less about people who really make sure that you hurt your enemy and keeping that in mind and digging it constantly and continuously and drop in a word here and there to hurt the feelings of the other person. That is meanness, whether you are screaming loudly and being crazy or whatever. To me that is meanness. So it is important not to be a mean person. That doesn’t go together with kindness at all. The mean person will drive their point to prove their point beyond doubt – which no one can. So we will waste all our life to drive a nail into a point. That is meanness to me. Maybe my meanness is different to your meanness. Maybe we are entitled to our own interpretations of meanness. But in other words, truly speaking, it should not have any association with hatred or self-superiority.

0:47

Trying to prove my point is self-superiority. Trying to prove that the other person is wrong is to satisfy our own ego and hatred. Recognizing this is important. That is not only just for Buddhists, but any good spiritual person should not have meanness in their vocabulary. And if you do that you will travel from joy to joy. Your life is such that it brought you up to this level and now you can travel from joy to joy. Make sure those other emotions don’t drag you down.

Thank you and we will chant the Four Immeasurables in order not to have meanness.

0:48 Chanting of Four Immeasurable 0:50 end