Archive Result

20051009GRGRFR4M8

4mind 8: 1.35 hours

Good morning everybody. We have been praying and meditating: may all beings be free from suffering. We have to remember the tremendous sufferings that people go through. Despite all the great scientific developments, human sufffering still continues. Last night somebody was telling me that the latest earthquake in Kashmir/Pakistan now has a death toll of 20,000 people. I think it is in the North Kashmir-Paktuni area. That is in the middle of nowhere. The people there have also been fighting for their own independence for years, ever since I came to India. Also the mudslide in Guatemala killed 1800 people. There is so much suffering. That reminds us more and more of compassion and reminds us more and more of our commitment to liberate sentient beings from suffering. It is not only a meditative reality, but right in our face that very vivid suffering is tremendous.

I would like to continue where I left off last night. We established the object of negation, or as the translation says: ascertain the object to be refuted.

The second point is to establish the pervasion. I was wondering whether pervasion is the same as pervasive. When we do the mahamudra teachings the very first words are

Kun yab kun gyi rang zhin dor je yin

It is the pervasive nature of vajra dharmadhatu. It is the nature of reality of all existence, animate or inanimate. It is the nature of all, wherever you look, wherever you search. It is emptiness. Even permanent existence is in the nature of emptiness.

If this false self exists independently, if it has natural existence as one with the five aggregates, as the same entity, then there must be five selves, since they are inseparable from the five aggregates. Here there is the fault that there cannot be five aggregates as there is only one self. The basis of the five aggregates and self are not independently self-existent one. You can understand this by thinking of what happens at death-the form aggregate is left behind and disposed of. Is the self burned or buried along with the body? If so, the self would disappear at the same time as the body. So here there is the fault of denying that the ego continues on to future lives. In short there isn't an ego that doesn't rely on the five aggregates.

If we say that the naturally existing or independently existing self is separate from the five aggregates, then there would be no relation whatsoever between the two, but that is not the case. When we are hurt, we don't say: "Oh! Someone stuck a needle into my body!" We say: "Someone stuck a needle into me!" The reference is not to the body aggregate, but to a self. So the self does not independently exist as one with the five aggregates, nor as separate from them. The relative self is totally dependent on the five aggregates, and there isn't an ego which does not rely on thc five. If we think that: since it doesn't exist as one with the aggregates, nor as a separate entity, does a self exist at all; then the answer is, yes, there does exist a self in the form of nominal mental labeling.

There is not a self which does not depend on the five aggregates. Independence on the five aggregates, labeled onto the five aggregates, there is a nominal self which attains Enlightenment, wanders in samsara, goes on to the next rebirth, etc. That is the functioning self.

This is now the second point: the one and many, establishing the pervasion. Pervasiveness means that emptiness is the nature of all that exists. When you see the “I”, not the ego-I that gets upset when accused, but the normal, functioning “me”, somehow you get a picture of something, not a solid figure, but a mixture of physical appearance and mind.

I have a cell phone and in there are many numbers for people, their cell, home and work numbers. At the work numbers there is a funny looking picture, which looks like the English letter “I”. So when I think of “me” the image of that letter “I” comes up for me. When I think in Tibetan I get the image of the letter nga. But it doesn't matter what image you get. We have been telling you strongly that the “I” is not the body and not the mind, so you lose all of them, but you get something. Whatever you get, it doesn't matter.

Taking that picture inside of me, I call this a “me” or “I”. It is within my body, within my aggregates and elements. Is that “me” the same as the five aggregates? Is is established as oneness with my aggregates or is it completely separate from them? If it is one, there is a big contradiction. I have five aggregates, but only one “I”. When I separate out the aggregates, do I have five “I's”? Does each one of the aggregates get one “I”? If that is the case, am I five different I's? Plus do my four elements have an “I” each? Are there nine “I's then? That is not the case. I don't have a split personality. I am “me”.

The other option is: I would have to be established completely independently from the aggregates and elements. I then can't have virtually nothing to do with my aggregates. I should be completely independent and separate from them. But in that case, if I get hurt physically, I should not say, “I hurt myself”, because only the physical form aggregate was hurt, not “me”. But that does not happen. We say, “I have been hurt, I have been stabbed.” Then when you get asked where, you may say, “In my stomach”, but you never say, “my form aggregate has been stabbed.” So we do identify with the aggregates and elements, we can't be separate.

If I am completely one with the five aggregates, I would be inseparably one with them. In that case, when at death my five aggregates are cremated, do they cremate “me” as well? If they bury the body, do “I” get buried?

So, neither options are correct. I neither exist in oneness with the aggregates nor separate from them. I am here just because the aggregates and elements happen to be functioning together. I am “just me”. That “just me” will arise out of space-like emptiness.

The logical reasoning of dependent origination, pratitya samut- pada' in Sanskrit, may be easier to understand. These two words, in Tibetan "rten," dependent and "brel" origination, demonstrate that there is no contradiction between the non-truly existent self and the self which exists on the conventional level. If you use the logical reasoning and take the example of a sprout, it does not have true independent existence because it is a dependent origination. The fact that it is a dependent origination eliminates the two extremes of nihilism and eternalism. The word "brten" shows that it is dependent on something, that it cannot exist by itself without relying on its object of mental labeling. We say, "We did not plant the flower; it grew by itself." Although this is not the same, reliance or dependence shows that it cannot exist or stand alone. The word "brten" negates the true independent existence of the self and shows that it has to depend on something. Then if you ask whether the self exists at all, the next word, "brel", origination, shows the interdependent nature: because of the self, we can experience happiness, pleasure, misery, etc. It has the function of experiencing and of accumulating positive and negative actions and then experiencing the consequences. This goes to prove the existence of the relative self.

When you read “brten” and “brel”, you have to pronounce that as “ten” and “drel”, otherwise it becomes “britain” or something. I remember a funny thing. In the late 50s Professor Wiley from Seattle was very deeply interested in Tibetan Buddhism. All his studies were based on books though. He could read and understand Tibetan language but he would read it “brten” rather than “ten”, pronouncing every silent syllable. Actually, Professor Wiley produced a number of great students of Tibetan language, such as Gene Smith and Mel Goldstein, which is still the generation before Bob Thurman and all those people.

Anyway, there was a Tibetologist-Buddhologist conference in Europe and Professor Wiley was reading the name “Khedrup-je”, which is Tsongkhapa's disciple on the left hand side. When you spell it out, Khedrub is spelled Mkhasgrub. So he was reading it as “Makesgrub”. Nobody could understand what he was talking about. He kept saying, “You don't understand Makesgrub?” When he learnt it was pronounced Khedrup, he was surprised and said, “I only learnt from dictionaries, I didn't have a living teacher.”

The great Guru Chone Lama Rinpoche has said: the word "brten" is to demonstrate the void nature of the ego; it explains the lack of true existence of the self. The second word, "brel", explains the interdependent nature, the functions in keeping with the experience of ordinary people. These are, for instance, basic cause and effect, children from parents, and crops from seed, the ordinary functions of the self. Since it refutes the two extremes of nihilism and eternalism, it is called the king of logical reasoning. This is how we can negate the false concept of true existence, while establishing the existence of the self on the conventional level. Thus we can understand the void nature of the self, without falling to extreme views. Unlike arriving at a proper understanding and development of Bodhichitta, this is a difficult and dangerous point. You need extensive, correct teachings from a qualified Guru before engaging in meditation. After proper Guru devotion, and correct intellectual knowledge, you also need the accumulation of physical and mental merit as a force behind the realization of Shunyata.

Kyabje Rimpoche makes the point of the “King of Logic” here. Take the example of a flower. You can also use the same reasoning with the person or self, but perhaps a flower is easier. We say that a flower does not exist truly, because it is dependent arising. Using dependent arising as reasoning proves that if you rise dependently you did not arise independently. Your existence has been depending on a variety of points. Therefore you are not truly existing, but collectively existing. Now take the person. “Me” does not truly exist because my existence depends on my physical, mental aspects and my name, label and identification, all together. That then becomes Gehlek Rimpoche. Gehlek Rimpoche does not exist independently. If that were so, Gehlek Rimpoche should not depend on anything and should remain forever. But that is not the case. Especially, the name “Rimpoche” does not have any value, unless and until such a person shows their own quality and people acknowledge that. On the basis of the quality shown to the people the label “Rimpoche” has value. Therefore it is a dependent arising. Just like anything, because it is dependent, it is not truly existent.

An example for that is when you walk with the aid of a walking stick it shows your dependence on the stick. You cannot walk by yourself, independently. When you try to stand up by relying on the help of a table or another person, it is a clear indication that you cannot stand alone by yourself. Dependent arising not only means depending on somebody else, but also within itself, on parts, parcels, causes, conditions and people even may say, on consciousness. Therefore the dependent arising is one of the most important reasonings. Buddha called it the “King of Logic”. It is just one reason. I don't have to elaborate much, because this subject is exactly what we are teaching in Ann Arbor and New York on Tuesdays and Thursdays.

If during the analysis of Emptiness we are using the analogy of a vase, we see that the top is not a vase, the belly is not a vase, the spout is not a vase. If you then say: "Oh there is no vase at all, the fact that no independent truly-existent vase can be found in any of its parts goes to prove that there is no vase", that is an intellectual fabrication of Voidness; it is a misunderstanding. Denying the conventionally existing vase is a mistake to be avoided. At the same time we have to understand that things lack a truly-existent self which does not rely on the five aggregates. Take the feeling of ourselves which is not based on the five aggregates: such true independent self existence is not to be found. There is, however, a relative self, dependent on the five, on the conventional level, which has functions and experiences. Just as we used this method to ascertain the Voidness of the self or egolessness, we should follow it for objects. Take a vase: if we look at it without relying on the components, i.e. the top, base, belly, rim, spout, then we get a feeling of an independently existing vase. The true vase, or the conventional vase, is not independent of anything, it is something which has been mentally labeled a vase on parts which have a specific function. Applying the same logical reasoning to ascertain the Voidness of other phenomena is known as the sky-like contemplative Voidness.

Kyabje Rimpoche is using the example of a vase. I think he is referring to the intiation vase that has a spout. When you take the top off, the belly away, all parts away, then you may think, “Ah, it's empty. There is no vase.” But that is what we may feel. But Kyabje Rimpoche says that if you do so you are losing the identification of the vase and that is called nihilism. You are not supposed to lose the vase. The vase remains there. This is a mental exercise. Take a table. That is even easier. If you physically dismantle the table, it is destroyed and no longer there. But when you say, “The top is not the table and the legs are not the table”, the table does not disapppear. Because if you make the table disappear that is not the emptiness of the table at all. You have gone too extreme. In between that you have to recognize the collective existence of the parts and parcels – including the label. Then you can say, “This is a table”. It serves the purpose, you can put your books on it, put a clock and flowers on it. It is a table. It looks like a table, functions like a table – it is a table. It still exists.

When you analyse the self, don't lose the conventional aspect of the self. You may say, “The “I” is not my body, not part of my mind”, etc, you may think there is no “I” at all.

If you lose the conventional truth, you are going too much into the extreme of empty. If you make it solid, then that becomes the extreme of existentialism. On Tuesdays and Thursdays we are presented with a variety of different views by different schools. We didn't talk much about the Hindu philosophy, but when you study this deeply you have to study the five different viewpoints of ancient Hindu masters. It is presented in Tibetan Buddhism quite clearly in the drub ta tradition of tenets. You start with the Hindu schools and then go through the lower Buddhist schools, starting with the Chetramawa (Vaibasika – Great Exposition). These views are mostly contained in the abhidharmakosha. The most important person to present the abhidharmakosha, almost like the founder of it, was Vasubandhu. There are actually two abhidharmakoshas, upper and lower. The lower one is the one presented by Vasubandhu, the nephew of Arya Asanga. Asanga has presented the higher level of the abhidharmakosha. At the same time the nephew became the student of his uncle too. That is how it goes anyway. In reality, Vasubandhu was highly developed, equally to Asanga, who was as good as Nagarjuna. I think it is for the benefit of us, so that we may understand better, that they have presented different viewpoints.

I think I mentioned it during one of the last teachings: the lower abhidharmakosha might not even accept emptiness at all.

After that, the do depa( Sautrantika – Realist) school has also several divisions and they do present emptiness in different ways. Then comes the Mind Only school's way of presenting emptiness and then there is the Madyamaka school. That also has two divisions: one is the uma rang gyupa (Svatantrika-Madhyamaka) of Lek den je (Bhavaviveka). But all Tibetan schools now claim to be followers of Nagarjuna's view on emptiness as presented by Buddhapalita and Chandrakirti. That is the Prasangika Madhyamaka school (uma tal gyur wa).

There are eight special criteria that distinguish Buddhapalita's system from all others. Actually, there are sixteeen, eight difficult points and eight special criteria. They overlap. It is a little confusing there for us.

One of the eight special qualities is what we call in Tibetan nga tsam. That means the mere “I”, literally “just me”. According to Kyabje Rimpoche in this text, that is the “I” which is not to be refuted. But the big “I” needs to be refuted. Then the “just I” remains. Why does it say “just me”? It is because I just exist when all terms and conditions, parts and parcels come together just right. So I am here. It is a very simple, humble, fragile, completely dependent thing, yet it is the basis of all functioning, of good and bad karma, of traveling from this to the future life, of being responsible for one's deeds. It is just this simple “I”, due to the conditions being right. It is very fragile, humble, small, yet very responsible and everything. That is the nga tsam. This short, little talk about it may not be good enough, but by the end of next year, after finishing the subject on all the Tuesdays and Thursdays, I do hope we will have quite a solid understanding of sunyata.

That reality does not only apply to the self, but to all animate and inanimate phenomena. It is just like this clock here. It functions perfectly well, as long as all the parts and parcels are working together. If the battery goes off, no matter what you do, banging and breaking will not make it function. Then the clock also has all the cogs and wheels pushing each other and make the hands of the clock move. If only one of them stops moving, the hands on the clock won't move. Just because of the perfect movements of all the parts the clock works. It is very fragile, although it looks very solid. It just exists because of causes and conditions being right. This gives you a very good example of the emptiness of phenomena, the inanimate.

Now we have the fifth verse, although there are only four mindfulnesses. That fifth verse is about the meditative aftermath.

"At the cross-roads of the varieties of appearance and the six consciousnesses is seen the confusion of the baseless phenomena of duality, the illusory spectacles of a deceiving magician are there. Not thinking they are true, look to their entity of Emptiness. Not letting your mind stray, place it within appearance and Emptiness, Making your attention unforgetful, maintain it within appearance and Emptiness. "

This is the last verse. [Rimpoche reads the oral transmission of the colophon as well].

The colophon says that Manjushri has given this teaching known as the Four Mindfulnesses himself directlyto the great Dharma King Je Tsongkhapa. The Seventh Dalai Lama says, “This has been put in form of a song in order to establish the good seed of understanding of emptiness by the Buddha's simple follower, the monk Losang Kelsang Gyatso.” Kelsang Gyatso is the Seventh Dalai Lama.

Let me paraphrase the last verse:

All kinds of appearances of the six senses – there are all kinds of things that have no root of existence. Everything is almost like a sorcerer's creation. Do not think it is true. Look into the nature of empty. Don't leave your mind wandering round. Let things appear, but know they are not true. Do not forget that. Keep your mind empty, yet appearing and functioning.

During the contemplative stage you have to apply reasoning to ascertain the nature of Voidness, then fix your attention single- pointedly on the realization of Voidness. At this stage of contemplation, you don't see things, but when you rise from meditation you see many things, animate and inanimate, as mere illusions lacking true, independent, self-existing nature. You see them as mere mental labeling, you see that they all exist by the force of labeling. We should have the experience of "snang stong", in which the term "snang" points to the appearance and functions, and "stong" to the lack of independent self-existence. Like a magician who can produce many illusions but to him they lack reality, similarly, in meditation we ascertain the fact that all things lack true independent existence. In the post-meditation period we see whatever appears in that light, as lacking true independent existence.

Regarding the first two lines, when you arise you see many different things, just like when standing at a junction you see various kinds of activities. These multiple activities are the objects of the six consciousnesses and of the six organs--eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch and mind. As objects appear to these sensory organs, you will see, feel, hear many things, but you should see them as the chaos of duality, since you have realized the Void nature in the state of contemplation, that all things lack independent true existence. They are empty, "stong", but they have appearance and function on the conventional level, "snang". In the post-meditative concentration one sees things as a mere drama, as illusory creations, just as a magician knows when he produces his show, while to ordinary people they may seem real. Like a magician, we have to develop an understanding of the real nature of things.

Although things appear initially to be truly independent self- existing phenomena, you should understand their illusory nature. You have to remember your own realization of the illusory nature. Despite appearances, you need to have the conviction and understanding that the appearance and the reality are separate, and that in reality things are lacking true independent self-existence although they seem to appear to us.

That was the explanation on the fifth verse. There are four mindfulnesses and the fourth one has A and B. A is telling you the meditation and mindfulness of emptiness. Part B is about the aftermath experience.

In the later part of the lama chopa there is a verse:

Verse 72:

Inspire me to complete the perfection of illusion-like affermath,

realizing that inner and outer phenomena lack true existence,

yet still appear like an illusion, a dream

or the reflection of the moon in a clear lake.

I have not presented to you the real emptiness yet. I only showed you that the “I” can't exist as oneness or separate from the aggregates. It is the second out of the four points that Kyabje Rimpoche made above. That is the most important one anyway. That is good enough for now. Then, when you are totally focused on emptiness, within the sphere of that meditative state nothing else exists at all. A lot of people assert that there are funny experiences there. But each of these arguments can be answered. Truly speaking, you are completely absorbed in emptiness. Within the view of that mind, at that moment, nothing else exists, not even our physical body. It is completely absorbed, soaked into the sphere of emptiness.

There is no question. You cannot manage without vajrayana here. That void is not embraced by the mind that is in the nature of joy, of great bliss. The mind of great bliss is totally absorbed in the space-like empty. That is the total absorption of emptiness. Nothing else exists for that mind.

When you rise from that meditative level you again see all the animate and inanimate objects. However, now that you have discovered the true nature, you somehow have gone beyond the laws of physics. The normal, usual things that make sense don't make sense to that person. Such person could walk straight through a wall, without damaging the wall and without damaging their body. It is like we see ghosts walking through walls.

There is a story of Milarepa. Once his disciple Rechungpa came back from India, and Milarepa asked, “What present did you bring me?” Rechungpa gave him a long life initiation in the system of Machig Labdron ma. Rechungpa developed some pride at that point, thinking that Milarepa was not his only teacher, that he had obtained a great deal of teachings in India from great masters and now he was giving initiation to his guru Milarepa. Milarepa noticed that pride and manifested a great storm. Milarepa hid himself inside a little yak horn and in his biography it says, “Neither did the yak horn increase in size, nor did Milarepa shrink his body.” Yet he got in there and began to sing. He sang,

“There is wonderful open space in this yak horn, If you, the son, are equal to the father, come and join me.”

Rechungpa couldn't get in there, he couldn't even find the yak horn on the ground. So when you really see emptiness directly you have that quality. Whenever we talk about the great power of the mahasiddhas, that is their power. But we are instructed that at that point you can't go on behaving like that. You need to maintain discipline. You will see everything and accept everything that happens, but you must not forget that all these come out from emptiness, that they are empty in nature.

The traditional teachings always give the example of the magiscian's show. In the old culture where I come from, the magician they mention is actually referring to a sorcerer, not the kind of magician that produces a rabbit out of a hat and coins from behind your ear lobes. When a sorcerer performs sorcery he himself knows that it is only a trick, but other people don't see that. So the teachings tell us, “Look at reality as being like that.” By that time you have seen the reality and you look at appearance like a sorcerer's show. That is the meditative aftermath. Like the lama chopa says, “Look at outer and inner phenomena, animate and inanimate, as like sorceres's illusions, like dreams, like reflections of the moon in a clear lake. Things appear, but they are not truly existing. That is called the yoga of illusion.

This text was composed by the Seventh Dalai Lama Gyalwa Kelsang Gyatso. Although the title is “four completions”, it seems to have five contemplations. Since it set out separately the way of realizing voidness in meditation and the post meditation period.

Dooboom Rimpoche and the staff of Tibet House requested me to give a teaching aimed primarily at non-Tibetan students, rather than a Tibetan audience. So I chose this text of the Four Contemplations, because it is short and concise and carries great blessings, as it comes from the Seventh Dalai Lama.

I am sure something went wrong with the transcriber or the editor here. I do remember

hearing that the great blessings come from Manjushri directly to Tsongkhapa and that it was composed as a song by the Seventh Dalai Lama.

It contains the quintessential teachings of the graded path to enlightenment, from the guru devotion upwards, the complete path. Although born in very developed nations with much material progess, you have left it all behind in the quest for spiritual knowledge. I have much admiration for your dedication and sincerity. Now you are in the process of studying and accumulating knowledge about dharma. But you shouldn't be satisfied with mere knowledge. You have to make it useful and put into practice what you know and have studied. After knowing how to practice dharma, if you don't engage in sincere practice, then it is of no great benefit. Even at the time of Shakyamuni Buddha, his cousin Devadatta, who was a very learned person and knew much about dharma, failed to put it into practice and so he wasn't able to achieve or attain the fruit of his knowledge.

As Je Tsongkhapa said in his lam rim chenmo: The graded course to enlightenment you study in order to aquire knowledge about the dharma for the purpose of putting it into practice or action, according to your own capabilities. Some people are more intelligent than others. Everyone is endowed with different capacities and abilities, but one should put one's knowledge of dharma into practice according to one's individual capacity. One's own thoughts and behavior is known to oneself, without any secret. So, if by following the teachings on dharma you make any change or corrections in your behavior, then it is an improvement. But when observing your own behavior, you haven't made any progress, but instead maintain the same, then you haven't made practical use of dharma in your daily life. Although you have received the blessings of attending such a teaching, you haven't received the ultimate benefit, because you have failed to put it into practice, to bring about an effective change in your personality and behavior in your daily life.

In short, whatever knowledge you have, if you put it to practcal use to improve yourself, then it is excellent and this is to be encouraged. You should please try to practice virtue as much as possible and try to abstain from non-virtuous actions. To be honest, develop all good qualities, entrust yourself to the protection of the Triple Gem and always perform your actions in accordance with the law of cause and effect, or karma. I have given these teachings and you have heard them. So in turn, when you return to your respective countries, you should always be mindful of benefiting others. Just as you have benefited from this teaching, you should hold the wish of benefiting others dear to your heart. I will always pray for your successful achievement and practice. You in turn pray for the preservation of dharma and for the happiness and welfare of all living beings.

Amen, this is it. So I am glad I was able to look through a little bit in the plane coming here. Otherwise there wasn't much background. His Holiness the Dalai Lama once gave a teaching on this and Jeffry Hopkins translated. That is available on the internet. There is no strong commentary for this teaching anywhere. I looked in a number of places but couldn't find anything. So somehow this has been kept a little secret. Although this translator tries to use “Four Contemplations”, it is really called “Four Mindfulnesses”. His Holiness' teaching also says it is the Minfulness of the Guru, Mindfulness of Altruistic Aspiration, Mindfulness of Body as Deity and Mindfulness of the View as Emptiness.

By using the term Mindfulness this teaching is hidden, because everybody will think it is talking about the mindfulness of body, feelings, thoughts and phenomena. There is a lot of secrecy in there, actually, but I took the liberty to talk about it, because Kyabje Rimpoche talked about it in his teaching. Now I should conclude, just as Kyabje Rimpoche had said: The great Marpa Lotsawa said to Ngogden Choje Dorje, one of the four great pillars among his disciples,

I have shown you the path to liberation.

Liberation does not depend on others.

Liberation depends on yourself.

Some people may think that in order to liberate themselves they have to retire from their job. They think they have to reduce their responsibilities, go into the forest, moutains or retreat. Another of the great masters said,

Liberation can be found in the kyim, the lay people's households.

Lay people here means those who haven't been ordained as monks. I am an ex-ordained person. So now we have all become lay people. The great early mahasiddhas and great kings, and the great Marpa Lotsawa, remained householders. When Milarepa met Marpa, Marpa was out in the field sowing seeds. He showed himself as a farmer. I talked to you about Drukpa Kunlep, the crazy guy who was actually the founder of the Drukpa Kargyu tradition. He was a lay person too. I don't like the term “householder”. It is really the common, normal human being, leading a normal life. So liberation is in our home, with the family, in our farm, our business, our work place, our office. It is everywhere. It is pervasive. It depends on the individual how we pick it up, whether we can do it or not. Once you have decided to follow this, when you are looking for liberation, betterment and improvement in spirituality, you can do it anywhere. The way you do this is by following the mindfulness of the guru, mindfulness of compassion and altruistic bodhimind, the mindfulness of the divine being and the mindfulness of emptiness wisdom.

As I told you, according to the earlier teachers, the mindfulness of divine being means to look at every male as Avalokitesvara, every female as Tara, every sound as dharma and mantra. That is the divine mindfulness.

Lastly there is the mindfulness of the nature of reality. That is important because we have been fooled all the time. Because of not knowing emptiness, our goals are set wrong, our priorities are set wrong. That makes us waste our time and miss the opportunity. Remember the illusion-like reality. It appears, yet it is not true. With this in mind I would like to say thank you so much to all of you for coming here to this week end. You could have done many other things, but you chose to come here. That is very kind and wonderful and I hope it will be helpful.

end

12/06/05