Session Ten: How To Meditate
We are studying this text, Letter of Practical Advice on Sutra and Tantra, which the great Tibetan master Tsongkhapa wrote to one of his disciples and friends, the meditator Konchog-tsultrim, with whom he also exchanged teachings back and forth. This Konchog-tsultrim had asked Tsongkhapa for some practical advice, and Tsongkhapa wrote back — after giving an introduction expressing his modesty — that he had nothing to say, then he said he will try to say something that might be of use.
Review of Previous Sessions
Precious Human Rebirth
So — just as a brief review — he said that we’ve found an excellent working basis of a human rebirth, and we’ve met with the teachings, and we have been cared for by great spiritual masters, and we have the power to discern what’s to be adopted and rejected. This indicates a situation in which we already are, in a sense, involved with the Dharma. If we put it into our practical situation nowadays, this would be referring to people who actually perhaps are going to a Dharma center — so they have a precious human rebirth, they have interest, they’ve met with the teachings, they have (presumably) qualified teachers, and they have the ability to discern between what’s to be adopted and rejected. Now the difference is whether they just go to the center, or do they actually engage themselves or involve themselves in the teachings, which means really to use them to try to tame their minds and to work on their personalities and gain the spiritual goals that we speak of in Buddhism — improving future lives, gaining liberation, and gaining enlightenment.
Reliance on a Qualified Spiritual Teacher
Then Tsongkhapa says, “Well, how do we actually engage ourselves?” We have to do this by knowing how to do it; and if we don’t know ourselves, which probably we don’t, then we have to definitely rely on the guidance of someone who does. That would be our qualified teacher. The teacher needs to be able to differentiate between what actually are the pathway minds that we need to develop, and which ones are not; and not add anything, not leave anything out; and know the proper order for introducing them, and the proper order for training them, and how to apply them specifically to each of us disciples. Because if the teacher doesn’t know this, then they can either lead us astray by teaching us things that are detrimental, that are not really what we’re supposed to... what we need to develop, or by leaving things out or adding things that are unnecessary, or starting way over our heads or way beneath us so that we get discouraged.
Then this teacher has to have gained certainty about all of this by himself or herself, having been led through this spiritual development by their own teachers in a way that is in accordance with the great texts. We have to be quite clear here that there isn’t a separation between Dharma which is in the text and to be studied and Dharma which is to be practiced, that whatever is in the texts is intended for our practice. Our study then needs to be very thorough.
The Motivating Mental Framework
Then how do we actually begin our practice? Well, the most important thing is taming our minds. This is what the practice is all about, is taming our minds so that we don’t act destructively, so that we don’t perpetuate our samsaric existence, and so that we don’t just care for our own liberation in a selfish, self-centered sort of way.
To tame our minds, then, what we need to do before applying any of the specific methods — like in tantra and so on, or the understanding of voidness, or gaining concentration, or any of these sort of things — is that we have to establish the proper motivating mental framework. That motivating mental framework, as we’ve seen, has several components to it. It has an aim — what is it that we are aiming for? — and why do we want to achieve that, and what is the emotion behind wanting to achieve that? All of that is the motivating mental framework. It’s helpful, I think, not to just use the word motivation and leave it like that, because then, again, we might be leaving something out or speaking about something different. When Buddhism speaks about what’s usually called motivation, it’s this whole mental framework: the aim, the intention to achieve it, and the emotion behind that.
For this there’s the very common scheme that was formulated by Atisha (Skt. Atiśa) of the three levels of motivating mental framework: the initial, intermediate, and advanced. These are graduated, which means that one builds on the other and it’s not that we can start in the middle or start at the end — we need to start at the beginning. Whenever we do something like... There are different types of meditation, and there’s one meditation which is a type of reviewing — or glance meditation sometimes it’s called — in which we go through all the stages, very roughly, of the path, so that we review the whole thing and remember the context and the whole way in which all the stages build on each other. This is very, very helpful, because if we leave out certain things then this really causes a lot of problems.
This initial level, we saw, was to think in terms of turning our interest from just this lifetime itself. We think of death and impermanence and how we can go to worse states or better states in the future, and we get the motivation to work for our future lives so that we continue to have a precious human life to be able to continue on the spiritual path. To do this, we need to refrain from acting destructively and act in a constructive way, and also offer prayers for precious human rebirth, and build up the other causes, which are basically the six far-reaching attitudes. In other words, practice generosity and ethical discipline — the most important is ethical discipline, so we don’t just act like an animal out of our instincts — and then having patience and perseverance, and some concentration, and using our intelligence (our ability to discriminate between what’s helpful and what’s harmful, what is correct and what’s incorrect). All of these are causes for continuing to have a precious human rebirth.
Then, on the intermediate level, we need to think of the disadvantages of all the various rebirth states that we have. In other words, think not just of the suffering of suffering (sdug-bsngal-gyi sdug bsngal) (the gross type of suffering) but also think of the suffering of change (’gyur-ba’i sdug-bsngal), it’s called. That’s referring to our ordinary type of happiness, which never lasts, it’s never going to be enough, and there is no security to it, you never know what’s going to come next. Think even deeper in terms of the suffering of having continued compulsive rebirth over and over again with a basis that is going to support the gross suffering of suffering and the suffering of change and is just going to perpetuate it and cause more and more and more, and how this is unsatisfactory: we’re completely tired of that, fed up with it, disgusted with it, and we say “Enough!” and we develop renunciation, which is that “I want to get out of that. I’m willing to give that up, and give up the causes for it, and work instead for liberation.”
Then, on the advanced level, we think how everybody else is in the same situation and how inappropriate it would be for me just to work for my own liberation alone. — because of the interconnectedness of everybody, and that everybody wants to be happy, nobody wants to be unhappy, we’re all equal, etc. — then we work for enlightenment, because it’s only with enlightenment that we will get rid of all the obscurations of our mental continuum so that we know really fully cause and effect, so that we can know how best to help others — what will help them, what will be the consequences of anything that we teach.
All of this, we saw, was based on a confident understanding of our mental continuum, the mind — that it has no beginning, it has no end, therefore it’s totally shortsighted not to think of future rebirths, because they will occur. We take some responsibility and have concern for our own future rebirths. Then we think in terms of the nature of that mental continuum, that it is not intrinsically stained by disturbing emotions and karma, and therefore it is possible to gain liberation from that, and so we’re aiming for that. We take responsibility to overcome these fleeting stains. Then we think, even further, of the purity of the mind, that the mind doesn’t intrinsically make appearances of true existence, which would prevent us from being omniscient, from knowing all the aspects of cause and effect. Therefore, we take responsibility for helping everybody, because we see that it is possible to help everybody and we see that everybody’s mental continuum is in the same situation, therefore everybody’s mental continuum is pure.
As we progress through this sequence of developing our motivating mental framework, then, with each later step it actually strengthens the earlier steps. Because the more we think of, let’s say, uncontrollably recurring rebirth (samsara), that it’s going on and on and on — well, of course, the more we get into that way of thinking, the stronger our belief is going to be, our confidence is going to be, that there is such a thing as future rebirths, and although we want to continue having precious human rebirths, we want to get free of that.
Actually, the point that I wanted to make is that we realize how long it’s going take in order to gain liberation, that it’s not a simple process, and so the more that we take that process seriously — “I’m really going to work for liberation, and it’s going to take a long time. I’m willing to do that” — then of course that strengthens our resolve to continue to have a precious human rebirth, because in order to gain that liberation, we need to continue to have those precious human rebirths, lifetime after lifetime.
Now, what is tricky, of course, is to really be sincere in the intermediate level, that it’s not that we’re attached to the precious human rebirth and we’re just thinking of the nice things of that: all our friends and good circumstances and… I mean, all these prayers: “May I be able to meet the Dharma quickly, and may I have the best spiritual teachers and long life and good health and intelligence,” and all these sort of things (support of Dharma friends, etc.). Well, it’s easy to fool ourselves when we are praying for that (dedicating positive force for that, to put it in more Buddhistic terms). It’s very difficult not to be attached to that.
When working with this intermediate level of motivation, it’s a tricky type of thing — to say, “Well, I want all of this, but I realize that that is not the real thing that I’m aiming for. This is just something which is provisional.” Therefore, it’s important to think over and over again about the sufferings of samsara, that even with this precious human rebirth with all these positive things to it, there’s still going to be a lot of problems that we’re going to face, a lot of obstacles still with attachment and anger and so on.
One needs to identify the attachment to the precious human rebirth in order to stay focused on liberation (this intermediate level). But to give up attachment for the precious human rebirth doesn’t mean that we don’t aim for a precious human rebirth. This is the delicate thing, how to want something and wish for something and aim for something but not to be attached to it. How do we do that? Anybody?
Participant: If there is some sort of positive attachment, you can use this attachment in order to gain enlightenment.
Dr Berzin: Right. Is there a positive aspect of attachment? Yes. One can use that to gain enlightenment. Why? Because until we gain liberation, we’re still going to have attachment, so it’s unreasonable to think that we can be totally unattached to gaining the precious human rebirth; therefore we, in a sense, transform that attachment. But what is the definition of longing desire and attachment? Anybody remember the definition?
Participant: It’s exaggerated.
Dr. Berzin: Exaggeration. Exactly that. It’s exaggerating the good qualities of something. Then clinging, or longing desire, is wanting to have what we don’t have. Attachment is not letting go, not wanting to let go of what we do have. But both of them are based on exaggerating the good qualities of something. The other extreme, of course, is underestimating and undervaluing the good qualities of the precious human rebirth.
This is what we need to keep in mind here in order to avoid gross attachment and just being on that initial level. Because remember, these levels of motivating framework are built on each other, which means that you add the second one to the first, and you add the third to the first and second (you don’t give up the first and second), so you modify it.
Participant: What I find helpful in this context is how Shantideva wrote that the one you love the most, the one you want and are attached to — you won’t see them for eons and eons.
Dr. Berzin: Right. She points out that what’s helpful is a line from Shantideva, that those that we are the most attached to… I think this is referring to friends and relatives we won’t see for thousands of eons, that this is helpful to have us not become attached to specific friends and specific relatives. But I’m thinking in a more general sense: “May I always have supporting Dharma friends, whoever they are.” It could be more general.
Participant: I also meant more the general case of thinking of the precious human rebirth.
Dr. Berzin: Right. Thinking of the precious human rebirth, that we’re not going to have it for millions of eons. Well, yes, it’s very, very rare, that’s true. That could lead us to have more attachment to it, though. “It’s so rare. I really want it.”
In any case, one needs to not exaggerate how easy it is to get it, that’s for sure, and not ignore the causes for the precious human rebirth but not exaggerate its purpose. Its purpose is a vehicle for gaining liberation. To really aim for liberation, as we’ve discussed, is really quite an incredible step if you really take that seriously, what it means.
Now, on the advanced scope, we’re thinking of everybody. Now, this becomes very, very interesting. When you think of your own suffering, the suffering that I have now — well, some of us might be in really horrible situations, but there are always those who are worse, and often our situation is not so bad compared to the situation of people in the middle of a war or people in the middle of a famine or these sorts of things. Then, if we’re thinking about all the possible… the sufferings of samsara, on the intermediate level, in a sense it becomes a little bit theoretical: we’re just imagining it. But if you really start being concerned with others, and looking at others, and taking the situation of others very seriously in terms of developing compassion for them and a feeling of interconnectedness and so on, the more you see the other people’s suffering, which is not theoretical, the stronger your wish is not just to gain liberation but to gain enlightenment so that you can help them (but to avoid that; in other words, to gain liberation yourself).
I think, in this way, the more serious one is on the advanced level, it makes stronger the intermediate level as well. You see all this suffering and all the various horrible situations that others have, and “Wow, do I not want to have that, because I see how awful it is. I really, in order to help them, I really have to overcome my own disturbing emotions, which are so trivial, and my own superficial problems, which are so trivial compared to these people” — and these beings, not just people — “I really have to overcome that.”
Remember, to gain enlightenment, it’s based on already gaining liberation. I mean, of course there are two presentations. Svatantrika (Skt. Svātantrika): you gain liberation and enlightenment at the same time (as a Mahayana (Skt. Mahāyāna) practitioner). In Prasangika (Skt. Prāsaṅgika), first you gain liberation and then you gain enlightenment. But the point is that we need not aim just simply to overcome these obscurations preventing omniscience, the cognitive obscurations, and ignore the emotional obscurations. “In order to really help others, I really have to overcome my attachment to them and my getting angry with them and my impatience and my laziness, and all these sorts of things.” The six far-reaching attitudes, the six perfections: generosity to overcome being miserly, and ethical discipline to overcome being just completely out of control, and patience to overcome anger — I mean, ethical self-discipline also to overcome clinging and attachment, these sort of things, not being greedy — and perseverance to overcome laziness, concentration (mental stability) to overcome being unstable and mentally wandering all over the place, and discriminating awareness to overcome being naive (not understanding). “I have to develop these.”
When we are working with the six far-reaching attitudes… Well, working with voidness, of course, is to overcome both the emotional and cognitive obscurations (making appearances of true existence and believing it). But all the others are really working to overcome these emotional obscurations with the help of understanding the voidness; I mean, they’re just provisional things. But my point here is that the more that we think seriously about helping others, the stronger our wish for liberation is going to be, not just our wish for enlightenment. These motivations really, really work to reinforce each other as we go further and further.
Developing the Motivating Mental Frameworks Sincerely
Then Tsongkhapa says — what we were discussing in our last two classes — is that it’s very important not to have all these motivations just with sweet-sounding words, but we have to have them really very sincerely by meditating on them. Which means building them up as beneficial habits, going through the stages and the process of how do we actually develop these motivations, and not just say, “With blah, blah, blah, I’m doing this for the benefit of all sentient beings,” which doesn’t mean anything for most of us if it’s just words, if we haven’t really, really worked on developing this motivating framework on a very deep level.
We had big discussions about what it means to sincerely feel something, to feel a motivation, to really have a certain aim in life. When it is really is unlabored (rtsol-med), is the term (which means that you don’t really have to build it up and work on it, step by step, to build up to that state, but it’s there all the time), then as Shantideva said, whether you are awake, whether you are asleep — even if you’re drunk — you still have bodhichitta (Skt. bodhicitta): it’s still there; it’s still building up positive force. What does that mean? That means that this is your underlying purpose in life. It is so firm that no matter what you’re doing, “This is my purpose in life. This is my aim.” Everything is within that context. You don’t have to be conscious of it, consciously thinking it all the time; it’s just there. It structures our entire lives. That’s when it really is firm.
When we talk about a sincere level of these motivating frameworks — sincere compassion, sincere whatever, renunciation — it’s just there all the time. We don’t have to think about it. We don’t have to build it up. It’s just fully, fully integrated. Whether we describe it in terms of… We found that this is quite difficult to describe, what it really means for my heart to be moved. Different people are going to experience that, I think, a little bit differently, and probably it has to do with chemicals in the body and other things as well, undoubtedly. But the aspect that makes it sincere is that it’s totally, totally digested — it doesn’t have to be conscious — so that you just automatically respond.
Automatically, Atisha called everybody his mother — the yak that was carrying him, that was carrying the things. Just automatically. Wasn’t something that he had to think about. This sort of thing, that automatically you see everybody in terms of a beginningless and endless mental continuum that conventionally now has built up the karma that is manifesting in taking this form but has been my mother. There’s no attachment to this particular form in this particular lifetime or this particular individual, but without denying the conventional reality that in this lifetime they’re a cockroach or my goldfish in a bowl, or my best friend, or my actual mother.
These are tricky things. Now, any questions or comments before we go on?
Participant: To reach this state of digestion is the way through thinking and understanding? Or is it part of the feeling of having an open heart?
Dr. Berzin: Right. To actually digest one of these motivating frameworks — is the process for doing that a thinking one or a feeling one? These are the things that actually we discussed quite a lot in our last classes, and what we found was that it’s very hard to define what it means to feel something. Is it done with the brain? Is it done with the heart? Those are Western ways of dividing experience. In Buddhism they’re not divided that way and there isn’t such a dichotomy here between mind and heart.
The thing is that — and I think this is a point that Tsongkhapa made earlier — that we shouldn’t think of the text as “study Dharma” and then that there’s “practice Dharma” separate from that. Making that kind of dichotomy is also a mistake in terms of what we in the West would call thinking and feeling. I think that’s a unified process. Or ideally, it’s a unified process, put it that way. It doesn’t mean that for everybody it’s the same. I don’t really know. It’s hard to say. Because even thinking… Is thinking… does that mean just verbal? My own teachers used to really scold me when I would say that thinking was verbal, that it was limited to being verbal. These are the questions. How do we categorize experience?
The process of making something digested is a process of familiarization. We will go through, in the next paragraph that he wrote, the method for doing this. But it’s a matter of familiarizing ourselves over and over again with certain points that we can do verbally, we can do with images, we can do with feelings or emotion. The combination here will be different for different people.
You see, the problem is always when there’s somebody who in the West we would describe as a very emotional person, who just goes on the basis of emotion without discriminating between what’s helpful and what’s harmful. That’s being out of balance. Then there are others who just act in a very clinical type of way — “This is beneficial. That’s not beneficial” — but might not act; they might not do anything. Or even if they do something, there’s no human warmth there. They don’t feel anything, we would say. But what does it mean to feel something? That’s hard to say. It’s hard to define.
Participant: Like autistic or Asperger’s people who have trouble understanding the emotions of others.
Dr. Berzin: Right. Autistic people find difficulty in understanding the emotions of others. That’s in addition, not understand the emotions of others. But do you have your own emotions?
This is the whole issue of what it means to have blocked emotions or not to feel anything. What does it mean that you don’t feel anything? These are things that I discuss a little bit in the sensitivity training. Can you really feel nothing? Or isn’t that a feeling, a feeling of nothingness? Or is it just a matter of not being mindful of feeling something? Or just a matter of mental labeling (you’re feeling boredom, you’re feeling disconnectedness; it’s not that you’re feeling nothing)? What’s behind that? Or is it a factor of energy? As I say, these are very, very difficult categories to define — thinking and feeling.
What is it like to have something fully digested as your aim and your motivating emotion? Do you have any examples in your own life? Maybe not a spiritual motivating framework. There could be one to get a good job, to get good grades in school, to make a lot of money. There are these overwhelming aims, aren’t there, with some sort of emotion behind it. What is that like?
You see, this is an interesting point. There’s a difference between having the emotional component of a motivating framework be a disturbing emotion and being a non-disturbing emotion. If it’s sincere compassion, it’s not disturbing, for example. If it’s “I have to get ahead because I want to be the best,” and big ego trip, or even trying to be a bodhisattva as a big ego trip, it’s a disturbing emotion. What’s the difference between feeling a disturbing emotion and feeling a non-disturbing emotion? That’s not an easy question, is it? It won’t disturb the mind? I think there’s a difference in energy.
Participant: It doesn’t shake the mind.
Dr. Berzin: It doesn’t shake the mind; it doesn’t shake the energy. When it’s a disturbing emotion that’s your motivating emotion, your energy is shaking, in a sense. I think it’s important to not identify feeling something with that. Yes, that is feeling something, but that’s not the exclusive domain of feeling something.
It’s like — pardon the example — the difference between being in love with somebody and loving somebody. When you’re in love with somebody, you completely exaggerate the good qualities, totally ignore the negative qualities, and your whole life is pretty much upset in terms of being completely out of balance. But it feels good, which is of course the difficult thing about it — feels very good — but your energy is not stable and steady: it’s really excited. Whereas when that has calmed down and you have a very stable loving relationship with somebody — that is there, in a sense, without making it solidly existing, of course — you don’t have to think about it. It’s just so totally part of you: it’s not disturbing, the energy is smooth, the energy is calm. But that feeling is very, very strong, isn’t it? Do we feel it or not feel it? It’s not exciting. But this is there. This is there.
Now I’m wondering: in terms of thinking and understanding something, is there a similar difference? I don’t think there’s... I mean, it’s interesting. His Holiness the Dalai Lama was speaking with scientists and asking: is there a difference between thinking — from a brain function point of view — between thinking “one plus one is three” or “one plus one is two”? There’s absolutely no difference from the brain and all the things that you could measure in the brain. Obviously, there’s a difference between thinking “one plus one is three” when you know that this is ridiculous. But if you don’t know… Yet it says unknowing — not knowing reality — that’s a disturbing emotion. Disturbing, I think, because it makes us insecure, because then we react to something which is very... it’s involved with how we perceive things; not like an abstract thing, like “one plus one is three.”
But anyway, I’m losing the point here. The point is: What does it mean to fully digest something (with our understanding as well)? We don’t want it to be just superficial. When it’s superficial then you’re uncertain about it, so there’s indecisive wavering. What happens when you’re totally convinced of something which is incorrect? Is there indecisive wavering there? Well, no. It’s just wrong. But based on something which is wrong (and we’re not talking about “one plus one is three” here; we’re talking about how things exist) then you get all sorts of disturbing emotions that are based on that. Isn’t it? We get into trouble. “I’m totally convinced that you are an honest person and that if I loan you ten thousand euros, you’re going to pay it back,” for instance. You could be totally convinced of that, and the other person has no intention of paying you back and is just a hustler — a con artist, then, is the word. He’s just a con artist getting your money from you. It might not be a disturbing situation right then, but afterwards it is going to be a disturbing situation, because what you thought was wrong.
Anyway, this is a very delicate and difficult point of what does it really mean to totally digest a spiritual motivating framework. It has to be one which is non-disturbing, I think; that’s a big qualification of it. But anyway, let’s go on.
Tsongkhapa — in what we read before; his last sentence was:
Therefore, to develop these motivating mental frameworks in an uncontrived manner,
That means not artificial, not made up.
it is not sufficient to have merely an intellectual understanding (of them). We must meditate (in order to build them up as habits).
Intellectual understanding would just be to be able to say all the words correctly and give all the right answers to questions about it.
How To Meditate
Tsongkhapa says then:
As for how to meditate, we need to actualize (these motivations) by acquainting ourselves over and again with discerning meditation itself,
That sometimes is translated as analytical meditation (dpyad-sgom).
with which we meditate by discerning, in many ways, the causes and aspects pertinent for (developing) each of these kinds (of motivations) like this.
Then I gave an example here. Geshe Dhargyey gave an example:
(For instance, by examining many aspects of others’ suffering, we can develop compassion.)
Well, let me read the whole paragraph.
In regard to that, even though cultivating (repeatedly meditating with the proper) focal objects and aspects for these (motivations) is the main cause (for actually developing them…
Then giving an example in parentheses:
(for actually developing them, such as focusing on others’ suffering with the wish that they be parted from it as the way to develop compassion), just (to do) this much is not enough. In between sessions, we need to make (our development of them) firm and certain by having looked at the stainless expositions (of Buddha) and the (Indian) treatises, together with the personal instructions, that have been composed around (the themes of) these (motivations).
OK? Then the example, in parentheses:
(For example, we can read the accounts of how Buddha developed renunciation, compassion, and an enlightening aim of bodhichitta in his previous lives.)
What is all of this saying? This is giving quite good instructions, but you have to go a little bit into careful analysis of what Tsongkhapa is saying here.
Now, discerning meditation, analytical meditation, means to... it’s the step beyond thinking. It’s a threefold process:
- Listening (thos). Because originally nothing was written down, you have to listen to a correct explanation; you have to get the information. Nowadays we can read, but listening from somebody who actually has actualized it adds the extra bonus of some inspiration. You listen to an explanation.
- Then you have to ponder (bsam) or think about it. Think it over (does it make sense? etc.) until you understand it and you’re confident that it’s true.
- Then the actual meditation (sgom) — which is the word “to build it up as a beneficial habit” or “to have it become” (the Sanskrit word, bhavana, comes from the word “to become”), so you actually become like this — is to discern it.
To discern it means to... well, we use the English word “to see it” with this meaning. To discern it means that first you go through the line of reasoning again, all these factors, and then when you’ve built it up again — not just so that you understand it, but you’ve understood it — but you build it up again, and then you actually try to discern it or see it, which could mean to feel it as well.
You build up “Everybody’s been my mother, blah, blah, blah,” all these sort of things, and then you work yourself up to a state of compassion, and then the discerning meditation would be to focus on — this is what Tsongkhapa says, you have to know the focal objects and aspects — focus on the other… on people suffering, on beings suffering. That’s what you’re focusing on. The aspects would be all the different aspects of suffering. There’s a whole long list in the lam-rim of the general sufferings of samsara, the sufferings of each of the individual rebirth states, and so on. Then — it will come a little bit later, not in this paragraph — the way of holding, which is how does your mind actually perceive or take hold of this object (the suffering), and that is with the wish for them to be free of it. That’s what you have to cultivate. That’s discerning meditation. To actually stay focused on that suffering, all the aspects of it. The state of mind that you’re sustaining is that wish for them to be free of it. You’re not verbalizing.
Now are you feeling it? Are you thinking it? I don’t think we could put it into those two separate categories, can we? There isn’t really a difference there. Is there an emotional aspect to it? Yes. If it’s a disturbing one, there’s a little bit of a problem there. If it’s not disturbing, does that mean that you don’t feel it? No. It doesn’t mean that. Now, does it bring tears to your eyes? Well, in many of the texts, it says yes, it should bring tears to your eyes. To bring tears to your eyes — is that disturbing necessarily? I don’t think so. I don’t think so.
Do you ever have this… I think it comes more easily when seeing a movie than seeing real life. A lot of people cry at movies, don’t they? They don’t cry so often at real life, but at a movie you cry. Why? I don’t know. Maybe it is because it’s a protected space and nobody is seeing you, and the other person isn’t seeing you, etc. But anyway, we cry at movies, many of us, at a very sad thing. Is it disturbing? I don’t think it has to be, does it? What’s your experience? Ever cry at a movie?
Participant: I know sometimes I identified with…
Dr. Berzin: Right. Sometimes you identify with the character.
Participant: That’s part of the reason for my crying. The last film I saw, a very interesting, good film, a very realistic film. This was… it was different because it was French language and it was so good, realistic, and…
Dr. Berzin: You cried?
Participant: Yes.
Dr Berzin: Right. She says that she experiences sometimes with an emotional component, particularly when you identify with the character and it brings up some personal stuff from our past, and there are other times when it’s not so personal and it’s not so disturbing. I think even if it does relate to something which is part of our personal experience, it doesn’t need to be disturbing.
Participant: It’s more difficult.
Dr. Berzin: It’s more difficult? I don’t think that it is a matter of a conscious decision. The crying automatically comes. You don’t have control over that.
Participant: It’s different, because it’s more exciting, like trembling inside and shaky. The other one is… you wake up to it, you see it and you come awake to what you’re looking at. It’s different.
Dr. Berzin: She describes one is... What was the word you used? Disturbing? Not disturbing. You used another word... shaky. One is shaky. This goes back to the description that I was saying before, that when it’s disturbing, our energy is shaky. The other is more… What was the word you used? Clearer. More awake was the word that you used. I’m not quite sure that I understand that one. You’re relating more perhaps.
Participant: The moment that you experience this, you feel more aware, and you are very awake. You could never fall asleep in this state.
Dr. Berzin: Right. At other times it’s not disturbing, but you’re very awake. Even if it is disturbing, I think you’re awake. You’re not going to fall asleep at that time.
Participant: Clear is a better word.
Dr. Berzin: I think clear — you’re clearer — it’s more flowing, more open. It’s an open feeling. That is it. It’s a very open feeling. Your barriers are down. This is why it’s easier watching a movie. Your barriers are down. The person in the movie is not going to respond to your crying. You don’t have to deal with this person. It’s usually dark, so other people aren’t seeing you either. Your barriers are down. It’s not such an ego-based experience, is it? But you feel something. What does it mean, feel? This is the question.
Participant: That something is touched, something moves.
Dr. Berzin: Something is touched. Sometimes you see His Holiness... Have you ever seen His Holiness cry? His Holiness sometimes when he teaches and he’s talking about compassion, or he’s talking about something, and he just starts to cry. He cries for a few seconds and then it’s totally gone. Totally continuing. It’s not as though he’s sobbing and it takes a long time to get over it. It just flows and then stops. It’s not a big deal.
Participant: I think it’s really this point of disturbing versus non-disturbing.
Dr. Berzin: Right. Disturbing versus non-disturbing. Our parameters here are not dramatic versus nondramatic.
Participant: But it doesn’t mean it’s not strong.
Dr. Berzin: Which doesn’t mean not strong. It doesn’t have to be dramatic in order to be strong.
Participant: It also doesn’t need to be very weak in order to be non-disturbing.
Dr. Berzin: Right. The opposite is true: it doesn’t have to be weak in order to be non-disturbing. It has to be... I can only think of the German word fest. It has to be... What’s the word fest? Secure. It has to be…
Participant: It’s fixed.
Dr. Berzin: Fixed. Stable. It’s a stabilizing. I don’t know what word… It’s hard to describe.
Participant: It makes the mind clear and stable.
Dr. Berzin: Right. It makes the mind clear and stable.
Participant: As opposed to more confused. Less energy.
The Three Ways of Believing a Fact to Be True
Dr. Berzin: Well, hey, this is one of the... When you talk about belief (what sometimes is poorly translated as faith), there are three types of belief in a fact, belief that a fact is true. To be more precise of what it’s saying, it’s not believing in Santa Claus or something like that, but it’s believing something that is true and to believe that it is true. Believing a fact to be true.
- There’s one which I translate as clearheaded belief (dvang-ba’i dad-pa), which is the type of belief that when you hold it, your mind is clear, and it clears away disturbing emotions.
- Then there’s the one which is based on logic and reason (yid-ches-kyi dad-pa, belief in a fact based on reason).
- Then there’s one which is with an aspiration (mngon-’dod-kyi dad-pa, belief in a fact with an aspiration).
Then the example is used in terms of the good qualities of the teacher. You focus on the good qualities of the teacher, which are actual good qualities, and you have belief or confidence that they do have these, and it makes your mind feel clear, non-disturbed. It doesn’t arouse your jealousy, it doesn’t arouse your attachment, or anything like that. It just makes you feel very confident, clear, etc. Secure, in a sense.
Then there’s one which is based on reason — that the teacher acted like this and that, and they trained like this and that, and I’ve seen their behavior, therefore they have these good qualities.
Then there’s one with the aspiration of “I believe in this, and I want to try to become like that too.”
These three types. Here when we’re talking about feeling something, this clearheaded aspect which is described in the Dharma is probably there — that you feel it and it makes the mind more clear, more not disturbed, more open. Maybe.
Anyway, this is how he says that we do that. We have to discern. First, he says, we have to acquaint ourselves over and again to actualize these motivations. You acquaint yourself over and over again. It’s repeated. Meditation that you repeat. It’s training. It’s conditioning, in a sense. You train yourself. (You don’t have to do it just sitting cross-legged in a quiet place. Do it on the U-Bahn, the subway. You do it walking around. Waiting in line at the supermarket. In terms of compassion — you try to actually discern, see the people with compassion.) Discern over and over again, in many ways, the causes and aspects pertinent for developing each of these kinds of motivation.
What are the causes for developing compassion? Well, we’ve thought of our own suffering and just this “I don’t want to have sufferings.” There’s the other. These are the causes, how you build up to it.
The aspects — you think of all the different aspects of their suffering. Just as I don’t want to wait in line at the supermarket and I have other things to do, so do these people. They’re exactly the same. Nobody is enjoying waiting in this queue. Nobody considers it having fun: “This is how I want to spend my day.” The different aspects of the suffering of that person who is at the checkout counter, and how totally boring that job must be, and repetitive, and how it probably has an extremely low salary, not to mention low social position. (What do you do for a living? I’m a checkout clerk at the supermarket.) You think of the different aspects of this. What do their children think of them? (What does your mommy or daddy do? Well, they’re checkout clerks. What is the other one’s mommy or daddy? Well, they’re a doctor, they’re a lawyer.)
You think of these different aspects, the different causes, how I would feel if I were in that situation. Really terrible. Therefore, you see this person — and what we do in sensitivity training — you see this person as a human being: they have feelings just as I do, blah, blah, blah, all of this.
This is what Tsongkhapa is saying here, and that even though knowing what the focal object is (we’re focusing on the suffering and all the aspects of it) and how to actually relate to what it is that we’re focusing on (the wish for them to be free from this), then he says this is not enough. We need to make our development of it firm and certain by reading the various scriptures, Buddhist texts, treatises on it, and so on, and the personal instructions that have been composed around the themes.
Geshe Dhargyey gave the example of reading the previous life accounts of the Buddha — how Buddha developed renunciation, compassion, and so on. I used an example that was very helpful to me this week. I had a very, very tedious task on the computer to do. It took me three days to do, filling in a very complex chart and looking up so many things in order to fill in this chart. At the end of three days, it got deleted by some reason. I don’t know why it happened, but I lost it all and I had to do it all over again. Fortunately, the second time only took two days, not three days of work. But what helped with that? It’s not just focusing on this and patience and perseverance and developing all of that, “If even an earthworm can achieve enlightenment...” — these sort of things — but looking at accounts. What always helps me in situations like that is to remember the account of Marpa, the great Tibetan translator in the beginning of the eleventh century, who went to India, translated a lot of texts, a whole bunch of texts, from Sanskrit into Tibetan. After many years of work, he took his work, his translations, with him in a big bundle back to Tibet. He was in a boat crossing the Ganges River, and the boat overturned, and he lost all his work. What did he do? He went back and did the translations all over again. It took him many years again, then he went back to Tibet with these. Reading these examples gives great inspiration, and that’s Tsongkhapa’s point. Inspiration from examples that we read. Very, very helpful. Very helpful.
Participant: When one uses the word contemplate, which is this?
Dr. Berzin: Usually contemplate is the translation of the second step, thinking. Thinking. You can also say pondering in English. Thinking it over, with the aim to understand it and to believe it. You can understand something and think it’s absolute rubbish. You have to be confident…
Participant: The German word would be nachdenken.
Dr. Berzin: Nachdenken would be the proper German word. Yes.
But often one misses the point, the full point, of thinking over something. It’s not just to understand it; it’s also to be convinced that it’s true, that it’s correct, and also convinced that “I can attain it.” Let’s say if we’re thinking about liberation: “I understand what liberation is, I’m convinced that it’s possible, but I’m also convinced that I can achieve it.” Otherwise, why in the world would you try to build up aiming for it as your motivation, as your aim? All of that is involved with the thinking process.
The Four Axioms for Examining a Dharma Teaching
Now there isn’t that much time left, and I see everybody looks quite tired, so I don’t know if we really want to start the topic here. But the topic was going a little bit further about how we think over the teachings so that we can discern it. Tsongkhapa just sort of indicates this a little bit. I can introduce the topic, and maybe we just introduce it and then later we can, next time, go into it in a little bit more detail. This is the topic of what I translate as the four axioms (rigs-pa bzhi).
[1] Dependency
Dependency (ltos-pa’i rigs-pa) is the first one. Certain things depend on other things as their basis. For a result to come about, it must depend on causes and conditions. If we want to develop a good quality or an understanding of something, we need to investigate what does it rely on. What do we need to develop beforehand to serve as a basis?
If we want to develop compassion, for example, we need to know what it is based on. What does it depend on? If you’re going to do the meditation “I want to develop compassion” — well, where do you start? It depends on renunciation — thinking of your own suffering, and just as you want to be free of it, then switching that to others. Why would you switch it to others? “Because everybody has been my mother and they’ve been so kind, and I want to repay that kindness. I wish for them to be happy,” and so on. It depends on that. Or that everybody is equal. To gain the understanding of “everybody is equal” you need to focus on everybody. We need equanimity. We need to know, in order to develop this motivation of compassion, what does it rely on.
OK? Is that clear? That’s the first axiom that we use.
[2] Functionality
The second one is functionality (bya-ba byed-pa’i rigs-pa). In order to understand the methods, we need to investigate what do they do. What are their functions? Certain things are compatible, and others are not. Certain states of mind will function to enhance or increase other states. In addition, we need to understand the function of something to damage or counter another.
For instance, what does compassion do? Compassion will... What’s compatible with it? Love. Taking responsibility to help others. The more compassion we feel, it will function to help us to actually take responsibility and work to help others, won’t it? What does it counteract? What is its function? It counteracts not feeling anything, harming others, hurting others, ignoring others, self-centeredness. It helps us to overcome self-centeredness and selfishness, and it helps us to work to benefit others. We need to understand this, in terms of compassion. What is it going to help (what is going to be compatible with it)? What is it going to get rid of (what is it going to counter)?
[3] Establishment by Reason
Then the third thing is establishing something by reason (tshad-ma’i rigs-pa). This means that the valid way of knowing is not going to contradict it. Three ways of knowing:
First is scriptural authority. Does scriptural authority contradict it? No. All the scriptures, all the Buddhist texts, say develop compassion. Buddha developed compassion. All the texts talk about love and compassion. From a scriptural point of view, nothing contradicts it.
From a logical point of view, an inference, is there anything that contradicts it? Well, everybody is equal: everybody wants to be happy; nobody wants to be unhappy. Therefore, just as I want to be free from my sufferings, so does everybody else. Just as my suffering hurts, so does everybody else’s. That is logical; that is reasonable. Logic doesn’t contradict it.
What about straightforward cognition (mngon-sum)? Straightforward cognition — we see. You put your finger in front of an ant and the ant runs to the other side. The ant is frightened. It thinks that it’s going to hurt it. We see for ourselves that nobody likes to be unhappy. Everybody wants to be free from suffering.
It’s established by reason.
[4] The Nature of Things
Then the fourth thing, the nature of things (chos-nyid-kyi rigs-pa). This is the way that things are. Why does everybody want to be happy, and nobody wants to be unhappy? Well, that’s just the way it is. It is the nature of things. Developing compassion, then, is harmonious with the nature of things. Everybody does want to be happy, and nobody wants to be unhappy.
These are the things that also help us to develop a certain state of mind. First of all, in terms of thinking it over. Then, once we’ve thought it over in terms of these things: I know what it depends on, what I have to develop first and second and so on, and what’s going to support it, and I know what is going to be compatible with it, I know what it’s going to counteract, I know that it is reasonable (the scriptures don’t contradict it, it’s logical, I can see it for myself in real life), and it’s in conformity with the way things are. Based on all of that, then this aspect that I was just saying, that in the pondering or thinking over or contemplating step, it’s not just to understand it, but it’s to be confident about it. I’m confident about it: “I really understand. It’s based on all of this. It has all of this as its foundation. It works in this way. It counteracts that. It’s reasonable, it’s logical, it fits in with everything.”
Then on that basis, what do I focus on? What are all the aspects of what I focus on? How does my mind take that object? Focusing on the suffering of others. On other beings. Their suffering. All the different aspects of it. Wish for them to be free of it.
We see this is very, very different from bodhichitta. Bodhichitta — what are you focusing on? Come on, what are you focusing on?
Participant: Your own future enlightenment.
Dr. Berzin: Our own future enlightenment which has not yet happened.
That becomes a very tricky thing. What in the world are we focusing on? We don’t have time to go into that, but I’ve written a great deal about that on the website, in terms of what does it mean to focus on something that has not yet happened. What are you focusing on? You need to know what you’re focusing on in order to focus on it. The different aspects of it. Then how does your mind take it? It’s the wish to attain it and the wish to benefit others by means of that. What is it supported by? It’s supported by love and compassion. What does it counteract? The inability to help others fully. It counteracts the… With bodhichitta it’s the strongest opponent — gives the strength to the understanding of voidness to overcome cognitive obscurations. It’s reasonable, logical. Buddhas have achieved it. All the texts speak in terms of it. It’s something that can be attained. Yes, it fits in with the nature of the mind. The mind is free of obscurations. These sorts of things.
One has to work with all of these. To really sincerely develop bodhichitta, you have to understand all of this. What in the world are we focusing on? Why? How does it function? What does it do? What does it counteract? What is it supported by? Then you’re really convinced that this is something to achieve.
All of this is incredibly excellent advice that Tsongkhapa is giving here. OK? Good.
Let’s end here with the dedication. We think whatever understanding we’ve gained, may it go deeper and deeper and act as a cause for reaching enlightenment for the benefit of all.