Traleg Rinpoche: Mahamudra Talk 1 In Tibetan Buddhism, particularly in the Kagyü tradition, the tradition to which I belong, the concept of mahamudra is very important. The word ―mahamudra‖ literally means ―great seal‖ or ―great symbol.‖ In Sanskrit, ―maha‖ means great and ―mudra‖ means seal or symbol. Mahamudra basically refers to ultimate reality, to shunyata or emptiness, but the word mahamudra also refers to the very nature of mind. Ultimate reality, which is mahamudra, is all-pervasive and non-differential and does not fall on either side of subject or object because of its all-pervasive nature, and that concept is not different from the nature of mind itself. From this point of view, the nature of mind is different from the mind that we normally refer to in ordinary discourse. Normally, when we talk about the mind, what we mind is the mind that thinks, which wills, which experiences experiences emotions and so forth, but when we talk about the nature of mind we are talking about something which goes beyond all that. Because the nature of mind is indistinguis indistinguishable hable from ultimate reality, which is emptiness, it no longer relates to the thinking process, or the process of willing, or the process of the experience of emotions. It goes beyond all that. Therefore, the nature of the mind and ultimate reality are known as mahamudra. There is that sense of nonduality. But I think that in order to understand mahamudra, we need to place it in the context of the Buddhist tradition generally. From the point of Buddhism, the ultimate aim is to achieve nirvana or enlightenment. Nirvana is achieved as a result of having purified one‘s mind, having overcome certain defilements and obscurations of the mind which afflict the individual‘s consciousness. As long as defilements such as anger, jealousy and all kinds of egocentric tendencies exist, as long as there are defiling tendencies of the mind, then sentient beings, human beings, continue to experience a sense of dissatisfaction, frustration, suffering and so forth. These defilements exist in the first place because human beings generally have a very misguided way of understanding themselves, of understanding the nature of what they consider to be their own self. Human beings generally tend to think that the self is something immutable, lasting and unchangeable. This is not available in direct experience, but is a mental construct. Based on this, one then sees everything from the point of view of a very stable, unchanging, permanent self. Of course, this can manifest in relation to various philosophical and religious ideas regarding the nature of the self, the notion of
the soul, but it does not have to have anything to do with philosophy or religion. Even if one does not believe in immortality of the soul, nonetheless, almost everybody has the notion that it is ―me‖ who feels happy, who feels sad, who experiences joy and unhappiness and there is something called the self which endures the varities of experiences that I have. ―I‖ may feel good, or ―I‖ may not feel good, ―I‖ may grow old. There is the feeling that there is something called ―me,‖ essential ―me,‖ whic h endures all these experiences. The experiencer who has the experiences is somehow more lasting, more permanent than the experiences themselves. When Buddhism talks about egolessness or selflessness it does not mean that ego as such does not exist at all, as an empirical thing. Of course it does. But the almost instinctive feeling that we have that says there is something called ego which has this permanent endurance –that is unreal, that is a simple mental construct, because ego, like everything else, is impermanent. As long as one does not have that understanding, then one would continue to grasp onto things, hold onto things, cling onto things, because this tendency which human beings have, in terms of clinging onto the self, would automatically lead to clinging onto other things, things which are outside the self. As long as human beings have the tendency to believe in a permanent self, then automatically, one would want to obliterate anything that is considered to be threatening to that notion of a self or one would want to pursue those things which one believes would promote the solidification of that notion of a self: aversion and excessive desire. Even aversions such as hatred, resentment, hostility and so forth are a form of clinging. From the Buddhist point of view, once one starts to realize that this socalled self or ego is non-enduring, non-permanent, non-eternal, then gradually one starts to cling less and as a result of that one‘s experience of frustration, dissatisfaction and so forth would decrease. This is not to say that clinging, grasping, craving and so forth are the same as desire. Over the years in the course of talking to Westerners, I have found that many of them have the notion that Buddhists really aim towards the extinguishment of all desires. That is no true. What Buddhists really talk about is the idea of overcoming clinging, grasping, craving.
As I mentioned before, clinging can manifest even in the form of clinging onto the idea of begin resentful of someone, clinging to the notion of not being able to forgive, not being able to accept certain things, holding onto one‘s feeling of hostility and resentment of other people. Desire, on the other hand, can be either positive or negative. Clinging, grasping, craving can never be positive. Clinging onto anything, at least from a Buddhist point of view, is always unhealthy. But we have to have desire to be even able to operate as human beings. Without desire we will never get anywhere. Even from a spiritual point of view, unless we have the desire to sit on our cushion and meditate, we will never get anywhere. Unless we have the desire to want to attain enlightenment or become a Buddha we will never get anywhere. Unless one has desires, nothing can be achieved. From a Buddhist point of view there is basically nothing wrong with having the desire to want to have a good family, to want to look after one‘s children, to want to have a good relationship, to want to have a good partner in life, to want to get a good jo b or even to want to keep one‘s job. The problem arises when those desires become exaggerated. When desires become transformed into forms of clinging, forms of grasping and, at the same time, if desires manifest in the form of craving, then it becomes a problem. So I think it is important to realize that Buddhism does not promote the idea of abandoning desires altogether. What Buddhism encourages is the idea that all forms of craving, grasping and clinging, which are exaggerated forms of desire, have to be abandoned not because there is something morally wrong with them, but because, ultimately, they are the cause of unhappiness. One may think that clinging onto things somehow or other would promote one‘s happiness, but that is misguided. Such misguided ide as as come from having this mistaken notion about the self, from thinking that the self is a permanent, enduring entity rather than realizing that the self, just like the experiences which the self endures, is impermanent, mutable and therefore ephemeral. So, from the Buddhist point of view, if one is to overcome the experience of suffering or dukkha, then one has to have proper insight into the nature of the mind or into the nature of the self, because as long as one clings onto this mistaken notion about the self, then one would experience varieties of suffering.
We have to understand that suffering, from a Buddhist point of view, is quite different from what we normally mean by suffering. When Buddhists say, ―everything is suffering,‖ that does not mean th at Buddhists have the understanding that everything is terrible and bleak, there is no future for anybody and we cannot have any sense of enjoyment of happiness. Suffering is understood in a broader context, in the sense that, as long as we cling onto the idea of an enduring self, even the happiness which we experience, the pleasure which we experience, is always going to be something impermanent, something which only lasts for a short time, precisely because of clinging and grasping. The happiness and pleasures that we experience are not denied. Buddhists do not say we do not experience happiness or pleasure. But, because of our grasping or clinging, even when we have experiences of happiness and pleasure, they are only temporary. As human beings, our mind is dominated by the concept of an enduring self so when one has the experience of happiness and pleasure, the way in which such experiences are pursued is in relation to something that is external to the self. How does one pursuer happiness in relation to things that are external to the self? Wanting to get a job that pays well and thinking that will bring permanent happiness; thinking that if one marries the right person, then permanent happiness will be found; thinking that if one has children who are good an pleasant to have around, then permanent happiness will be discovered. From the Buddhist point of view, the reason why everything is seen as suffering is precisely because of having that misplaced conviction, having that misplaced understanding in relation to what would really bring happiness, what would really bring pleasure in one‘s life. As long as one thinks that long -lasting happiness or long-lasting pleasure can be obtained only in relation to things other than the self, then no happiness or pleasure really is going to be lasting, because one‘s whole idea or experience of happiness is contingent on other things. Whether things which would promote one‘s happiness persist or not is dependent on all kinds of external causes and conditions which are mutable, changeable, impermanent and which, for that reason, bring about a sense of frustration and dissatisfaction. Therefore, everything is suffering. If one wants to attain lasting happiness, then that can be achieved only through self-transformation, t hrough changing one‘s attitudes, through changing one‘s understanding of the self. Without that, no matter how much one wants happiness, no matter how much one pursues happiness, happiness is going to be elusive. One think that happiness can be achieved or discovered in
relation to things that one possesses or things that one does, but not in relation to the way one exists, in the way one lives one‘s life, not in relation to one‘s own being. From a Buddhist point of view the reason one needs to gain proper insight into the nature of the self is precisely happiness, real lasting happiness, simply comes from just that: having insight into the nature of the self, into the nature of the mind, and realizing that thinking there is this self, this unchangeable, permanent, enduring entity, is a misconception. Furthermore, with this misconception all kinds of delusions and obscurations of the mind arise, which in turn inhibit the individual from experiencing and perceiving reality. So right from the beginning Buddhism has emphasized the importance of purification of the mind, of how important it is to eradicate the defilements and obscurations of the mind, of how important it is to have proper self-knowledge, because that is the only way that real, lasting happiness can be attained. That same emphasis exists in the later teachings, in the Mahayana teachings, and also in the teachings of mahamudra which I‘m going to be discussing. I think it is important to talk about these things because the teachings of mahamudra make sense only in relation to understanding these fundamental Buddhist insights. Right from the beginning, Buddhism sees spiritual salvation only in understanding the nature of one‘s own self, in realizing what kind of individual one is, and in seeing how certain emotional conflicts arise due to certain misconceptions. Those are the two veils: the veil of conceptual confusion and the veil of emotional conflict. This means that our thinking and our experience of emotions are intimately related. We cannot separate the two. Due to certain misconceptions regarding what we understand ourselves to be —for example, the notion that there is something called an enduring, permanent self –all kinds of emotional conflicts follow. By changing the conceptual structures of the mind even emotions become transformed. In the West we have the notion that emotions and thoughts are very different, that emotions and reason are completely opposed to eachother. From a Buddhist point of view this is not true. In fact, what we believe in, how we think, has direct influence on the mind of emotions that we experience. Fundamentally, all our beliefs are tied up with our notion of the self. A Buddhist would say that our very dogmatic attitudes towards things or people, dogmatic attitudes toward people who belong to other religions, other races, and so forth all reflect one‘s own notion of the self. Either they
are seen as threatening or they are seen as something that would help consolidate the notion of the self. But once that whole idea of the self as being an enduring permanent entity is overcome then all the defiling tendencies of the mind would subside, both on the conceptual as well as the emotional level. I would like to stop here and have a discussion. Q: There is no doubt that outside things do contribute to happiness. They are impermanent, but they still contribute to our peace of mind and well being. Does that mean it‘s not real? A: No. From a Buddhist point of view, it is legitimate to have the desire to want to have a good job, have a nice family, be able to drive a car that runs, rather than one that breaks down and causes further misery, or have a spouse who is supportive and understanding, rather than one who abuses you. All that is important. But because of clinging and grasping, one normally has the tendency to think that these will bring about permanent happiness. So what happens when the spouse stops loving you or when the car breaks down or when you lose the job? Then one would feel suicidal, because one thinks, ―I‘m nothing, other than the job that I have,‖ or ―I‘m nothing without such and such a person.‖ Everything that one believes oneself to be is defined by these things or people that one finds oneself with. And that is mistaken. That is what Buddhists mean when they say real lasting happiness will be obtained through self-knowledge, through real understanding of oneself, and not from other things. Which is not to deny the existence of temporal happiness. When Buddhists say ―everything is suffering,‖ that does not mean the re is no pleasure or happiness in life outside oneself. There are such pleasures and happiness, but they are only temporary, precisely because they are dependent upon causes and conditions external to the self. Even when one has a really good relationship, let‘s say, one is in love with a spouse and the spouse loves you and everything is hunky dory, if the spouse dies unexpectedly, then happiness disappears and suffering sets in. One has to have a proper understanding of impermanence and real appreciation of impermanence would come from realizing the impermanence of the self. What we regard as the self which we think is unchanging and immutable, in fact, is always in process. And that could be a good thing. So from a Buddhist point of view self-growth can take place precisely because the self is not some kind of immutable unchanging entity. Otherwise any kind of change or transformation in the self would only
be apparent, not real, because the real self is seen as something that is unchanging and permanent. Q: How do you distinguish between a desire that is valid, and clinging and grasping? A: Just from not clinging, but desiring. For example, if you want to get a job, if you want too much, then you‘ll make a fool of yourself during the interview, precisely because you want it so much. Or if you desire somebody and you think, ―He is so good, he is so fantastic,‖ and the more you think about it the more you get worked up, that in itself might make the other person stand back and not have anything to do with you . That‘s really what clinging, grasping, craving means. Buddhists are not promoting a notion of social breakdown, that parents should stop loving their children because it is a form of attachment and that children should stop loving their parents because it is a form of attachment or that husbands should leave their wives as quickly as possible because that also reflects a form of attachment. That whole idea is a misunderstanding in so far as there is nothing wrong with these things as long as one keeps everything in perspective, as long as one does not become attached and there is no clinging-grasping involved. Q: In that situation when one is clinging, say to anger or grief, and one watches oneself clinging, how does one work themselves out of it? A: In Buddhism that is why meditation is so important. Through meditation we become more aware. If one becomes more and more aware of the tendencies that one has, then even without making any deliberate effort to drop certain habits that one has, they will naturally drop away. There is a story about a thief who was wandering around in the mountains. There were no houses with riches or anything like that, so he was feeling a bit desperate when he discovered a cave. He went in and there was a meditator sleeping. He started to take whatever he could while this meditator was sleeping. As he was about to leave the mouth of the cave the meditator woke up and asked, ―What are you doing?‖ The thief said, ―There‘s been nothing to steal so I had to come here. But I‘m sorry. I know you are a meditator and I shouldn‘t be doing this.‖ The thief was feeling really embarrassed and said to the meditator, ―Look, I feel so bad, I‘ll do anything. I should change my ways. I would like to become a spiritual person. You, being a meditator, maybe you could teach me a few things. But don‘t tell me to stop stealing, because that is what I do and I can‘t help it. But
you can teach me anything else and I‘ll do it.‖ The meditator said to him, ―Don‘t worry about it. Next time when you st eal, just be aware that you are stealing.‖ After about two weeks the thief came back to the meditator and says, ―What have you done! I can‘t steal anymore.‖ So if one has that awareness, even if one is not deliberately trying to stop certain negative habits, just being aware would naturally wear them down. In fact, if one tries too hard to drop certain habits, then those habits may become more solidified. Awareness is more important than actually making too much effort into not being certain things. For example, if we try too hard to be nice, we end up not being nice. We become nice by becoming more aware of not being nice, rather than trying too hard to be nice. Q: Are the mind and the nature of mind two separate things? They are. And the mind, I presume, is the logical mind that we perceive the world around us. Can that mind become aware of the nature of mind? And if not, how do you become aware of the nature of mind? A: The nature of mind is not different from our thinking mind as such, yet at the same time they are not identical. It is because one does not have insight into the nature of the mind that ignorance exists. I‘ll talk about this later, but the nature of mind is no different from the nature of thoughts and emotions that we have, but because we do not have insight into the nature of thoughts and emotions, we do not have insight into the nature of the mind. How do we gain insight into the nature of the mind? That comes from awareness. Awareness is the key. For example, when you do meditation, witho ut thinking ―Why do I think about these trivial things, why do they come up in the mind? Why do certain emotions arise? Why do I have certain thoughts and emotions arising?‖—not thinking like that, not judging them to be bad or terrible things that you have to get rid of, but simply being aware of them, that is the mahamudra approach. From the mahamudra point of view, if you judge certain things to be bad or terrible, then that is a form of clinging as well. If you think, ―I have to get rid of these terribl e things that I think about, these terrible negative emotions,‖ then that in itself is a form of clinging. So just be aware of what arises in meditation. Q: Is the difference between the mind and the nature of the mind like the difference between the consciousness and the subconsciousness?
A: I suppose we could say it is, in so far as we are not conscious of them. If one has more awareness of the nature of the mind then much of our experience of dissatisfaction and so forth would subside. Q: Is the nature of the mind more like emotions and the way you behave, and the mind is more like what you are thinking? A: I‘ll be talking about this later, but the nature of the mind is said to be completely nondifferentiated, spacious, and is the basis of all of our experiences, the source from which all of our experiences arise. But in itself, it is not differentiated. So the nature of mind, unlike our thoughts and emotions, does not exist as an entity. Often it is compared to space. Space itself is not something like an entity, but it is because of space that clouds and so forth arise. Clouds have definable characteristics, whereas space itself doesn‘t. But space makes it possible for the clouds to be there in the first place. Sometimes the mind and the nature of the mind are compared to waves or the surface of the ocean and the ocean depths. One may perceive the waves, the activities on the surface of the ocean, but not actually realize the stillness and infinity of the depth of the ocean. The mind is said to be the same thing. On the other hand the nature of the waves and the nature of the depth of the ocean is the same thing, it is still water. In a similar kind of way, our thoughts and emotions have the same nature as the nature of the mind, but because of our ignorance we cannot appreciate that. If you are a psychologist or try to understand the mind, then you try to understand the mind in relation to its definable characteristics, in relation to thoughts and emotions. But there is another way of understanding the mind, which has to do with understanding the nature of the mind, which goes beyond that in a sense. Maybe I should put it another way. From the Mahayana point of view, we talk about two levels of truth, relative truth and absolute truth. What is absolute truth? Absolute truth is emptiness. What that means is that things do not have enduring essence. There is no such thing as substance or something that we can refer to as being the essence of things. On the other hand that does not mean that things do not exist. The nature of things, all the chairs and tables that we perceive, their nature is emptiness. The problem is in not perceiving the emptiness of the chairs and tables, not realizing that they lack enduring essence. How do we realize that? We realize
that through these very things, chairs and tables. Emptiness does not exist over and above them, emptiness exists as the nature of these things. The same thing with the mind. We understand the nature of the mind through our thoughts and emotions. Q: If the self has no enduring quality, what element is it that is therefore transmitted in the Buddhist belief in reincarnation? A: A Buddhist would say that precisely because there is no enduring self that there is rebirth. Buddhists do not really believe in reincarnation, Buddhists believe in rebirth. Each rebirth is quite complete. Nothing that is unchangeable gets transferred from one state of existence to another. Certain dispositional properties of the mind become transferred from one state of existence to another. Often, in the traditional Buddhist teachings, the example of plants are used. You would not say that a seedling is the same as a mature plant, but nonetheless there is the obvious transference of dispositional properties from the seedling to the mature plant. In a similar kind of way, certain dispositional properties of our previous existence get transferred to our present state, but nothing that is unchanging survives during this period. A seedling is one thing and a mature plant is something else. We were all in an embryonic stage at the beginning of our life, but as regards the relationship between the embryo and the mature people that we have become, obviously something from the embryo is transferred, but we are not the embryo. From that point of view, it is the same with the notion of the self or ego. Buddhism says that our notion of the self gets reinforced in two different ways. One is through habit, through an innate tendency to think that my ―self‖ is something permanent, which comes with the birth of consciousness. The other is that the same idea gets reinforced through learning. So if we are brought up in an environment which promotes the notion of a soul or some kind of unchanging psychic principle, then that would reinforce our idea of the self as something permanent and nonchanging. So it comes from two sources. One is innate, the other is learned. Q: So in an embryonic state we would have at least a beginning of a self, which is then developed and reinforced as the embryo develops and we grow older. But in fact that notion of self is an illusion.
A: To understand the self from a Buddhist point of view means we have to understand it from the point of view of the middle way. A Buddhist does not deny the existence of an ego or of the self. The self exists, on the relative level, but the self is an ultimate entity, as some kind of unchanging permanent thing does not exist. But that does not mean people do not have egos or that ego is totally illusory. I think some people have interpreted the Buddhist notion of selflessness or egolessness from that point of view, which is not true. We do have egos, we do have selves, but the self, as a Buddhist would say, is an aggregate, a skandha. We tend to think that the self is somehow distinguishable from our memories, our emotions, our thoughts, our attitudes. Somehow or other the self remains at a distance, observing all these things going on, or enduring all these experiences, but the experiencer is at a remove from what is going on. But Buddhists say that is exactly what the self is. The self is the memories, thoughts, emotions, concepts, attitudes. Put them together and you have a self. And if you take away all of that —in Buddhism we do this as an exercise —if we disassociate ourselves completely from our body, our memories, our thoughts, emotions, attitudes, our backgrounds, experiences, if we divorce ourselves from all these things, what remains? Nothing. We are something, somebody, precisely because we have those things. Without them, it is nothing. And that is emptiness, I suppose. But when we have them together, that is an aggregate, that is what‘s called skandha in Sanskrit. Q: You know that the concept of there being an ―I‖ or an experiencer is just that and you know that you have another concept that there may not be anymore there, but how do you get past just having an idea about it to knowing it? A: Basically from observation, through meditation. The continuity of the self is there. That is not denied. What is denied is something that is unchanging, permanent. Q: I‘m not going to identify with my body, any of my emotions, any of my experiences, but I still have this thought that there is someone there who is experiencing. A: Well there is. That‘s the thing. There is, and that is the ego, ego which is changing and impermanent rather than something unchanging and permanent as we normally assume it is. Ego as an empirical thing exists, but it is a product of causes and conditions, just like our body. That is what Buddhists
mean by egolessness . It doesn‘t mean it doesn‘t exist, as so many people assume. It exists, but it doesn‘t exist as an ultimate entity. It has been said that western thought talks about the ego, while Buddhism does not and, in fact, it teaches the nonexistence of ego. But even western psychology does not make any reference to the concept of soul or anything unchanging. When western psychologies talk about the ego, they are not talking about anything unchanging, permanent, immutable. So in some ways, there are similarities there. It is also said that western psychology talks about building up the ego, whereas Buddhism teaches how to break down the ego. But Buddhism, as much as western psychology, also talks about building up self-confidence and feelings of self-worth. Buddhism does not say that through the experience of egolessness we should feel nothing, that we should feel bad about ourselves. But through understanding of the self as not being permanent, a real appreciation of the self can be attained because then the self is something that can be transformed rather than something that is unchanging and permanent. Q: I‘ve often wondered why Buddhism uses the noun form ―emptiness.‖ It seems to me that the word ―emptiness‖ creates the illusion that emptiness is an entity itself. A: Nagarjuna has said that if we cling onto the idea of emptiness as being something, then that is worse than clinging onto the idea that everything has enduring essence. He says, ―To think that things have enduring essence is as foolish as a cow, but to think that everything is nonexistent or completely empty is even worse.‖ That is the middle view. The idea is that emptiness does not mean things do not exist. Emptiness is not discovered over and above existing things, emptiness is discovered as being the nature of all things that exist. It ‘s not something that is a negative thing, it‘s not total voidness, or anything like that. Q: Something we say all the time that I have found quite useful is, ―change your mind.‖ You might say, ―I‘ll have a cup pf coffee‖ and then, ―I‘ve changed my mind‖ and it‘s quite simple. Sometimes when I‘m angry I‘ll remember and just change my mind, just do something different. That catches the idea that it‘s not permanent. A: That‘s an interesting comment. From a Buddhist point of view, thoughts and emotions are so intimately related that by changing our thoughts we change our emotions. For example, the thought that your lover is having an
affair makes you angry or jealous, but if you realize that that was unfounded and not true, then jealousy or anger subsides immediately. In the west, these days, there is this tendency to think that you can deal with emotions directly, but from a Buddhist point of view, we actually can have more success with the changing of our emotions only if we change our thoughts. If we think differently, then we will feel differently and we will experience our emotions differently as well. So in that sense, yes, by changing our mind we will be a different person. As we know, the most upset person is the one who thinks too much. You can‘t sleep, you can‘t eat, constantly these thoughts are nagging at you and you get more and more worked up. TALK 2 Having discussed the general Buddhist understanding of the concept of the self and what needs to be done in relation to establishing a proper concept of the self so that one would be able to gain real insight into it, now I will talk about the Mahayana Buddhist concept of Buddha-nature, which is called tathagathagarbha in Sanskrit. The tathagathagarbha theory, the theory of Buddha-nature, was presented by the Yogachara school of Mahayana Buddhism. In order to understand the mahamudra view of the nature of mind it is essential to have some understanding of the concept of Buddha-nature, because the mahamudra concept of the nature of mind is based on this essential Mahayana notion that all sentient beings have the potential and opportunity to become fully awakened. The concept of tathagathagarbha has been rendered differently in different English translations of various Mahayana texts. Some translate this particular concept or word as the ―womb of enlightenment‖ others as ―matrix‖ yet others have translated it as ―seed of enlightenment.‖ In any case, when this concept was introduced into Mahayana it was seen as quite revolutionary, because up to that point Buddhism only talked about egolessness, lack of self. When the notion of Buddha-nature was introduced into Mahayana literature some Buddhists felt that this was, in a way, a perversion of the original teachings because Buddha-nature implies that there is something in the continuum of the consciousness which, in fact, is unchanging and can act as the basis upon which one can develop on a spiritual level. There is this potential for enlightenment in everyone. In some of the Mahayana literature Buddha-natur e is called the ―great self‖—the ego being
the ―little self.‖ In some Zen literature it is also called ―the mind of no mind.‖ When this idea was promoted by the Yogacarins it seemed to many that the whole idea of an unchanging self was being re-introduced into Buddhism, therefore people were very skeptical. Many Buddhists tried to explain this new teaching regarding the concept of the essential self. Some teachers said that the teachings on Buddha-nature are taught not because they are really true, but so that certain people who have been frightened by the notion that there is no self would find some comfort in thinking that there is something afterall, which is called Buddha-nature. For many Mahayana teachers, particularly the so-called sunyavadins or teachers who emphasized the importance of emptiness, it was just an expedient method to enable people to come to some understanding about themselves on a gradual level. After coming to have some understanding of Buddha-nature, they would then gradually abandon the whole notion of Buddha-nature and eventually come to accept the teachings on emptiness, which is the ultimate truth. For many other Buddhist teachers, particularly the Yogacarins who of course promoted the concept, Buddha-nature is not just a theory, not just a concept, but exists in reality and is the essential nature of all human beings. What this concept suggests is that for human beings, or sentient beings generally, as far as their mind is concerned, there is an element of consciousness which has never been defiled, which has remained pure, right from the beginning and precisely because of the purity of this element of consciousness it is possible to attain enlightenment. Without it, that would not be possible. The Yogacarins said that the defilements exist but only on a relative level because ultimately the mind is pure by nature. In terms of early Buddhism the Buddha in some of his early sutras in fact made references to the mind being undefiled, pure and so forth, but these were just references. He did not elaborate on this. We could say that the Yogacarins elaborated on that concept. The mind itself is completely undefiled, but what they call ―adventitious defilements‖ arise. The word ―adventitious‖ is used in order to suggest that defilements and obscurations of the mind are not essential to the mind itself, but arise due to causes and conditions. These defilements exist only on the
relative level, because on the ultimate level the mind itself is totally pure and undefiled and has been right from the beginning. Now, if the mind itself or an element of the mind or consciousness has not been defiled, right from the beginning, then the question might be asked, ―From where do the defilements arise? From what source?‖ TO answer that, the Yogacarins introduced the notion of alayavijnana. That word is normally rendered into English as ―storehouse consciousness,‖ but some translate it as ―fundamental consciousness,‖ while Professor Guenther translates it as ―substratum of awareness.‖ In any case, the word‖alayavijnana‖ was introduced into Mahayana teachings by the Yogacarins because they felt it had to be proposed as the basis of all our delusional experiences. This is the basic source from which all the obscurations and defilements arise. It is also the source from which one has this mistaken notion of self-existing, unchanging, permanent self. As the English rendition this Mahayana term as ―storehouse consciousness‖ suggests, all of our experiences in terms of our karmic traces and dispositions are stored in the alayavijnana. Nothing, in fact, gets wasted. Everything remains dormant on an unconscious level and, when the appropriate time and situation arises, then the karmic traces in the mind would give rise to certain appropriate experiences. According to Yogacara philosophy, defilements arise from the alayavijnana, but the mind itself understood from the point of view of tathagathagarbha or womb of enlightenment is pure and non-defiled. That is, in fact, the ultimate aspect of the mind. The relative aspect of the mind understood from the point of view of the storehouse consciousness, is defiled. So the defilements in the mind exist only on the relative level. From the ultimate point of view the mind is completely pure. Some of the teachers who expunded this theory went so far as to suggest that tathagathagarbha or Buddhanature has four aspects: pure, blissful, permanent, and nontemporal and great self. Those of you who are familiar with conventional Buddhist teachings would know how radical this whole notion is. Traditionally, it is said that the mind is impure because of the defilements; there is no bliss, only suffering because of the defilements and due to clinging, grasping, and craving; nothing is permanent in terms of the mind or the self, everything is subject to change and is therefore mutable, but the Yogacarins say that Buddhanature is permanent. The last characteristic is great self, but Buddhism as we know has rejected all notions of a permanent, immutable self.
So the Yogacarins say the tathagathagarbha has these four attributes of being pure, blissful, permanent, and manifesting as the great-self. Now this might lead people to think that the tathagathagarbha theory is not different from the notion of the atma in Hindu tradition, which is normally translated as the soul or great self, because the atma is also understood to be permanent, blissful, et cetera. But according to Yogacara masters that is not the case. When it is said that Buddhanature is permaenent this is not saying that the tathagathagarbha is some self-existing reality, some kind of immutable entity. It does not meant that there is something that is actually existing and has some endurance, but permanent only in relation to the aspect of emptiness. The nature of tathagathagarbha, the womb of enlightenment, is emptiness. And because emptiness is not subject to change, it is therefore permanent. So these Mahayana teachers distinguished the notion of Buddhanature from the atma theory. They did not want to posit this concept as having some kind of self-existing or inherent existence. The phrase ―womb of enlightenment‖ or ―seed of enlightenment‖ suggests that tathagathagarbha exists only on a dormant level or as a potential. Again, different interpretations arose regarding this. Some say that it is called the seed or womb of enlightenment because it suggests that sense of dormancy or potentiality, rather than actuality. If this is the case, then tathagathagarbha is to be realized over a long period of time, after overcoming appropriate or characteristic obstacles on the path. The tathagathagarbha exists as a potentiality only. Yet others interpreted this in a radically different way. They said no, tathagathagarbha exists in all sentient beings. The lement of the consciouness which is non-defiled in ordinary sentient beings is no different from that of enlightened beings. Therefore sentient beings are originally enlightened, they only do not realize they are enlightened. That is the only problem, so ignorance lies in not realizing that. The tathagathagarbha, the womb of enlightenment exists not just in potentiality, but in actualiy. It is already there. These two different streams of interpretation exist both in Chinese and Japanese Buddhism, in relation to Zen. The teaching which said that the tathagathagarbha exists only in terms of potentiality is called ―Zen of the dcotrines,‖ while the teaching which said that the tathagathagarbha exists in
its complete form even in unenlightnened ordinary sentient beings is called ―patriar ichal Zen.‖ We have the same two different kinds of interpretation in Tibetan Buddhism also. Some traditions interpret the concept of tathagathagarbha to mean that it exists as a potentiality for enlightenment, rather than enlightenment as such. Other traditions such as the teachings on mahamudra and Dzogchen or maha ati interpret it to mean complete enlightenment. Enlightenment is already present in its fullest form, nothing has to be added. If proper insight is gained into the nature of the mind, which is the same as tathagathagarbha, then there is nothing that has to be attained. It is more a question of realizing what one already possesses, rather than trying to improve on something through practice, through meditation, through embarking upon the spiritual path. These two traditions are normally referred to as the gradual and instantaneous schools of practitioners, the gradualists emphasize the importance of having to spend a lot of time developing that innate quality of the mind, which is non-defiled, and the spontaneists saying that there is nothing that one needs to do. In fact even meditation itself is not something that one does in order to improve the mind. Rather, meditation is done in order to strip away the layers of veils, the layers of defilements. But nothing needs improving, nothing needs to be added. Sometimes in mahamudra and in Dzogchen teachings it is said that ―nothing needs to be subtracted or added to, everything is complete in itself.‖ In mahamudra teachings Buddha-nature is identified with the nature of mind. The very nature of the mind is said to non-defiled and complete. The nature of mind of ordinary sentient beings who are afflicted with varieties of obscurations and defilements is not different from the mind of enlightened beings. There is absolutely no difference. So the practice is not one of gradually working through one‘s karmic traces and dispositions and overcoming appropriate obstacles on the paths and stages, as it is in Mahayana teachings, but rather of allowing the mind to be. If one is able to allow the mind to be and not make any effort, not even the effort to become enlightened, if through practice of meditation one is able to allow the mind to be in its natural state —that is what is called in mahamudra teachings: ―in its natura l state‖—then one would realize that one is already enlightened. Enlightenment is not something one has to attain. Enlightenment comes from being, from being in one‘s own authentic condition, without any contrivances.
It is said that through the practice of mahamudra one does not use any methods to change or transform the mind. The question is not of transforming the mind as much as it is of allowing the mind to reveal itself, because the nature of the mind itself is already perfect, complete and totally non-defiled. Therefore enlightenment is not achieved, as it has been said in oneself to be in one‘s own natural state. Then all the defilements would naturally become self-liberated. ―Self -liberated‖ is a technical word used in mahamudra teachings and also in Dzogchen. The idea here is that, unlike the gradual approach of using the gradual approach of using different antidotes in order to overcome certain obstacles on the path, there are no antidotes that one needs to use, because all the delusions and obscurations of the mind would naturally become selfliberated if one is able to rest the mind without any contrivances, without trying to change it, without trying to transform it, without even trying to make it become more still, more clear, more translucent, more calm, more tranquil and so on. Without doing any of that, if one simply exercises pure awareness, observes what arises in the mind in terms of thoughts and emotions, does not judge them, does not pursue positive thoughts and emotions or shun the negative ones, but is able to simply let whatever arises in the mind to be, then according to the mahamudra traditions the thoughts themselves can become part of meditation. Thoughts and emotions may continue to arise, but they will no longer disturb the stability of the mind if one is able to maintain a pure sense of awareness. From the mahamudra point of view, the way in which one realizes the nature of the mind is not from shunning thoughts and emotions, but from letting them be, because if one is able to allow the mind to be in its natural state, then when thoughts and emotions arise, the nature of these thoughts and emotions would be revealed as having the same nature as the nature of the mind. Therefore another technical term used in mahamudra teaching is ―ordinary mind.‖ Instead of thinking that Buddhahood is attained through transforming the mind or through becoming something greater than what one already is by trying to overcome one‘s negative thoughts and emotions, if one simply relates to the ordinary mind itself, ordinary mind meaning the mind which has experiences of all kinds, then during meditation, when thoughts and emotions arise, even if they are of a negative nature, if pure awareness is applied, then the nature of the negative thoughts and emotions would be revealed as having the same nature as the nature of the mind.
One of the mahamudra prayers says that ―the nature of thoughts is dharmakaya.‖ Dharmakaya, meaning the nature of the mind, is not different from ultimate reality, so the nature of the thoughts is dharmakaya. Dharmakaya or ultimate reality is not to be found somewhere else, existing over and above the delusions which are already present in the mind. If proper awareness is applied by seeing the nature of the delusions, one would understand the nature of the mind, which is of course equated with the attainment of enlightenment. From the mahamudra point of view, because enlightenment is already present one should not concern oneself too much with abandoning this and trying to acquire that, unlike the traditional Mahayana approach to the path and meditation where one tries to abandon certain negative tendencies and replace them with positive ones, such as trying to overcome one‘s bad karma so that one would be able to create good karma and then be able to realize Buddhahood. One does not concern oneself with such an approach. What one has to do is practice meditation in such a way that the mind is left alone. One is not trying to use antidotes in order to overcome obstacles in meditation, one is not trying to transform the mind or use any kind of contrivances. One allows the mind to be in its own natural state. This is the so-called spontaneous approach, gcig charba in Tibetan. The gradual approach is called rimgyi ba, which means ―step -by-step approach to enlightenment.‖ Enlightenment is not something that can be attained straight away, it takes a lot of effort and a lot of time. According to some Mahayana teachings it takes three countless eons to achieve enlightenment, so it is not an easy task. The instantaneous approach on the other hand says that because enlightenment is already present all one needs to do is to enter into that mind state, the state of enlightenment. It is not a question of going through different stages. Some teachers have noted that the gradual and instantaneous approaches may be able to reconcile their differences if one understands that when spiritual insights occur they occur instantaneously, but that there are many different kinds of spiritual insights that one can obtain, so these insights may occur over a period of time. Even though insights as they occur may be instantaneous, nonetheless these varying degrees of insight would be happening over a period of time. Therefore in a sense it is gradual also.
When the Mahayana teachings say that it takes three countless eons to become enlightened maybe that should not be taken too literally —this is according to some of the teachers who reconcile the differences between the gradual and the spontaneous approaches. Maybe it does not mean that it literally takes three countless eons to attain enlightenment, but because of the Mahayana concept of bodhichitta, of having to adopt infinite compassion to want to liberate all sentient beings, one generates the thought that until all sentient beings are enlightened one would not want to become enlightened. One has to develop such an attitude, but to develop that attitude and to think that one would like to remain in the samsaric condition for as long as it takes to liberate all sentient beings does not mean that the bodhisattva actually remains in the samsaric world for three countless eons, or for an indefinite period of time. If the bodhisattva has generated the relevant bodhisattva attitude, then that bodhisattva may attain enlightenment in a short period of time. So understood that way, it is said that there is no real contradiction between the approach of the gradualists and the non-gradualists. Even for example the teachings which explicitly set out the five paths and ten stages of the bodhisattva, of the Mahayana practitioner even these teachings which explain in great detail how each of the paths are traversed and how one gets transferred from one level of the bodhisattva to the next should not perhaps be understood in a too literal sense of having to spend so long a period of time going through the five paths and ten stages. The paths and stages can be traversed within one‘s own lifetime. Mahamudra teachings and the ones who try to reconcile the two different traditions emphasize the importance of aiming towards achieving enlightenment in one‘s own lifetime. Enlightenment is not something that one works towards in terms of accumulating good karma or merit as it is called over a long period of time and hoping that at some future time in one of one‘s future rebirths one would become enlightened. Enlightenment should be attained on the spot. When one sits down to practice on the meditation cushion ones does not think, ―I‘m just an ordinary sentient being with so many delusions and defilements. I do not have the ability to attain enlightenment. I have to do with breaking down certain negative karmic tendencies and gradually stripping the mind of defilements. Then at some future time I might become enlightened.‖ Instead, one has to think, ―Enlightenment is accessible right now.‖
Mahamudra teachers are always pronouncing the importance of not distancing oneself from the state of enlightenment, of not thinking that enlightenment is something superior, something transcendent, something that is not really within one‘s reach at the moment. One should think of enlightenment as imminent, alre ady present. By dropping one‘s defilements, which include such negative thoughts as distancing oneself from enlightenment, one would attain enlightenment on the spot, during meditation. Even to think of Buddhahood as being something so different, something totally independent of the samsaric condition, is a form of discrimination. And the mind should not discriminate in that way. By not discriminating, by not judging, by not placing evaluations on one‘s experiences but allowing the mind to be, then one atta ins enlightenment. All the delusions become self-liberated. One does not deliberately get rid of the defilements or the obscurations of the mind. They become self-liberated, purely through awareness. I think I‘ll stop here and we can have a discussion. Q: You talked about mahamudra being a spontaneous or instantaneous enlightenment compared to a gradualist approach. What makes the difference between being enlightened in one instance and not in another? A: The mahamudra masters actually do not say that there is a real conflict between the gradualist approach and the instantaneous approach because when spiritual insights occur they occur instantaneously, but on the other hand insights occur over a period of time in terms of intensity and so on. So in a sense there is a sense of gradualness about it. What the mahamudra teachers say is that the gradualness does not have to do with many lifetimes. It is not necessary that one has to devote so many lifetimes to practice, before one achieves enlightenment. According to mahamudra, even the Mahayana teachings which talk about the paths and stages, teachings which claim that it is necessary for the bodhisattva to spend three countless eons before attaining enlightenment, should not be taken literally. It simply refers more to the attitude of the bodhisattva then what it, in fact, the case. The bodhisattva, due to his or her infinite compassion, cares so much about the sufferings of ordinary people and so wants to postpone enlightenment. That is their mental attitude, but that does not mean that they would in fact, end up spending three countless eons before attaining enlightenment. So they say that even the teachings which set out detailed descriptions of the path and stages should not be taken too literally.
In that way you can reconcile the two traditions of gradualist and instantaneous approaches. Q: So it‘s just a difference in emphasis in the motivation at the point when you sit down to meditate? A: Yes. Even if you have this concept of Buddha-nature, if one has the gradualist approach, then one may see Buddhanature as being more like a seed of enlightenment or potentiality for enlightenment, rather than Buddhanature being a fully developed enlightened aspect of the mind as it is now. Q: I find it difficult to pinpoint the difference between the instantaneous approach and the gradualist one. It seems to me that the practice is very similar. A: The gradual approach think of enlightenment as occurring in the future and the instantaneous approach thinks of enlightenment as being present now: it is only delusion which stands in the way, it has nothing to do with transformation of the mind or improving on anything. The mind in relation to its nature is already perfect. Dzogchen is another tradition which emphasizes the instantaneous approach. ―Dzogchen,‖ ―great perfection,‖ means simply that the mind as it exists is perfect itself. It is only due to ignorance due to delusions that one does not realize it. Enlightenment does not mean that the mind has become transformed, as much as that delusion, which stands in the way, has been removed. Once that is out of the way then one realizes one‘s own nature is perfect, that nothing needs to be added or subtracted from, as is said in the mahamudra and Dzogchen teachings. Subtracted means removing the defilements or delusions. But even teachings such as mahamudra and Dzogchen, which emphasize the instantaneous approach, try to reconcile the differences between the two traditions. They do not say that the gradualists are wrong. What they do is interpret the gradualist approach, the teachings which say that in order to become a fully enlightened Buddha first of all you need to adopt a bodhichitta or bodhisattva outlook and traverse the five paths and ten stages of the bodhisattva, then eventually this would culminate in the attainment of full Buddhahood and normally it would take three countless eons to do that. The mahamudra teachers and Dzogchen teachers have reinterpreted this to mean that in reality it does not mean it actually takes three countless eons to achieve Buddhahood, but according to Mahayana teachings which emphasize compassion so much, to develop this attitude involves having infinite
compassion for others, therefore such a bodhisattva has the attitude of not even wanting to attain enlightenment in a great hurry, that one would like to postpone one‘s enlightenment. But as Trungpa Rinpoche once said in his teachings, even if the bodhisattva does not want to become enlightened, he or she would become enlightened in spite of himself or herself, even without trying. Q: Why should it be a disadvantage to wish to become enlightened? Surely you are instantly more useful if you are enlightened than if you are not. What‘s the idea of putting it off? A: The idea is that one does not want to enter nirvana prematurely. One wants to be in the world helping others. Q: Is that a consequence of not being available? A: Yes. But according to certain Mahayana teachings, and this includes Mahamudra and Dzogchen teachings, samsara and nirvana are not so different. Sometimes it has been said that samsara is nirvana and nirvana is samsara. That does not mean samsara and nirvana are identical, what it means is samsara and nirvana have the same nature, which is emptiness. In that sense entering into nirvana does not mean going into some kind of totally different or transcendent realm, far from the empirical world that we live in. Nirvana is here right now if one knows how to attain it. So it is not something that takes place outside of space and time. Q: So where does the thought of wanting to put off one‘s enlightenment come from? A: That comes from compassion. Achieving enlightenment for one‘s own sake without thought of others is considered to be non-Mahayanist because Mahayana Buddhism puts so much emphasis on compassion. For that reason. Q: I see preliminary practice as a more gradual practice. Would you recommend for somebody to focus purely on doing mahamudra or on doing both mahamudra and preliminary practice? A: In the Kagyu tradition we do preliminary practice, we emphasize that very strongly, and we also practice mahamudra. But the preliminaries are performed with the intention to want to realize mahamudra in this life. Preliminary practices are not done with the intention to want to become enlightened in the distant future at some later date. As some of the
mahamudra teachers have said, the practices of the preliminaries help to thin out the defilements. For that reason they are practiced. But all the while one is doing the preliminaries one should have the mahamudra view, which is that enlightenment is within one‘s grasp and it can be attained. It is not something that is too exalted or out of one‘s reach. One can do the preliminary practices with the mahamudra view, instead of thinking that with the preliminary practice one is slowly wearing down the negative karma and, if one is lucky, at some future date one may become enlightened. Q: It is possible to grasp onto the idea of becoming enlightened? A: Yes. From the mahamudra point of view we should not be grasping onto any kind of idea, even the thought of enlightenment. When the mind is not grasping, when it‘s not clinging onto anything, including the notion of having a tranquil mind, a peaceful mind, or grasping onto the notion of getting rid of thoughts, negative thoughts and emotions, then one realizes enlightenment. Q: Can one do meditation on one‘s own or does one need a teacher? A: It is important to have a teacher, but we have to realize that the teacher does not mean what in the west people think gurus to be. Basically having a teacher is to have a relationship with somebody and because the teacher has more experience than you, then you can work with the person. But that does not mean that someone has to be ultimately dependent on the teacher. For that reason, in fact, in mahamudra teachings it is said that the teacher has two aspects, relative and ultimate. The ultimate aspect of the teacher is Buddha-nature, or the nature of the mind itself. That‘s the ultimate teacher. The relative teacher is the human one. Through the human teacher one comes to realize the ultimate teacher, which is the nature of the mind itself. Q: I‘m not f amiliar with the preliminary practices. A: The preliminary practices are normally, in Kagyü tradition, what we call the four foundation practices. One is doing prostrations, another is called mandala offering, the third is Vajrasattva and the fourth is practice of devotion to the lineage. These are conducted in order to overcome certain obstacles. For example , doing prostrations can work with one‘s sense of egocentricity. With prostrations for example, westerners find the fact that you prostrate demeaning. Even though you are not prostrating to any individual as such,
just the simple fact of doing it is a bit too much. On the other hand, in order to show our humility we do that. People kneel in church, people kneel to pray, so it‘s not foreign. Even in the west doing prostrations or kneeling reflects that attitude of humility, which is, of course not the same as lack of confidence or of self-worth. It works in terms of dismantling one‘s ego -centric attitudes so that one becomes more open. Mandala offering works with the sense of generosity so that you give up clinging-grasping and Vajrasattva is for purification of the mind. Devotion to the lineage to build up confidence in what one is doing. For example, if you are practicing something which has been put together by some crackpot who woke up one morning and thought he or she spoke to god who said ―this is what you should do,‖ obviously that is not as credible as a tradition which has been based on authentic transmission from teacher to student, so there is a real valid transmission which has been preserved. So building confidence in that with one‘s devotion to the lineage. That‘s what one does with the preliminary practices. Q: Could you say something about the relationship between ethical practices and meditation? A: In Buddhism we talk about cultivating wisdom through reflection, through contemplation, through meditation, and you cultivate compassion in terms of your actions, in terms of how you relate to others. In the early Buddhist teachings these are set out in the so-called paramitas, which also promote the whole idea of the three trainings of morality, wisdom, and meditation. Q: Meditation is really seen as the link between compassion and wisdom. In order to do both properly, one needs to practice meditation. From the mahamudra point of view actually, it is said that meditation is in some ways more important than concerning oneself too much with the practice of compassion because unless one has certain insight into oneself, unless one has certain un derstanding of one‘s own mind, then even if one is trying to do something which is good or worthwhile, it may in fact be perverted due to one‘s own delusions and lack of insight. It is said that through meditation in fact one‘s capacity to help others wou ld come naturally. If one is able to have proper understanding of oneself, then one would have proper understanding of everything else. From the mahamudra point of view to understand the nature of the mind is to understand all
things because there is no separation, there is nonduality. If one has that experience of nonduality then compassion would stem forth naturally. It is not something that one has to deliberately cultivate. It would come. But generally, unlike what some people in the west think, Buddhism—because of its emphasis on meditation —does not undervalue the importance of engagement in the real world, helping people, doing whatever is necessary to alleviate other‘s suffering. Which is very important. As the Buddhist nun Aya Khema said, ―Compassion can move mountains, but without wisdom you don‘t know which mountain needs moving.‖ That sums it up nicely, in terms of the importance of both. Q: Is mindfulness essentially without language? I can be self-conscious of myself, but that will always be with a form of language following myself around. The idea of mindfulness seems to be something which transcends language. A: I suppose that‘s true i n a way. Mindfulness is really involved with an object. You use certain objects so that you can practice mindfulness. From a Buddhist point of view mindfulness should give rise to awareness. It is very difficult for a beginner to be aware. You do not just become aware, but through the practice of mindfulness it is possible to develop awareness. Awareness comes from the practice of consistent mindfulness. You use an external object or you use the breath or you use your senses to practice mindfulness, so you are constantly going back to the object of mindfulness and not allowing your mind to run off in all directions. Mindfulness helps to anchor the mind so that it does not get too indulgent in thoughts, and language too. But from a Buddhist point of view mindfulness is something that becomes transcended through development of awareness. Once awareness develops, then one does not need to be mindful. Mindfulness is a deliberate thing whereas awareness is more spontaneous. Q: If just by being in the presence of a teacher you become emotional, what is actually happening? A: In Tibetan Buddhism we have this notion, this concept called ―auspicious coincidence.‖ It is in a way similar to Jung‘s idea of synchronicity. For example if you hear Buddhist teachings it may strike a chord in you. Auspicious coincidence does not mean it is something accidental, that it just happened. The cause lies in one‘s own past and because of that now it has come to fruition, in a sense.
Q: What comes to fruition? Is it something from the past? A: In terms of one‘s past karma. From a Buddhist point of view nothing which is significant happens accidentally. If you hear something and that gives rise to certain emotions, then that does not mean you just happened to be there and, all of a sudden it just happened. Another expression used is ―karmic connection,‖ whatever that means. That‘s the phrase westerners use, but the concept is the same as what we call auspicious coincidence. As lamas keep on saying, there are millions and millions of people in the west and only a very few take an interest in Buddhism. Why so? From a Buddhist way of understanding, the ones who take interest in Buddhism have some kind of karmic propensity already, that is why. It doesn‘t happen just like that. The interest in Buddhism, for example, does not just happen. It has happened because of one‘s karmic propensity, which is already set in motion. Q: Is that from previous lives? A: Past lives, generally speaking from Mahayana point of view. That‘s one way of understanding. But to be Buddhist or to practice Buddhism one does not have to believe in rebirth or anything like that. That‘s not essential. What one needs to believe in is what Buddhism says about what causes suffering and how to overcome it. If we do that, then that‘s the essence, that‘s the most important thing. There are certain auxiliary concepts in Buddhism, concepts such as rebirth which are part of Buddhist teachings as well. But they are not essential. Q: In talking about the four characteristics of Buddha-nature you explained how the term ―permanent‖ is interpreted in such a way that it is seen as being nonsubstantial. Could you interpret the term ―great self‖? A: It is the ―great self‖ precisely because it is not some kind of metaphysical entity. It is t he ―great self‖ only because it represents the whole qualities of enlightenment which are already present within one‘s own mind. Because of that it is the ―great self,‖ but not the ―great self‖ as the atma concept suggests. Q: About the emotional response that is some kind of connection to whatever in your previous karma, how does one deal with it? A: Just accept it and let it be. Q: How can one come to terms with a situation like grief?
A: From a mahamudra point of view, one has to allow oneself to feel the grief, and then let go. Not suppress it, not encourage it, but when it arises one experiences it, and then let go. Q: How can you do that without becoming self-indulgent? A: Through awareness. There is nothing wrong with the feeling of grief. That is another thing. After doing meditation even if one has been doing meditation for a number of years, at least from a Buddhist point of view particularly from a mahamudra point of view, one should not think that one should go beyond all experiences of emotion. Emotions may still arise, but one experiences them differently and one deals with them differently, through the practice of meditation. That is really what is the most important thing. Even if you meditate, if a loved one dies then the appropriate emotion to experience is grief. If you don‘t grieve, there‘s something wrong with you. But to go on and on and not be able to let go, then it becomes a problem. Even if one is meditating, if some tragedies happen in one‘s life or tragedies happen to others, emotions arise but they are managed better because they don‘t overwhelm the person as much as if one was not meditating. Meditation should not lead the person to become like a piece of wood. Q: So you don‘t need to understand a karmic connection to understand where it‘s coming from so you can try and transcend that emotion? A: You can transcend it by letting go, by not worrying about it. Not worrying is letting go, worrying is grasping. That‘s what it is. From a Buddhist point of view, particularly from a mahamudra point of view, we should not be asking too many questions about why certain emotions or thoughts have some into the mind, but rather how they arise. How the emotions arise, how they affect us, that is really more important than looking for causes because you can come up with so many different explanations in terms of why and you can never be sure which one is correct. I think the existence of so many different psychotherapies proves that. Each form of therapy has a different explanation as to why certain emotions or certain neuroses arise. But that does not mean that is not important, we can still ask those questions and try to understand in terms of why, but it is more fundamental and more important to understand how they arise and how they affect us.
The question that should really concern us is more the question of ―how?‖ not ―why?‖ When you ask the question ―how?‖ it is immediate. You can perceive it, it‘s happening. When you start to ask ―why?‖ it‘s in the past. Then you start to look into causes. That‘s why asking ―how?‖ is more important and more beneficial. You were saying that when you hear Buddhist teachings emotions arise. You should be looking at how those emotions arise and how those emotions affect you, rather than thinking, ―Is it karmic connection or am I seeing the teacher as a father figure?‖ So not concerning oneself too much with that, but with what type of emotions arise and how they affect you. That‘s important. Even in terms of meditation, when emotions arise, it is more important to think of how they arise, rather than why they arise. Q: Whenev er a certain type of music is played, and it‘s the bagpipes believe it or not, I get an irrepressible urge to cry and it overwhelms me. I don‘t know how… A: That‘s how. Q: Okay. I feel very sad and I wait for it to go. A: That‘s it. It‘s good to be aware o f that. Q: It doesn‘t stop it. A: That‘s not the point. Talk 3 The teachings of mahamudra are basically drawn from two streams of Mahayana thought, one being the Yogacara system and the other the teachings of the sunyavadins, who promoted the idea that ultimate reality is emptiness. Within the Buddhist tradition generally, one needs to eradicate certain defilements and obscurations of the mind in order to realize the ultimate truth or ultimate reality. The most effective way to achieve that goal is through the practice of meditation. Generally speaking, two different types of meditation are engaged in. One is called shamatha, or meditation of tranquility, and the other is called vipashyana, or meditation of insight. Through practice of meditation of tranquility the meditator learns how to quieten the mind so that it becomes more focused, more resilient, more aware and less susceptible to distractions. Meditation of insight on the other hand is usually conducted in an analytical
form. Therefore, while the practice of meditation of tranquility encourages the mind to become more calm and less disturbed by conceptual thoughts, meditation of insight uses these thoughts in order to gain certain insights such as realization of the fact that there is no enduring or permanent immutable self. Conventionally, meditation of tranquility is presented in a way which suggests that as the mind becomes more focused the meditator could enter into different levels of concentration, of absorptions. So as discurcive thoughts subside, the mind would go into different levels of absorptions. Once one has perfectd shamatha, if one engages in analytical meditation, then thinking no longer gives rise to conceptual confusions as it normally does, but it gives rise to different insights. It is said that Buddhist meditation is regarded as being different to other traditions only because of the practice of meditation of insight, since other traditions also have techniques of quieting the mind, techniques that help the mind to become more focused. But it is through the practice of meditation of insight that one comes to the realization that there is no such thing as an enduring or permanent self, or that there is no such thing as enduring essence in physical and mental phenomena, or in physical and mental properties. Mahamudra also makes use of these two different techniques of shamatha and vipashyana, but according to mahamudra teachings to go through different levels of absorptions or concentrations is not important. It is sufficient for one to have stabilized the mind. Even if one has not achieved any ultimate state of concentration, even if one has not managed to obtain any level of absorption, nonetheless if the mind has become more stable and less susceptible to distractions then one can proceed with the practice of meditation of insight. Here also the practice of meditation of insight according to mahamudra is quite different from the conventional approaches. In the Mahayana tradition one normally uses the analytical method to understand the lack of essence in all things, realizing that everything that exists in the physical and mental realm is a product of causes and conditions. Nothing exists in a self-sufficient way therefore everything that exists is dependent upon causes and conditions. Through such an analytical method one would gain some conceptual understanding of what emptiness is, and that leads to the direct experience of emptiness. But mahamudra teachings say that if one focuses one‘s mind on the mind itself and realizes the nature of the mind, then one would realize the nature
of everything else. Instead of using reasoning and the analytical method to reduce everything to emptiness as is normally done in the Mahayana approach, if one focuses one‘s mind on the mind itself and re alizes that the nature of the mind is emptiness, then one would realize that everything else has the same nature, which is emptiness. According to mahamudra teachers the normal sutric approach of the Mahayana uses an external phenomena as objects of meditation, whereas mahamudra uses the mind itself as the object of analytical meditation. But even in relation to the mind, in mahamudra one does not analyze the mind in order to realize that the nature of the mind is emptiness. Rather, through contemplation, by allowing the mind to be in its natural state, the mind would reveal itself to have that nature. The nature of the mind is not analyzed and one does not have to have some conceptual grasp of the fact that the nature of the mind is empty. If the mind is allowed to be in its natural state and if all discursive thoughts subside, then the nature of the mind itself would be revealed as being empty of enduring essence. In a normal context, when one engages in the practice of meditation one has to use different antidotes for different obstacles. According to mahamudra, one should not become too concerned with the obstacles and also with the use of the antidotes in order to quieten the mind. One should have a general sense that all obstacles that arise in meditation can be divided into two categories. One is the obstacle of stupor or drowsiness and the other is mental agitation. With stupor, even though the mind is not disturbed by the agitation of discursive thoughts or emotional conflicts, nonetheless there is no sense of clarity in the mind. The mind has become dull and sometimes of course this gets followed by sleepiness and drowsiness. Mental agitation on the other hand is easier to d etect because one‘s mind has fallen under the influence of discursive thoughts, distractions, emotional conflicts and so on. Instead of using different antidotes to control the mind in these situations, the mahamudra approach recommends two methods. One is relaxation and the other is a tightening up process. If the mind has become dull, then one should tighten the mind with the application of mindfulness. One should try to regenerate and refuel the sense of mindfulness of the meditation object, whatever it happens to be. If one‘s mind is agitated, then one should not apply too much mindfulness, but relax the mind more. If mental agitation is present during meditation, then one needs to loosen the mind, in a sense let
go of mindfulness or whatever it is that one is using in order to make the mind more focused. If the mind has become dull and there is no sense of clarity, then one should try to regenerate and refuel the presence of mindfulness. In terms of posture also, if one‘s mind has become dull, then one should straighten one‘s spine, expand one‘s chest and tighten the body somewhat. Not too rigidly, but make the body become a little bit more rigid. If mental agitation is present, then one should loosen one‘s posture so that one feels more relaxed and one should focus one‘s mind on the lower part of the body. Basically, if mental agitation is present then one should loosen one‘s body and concentrate on the lower part of the body; if dullness is present, then one should try to tighten the body. In any case, these two methods of loosening or tightening are used. The practice of mindfulness is called dran-pa (pronounced tren-pa) in Tibetan. It literally means rememberance. Before awareness arises in meditation, the meditator has to learn how to focus the mind and that is achieved through the practice of mindfulness. One has to use a particular object in order to practice mindfulness. When mindfulness is practiced for a period of time, then awareness would arise as a product of mindfulness. In mahamudra teachings, in relation to shamatha meditation, the beginner should first use some external object such as a piece of wood, a pebble, any kind of physical object in one‘s visual field and concentrate on that. Whenever the mind become distracted, through use of mindfulness one remembers to go back to that object of meditation, that physical object. After having done that for a period of time, one can use one‘s own breath as the object of meditation. One applies mindfulness to the incoming and outgoing breath. In order to help with this process one can even count the breaths, up to five, up to eleven, and so on. Each outgoing and incoming breath are counted as one. Counting helps the mind to be more focused on the object of meditation, which in this case is the breath. When one has been able to do that with some success, then one should move onto using the mind itself as the object of meditation. One tries to be mindful of the thoughts and emotions as they arise, without labeling them, without judging them, simply observing them. As this observation continues, mindfulness becomes transformed into awareness. So if distraction arises, one becomes aware of that distraction; if dullness or stupor is present in the mind, one becomes aware of that; if mental agitation is present, one becomes aware of that.
With the practice of meditation of tranquility the mind becomes more stabilized. When one contemplates on the mind itself and lets the mind be in its natural state, then, apart from mental stability there has to be a sense of clarity. It is not sufficient that the mind has become stable, it is also important for clarity to be there. In mahamudra teachings this is described as gnas tyur , the aspect of stability, and gsal tyur , the aspect of clarity. A mind which is stable but without clarity is deficient. Both mental clarity as well as stability have to be present. According to mahamudra teachings, if one is able to pursue with this, as the mind becomes more stable and clarity is present, then even when thoughts and emotions arise, the stability and clarity of the mind are not disturbed. So if one maintains mental clarity when the mind is calm or when mental agitation arise, that is the best form of meditation. Meditation does not mean one‘s mind should always be calm or emp ty of thoughts and emotions. If a sense of mental stability or clarity is there, even when the mind is in movement, then that is the ultimate goal. The ultimate goal is not to eradicate thoughts and emotions, but to be able to maintain that sense of awareness both in movement as well as in a restful state. That is why in mahamudra teachings we use expressions like gnas ‗ju rigs sum . Gnas means the mind when it is stable, when it‘s not agitated; ‗ju means the mind when it is in movement, basically when thoughts and emotions arise; rigs means awareness, that sense of mental clarity. So awareness is present whether the mind is in a state of rest or in a state of movement. It does not make any difference. When the meditator achieves that, then the meditator realizes the nature of the mind. Through awareness one realizes that the nature of the mind has the dual characteristic of being empty, yet luminous. In terms of its emptiness aspect the nature of the mind is not different from non-mental things, physical things such as tables and chairs, because the nature of the table and of the chair is emptiness and the nature of the mind is also emptiness. But in terms of the clarity aspect the nature of the mind is different from non-mental things, because the nature of the mind is not only empty, but luminous at the same time. The clarity aspect is what distinguishes the nature of the mind from non-mental things. From this point of view the nature of the mind is realized when the mind does not make any distinction in meditation between mental agitation or a
state of restfulness. By not making this distinction, the mind is left in its natural state and then thoughts and emotions become self-liberated. It is also said in mahamudra teachings that one should no think of thoughts and emotions, particularly the negative ones as being something that one has to eradicate and get rid of. If one is able to realize the nature of these thoughts and emotions, then one would understand the nature of the mind itself. In the teachings the relationship between the nature of the mind and the delusions is compared to a lotus blossoming from mud or to the manure one has to use on a field. Just as a lotus blossoms in the mud and the farmer has to make use of smelly and repulsive manure in order to cultivate a field, in a similar way wisdom is attained not through eradication of the defilements and the obscurations of the mind but from realization of the nature of these defilements and obscurations. In Tibetan it is said, nyon mong spang ba gong rolna , ye she‘s ja we ming yang med . Nyong mong means the delusions, the obscurations of mind; spang ba means to abandon, gong rolna means over a nd above, ye she‘s means
wisdom, ming yang med means not even a name. Basically it means, ―Having abandoned or eradicated the delusions and conceptual confusions of the mind, one cannot speak of wisdom.‖ According to mahamudra understanding, wisdom is not attained from the eradication of the defilements, as much as from understanding the nature of the defilements themselves. That is why in mahamudra teachings the phrase ―ordinary mind‖ is used to say that to realize the nature of the mind, to realize Buddhanature does not involve getting rid of anything that exists within the mind. It comes from realizing the nature of this very mind that we have: the mind which thinks, which wills, which anticipates, which feels. The problem is not that one has feelings and emotions, the problem is in not understanding the nature of these thoughts and emotions. Through practice of meditation the mind becomes more stabilized and there is a sense of mental clarity. Then, when the mind is left to itself, if awareness is maintained as thoughts and emotions arise, those thoughts and emotions reveal the nature of the mind as much as the mind which is not disturbed, which is not in motion, which is at rest. From the mahamudra point of view it is important not to try to force the mind to become more focused. One should simply use the very gentle methods of tightening and loosening, so that the mind can be in its natural state. If one tires to use techniques of concentration, then it is said that the mind is,
in fact, not left in its natural state. If one tries to stabilize the mind deliberately by use of techniques to make the mind more focused, then it is contrived. So without any contrivances, one should allow the mind to be in its natural state. Spang blang dang bral wa is another phrase used in mahamudra teachings. Spang means to abandon, blang means to cultivate , bral wa means free from
any thought of cultivation of positive mental qualities or abandonment of negative thoughts and emotions. One‘s mind should be free from such concerns, because as long as the mind is plagued by these tendencies of wanting to shun or abandon certain aspects of the mind which one finds undesirable and wanting to pursue and cultivate the more positive aspects of the mind, then the mind is not left in its natural state. Therefore, the nature of the mind becomes obscured due to this interference. So the very simple technique of letting the mind be should be conducted with the use of either tightening or loosening the body and mind. Even these two different methods should not be done with extreme deliberation or effort, so another expression that we find in mahamudra teaching s is ―letting the mind be in its natural state effortlessly.‖ That effortlessness comes from not judging, not thinking that, when thoughts and emotions arise, that has somehow disturbed the mind or upset the meditation, but realizing that as long as one‘s mind is focused and there is a sense of awareness, then no matter what arises in the mind, whether the mind is stable and at rest or in a state of movement with thoughts and emotions arising, one would be able to realize that all that occurs is the nature of the mind. In this way, in the mahamudra teachings also, meditation of tranquility and meditation of insight are practiced together. Meditation of tranquility is initially practiced in order to stabilize the mind. Then gradually, by shifting one‘s focus from meditation objects such as external physical objects or the breath to the mind itself, the clarity aspect is developed. In that way, when one engages in meditation these two aspects are present: the mind is stable and yet, at the same time, luminous. The mind is stable even when thoughts and emotions arise, in so far as awareness is not lost. Stability of the mind is judged not from whether the mind has thoughts and emotions, but from whether awareness is present or not. When that occurs then the third aspects of the nature of the mind, which is called bliss, becomes manifest. Ultimately the nature of the mind has three qualities. First the nature of the mind is emptiness. Second, even though the nature of the mind is
empty, at the same time, unlike the emptiness of physical things or entities, the nature of the mind is luminous. Third, when the mind of the meditator is stabilized and the meditator is able to maintain awareness even when the mind is busy with thoughts and emotions, then bliss is experienced. Even when the mind is in a state of movement that does not give rise to mental agitation or to delusions and obscurations which are the basic cause of suffering and dissatisfaction. Then bliss, the third aspect of the nature of the mind is revealed. So according to mahamudra teachings the nature of the mind has these three aspects of being empty, having the aspect of clarity or luminosity and. Finally having the aspect of bliss. According to Dzogchen teachings, or what is sometimes called maha-ati in Sanskrit, the nature of the mind has the three aspects of emptiness, clarity and creativity as they call it. The nature of the mind may be empty and luminous, but that does not mean that thoughts and emotions cease to have any kind of relevance. Thoughts and emotions become more subdued and no longer run rampant and afflict the mind, therefore it is referred to as the aspect of creativity. For that reason the nature of the mind itself is called mahamudra because mahamudra or great seal means that nothing exists outside of mahamudra. Everything is contained within mahamudra itself, because the emptiness aspect of mind is the same both in physical and mental phenomena. It is all-encompassing. I think I‘ll stop here. We can have a discussion. Q: In the actual practice of meditation on the mind itself, when the mind is in a state of rest you would just focus on the sense of luminosity and when thoughts or emotions arise you just allow yourself to touch that and let it move on, but you still maintain that sense of luminosity or awareness? A: That‘s right. Q: Whereas in shamatha there might be breath, breath and thoughts come through, in meditation of mind itself there would be a sense of luminosity and thoughts and emotions come through. A: That comes from awareness. That‘s why shamatha is so important. Through shamatha by focusing one‘s mind on an external physical object or the breath one is able to practice mindfulness, and with mindfulness comes awareness. When you are learning how to meditate, at the beginning if you do
not focus your mind on the breath or some kind of physical object, but think, ―I‘ll just be aware of what‘s going on in my mind,‖ it doesn‘t work. That is why it is important to practice shamatha, so that the stability aspect is achieved. Then when awareness develops from that stability, from that mindfulness with the awareness comes the clarity aspect of the mind. Eventually the meditative mind should have the two qualities of stability and clarity or luminosity. First one has to deal with the stability aspect and then the luminosity aspect would come later with the development of increased awareness. With increased awareness and increased stability of the mind, even when thoughts and emotions arise those two aspects of the mind are still present. That is why in our mahamudra prayer we say, ―the nature of thoughts is dharmakaya.‖ The thoughts are not to be disc arded or abandoned. By allowing the mind to be, as the thoughts become self-liberated, then the nature of the thoughts is revealed as dharmakaya as much as the nature of the mind when it is at rest. Q: Could you expand a bit on the creativity aspect of the mind? A: Doing meditation for a number of years does not mean that thoughts and emotions stop arising in the mind, but they no longer disturb the mind, so that‘s seen as the creative aspect. In Dzogchen it‘s called rtsal , which means something like creat ive, creative in terms of one‘s experiences. As it is said, everything that comes under the experience of samsara and nirvana comes from the creative aspect of the mind. Creative in the sense of the mind being the producer of all kinds of experiences, both good and bad. Q: Going back to that creative aspect of the nature of the mind, is it creative because it allows thoughts and emotions to arise or come into being? A: Basically, as Saraha says, ―The nature of the mind is king of all the creators because all of our experiences of both samsara and nirvana arise from that.‖ In that way, everything that we experience is created by the mind. Everything is mind-dependent. Even our perception of the external physical world is dependent on the mind. So, because it is the source of all of our experiences, it is said to be creative. Q: Emptiness also allows things to arise. How is the creative aspect of the nature of the mind different from the emptiness aspect? A: Because the nature of the mind is emptiness, thoughts and emotions and our experiences can arise from it. And these very thoughts and emotions have
the same nature as the nature of the mind. They are not two different things, as mahamudra teachings say. Q: Could you say something about the bliss aspect of the nature of the mind? A: During meditation when the stability and clarity aspects of the mind are established, then bliss would follow, because one‘s mind is no longer disturbed by thoughts and emotions, even when they arise. So in meditation thoughts and emotions may arise but due to the stability and clarity aspects of the mind there is no disturbance. The mind is not agitated. That is the aspect. Obviously it does not mean anything like you are blessed out. Q: What is the Tibetan view of time? You seem to have the enormous eons of time as well as tiny ones. Is there in fact a difference? A: From a Mahayana point of view, time does not exist in any kind of ultimate form. Time exists like everything else, as a relative thing. Time is determined purely in relation to things that exist. Without things existing there would be no time, either before or after. Before or after what, if there is nothing existing? From that point of view time is relative and that is the emptiness nature of time, according to Mahayana teachings. So things do not exist in time. There is no all-encompassing thing called time. Time exists only in relation, like everything else. That is what emptiness means. Emptiness does not mean things do not exist or everything is unreal, it is like a bad dream or something like that. Emptiness means everything exists in relation. Nothing exists on its own accord by itself. Nothing has self-sufficient existence or subsistence and time is no exception. Q: you talked about the nature of mind being the dharmakaya. Are the nature of the mind and dharmakaya permanent things? A: To call it permanent is not as accurate as calling it atemporal. The nature of the mind and dharmakaya are basically the same thing and it is atemporal. Because the nature of the mind, unlike thoughts and emotions, is nondifferentiated, because the nature of the mind has no definable characteristics, therefore it is atemporal. That is why the nature of the mind is often compared to space, in the teachings of mahamudra. Q: How does that link in with the empty aspect of the dharmakaya, the svabhavakaya?
A: It‘s the same thing. Mahamudra teachings say that concepts such as dharmakaya, Buddha-nature, nature of the mind are all synonymous. BOKAR RINPOCHE: MAHAMUDRA MEDITATION TALK: 1 Rinpoche will make an attempt to share some essential points about the practice of meditation in accordance with the Tibetan Buddhist tradition. The teaching Shakyamuni Buddha expounded is very vast and very profound. It is vast because it addresses the different mental capacities and inclinations of indiviudals, as well as the various confused habitual tendencies of mind that people have developed. While the teaching is vast, both in terms of stages as well as in terms of classifications, it is essentially directed towards addressing how to bring about the transformation of the confused habitual outlook, the confused erroneous habits of mind that people have developed. At the same time the teaching very directly addresses the different ways and methods by which the potentials of our mind could be cultivated and developed. For such purpose the teaching is presented. We experience confused habitual tendencies in various ways through conflicting emotions of the mind. At a more gross level, all conflicting emotions fall into what are commonly known as the three poisons, which are attachment, aggression, and ignorance. Among the teachings the collection of the Vinaya, the basket of the teachings dealing with various aspects of discipline and conduct, is presented as an antidote to the habitual emotional patterns of attachment. The sutra aspect, or the basket of the Tripitaka deals with the conflicting emotions of aggression, and what is known as the Abhidharma aspect of the teachings deals with the conflicting emotions of ignorance. So these three principle classifications or categories of the teachings, these subject matters, are presented. The practical approach is through development of the three learning‘s or disiplines of sila, which is moral discipline, Samadhi, the meditative training towards the experiencing of meditative stability, and prajna, the experience of transcendent awareness, wisdom insight. Presenting the teachings through these three principles of moral discipline, meditative stability, and development of wisdom is very practical and pertinent. The principle reason for our experience of bewilderment, our experience of sufferings in the world, is because of ignorance, ignorance in the way of
confused thinking and perceiving of the world and ourselves, and therefore confused perceiving of our experiences and our life altogether. In order for us to be free of the obscuration of bewilderment, of ignorance, there is need to have wisdom, the wisdom of insight. And in order for us to experience the wisdom of insight, that is the obscured way of perceiving ourselves and the world, then there must be the experience of meditative stability of mind. What creates an important framework for meditative stability, so that we can nurture meditative stability of mind, is to have the proper discipline of moral conduct, healthy discipline. Speaking the other way around, the proper action of body, speech, and mind is essential towards facilitating the experience of stability of mind, and the development of stability of mind gives rise to the experience of proper awareness, of wisdom. So in this way, these three principles are emphasized. Mahamudra is the meditative tradition, the meditative practice in our lineage. Among the three principles of learning the subject of mahamudra covers the latter two principles of Samadhi and prajna, meditative stability and wisdom, insight. That is what the subject of mahamudra is about essentially. The incorporation of sila or moral discipline compliments these two, so we can also say that the subject of mahamudra includes all three principle learnings. When approaching the issue of moral discipline, moral conduct, there are certain classifications. There are the traditional vows and precepts taken by ordained practitioners, or householder precepts and the ordinations, those who have given up the life of householder, take. So there is that classification, which is regarded as formally committing oneself to specific disciplines of moral conduct. Then there is the natural or basic moral conduct, which is where, even if one hasn‘t taken any precepts formally and specifically, one is aware of the responsibilities of the actions of one‘s body, speech, and mind, and therefore avoids actions of body, speech, and mind which are harmful to oneself and others. Taking on wholesome actions of body, speech, and mind which are beneficial to oneself and to others is a basic, common-sense moral discipline, moral conduct. Rinpoche would like to provide and explanation and definition of the Sanskrit ter m ―mahamudra,‖ or in Tibetan, ― phyag rgya chen po ‖ or ―phyag chen.‖ The world mudra generally and literally means seal or gesture or symbol, but the seal that is being referred to, the gesture that is being referred to, in terms of the actual meaning is the basic, unconditioned, unfabricated experience of one‘s mind. That is referred to as the great symbol, the great
seal, seal in the sense of unchanging. The nature of the mind is unchanging and that nature of mind, free of any conditionings, habitual conditionings, discursive conditionings of any kind, is known as mudra, seal. The word ―maha‘ or ―chen po‖ literally means great, bigness. In reference to that, this fundamental, unconditioned nature of mind pervades everything. It is the fundamental nature of everything. From the point of view of the allpervasiveness of that nature, it is therefore great. So mahamudra literally means the great, all-pervasive seal, or the great, all-pervasive nature of mind, nature of phenomena. Now we talk about mahamudra meditation. In approaching the subject and the practice of meditation, it is most important that the term meditation is properly clarified and understood. Meditation practice, gom in Tibetan, does not have anything to do with discarding what we have now and thus be able to give room to accommodate something new, to bring something new into our life. Nor does meditation practice mean that one should go on some kind of intellectual journey and, through intellectualization, get to some new finding of some sort. Meditation practice also does not mean that a teacher or meditation instructor puts some kind of new life or new situation into your life or your mind that never existed previously. Meditation practice is simply to have an understanding of the unconditioned, the fundamental nature of our own mind. The responsibility or rather the work of a teacher is to be able to introduce practitioners to that potential nature of one‘s mind. The definition of mahamudra is the unconditioned, unfabricated nature of one‘s mind. So meditation practice simply means familiarizing yourself with the essential nature of your mind. If properly understood, the practice of meditation is actually very simple and very direct. What does it mean to be introd uced to the nature of one‘s mind and then to familiarize oneself with that natural quality in the nature of the mind? Presently the way we experience our lives is that the actions of our body and our speech are controlled by our mind. As far as our mind is concerned, it is under the sway of all kinds of habitual confusions, habitually developed ways of perceiving and thinking. Since such are the dictates of our mind, our body and speech also follow the actions of confused mind. So even though we have the illusion that we have freedom of mind and freedom of body and speech, actually we don‘t. Our actions of body, speech, and mind are governed by our confused habits. Meditation practice is the key. It is
essential towards developing the actual literal freedom of mind and therefore freedom of body and speech. In the practice of meditation what is simply pointed out is the importance of how to rest one‘s body, speech, and min naturally, at ease. To rest naturally at ease means free of any effort, free of any demands being made on our body, speech, and mind. ―Naturally at ease.‖ Actually to say that is saying a lot. To say, ―rest our body, speech, and mind naturally at ease‖ means to give our body, speech, and mind unconditional freedom, freedom without any demands, freedom without any effort. That is the basic experience and meaning of meditation practice. In approaching the practice of meditation there is emphasis on the importance of synchronizing body and mind. Five or seven specific meditation postures are mentioned. Depending on the degree of dedication on the path of meditation practice, one may want to learn more of the ways to sit and engage in meditation. Generally speaking if one is able to maintain these postures, then of course there are specific benefits. If one is not able to maintain these postures, then consequently there are certain disadvantages, certain drawbacks. But the initial approach would be to maintain the body free of any rigidity and tension. From the crown of one‘s head down to the tip of one‘s toes, allow the body to rest naturally at ease, free from any kind of rigidity or tension, any uptightness. The more one is able to allow the body to rest naturally at ease, the more it will contribute towards stability of mind, calmness of mind. There is a definite relationship between the body and mind in general and, in particular, between the mind and the subtle systems of the body, The more the flow of the energy to many of the energies to the body is balanced, the more it supports the spontaneous experience of stability and calmness of mind. While the different positions of the body are important, what is really most important is to get a sense of how to rest your body naturally at ease. It may not come about very easily because we do not have such habits. We have the counterhabit in that normally as we run through our lives doing the things we need to attend to, we do them with all kinds of rigidity, with all kinds of tension, and become totally tensed up. In this way we run our lives. So we have a habit of being rigid, of being under stress, if being tense. Even when there are times in our lives when for a few minutes or longer our body can be free from any involvement, any activtities, we don‘t know how to actually rest naturally at ease. We are still goverened by the habit of being
rigid and tense, ready to get up, ready to go. This rigidty and tension of the body that we experience goes against mental tranquility. Obviously it creates not only physical and mental discomfort, but also definitely contributes to the many of the imbalances in our health too. Just as our body is the victim of our habits of tension and rigidity and constant activities to attend to, so is our speech. Through the door of our speech we are constantly busy, constantly our speech is in a state of restlessness. There are things we have to talk about, that have some practical significance and relevance as far as our lives are concerned, in achieving what we need to achieve, communicating what we need to communicate, but a lot of our speech we waste. We deliberately indulge in talking about things that do not have any beneficial, practical meaning to ourselves or to others, but on the contrary, have only harmful effects. We do a great deal of talking out of the experience of jealousy, out of the experience of anger, out of the experience of attachment and so forth. We need to talk about how we see others, how we think about others, from the point of view of jealousy, of anger, of attachment. We spend a great deal of time in all kinds of frivolous chatter. There isn‘t any specific issue in mind that we would like to get resolved or accomplish, just random talking, random chatter, gossiping of all kinds. It is quite a habit. When we indulge in such things time passes away very fast, without our accomplishing anything, even in a very mundane and very worldly context. In this way, when our speech is involved in this constant activity, this constant state of restlessness, it has of course, tremendous harmful effects on our mind. When we are engaged in such talk it is not necessarily a pleasurable experience, a peaceful experience, a peaceful and calming experience. A lot of times, when we are on the spot in that situation it is a very stressful experience. The after-effect is often even worse because we think about what we have talked about, we think about all the time we have wasted and now we have all these other things to attend to. It is the experience of many people that, especially in the evenings, if you get into some kind of argument about some seemingly relevant or irrelevant subject, then after that, when you retire, it takes quite a while before one actually falls asleep. One is still dwelling on what one has been talking about, about what one shouldn‘t have said. A lot of times one is so serious about what one has said that you carry it through your dreams. Not only did you have a very restless conversation but you had a restless sleep too.
In this way, not only is there restlessness or imbalance in terms of our speech, but it is burdensome to our mind, to the possible peace and uplifted experience of our mind. So from the meditation practice approach, not only do we need to allow our body to rest naturally at ease, but through our breath we also need to let our speech rest naturally at ease. Maybe we can try to do that together for a short time. While letting the body rest naturally at ease, with our speech or breath simply breathe normally. Whatever is the normal pace of breath, without putting in any effort towards making it faster or shorter, pay attention to your breath, noticing your outgoing breath, noticing the inhalation, out and in, counting the pair of out and in as one, remembering the count. In this way, out and in, paying attention to the breath and to the count, count til twenty-one. Now, we change the focus of mind. We try to allow our mind to become calmer, focusing on a dot or point of white light between our eyebrows, gently focusing the attention of the mind on that, being aware of that for some time. Rinpoche hopes you are getting some sense of what he was talking about, in connection with what it means to rest the body, speech, and mind naturally at ease, and how if one is able to actually maintain that experience of resting the body, speech, and mind naturally at ease, various benefits could come out of it. Maybe not an actual experience of it, but some sense of the possible benefit coming from it. One point Rinpoche would like to make is that when we approach the practice of meditation or learn about meditation practice and engage in the practice of meditation, these approaches are very different from a scholarly, philosophical approach. When you approach a particular subject from a philosophical or scholarly point of view, then when you understand whatever the view is supposed to be, when you understand whatever thing it is that you should know, once you know it, then you have understood it, so that is the whole point of the process of learning or introducing. The practice of meditation is a more practical, rather than intellectual and theoretical approach. Here there are two elements which are important. One is understanding how to practice meditation, the other is beginning to experience the effect of meditation, the degree of experience depending of course on one‘s level. In the practice of meditation there must be some kind of matching of the experience that the practice brings about and what is being explained as the experience. But until
one has actual experience, a first-hand experience, intellectual knowledge does not confirm what the actual experience should be. For instance, in the past when Rinpoche lived in a remote part of Tibet, the various kinds of fruit juices available here were unheard of. If you explain to a Tibetan who comes from such a remote land what such a fruit juice tastes like, how sweet it is, what kind of flavour and texture it has, he may have some sense of it, but he has no experience of how it exactly tastes. When you are trying to introduce that person to how something tastes, you can‘t say exactly how sweet it is, or what subtle aspects of flavour it entails. The person who is doing the explanation can‘t explain more than that, and the person who is listening can‘t hear more than that. But when the person has an opportunity to taste even a drop of that juice, then at that moment he has an experience of what it actually tastes like. All the explanations become confirmed, and there is even further clarification through the actual taste. Now, when a whole glass of juice is put in front of that person, he or she knows exactly what it should taste like. So in that sense, actual experience is most intimate and therefore most important. On the basis of what Rinpoche has talked about and on the basis of what we have done together, basically experimenting with the practice, there may be some questions you would like to ask. Q: Does this imply that you have to experience everything in order to understand it? A: Generally in life, yes, experience is most important. Experience gives confirmation of understanding. Until you have experience in whatever field of activity, your understanding has not been put into practice, so it is not really fully confirmed. You may have an intellectual idea of what it is supposed to be, or how something is supposed to work, or what it is supposed to mean, but you don‘t have a personal experience of how it really is. This is more true in terms of meditation practice, because meditation is not intellectual, it is experiential. The wisdom of insight comes not out of intellectualization, but out of practical experience. Q: Sometimes it‘s physically difficult to stay still. Do you try to keep still or do you move? A: Basically we don‘t really have the habit of sitting still, so it‘s like work to sit still. Because of that habit, which we need to undo, what is recommended
in meditation practice as a more practical approach is for beginning practitioners to sit for short times, and more often, as opposed to a longer session. Not having the habit of letting our body and mind rest naturally at ease or being in a state of attention or awareness, after fifteen or twenty minutes the freshness is wearing out. It is no longer that refreshing. So after fifteen or twenty minutes stop, and if you have time to do more practice of meditation, take a break then do it again. So more often, but shorter periods of time as opposed to longer sessions. As your body and mind get more adjusted to it, then you can extend the time. During a particular session of ten or fifteen minutes, yes, it would be beneficial if one doesn‘t move around if one is able to sit still. But if one needs to do a little bit of adjusting and move around because of certain piercing physical discomfort, then of course there is no fixed demand in terms of not moving. But, preferably it is better not to move around or fidget too much. Q: Should the mind be able to control the body? A: It is possible. If you are able to maintain a more undisturbed stability of mind, calmness of mind, then whatever physical discomfort you have would become somewhat irrelevant. Q: Is the level of understanding of mahamudra r elated to the level of one‘s ability to uphold the Vinaya? A: There are definite relationships, particularly at the beginning stages of practice, when the stability of one‘s mind is dependent on so many circumstances. Then the importance of that relationship is more obvious than if one has experienced a more independent state of stability of mind. Moral conduct is like a framework, it would be like a glass. Samadhi, meditative stability, will be the water that is contained in that glass. When there is a glass and water is contained in it then, when that glass is unmoved, whatever is reflected in it, the sun or the moon, would be reflected very clearly. It is possible because of the container, it is possible because the water is not being stirred up so the reflection becomes clear. Wisdom is the reflection. When the mind is free from bewilderment, free from the statics of confusion, then the natural potentials of mind become manifest, like the reflection of the moon. The experience that we had before is, in itself, an example of how they work jointly. Allowing our body to rest naturally at ease free from all
the frivolous activities that our body could otherwise be involved with, allowing our speech or breath to rest naturally at ease, without indulging in chatter, these are also moral disciplines, in the sense that they are not involved in all kinds of disturbing harmful activities of the mind. And that framework of body and speech contributes towards a setting for the stability of the mind. Talk 2 In approaching the path and the practice of meditation, Rinpoche has come to find out that people have all kinds of different ideas about meditation: what it is, what it is not. Many of the ideas that people have concerning what meditation is or is not are irrelevant to the actual purpose and meaning of meditation practice. For instance people who have no interest in the practice of meditation, no knowledge about the practice of meditation, still have some idea about meditation. The most common idea is that people who meditate don‘t do anything with their body, don‘t do anything with their speech, don‘t do anything with their mind. They sit there rather dumb, while there are so many important things you could do in the world. Such an act of sitting there doing nothing, appearing totally inactive and uncreative, is a waste of your talent, a waste of your potential creativities, and opposed to all kinds of possible accomplishments, material and otherwise, that you could have. So there is this notion about meditation practice, that it amounts to nothing. Then there are others who have their own very entertaining ideas about what meditation practice is. They have the idea that you‘ve got to make up your own meditation practice, what you feel is good meditation practice for you to do. Or you read some books about meditation and spirituality and then make up your own interpretation of what they are supposed to be saying. You try to put into place some meditative workout, some kind of meditative technique for yourself and call it doing meditation practice, without understanding what the characteristics of proper meditation practice are, what kind of instructions should be received, how it should be approached and so forth, without taking these things into account. There are others who have some interest in approaching the practice of meditation and have heard or have some sense that meditation practice is good for bringing some stability or clarity into one‘s life. But their approach to the notion of meditation is that in meditation practice you are not
supposed to have any thoughts. When you are doing meditation practice you have to block out whatever unpleasant experiences and difficulties you are going through in your life and try to remain in state where you have blocked out thoughts. Then others have the notion meditation practice is being in a state of oblivion, being in a state of dullness, not feeling anything. The mind is not active, the body does not have any kind of mental or physical sensations or awareness. To be simply closed in, in a state of dullness or oblivion is that notion of meditation. Others have heard about the different aspects of the Buddhist teachings, or of the view or of idea of emptiness. People have heard that emptiness is the ultimate view, that there is something very profound attached to the idea of emptiness, so in meditation practice what you are supposed to do is to simply think emptiness. People try to sit there thinking emptiness. So there are various ideas about what meditation practice is, either personally created practices or misinterpretations of meditation practice. Any of these things that people do in the name of meditation practice are irrelevant to the actual practice of meditation. In order to make it possible for ourselves to experience the various profound benefits of meditation, the first and foremost important point is to understand what the practice of meditation is, because understanding that and doing it accordingly then gives rise to the various benefits. In the different aspects of the teaching of the Buddha, the sutras as well as in the tantras, the basic point is the same. What is the meaning of meditation practice? Meditation practice means being free of the misconceptions we have of our mind, having an understanding of the unconditioned nature of our mind —that being introduced to us by experienced meditation teachers —and having some intellectual understanding of the unconditioned, basic nature of our mind. Through some specific method of practice we familiarize ourselves with that fundamentally pure, untainted nature of our mind and, through the continuous cultivation of familiarity with the nature of the mind, we then experience the stability of continuously experiencing that nature of mind. And whatever experience of freedom arises from that is the benefit of meditation. So meditation practice simply means having an unders tanding about the nature of one‘s mind and cultivating familiarity of that nature.
In approaching the practice of meditation it is most important for people to understand what the benefits of the practice of meditation are and what the harm and disadvantages of the absence of the practice of meditation are. More importantly, people should realize in the absence of the practice of meditation there is not only the absence of the benefit of that practice, but also the disadvantage of the harm of not having a meditative mind, which is to say a mind that has some understanding, some insight, into the true nature of the mind and some freedom of expression from the stability of that true nature of mind. Normally we operate in the world from the point of view of confused, habitual thinking, distorted conceptual views, clinging to the notion of ego or self. When you approach yourself and the world from the point of view of this illusion of self-existence or self clinging, with the notion of the existence of the self or I, then believing in that reality perpetuates all kinds of conflicting emotions such as pride, arrogance, jealousy and attachment. Since there is a fundamental distorted conception of self and I, whatever arises out of that frame of mind is confusion in the way of conflicting emotions. And when one continually indulges in these conflicting emotions, then that results in the present experience of confusion as well as the accumulation of habitual patterns of mind, karmic patterns of mind, and the karmic patterns that one accumulates causes future experiences of suffering. So the ignorance of clinging to the notion of self and ego gives rise to conflicting emotions, which cause the accumulation of karma, which causes further experiences of suffering and confusion, thus creating a viscious cycle. In general, as far as the day-to-day experience of life is concerned, when there is the absence of meditative mind, stability of mind, what happens is that our mind is constantly occupied by the thoughts of the three times. Even though, from a practical point of view, the past is totally irrelevant because it does not exist anymore, we think about the past and, by thinking about the past, we create tremendous restlessness, tremendous unnecessary anxiety in our mind. Then we think about the future. The future has not yet happened, but we make an illusion of reality about it. By fantasizing and speculating about the future, we create all kinds of confusion, anxiety, and restlessness of mind for ourselves. Along with thoughts about the past and the future, of course, we think about the present, based on all the sense impressions that we find ourselves subjected to. So our mind is constantly in
a state of restlessness, constantly burdened by thoughts of the three times, and therefore what the mind experiences is confusion and restlessness. When there is this experience of conflict of mind there is no peace, there is no freedom of mind. There is experience of sufferings of all sorts. In brief, the disadvantage of not having a meditative mind is that our mind has no freedom to rest in its undistorted and pure nature. Our mind is constantly occupied by thoughts of the three times. A few minutes ago is in the past. An hour or two hours before now is the past. Yesterday, last week, last month, are all in the past. Any second that has not yet come into the picture is in the future. Tomorrow, next week, next month, next year, is all in the future. So actually, given that, there is not much of a present to speak about. Either it‘s mostly in the past or mostly in the future. Anyway, our mind is constantly occupied by thoughts in connection with the three times. Of the three times do we spend more time thinking about the past or the present or the future? Actually there is not much of a present to speak about, so we mainly think of the past and of the future. And, if we examine ourselves, we‘ll find we tend to think more about the future. When we think about the future, we think in two ways: in an optimistic way and in a pessimistic w ay. The optimistic way is that the plans we‘re going to make are going to be successful, projects are going to work out, funds are going to be enough, life is going to be good. That is the optimistic approach to how the future is going to be. Then there is the pessimistic approach: funds are not going to be enough, the project is not going to work, study is not going to be successful. Are we inclined to think about the future more in a pessimistic way or in an optimistic way? Equal? If there is one-hundred percent certainty that things are going to happen as we assume they will? That things are not going to work out don‘t work out, that things are going to work out do work out? Do they happen just as we assume they will? The basic point here is that this is how we spend our life. There is no certainty about whether anything will happen or not happen, but we speculate with all seriousness that something is going to go wrong, that something is going to go right, and we try to have complete reliance on what w e have speculated about, on which there is no certainty and guarantee that
it is going to come out as we would like it to be or as we anticipate it to be. Generally speaking there is more of a tendency to think about the future in a pessimistic way, in that things are more likely not going to work out. When there is no stability of mind, no awareness of mind, this is how we spend time, how we use our mind. P eople in general tend to think that you‘ve got to make some plans and think about the future. When you have no understanding, no idea about the more complete perspectives of life other than this particular experience of life that one is going through, then it‘s understandable that people think about the immediate future of this life. Now for a few moments, we can try to rest our mind, naturally at ease, free of any preoccupations with thoughts of the three times, the mind just as it is, its own natural nowness. Whatever small visual object is there in front of you that your eyes can comfortable focus on, without having ideas about trying to magnify it or trying to make it smaller or change, simply maintaining the gaze on that. Then maintaing the undistracted attention of your mind on that. Now foucs the attention of one‘s mind on sound. Whatever gross or subtle sound is heard, through the consciousness of the sense of hearing, without analyzing the sound as good, bad, indifferent, loud, subtle and so forth, s imply maintain one‘s mind in awareness of the sound. In order to realize the essential or true nature of mind, mahamudra, there are various meditative techiniques and approaches, particularly what is known as zhi gnas in Tibetan, shamatha in Sanskrit, the purpose of which is to bring about stability and calmness of mind, which is not a normal familiar experience of our mind, since our mind is constantly in a state of restlessness, constantly distracted by all kinds of thoughts and emotions, sense impressions or mental impression of all sorts. Then beyond that, the next meditative practice is vipashyana, lhag mthong in Tibetan, which has the meaning of bringing about panoramic insight. The practice of vipashyana brings insight or awareness into the essential true nature of one‘s mind. As beginning practitioners, even if one has some intellectual sense of the essential nature of one‘s mind, one is not able to immediately rest in the nature of one‘s mind because of all the distractions and experiences of
restlessness of mind. So first, through the zhi gnas methods of practice of meditation, one needs to cultivate and develop stability and tranquility of mind. For developing stability and tranquility of mind, shamatha or zhi gnas has manty different objects of focus, objects of attention. Rinpoche has gone over some of those methods which are geared towards cultivating stability of mind. If one is able to apply the shamatha or zhi gnas method of meditation, then in time, depending on how constantly and how effectively one is applying the method, one will gradually experience more and more stability of mind, calmness of mind, free from the constant conflict or distraction of mind. And peace or happiness of mind and various other goodnesses will arise out of a calm and a stable mind. Various potentials and qualities of the mind can begin to manifest from a stable climate of mind, particularly the wisdom of vipashyana insight, panoramic insight. Now, if there are any questions, we can have a discussion. Q: Can you tell me why the mind resists meditation so strongly? A: There would be various reasons. One is because of not having proper understanding about meditation practice and not having a thorough and clear understanding of the benefit of the practice of meditation, which could inspire one into doing the practice. Another is because of not having familiarity. With any new venture there is some hesitation, some resistance prior to getting into it, because one has no experience of what one is getting into. There is a sense of going into some situation or space that one has no familiarity with. If you have no experience of swimming you would certainly have some resistance to going into the water. Also, because of karmic as well as habitual conditionings there is some resistence to being able to break through certain habitual obscurations. Q: What exactly is meant by mind here? A: From the point of view of its essential nature, the mind is very profound. It is subtle, it is profound, it is not something that can be conceptualized, let alone be verbalized. No matter how articulate someone is in terms of language, they cannot, from the point of view of its nature, clearly say, ―This is the mind,‖ nor can the listener understand and say, ―Yes, this is what the mind is about.‖ Just as Rinpoche was earlier talking about somebody explaining about the taste and the flavor of juice, the person who is explaining cannot explain in
words exactly what it tastes like, nor can the person listening hear exactly how it is supposed to taste. Only upon experience can one say that the explanation has something to do with the taste. So it is like that. The nature of the mind is something to be realized, to be experienced, as opposed to something that can clearly and pinpointedly be verbally communicated. But generally when we make reference to mind, then it is not so difficult to understand. In Buddhist teachings there are, depending on activities, on its passive state or active state, from a habitual point of view or from an enlightened point of view, different terms for mind, such as consciousness, intellect, mind. But when we are talking about mind or consciousness here, enlightened or unenlightened mind, then we are talking about mind or consciousness here, enlightened or unenlightened mind, then we are talking about that which experiences and discerns the experience of happiness and unhappiness, the experience of pain and pleasure, that with which we discern such experiences, that with which we think and have thought and discernment and communicate. This thinking activity and this discerning activity that we have, that is mind or consciousness. Q: So mind is used to refer to both the essential nature and the more general nature? A: Generally, yes. But depending on the kind of mental outlook that one is experiencing, you still have different words the mind is addressed with. Q: The enlightened mind is no longer restless and distracted, without karmic obscurations. Are there any other differences? A: The most distinctive difference between enlightened mind and unenlightened mind is that in the case of unenlightened mind, all the expressions of the mind come out of the absence of freedom of mind, while in the experience of the enlightened mind the various expressions of the mind arise out of the freedom of mind. In the case of an unenlightened mind, everything arises out of the absence of freedom and is habitually dictated, habitually perpetuated. The result of such expressions of mind is further confusion, further suffering. Freedom expresses happiness and well-being, so if what we do results in suffering and conflict, either as the immediate result or the consequences of the experience, then that is not the expression of freedom, it is habitually motivated or habitually dictated.
In the case of the experience of more awakened or enlightened mind, it is nit like the mind goes into a state of blankness, not at all. People sometimes have that notion, that you don‘t have an y thoughts, nothing is going on, you are in a state of blankness. Of course, there is no benefit in that. In fact, when there is an experience of awakened mind, then there is more clarity and out of that awakened mind, out of that clarity, arises the many beneficial characteristics of an enlightened mind, such as kindness, gentleness, compassion, clarity of mind in the way of wisdom. So many such qualities do arise. They arise because there is a freedom of mind, too. Because of the experience of freedom of mind, the expression of the mind, the play of the mind takes these different forms, forms of compassion, forms of wisdom, forms of gentleness. The result is of benefit to others, of happiness and further benefit to one‘s own state of mind. So if someone is experiencing distorted mind and therefore experiencing suffering, how can such a person experience enlightened mind? If this is the seeming makeup of that person‘s mind, how can he or she experience a totally different state of mind, an enlightened mind? When a person is experiencing a confused state of mind and therefore the arising of conflicting emotions takes place, that experience of the expressions of the mind is not the nature of the mind. It is the expressions of habits the mind has accumulated. It is not a true expression of the nature of the mind. Then why is it that the person acts in a way contrary to his or her nature? Because of habit, the circumstances of habit. To provide a simple analogy, take the example of a person who, generally speaking, has a very wonderful personality. He is a very gentle person, kind-hearted and appreciated by everybody, has all the good qualities, a very noble person for that matter. One time he drank a bit too much, became intoxicated and lost his normal state of mind because of the effect of the intoxicant. He acted very differently, argued and fought with friends and physically and verbally acted in very violent ways. We know that this is not the nature of this person. This person has a history of having a very noble character, but his mind has been distorted by the intoxicant. When he recovered from the effect of the substance, then the normal person that he used to be will become manifest. It is not very wrong to say that, presently, our mind is in a state of intoxication. Because of all kinds of habitual tendencies there is no freedom of mind. We act out of the effect of the intoxication. When we are able to
resolve or undo that effect, then the natural potentials of our mind become manifest, the expression of which is also the spontaneous freedom of its various beneficial characteristics. Talk 3 As mentioned yesterday, many people have the notion that meditation practice is unimportant, a waste of time. Others have an erroneous notion that meditation practice could make your mind and life more claustrophobic, therefore it is something undesirable. All such notions stem from the fact that one has not the least understanding about the essential meaning and purpose of the practice of meditation. Actually, in living our everyday life in a very proper and healthy way and in bringing into our life a greater sense of sanity, wellbeing and peace, the practice of meditation is indispensible. As part of the activities of our life it should be in the forefront. We should give priority to the practice of meditation. Meditation is so relevant, particularly living in the world we live in, that weather we are spiritually inclined or not, meditation could and should play an important role in increasing the higher qualities of our lives. In the various realms of existence in the universe, to have experienced the birth of human beings is rare. We think of your birth as human beings as somewhat special and good. What can make the birth or experience of being a human being very special and good is if there is the experience of happiness and wellb eing. If one‘s birth as a human being is devoid of the e xperience of happiness and well being, then it doesn‘t seem particularly good being a human being. The essence of being a human being is that there should be the experience of happiness and wellbeing. Authentic reliable happiness and wellbeing can only be experienced through cultivating stability and tranquility of mind, and that is only possible through the practice of meditation. We want to experience comfort and wellbeing of body and mind. If one mind is not in a state of ease, confidence and stability we are not going to experience physical comfort and being physically at ease. Sometimes we have a break from whatever involvement, whatever work we are doing, and we must give ourselves a complete rest, a holiday or vacation. But even though we are not doing any work, our body does not experience the comfort and wellbeing of a real rest if there is no rest in the mind, if there is no freedom of the rest and stability of the mind.
It is very true to say then, that the most important and predominate source of happiness and well-being within this lifetime, both for our body as well as for our mind, is cultivating stability and calmness of mind through meditation practice. Particularly living in the present century, the importance of developing calmness and stability of mind through the practice of meditation should be very obvious. In the present century we have accomplished so much in the way of material success and scientific and technological advancement. It is unparalleled in any time in history of world existence. All these developments are so that we may experience greater happiness and wellbeing, but we have no choice but to accept the fact that these advancements have actually produced the opposite. In living in the present, our sense consciousnesses are subject to all kinds of material and technological expositions that the senses of people have never been exposed to before. With the development of all these gross and subtle machineries and gadgets the amount of sense impressions that we are subjected to in the way of form, in the way of sound, is totally overwhelming. Everything is brought in front of us, all the happenings of the world, through the different media. And with so much speed. All these machineries constantly moving so fast in front of us. But these things are machines. Our senses, our mind, is not a machine, and to have to follow all that is happening around us is burdensome to our senses, to our mind. It gets too overwhelming . That‘s why more than ever in the history of the world, people go crazy. People contemplate on taking their own lives, too much. The speed is overwhelming, what we are subjected to is overwhelming and, more than ever, the practice of meditation is essential. Maybe we can sit, do some practice together. First we will train ourselves to allow our bodies to rest naturally at ease, which simply means maintaining good posture free from any kind of tenseness or rigidity. Now, we should allow our breath to rest naturally at ease, watching our breath, noticing our breath, the outgoing and incoming, counting the pair of out and in as one, counting up to twenty-one times, maintaining attention on the breath and counting. Then focus the attention of one‘s mind on a p oint of white light the size of a pea, a point of white light between one‘s eyebrows, maintaining the attention of mind with it.
When you sit in this way, in meditation, and you see forms and you hear sounds, simply seeing forms or simply hearing sounds is not distraction. To hear a sound and therefore get concerned, thinking you are distracted: hearing is not a distraction. Following what you hear, making mental comments on the particulars of the sound that you heard is becoming distracted. If while maintaining the awareness of the mind, being in the state of awareness and mindfulness, you hear sound or see form, as long as awareness and mindfulness is not lost, simply seeing and hearing is not a distraction. This is true of touch, taste, smell, what have you, it is true of all other experiences. You must know as well as remember, that the practice of meditation is actually very simple. To have the preconceived idea that the practice of meditation is something very difficult, complicated and challenging is wrong, because one does not have to do anything difficult and complicated with one‘s body, nor does one have to say anything difficult to articulate with one‘s speech, nor does one have to think complicated thoughts with one‘s mind. Simply keeping the body, speech, and mind free of conditioned indulgences is what it amounts to. There isn‘t a great deal of arrangement or preparation that need to be made. Basically the practice of meditation is not anything difficult. In fact it should be extremely easy, because meditation means being able to allow ourselves to rest in the unconditioned nature of our mind. That is the true sense of meditation and in that sense meditation is our nature. Meditation in that sense, which is the actual sense of meditation, is our innate inherent nature. For beginning practitioners of meditation the doing of the practice of meditation seems to be somewhat difficult and challenging. That difficulty arises because of twp specific limitations or shortcomings. One is the habit of distraction, the habit of constant wandering of the mind. Our mind is in the habit of constantly wandering, constantly being lost in distraction. So to maintain our mind free of this habit of constant speculation, constant distraction, is a challenge, but meditation is, nevertheless our nature, for each and every one of us. The second reason that the experience of meditation seems to be difficult is because we have this notion that meditation is some kind of task that we have to work at, so we find ourselves putting a lot of effort into trying to create meditation, trying to get something going, instead of letting be. These conditionings of effort and constant distractions are what create obscurations to natural meditative experience.
For the experience of meditation to happen, to take place, only two things are necessary. First is awareness, being in a state of awareness. When we lose awareness, then there is no meditation. When people say that there meditation is not going well or they are not having meditative experience, what that simply means is that there is no presence of awareness, that one‘s mind has been distracted, caught up in thoughts of distraction. So the primary point is the experience of awareness, presence of awareness. The second point is that, in order for there to be continuous awareness or uninterrupted awareness, there must be the support of mindfulness. When the combination of awareness and mindfulness is present, then there is meditation, and that is all that meditation requires. Maybe we can do this together, for a short time. Maintain the presence of awareness, which is to say, do not allow one‘s mind to get distracted by all kinds of thoughts, yet at the same time do not put any effort towards having mindfulness and awareness. Simply allow the presence of mindfulness and awareness. Sit this way, one‘s mind distracted neither by any kind of thought nor one‘s mind involved in any kind of mental effort, simply maintaining the experience of awareness and mindfulness. Your experience of awareness, this experience of mind, is it like this? Is it free from any reference point in the way of location. In the way of sensation, in the way of colors, shape, form, free of any such reference point, yet at the same time there is the constant continuity of the experience of awareness, awareness in the sense that one‘s mind is not distracted? This experience or awareness is free of any reference point, therefore you cannot say whether it is like this or like that, but at the same time it is not distracted. If there is that experience, then that is having some sense of knowing one‘s own mind, having some feeling for the nature of one‘s mind. Rest in that. As you sit in this way, how does it feel for you, how is it going for you? Rinpoche has been attempting to give you a feel for what should be be the experience. Do you make some kind of connection? Is there some sense of a common understanding taking place? The practice as well as the experience of meditation is profoundly simple and yet, because of our habits of preoccupations and expectations, we obscure ourselves from the possibility of that simple and profound experience. We make the journey of meditation disappointing for ourselves.
For instance, when it is said that through the practice of meditation there is the possibility for one to allow oneself to experience the unconditioned nature of one‘s mind, the authentic, true nature of one‘s mind, even though it is explained as much as possible, how that experience should be, we tend not to hear that. We like to go along with our own expectations, so we think, ―Okay, I sit here in meditation and the experience of the true nature of mind will become revealed to me, and, when that becomes revealed to me, it will be revealed in some humongous form that I have never seen before. So it will be quite and overwhelming experience.‖ experience.‖ This is sometimes our expectation. At other times maybe you have an expectation that it will be such a glamour that a glow of light, a splash of light will be radiating everywhere, and that will be our experience. And when none of that is experienced, then you say, ―Where is the experience?‖ which you did not catch. The actual experience should be the fact that there us nothing, no fixed reference point to be perceived, to be seen by the mind. No glamorous, wonderful reference point of any kind to be seen. And so in terms of words, seeing that there is nothing to see. Shakyamuni Buddha has said, ―Experience the seeing of nothing to see is the greatest seeing.‖ So the a wareness wareness that is free of reference point is more in connection with beginning to make some kind of experience in connection with the nature of one‘s mind. Q: What would Rinpoche say about maintaining a correct posture? A: Actually, there are either five or seven specific positions of the body. For beginning practitioners maintaining the proper postures of the body as much as possible is helpful, is beneficial. If one has understanding about the nature of one‘s mind and has gained some training in the way of stability, then posture is not particularly important. Initially, the posture helps to create a better setting for being able to maintain the stability and calmness of mind. If you are able to do that, then you don‘t have to still apply the specific postures of the body. When there is a variety of people, there are different situations, some are able to apply the postures, and to say a lot of things in a short span of time may create a bit of confusion. But generally speaking, in terms of physical postures two elements are important. One is maintaining the uprightness of the back. That, and then letting the body be free of rigidity, free from being tensed up. These two are most important.
Q: Please clarify the difference between awareness and mindfulness? A: In Tibetan we have the word dran pa, which means the initial experience of not being distracted, the initial experience of being able to maintain awareness. The second word is she‘s bzhin , which is mindfulness, I guess. Some kind of awareness that checks on the awareness you are maintaining, so that there is a continuity, because you could slip away. So to make sure that you stay in a state of awareness or in a state of mindfulness. One is the actual awareness and the other is the checker awareness. Awareness is maintaining a state of mind that is free from distractions. There are two kinds of distractions. One is going through all kinds of thoughts, the other is just going blank, spacing out. That would be distraction, too. So free of distraction, open, spacious, however you want to describe the characteristic of awareness. If now you are in a state of awareness, doing anything while maintaining that awareness would be mindfulness. Basically one is saying, ―Maintain that initial awareness,‖ and the other is other is saying, ―don‘t lose it.‖ Q: I don‘t understand the notion of ―no fixed reference point.‖ Is that referring to the actual experience one has while meditating? Presumably my eyes are open and I experience a shape for or color, yet you‘re saying something about no shape, color, or fixed reference. A: If you are focused on a visual object with your sense of sight, of course everything is manifesting in shapes and forms. But we are not talking in that particular materialistic context. We are talking in terms of experience of the nature of mind, mind with which we experience pain and happiness. You are looking at the nature of this mind, which on one hand continuously experiences pain and happiness, but when you watch it or look at it there is no form or shape or color to look at. But does that mean there is nothing at all? It is not nothing at all either, the constant awareness, presence of awareness. Q: When one talks about the alayavijnana, is that not a form? A: Just as the nature of mind is free of any reference point, equally is the alaya consciousness also free of any reference point. Our present experience of perception of the arising of phenomena, of colors, form, shape do not arise because of habitual conditionings. Just as forms, shapes, and colors exist in a dream, but in reality lack true existence.
When we are talking about our mind or the nature of our mind, it might initially seem somewhat difficult to relate to, because we are habitually used to thinking and relating to a world of materialism. So trying to work with most of the abstract qualitites of the nature of the mind may seem somewhat funny, one can‘t seem to connect with it. But Rinpoche feels that is is very important that we pay attention to this particular issue because the whole world of experience, be it pleasurable or painful, happiness or suffering, everything that is produced in the world arises out of our mind. It is a product of the various activities, confused or otherwise, of our mind. Yet not to know about our mind, what it is like where all these things are arising, would be even more strange. So trying to understand it seems somewhat strange, but to not know about one‘s mind would be even stranger. Talk 4 In the long run doing continuous or consistent practice of meditation is more important but in order to do the practice effectively, of course one must know what to practice, how to practice. From that point of view, listening or hearing what and how to practice is, initially, also very important. So at the initial level listening and practicing are equally important, but in the long run practice is more important. When sitting it is possible that a lot of thought arises in one‘s mind. Such a constant arising of thoughts in meditation practice is likened to a waterfall, to the constant coming down of the water, the constant play of the water. When there are these great many thoughts arising in one‘s meditation experience or practice, if it seems like you are going with the falling down of the water, then you are distracted. On the other hand, if it seems you are standing on the side of the waterfall, seeing the waterfall, then meditation is happening. Beginning practitioners generally think that if one is able to have a period of time during the meditation session which is free of thoughts, absent of thoughts, then that would be preferable. What that kind of thinking or preconceived notion does is produce expectation and doubt, expectation in hoping that meditation will be free of thoughts, and doubt in having the notion that meditation practice will be interrupted by an upheaval arising arising of thoughts. One‘s practice of meditation should be free of such expectation and doubt. Thoughts are not necessarily an obstacle to the experience of meditation, but doubts and expectations are.
If you are sitting, meditating, and your mind is resting in awareness free of thoughts, that is fine, that is good. On the other hand, if thoughts do arise, the simple arising of thoughts is not an obstruction or distraction. One must not reject thoughts or suppress thoughts, nor must one pursue thoughts, follow thoughts. Whatever thought arises, simply notice it and remain in awareness of the mind. The thoughts is not a source of benefit nor a source of harm. When you do not react to thoughts through rejection and suppression or through pursuing, then thoughts arise and simply dissipate on their own. During the practice of meditation people tend to entertain idea or thoughts or expectations. For instance, people have the expectation or notion that the practice of meditation should be a very comfortable experience, a very peaceful experience, so while you are meditating your mind remains in a very peaceful, very tranquil and very comfortable state. That is not necessarily true. In meditation practice you will come across all kinds of experiences, textures of all sorts. Meditation practice is to simply continue to cultivate the familiarity of awareness, so there is continuous awareness. That is what meditation is. Meditation is not necessarily and experience of a calm and peaceful state alone. Because of circumstances in one‘s life, because of the possible experiences that one can come across, when one is doing meditation practice sometimes the glimpses and experiences may be very pleasant, sometimes very painful and quite unpleasant. Whatever the quality of the experience may be, one should think of meditation practice as a journey. On a journey one comes across all kinds of landscapes and terrain. The practical purpose is to get to the destination, not to stop because of wonderful scenery, nor for that matter, for a very treacherous path. The journey must be continuous. In the same way, as long as there is awareness present, then whatever may be the appearance of the experience, the practice must be continued. To think, ―Previously, when I was meditating it was very calm and very peaceful, now this is rocking and unpleasant. The meditation experience or quality is gone. It is not happening anymore, there is no point in pursuing this practice,‖ to think in those terms would be wrong. Meditation practice must be done whether the context of the experience is pleasant or unpleasant. For that matter, the practice of me ditation should be done whether one‘s life is comfortable and pleasant or one is in a very unpleasant and uncomfortable situation.
Daily practice of meditation must be maintained in order for us to develop authentic familiarity with our own basic awareness or basic nature of mind. If we are going to wait for the ideal moment, that comfortable moment, so that we can practice meditation, we will hardly get any chance to familiarize ourselves with the basic nature of our mind. It is also realistic to take into account the truth of impermanence. In his teachings the Buddha stressed the truth of impermanence. With the experience of birth, the coming about of death is inevitable. The impermanence of life is through death, meeting ends in parting, accumulation ends in exhaustion, building ends in collapse. All phenomena are subject to the four kinds of impermanence. In a way, we think of ourselves as being intelligent and smart. We put on that appearance. We have produced and created all kinds of things, seeming expressions of our intelligence. On the other hand, actually we are quite ignorant, rather stupid in that we have the illusion everything around us is permanent. We have that illusion of reality. As human beings we entertain ourselves with this tremendous illusion of reality. At least some of us think that we accept the coming of death, the possibility of death. ―At some point, some time in the future, I will probably die. But of course, that will be some time very much in the future. So until that time comes I will accomplish all of these things.‖ So all kinds of plans or projects are made or envisioned. But speaking quite straight forwardly, what realistic certainty does anyone have that all those things will be accomplished and achieved, that you won‘t be gone, that you won‘t be dead when that very distant future time comes? What certainty, what proof does anyone have? One can entertain illusions of proof such as, ―Because I am young right now,‖ or ―Because I am not sick physically.‖ But such are not proofs of certainty by any means. As if young people don‘t die. It doesn‘t help if you are young, because many people who are young die. If you are not sick today, it does not mean sickness is not going to happen or that sickness is necessary in order to die. But we all keep making these plans for the future, in a very sure way that it‘s going to go the way we want. We all make plans. For instance, we have the program sheets. Just as we have done today, we have the plan that, again, for tomorrow, Rinpoche and all of you come here for a session. It‘s printed in the brochure. But can we say, ―Yes I have total certainty that I will be here tomorrow?‖ There is no certainty. Everything is subject to impermanence and that impermanence is not a fixed time of impermanence: uncertain impermanent. When that moment of death is going to come, what
is going to be the unexpected cause of it, will be totally uncertain. So with that kind of truth happening all the time, to be believing in the permanence of phenomena, in the permanence of ourselves, is quite an ignorance. We should take upon ourselves the responsibility to put some time into the practice of meditation, give ourselves the opportunity to do some practice of meditation and not allow ourselves to get completely swayed or carried away by all kinds of habitual, mundane and materialistic concerns. The truth of the matter is that no matter what we have in the way of possessions, power or popularity, whaveter you have in the world, at the moment of death none of those things whatsoever is there to come for your rescue. None can speak on your behalf and get something done. At that time, if through the practice of meditation and through having cultivated familiarity with the basic nature of the mind you can have the presence of awareness, that is the only reliable companion. From that point of view, for the goodness and benefit of this life and for future times to come, what is most beneficial and essential is to develop awareness of the mind, familiarity of the nature of mind, through the practice of meditation. Considering the importance of some spiritual development or insight in one‘s life, even though it is very difficult to put all one‘s wordly concenrs aside and commit oneself fully to the cultivation of mind, to meditation, even if such drastic changes are not possible, one should at least make a point to take a closer look at how one spends one‘s time daily. For instance, in the course of a day how do we spend those twenty-four hours? Several hours doing things that appear to be practically necessary, a lot of time we waste doing all kinds of frivolous trivial activities that do not amount to even any mundane material accomplishment, let alone any spiritual benefit. So we have to take a closer look at how we spend our time and take care of the wasted time, bring it together and at least practice meditation for ten to fifteen minutes every day. That is not really a lot of time, but it is certainly a good start, because if you do ten minutes of meditation practice every day, in the course of one week you do about an hour‘s practice, and that is good too. Maybe we‘ll spend a short time doing practice, as we have done before. When we sit like this, resting our body, speech and mind at ease and maintaining basic awareness, given that one is doing it properly, one‘s experience is very simple and very clear. That experience is the self-liberation of all the
conditioned burdens that we normally find ourselves subjected to: pain and conflict, all kinds of things. This state of being at ease, this state of openness, of spaciousness and therefore of joy and happiness, wellbeing, however you want to put it, is a very natural experience and, because this experience is a very natural experience, it is a very real experience. That real, natural, or authentic experience can be referred to as essential happiness or essential wellbeing. So when we sit and experience that, for whatever moment, what we come to understand is that we have not only the potential but that reality of experience. All people without exception have the potential for that same experience, the basis for that experience. But unfortunately, that is not the regular experience of the minds of people. The regular experience of the minds of people is not only having no sense of the basic awareness of mind, but being burdened by all kinds of conditioned ways of perceiving reality, illusions of reality. So one‘s mind is caught in a constant state of bewilderment. Along with that is a constant arising of conflicting emotions. Obscurations are created by these conflicting emotions: pain, suffering, the conflict created by these emotions. People have no chance in a sense, to lead their own lives, because their own lives have the basic quality of awareness and mindfulness. One‘s life is governed by the dictate of habitual tendencies. What a way to live. When we experience this mental quiescence, this mental awareness, what this could wake us up to is a sense of genuine caring for other beings, who equally have the potential to have this kind of experience but are not aware of it, having fallen under the dictate of all kinds of habitual tendencies. The experience of the nature of the mind is the source of the arising of genuine good-heartedness of our fellow sentient beings. In actual meditation we cultivate the possibility of being able to rest our body, speech, and mind naturally at ease and thus maintain basic effortless awareness and mindfulness. But even in the course of actual meditation, let alone in post-meditation, that is not how our mind stays all the time. In order for us to be inspired to do formal meditation practice, in order to give birth to inspiration, in order to give birth to perseverance, and in order to make our formal practice of meditation more effective, then during postmeditation what is most essential is to try to maintain some sense of responsibility through mindfulness. That is, to be mindful of the undeniable truth of change and impermanence and to be mindful of the importance of
benefit, for oneself and others, of cultivating that kind and goo-heartedness, through remembering to cultivate genuine kindness and compassion. In practice of dharma or practice of spirituality, one of the most important elements that needs to be cultivated is good-heartedness or loving-kindness and compassion. As important as it is in a spiritual context, in terms of what is most important to develop, in our everyday life in the world, in our interpersonal relationships with people also the developing of cultivating lovingkindness and compassion is of very great importance. In fact, it is only when we have such qualities and characteristics as the true experience of a heart of warmth and caring, kindness and compassion, which are the essential ingredients of being a human being, which bring forth the integrity of being a human being, that we can proudly proclaim ourselves as human beings, because of the tremendous benefit and goodness that such qualities of mind bring about for ourselves and for others. Potentially, kindness and compassion are the nature of our mind, but because of twisted ways of perceiving reality such potential, vital characteristics of the mind have been obscured. So we have to nurture them, and act on bringing about the unfolding of such potentials. We have had the opportunity, however it happened, to be together. Rinpoche wants to sincerely convey to you the importance of the proper practice of meditation, as well as the importance of proclaiming, in some sense, our human essence, through nurturing and developing compassion and kindness. Whatever your activities and views are in life. Rinpoche feels that the practice of meditation and of cultivating good heartedness is meaningful and good for everybody. Rinpoche would like to take the liberty of encouraging you to do your best on your path. Q: The assumption in Buddhism is that the nature of a human being is kindness and compassion. Freud assumed that there is a drive for destruction and aggression in every human being, which seems to be proved in wartime, when the frame of society breaks down. How does that go with Buddhism? Q: The arising of thoughts of destruction in the way of anger, and therefore indulging in destructive measures, do not arise from the nature of the mind, do not arise as a characteristic and a quality of the nature of the mind. They arise from habitual conditionings of the mind. A person, who by nature is a very good person, acts in ways that are unnatural to his nature when affected by intoxicatns. That is the manifestation of his basic nature, it is the effect of the intoxicants being acted out. WE have all kinds of habitual
conditionings and, because of that, all kinds of destructions are brought about. That is because of the confused belief, the primitive belief, in the notion of the existence of ego, of self, clinging to that and, out of that ego fixation and clinging, developing all kinds of conflicting emotions. It is out of the patterns of conflicting emotions that these destructive activities arise, not as a result of originating from the nature of the mind. Q: Could Rinpoche give some advice to people who want to do regular practice, but who may have small children or be in family situations where it‘s sometimes very hard to give priority to meditation practice? A: Most important is an understanding of the benefit and the importance of having mindfulness, having awareness. When you have awareness and mindfulness which is free from distraction, in that moment it is like you are alive, you are back home. If you think about the importance of daily activities, be it attending to children or family needs or work, what have you, of course the list will never run out of important priorities, but one has to make it a practical point to give oneself the time. If one is facing circumstances where time seems to be difficult, in that kind of situation, of course, you can‘t be looking for the ideal time for practice, a regular morning time or a regular evening time, and a regular length of time, because you are not able to work it out. So recognize that actually, if there is mindfulness and there is awareness, there is meditation, because even if you are sitting on the cushion, if you are distracted then there is no meditation happening. So first, have some sense of what it means to have meditation happening. Then, with some sense of responsibility, even if you only have some short, free moments, a couple of minutes, take advantage of that couple of minutes. In some sense it doesn‘t have to be that you have to stop doing everything. You can apply mindfulness under many circumstances. When it comes to doing unwholesome activities, no matter how small it is one shouldn‘t overlook or disregard it by saying it wouldn‘t amount to anything. At the same time, when it comes to doing wholesome or virtuous activities don ‘t neglect even the least that you can do. In this way you can provide yourself the opportunity. Some times, when you are walking, when you are driving, you can bring your mind back to mindfulness. Let‘s say you got separated from someone very close to yo u, your child, your mother, or you are involved in an argument and someone said something to you that was very hurtful, very painful. That experience of a sense of loss, that experience of being hurt, is a very heightened experience. Whether you
are driving, cooking, sitting down, that experience of pain is lingering constantly. It doesn‘t stop. When you drive it doesn‘t stop, when you‘re cooking it doesn‘t stop. The cooking is not in it‘s way, the driving is not in it‘s way. In the same way, when there is mindfulness then things don‘t have to be this way. Things can happen, yet mindfulness can be there at the same time. What gom, meditation practice, basically means is ―getting used to,‖ ―developing a habit,‖ and that‘s exactly what it is. We are working to wards developing a habit, but instead of being unwholesome this one is familiarizing yourself with the potentials of your mind. So one has been introduced to the idea of mindfulness and awareness, which is not a familiar thing in one‘s life. If one is sin cere about it and appreciated the possible goodness of it, then one will try to make a point to be mindful. But because of habits of distractions it is very difficult to be mindful. Today you are able to be mindful: just once, the presence of awareness. That is hardly anything, but it‘s wonderful that it happened at all. Maybe tomorrow at two particular moments you are able to catch yourself and come back. One, two, three times, in this way, when there is a sense of importance and responsibility, gradually, one can introduce it into one‘s life. THE MAIN MEDITATION OF MAHAMUDRA - THE DIFFERENTIATION OF MAHAMUDRA MEDITATION Generally speaking, within the context of Buddhist tradition the practices of meditation are designed to cater for two different types of individuals or practitioners. Certain meditation practices, known as teachings of the instantaneous path, cater for individuals of excellent capacity and spiritual insight. Because of their excellent capacities these individuals have the ability to dispel varieties of doubts and uncertainties straight away, and then engage in the practice of contemplation. The other kind of teachings, known as teachings of the graduated path, cater for those individuals whose capacity is limited and how have not developed sufficient spiritual insight. These teachings encourage the individual practitioner to engage at the beginning in the practice of contemplation, which corresponds to meditation of tranquility and, once the mind has become more settled and focused, only then to engage in the practice of meditation of
