Emptiness

Disturbing emotions and disturbing attitudes arise from our unawareness of reality, which is fed by incorrect consideration. With incorrect consideration, the confused mind projects something that is not there.

An analysis of static phenomena, which are validly knowable and unaffected by causes and circumstances, and nonstatic phenomena, which are impermanent, changing from moment to moment.

The different views among the Indian Buddhist tenet systems concerning the difference between arhats’ and Buddhas’ understanding of the lack of an impossible “soul” of persons and phenomena.

The various Tibetan Buddhist traditions differ as to the voidness non-conceptually cognized by each of the three types of practitioners – shravaka, pratyekabuddha and bodhisattva – when becoming an arya.

Yongdzin Ling Rinpoche explains the Gelug Prasangika presentation of appearances being the play of the mind.

When voidness is cognized conceptually, its superficial truth appears; this is known as denumerable voidness. When voidness is cognized non-conceptually, an absolute absence of truly established existence appears; this is known as non-denumerable voidness.

Creativity becomes more open when, with an understanding of emptiness, we avoid making it an ego-trip.

Svatantrika and Prasangika are two divisions of the Madhyamaka tenet system, but according to the Gelugpa presentation, Svatantrika asserts self-established (inherent) existence, while Prasangika refutes it.

In “Four Hundred Verse Treatise,” Aryadeva deconstructs the various types of incorrect consideration that we all have, as espoused by the different non-Buddhist Indian schools of philosophy.

Tsenshap Serkong Rinpoche provides a deep analysis of the first few verses of the ninth chapter, “Discriminating Awareness,” from “Engaging in Bodhisattva Behavior.”