Archive Result

;;20020525GRCTNRHS05

Saturday afternoon

Let’s read from the actual Heart Sutra:

The Transcendent Victor (Bhagavan)

was residing at Vulture Peak in Rajagrha

with a great assembly of monks

and a great assembly of Bodhisattvas.

This tells you who was there with Buddha at that time. It is really a problem here, if you look at any of the translations, no matter which scholar has done it. The text says

Gelong gi gedün chenpo dang

with a great assembly of monks

The gedün has not been translated at all. All the translators just translated ‘assembly of monks’. But gedün means much more than monks. It means ‘One who has a very strong inclination or strong familiarity for virtuous activities’. Gelong is the fully ordained monks. Gedün is also Sangha. Along with Buddha and Dharma it is the object of refuge for those who are seeking liberation. So if it is simply translated as ‘monks’, then it is difficult. It would mean that the sangha are only the monks.

In the same way the next line says

Chang chub sempai gedün chenpo dang

and a great assembly of Bodhisattvas

Actually, here we are given the celibate and the lay-person’s side.

Gedün really means sangha. The Seventy Verses of Refuge say,

Even the 180 000 forces of evil cannot create a schism.

Ge means positive, wonderful, good karma-creating, nice spiritual work. Dün is someone who functions within that. Gedün means that the inclination of the sangha to the ultimate development of Buddhahood of oneself as well as others cannot be pushed apart even by the 180 000 evil forces. The sangha in that sense is a very powerful force so much so that all the evil forces cannot produce any cracks. Even all of those put together cannot create a friction. So the translation of assembly of monks and Bodhisattvas doesn’t give you the whole taste of what gedün or sangha is. When we become members of the Sangha community it is a privilege. However, we have to carry the responsibility along with that. You have to be able to go beyond tiny disputes here and there. Further, the word ‘great’ is added to assembly. There are reasons for that as well, but I can’t go too much into detail.

What does Bodhisattva really mean? In Tibetan it is chang chub sem pa. Jang means practice and the perfection of it is chang. Chang means therefore ‘faultless’. All the obstacles are cleared. Chub means ‘one who has obtained all qualities’. Sem is one who thinks about benefiting others. So it is almost like Buddha. The Bodhisattva’s mind is always thinking about benefiting others. Then pa is ‘hero’. This is the hero who destroys all internal and external obstacles.

Normally, when you talk about Bodhisattva vows and the bodhimind you don’t talk so much about the meaning of the word ‘Bodhisattva’. Another way of explaining the word is ‘One who knows the Two Truths’, absolute and relative. It is one who perfected the two truths, from the knowledge point of view is it jang, and one who practices the two truths is chang chub. Sem here is one is always thinking about the meaning of the Two Truths, and pa is one who works hard at that.

So there are many different and interesting explanations. It is not that one is right and the other is wrong. We should not be too quick to draw a conclusion. One word can give you so many meanings. If you draw conclusions too quickly, there could even be a danger of giving up Dharma.

Tap chik du really means ‘around one stove’. Tap means ‘stove’. Chik means one. Sitting around the stove means sharing everything. It is the family members living in one place. You don’t share your room and food with someone you don’t get along well together. You always get along well with the person you share your stove with. So in this case tap chik du zhuk te indicates that all the assembled beings are thinking the same thing, purposely. They are thinking about the teachings, about the emptiness.

Generally speaking, those who get along well and are liberally-minded and open-minded usually like to get together. If you are conservative, all the conservatives would get together with you. In any case, those who sit together at the same dining table are more likely to think the same way. So not only the Buddha, but also the whole assembly of monks and Bodhisattvas are thinking the same thing. They have got together for one purpose and that is wisdom. The root text goes on to say

At that time, the Transcendent Victor entered into a samadhi

on the categories of phenomena called Perception of the Profound.

The Tibetan starts with dei tse chom den de. Dei tse means ‘at that time’. I already explained the meaning of chom den de. The three different syllables give you three different meanings. In this case it refers to Buddha. There are other words for Buddha as well, such as sang gye, shakya tu pa, tam che kyen pa, and so on. So at that time Buddha was focusing on a particular samadhi called zap mo nang wa. The English translation we have says ‘Profound Illumination’. Another translation says ‘Profound Radiance’, but that may be wrong. The word is nang wa. That can mean light. The translation for zab mo is ‘profound’. What does ‘profound’ really mean? It means that one cannot easily comprehend it. In western culture clarity and precision is the most important. In the eastern cultures going a little bit deeper and being unclear is the most important. So zab mo means that it is not that easy to comprehend. It is something that can have many meanings. You can come from so many different angles. Nang wa is actually referring to wisdom. It is the wisdom that knows the difficult to know. It is the wisdom that knows the perfect and profound, that which is quite difficult to comprehend. Chö kyi nam drang is translated as ‘categories of phenomena’. That actually means the skandhas. There are the fives skandhas and then there is a way of counting the elements in 18 different ways. All these are ‘phenomena’. Each of these [classifications] has reasons. That will come later. Then the Tibetan says nyompar zhuk so. That simply means that Buddha remained in the concentration on that point.

Also at that time, the Bodhisattva, the Mahasattva, the noble Avalokiteshvara, beheld the practice of the profound perfection of wisdom and saw that those five aggregates

also are empty of intrinsic existence.

Then the Tibetan goes on to say yang dei tse chang chub sem pa. There are lots of reasons for saying yang. That means ‘again’ or ‘also’. The expression then is ‘also at that time’. This has additional meaning. It means that the time had come for the disciples to pick up this emptiness teaching. It is the time that the disciples are ready to accept this teaching, from the karmic point of view, from the preparation point of view, from the interest point of view, from all the angles. I already explained chang chub sem pa before. You have to remember these and do a little more work yourself, by looking into the Tibetan transliteration and the English translation. I am teaching from the Tibetan, because my English is not good enough to do the whole teaching without consulting the Tibetan. If I try to do it all in English it would be like the donkey trying to tell the mules how to walk.

Then next, sem pa chen po means ‘great being’. Then there is pak pa. In Sanskrit it means arya. That is translated as ‘noble’. In society, ordinary citizens are not nobles. They are part of the House of Commons. The nobles belong to the House of Lords. But these days the House of Commons actually has more power than the House of Lords. This is according to the rules of parliamentary democracy. The meaning of ‘noble’ in this context is more in the sense of special beings. Why are these beings special? They have gone beyond the ordinary level. They have solved the mystery of life. They have gone beyond that mystery. Do you get a Nobel Prize for being a noble person? Just joking.

Then the next word is chen re zig. In Sanskrit this is Avalokiteshvara. Chen means ‘eyes’. These are the eyes, which are totally focused on all sentient beings. We call Avalokitesvara the Buddha or Bodhisattva of Compassion. Let the philosophers worry about whether he is a Buddha or a Bodhisattva. So he is the Noble One whose eyes are totally focused on all sentient beings. This is meant symbolically. Even Avalokiteshvara himself is a manifestation. He is not a human being like Buddha was. He is not born from flesh and bones. So, through him, the Buddhas demonstrate their love for all sentient beings. That love is like Avalokitesvara whose name shows that all his three eyes are totally focused on all sentient beings. I hate to use the word ‘mythological fellow’, but it sort is that type of thing, although he is real and not a myth. But in order to better understand, I explained it in that manner.

Then comes she rap kyi pa röl tu chin pa. I don’t have to explain that. You know it means the wisdom that has gone beyond. The English says ‘Profound Perfection of Wisdom’. In Sanskrit that is prajnaparamita.

The Tibetan then says pung po nga po de dak la yang. This refers to the five skandhas and again we have the word yang here, meaning ‘also’. So it is not only the five skandhas, but all other phenomena, like the 18 elements and so on.

Then, by the power of the Buddha, the venerable Sariputra said this to the Bodhisattva, the Mahasattva, the noble Avalokiteshvara, ‘How should a child of good lineage who wishes to practice the profound perfection of wisdom train?’

Earlier I mentioned that in this sutra the sound of speech comes from the mouth of Sariputra, but it is by the force of the Buddha that the whole conversation takes place. I don’t have to explain much who Sariputra is. Just that much: In many tangkas depicting Buddha, there are two monks standing there next to him. The one who is known to be perfect in wisdom is Sariputra. The other one is Maudghalputra, who is perfect in magical powers. That doesn’t mean that Buddha only had these two disciples, nor that they are more important than others, but they are depicted because they represent the perfection of wisdom and the perfection of magical powers. Now this wisdom guy asks Avalokitesvara about how to practice the perfection of wisdom.

He said that and the bodhisattva, the Mahasattva, the noble Avalokiteshvara said this to the venerable Sariputra, ‘Sariputra, a child of good lineage who wishes to practice the profound perfection of wisdom should perceive things in this way - analyzing the five aggregates, by nature empty.

We have several versions of the English translation around here and some don’t have that last sentence. You can’t leave this sentence out. If it is missing in any of our translations we have got to put it back. It is important to see that the aggregates are by nature empty.

Actually, the translation should say Analyzing also the five aggregates by nature empty.

The Tibetan here says pung po nga po de dak kyang. Rang zhin gyi tong par nam par yang dak par je su ta-o. This not only gives you the five aggregates alone, but they are connected with everything. It means that not only the ‘I’ is empty, but the ‘mine’ as well. I am empty of inherent existence and so is my hand, my leg, my friend, my enemy. So anything in relation to me is also empty. If it was only about the ‘I’ being empty, it would be enough to say ‘Form is empty, emptiness is form’. However, also everything that is connected with me is empty too. This sentence is important and should be put back into the translation where it was missing.

Here we have to explain a little more about emptiness. I did explain some of it in the recent Chicago teaching and thought at the time that it was pretty easy. But when I looked back at the transcript I realized that it was quite complicated. Still it is better than nothing. It is definitely better to have that information rather than not having it. It is available as a hand-out.

We talk always about emptiness in Buddhism. In the usual American understanding emptiness is something horrible, void and completely gone. I have understood that by watching the kids’ movie ‘The Never-Ending Story’. They present emptiness as everything falling apart, the castle is going, the land is going, the trees are going, the kid is almost dying.

In that movie are so many important points. Maybe it is just my eyes that read it like that. That kid is trying to save a princess and therefore is entering that other world. I am not so much concerned with the purpose of that movie. But I noticed three important things.

One is when that kid is trying to get inside. Nobody could get through because there are these bullets shooting at them and when they try to get in the bullets shoot them. Across the street is a crazy, little scientist running up and down, calculating the timing of the bullets, and because of that the kid could get through the bullets. The kid learnt that and without telling that scientist, went inside. The scientist went crazy and said, ‘He won’t be able to survive in there, because the moment he sees himself, he is going to be sucked out.’ He was worried because he had not worked that problem out yet, but the kid was already gone in.

What I understood was that the bullets represent the negative emotions that cause the individual to get negative symptoms. That does work with the timing, with the events of life and so on. So the kid got through that and that was okay up to that point.

Then the kid saw his own reflection and the scientist thought he was going to freak out and die. But the kid, instead of freaking out, jumped through the reflection. That gives me the following message: Normally, when you encounter your primordial self, your impurities will be reflected by the primordial mind and you will be rejected from that state. You will bounce back. Now that kid didn’t freak out. He jumped in. In the movie he went through some kind of circle and then he was through. That means, when you are in touch with your primordial self and you are pure, then you really encounter emptiness.

So the kid got through and in there he found the emptiness. Everything was empty, the kid, the whole environment, everything was just falling apart.

Our emptiness will be different. Our emptiness is existent. I want you to clearly understand that although the word is empti-ness, it must have a value. It is not nothing. It actually exists.

What really is emptiness? There must be something that is missing. Otherwise why would you apply the label ‘emptiness’? The most important thing is to work out what is missing. People always want to work out what emptiness itself is. For me personally, it is much more important to see what is missing, what makes something empty.

Even in ordinary experience, for example you pour water out of a bottle and then the bottle is empty. The water is gone from the bottle, so the emptiness is the lack of water in the bottle.

We need to concentrate on the lack. There are these expressions: lack of inherent existence, naturally empty, lack of true existence and so on. All that is a play of words. But what does it mean? There are plenty of different terms for that in Tibetan and there also many now in English.

There is an example: you are dreaming at night of a beautiful, wonderful house. Where does this house come from? There really is no beautiful house. Yet in the dream you have seen it. So it is only a perception. It is not reality. In your dream-perception you can enter that house, sit in it, enjoy yourself, you can lie down and sleep, you can cook and entertain people. You can sell and buy the house. All that can be done within that perception. If you take the dream as reality, then everything that happens in the dream is reality. You can buy and sell the house, use it, cook in it and do everything that can be done in a house. But there is no house.

That is not the emptiness of the house, but it can tell you how the relative existence functions. I am not saying that our life is actually totally a dream. I am not saying that. But we are functioning like in a dream. Our reality is a little more solid than a dream. But if functions like that.

Therefore, the perception makes a big difference. The real emptiness here, the lack we are looking for, is in the perception, not in the reality. So when we look for the lack of water in the bottle, we are looking at the perception. The problem is that we perceive things to have a real solidness. That solidity we perceive is not there. This is the lack. We perceive solid, single beings. We look at Jennifer and perceive a unitary, solid Jennifer. There is nothing wrong with Jennifer. What is wrong is the perception of her being solidly existing. To describe that, all these different terms like lack of inherent existence and so on have been used.

Various Buddhist schools will give you different ideas about that. If I go into all that you will get completely confused. Let me therefore just stick with Buddhapalita’s viewpoint, the Prasangika-Madhayamaka (uma tal gyur wa, Middle Way Consequentialist). Everybody in Tibet claims to be a follower of Buddhapalita.

According to Buddhapalita, the inquiring mind that tries to find absolute reality is cutting the absolute existence. The Heart Sutra says,

Form is emptiness, emptiness is form.

Emptiness is not other than form;

form is not other than emptiness.

According to Buddhapalita that is a direct statement, not to be interpreted. Other teachings have to be interpreted. Some people try to interpret that, saying that the true intrinsically existent nature of the form is empty. But it actually is a direct statement. Form itself is empty. How is that? It is empty, because you can see it and touch it. That is why it is empty. Does that sound crazy?

Tsong Khapa says in the Three Principles of the Path:

Moreover, the appearance of things eliminates the extreme of ‘is’

And emptiness eliminates the extreme of ‘is not’.

One perceives the manner in which cause and effect occurs

And no longer is caught in the mindset that grasps at extremes.

You see, it is the exact opposite of what we normally would think. Normally, we will say, ‘He is there, because I saw him. I shook hands with him and he is as large as life. He is there.’ According to Tsong Khapa you should say, ‘I saw him and therefore he is not there. He is not there because I saw him, because I shook hands with him. He is not there, because I touched him.’ Does that make any sense?

What you have touched, seen, and shaken hands with is nothing but the collection of the parts and parcels of that individual. You did not see a solid guy there. You have only contacted the combination of that guy’s physical identity, with his beard and with the hand that you have shaken. We only exist as a collection of parts. We do not exist independently. There is no independent ‘me’. That does not mean that I am not there. I am here collectively. I am not here because of an independent ‘me’. I exist because I am collectively put together. My body, my mind, my nature, my consciousness, my form, my feelings, my recognition, conception, and all these skandhas, because of the togetherness of all those I exist. If one of them is missing my existence collapses.