LTF 2: The First Three Objects of Mindfulness: The Three Gems

[4] The Triumphant has proclaimed six (objects) for continual mindfulness: The Buddhas, the Dharma, the Sangha, generous giving, ethical discipline, and the gods. Be continually mindful of the mass of good qualities of each of these.

What seems to make sense here is that this is a description of the graded stages of motivation within the lam-rim – in other words, what one would need as a general basis and for all Dharma practice, all the stages of development, specifically what one would need for gaining one of the three better rebirths, which is the initial level of motivation. There are these six objects for continual mindfulness (Tib. rjes-sudran-pa, Skt. anusmarana, recollection). We also find a reference to these six in the Pali literature, not just here in the Mahayana literature. These six objects are things that we need to recollect and remain continually mindful of. Mindfulness is a mental factor that keeps a mental hold on an object and prevents that hold from being let go of. We can describe it as a type of mental glue, and Nagarjuna is pointing out these six items that we need to continually hold in our minds – to always remember. 

The Three Gems: the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha

The first three objects of continual mindfulness are the Three Rare and Supreme Gems: the Buddhas, the Dharma, and the Sangha. It's very important, in order to attain one of the better rebirth states, that we take “refuge,” which means to put a safe direction in our lives. “Safe direction” means that we are going in the direction that is indicated by the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. We don't just want one of the better rebirth states in general: we’d like a precious human rebirth. The main causes for a precious human rebirth are keeping strict ethical discipline, complementing that ethical discipline with the practice of the six far-reaching attitudes, and making prayers – prayers to always have precious human rebirths. In the lam-rim texts, these are described as the causes for obtaining a precious human life. Because of this, Nagarjuna mentions here ethical discipline as one of the objects for continual mindfulness and generosity as illustrating the other far-reaching attitudes. 

The gods are mentioned here because when we think of the good qualities of the various gods in the different celestial realms, then we become mindful of the constructive actions that they did in previous lives, which were the causes for them to gain the qualities that they possess. This leads us into doing the various constructive actions that would bring us to one of the better rebirths. These are, after all, the main teachings that we have in the initial scope of the lam-rim: safe direction, or refuge, and refraining from destructive actions and, instead, engaging in constructive actions, which are the teachings on karma.

So, Nagarjuna says that we need to remain continually mindful – which means being as mindful as possible, day and night – of all the good qualities of each of these objects. Actually, this is a general method that one has, not only in lam-rim but also in most Buddhist texts – that before we give instructions on how to develop something, we teach about the good qualities of it, its benefits. If we are convinced of the benefits of developing, let’s say, bodhichitta, that will give us the incentive to actually develop it. For example, Shantideva begins Engaging in Bodhisattva Behavior (Bodhisattvacharyavatara) with a discussion of the benefits of developing bodhichitta. This is the reason it's important to think of the good qualities of these six objects. As I mentioned regarding the gods, we want to think in terms of the causes that brought that rebirth state about.

In order to think of the good qualities of the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, we need to be able to identify them, so let’s try to identify what they actually are. First of all, Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha are known as the “Three Gems.” Actually, though, if you look at the Tibetan translation of the “Three Gems,” it's the “Three Rare and Supreme Gems.” This is explained in Maitreya's Uttaratantra (The Furthest Everlasting Continuum), in which it says they are rare to come by and have all the supreme qualities. The Three Rare and Supreme Gems are more precious than any ordinary gems. 

Actually, it is very interesting for those of you who know some Tibetan. The Sanskrit is ratna, which is just the word for “jewel.” However, the Tibetans don't translate it as “rin-chen” (rin-chen,) which is the Tibetan word for “jewel.” They translate it as “kon-chog” (dkon-mchog). “Kon” is from “konpo” (dkon-po,) which means “rare,” and “chog” means “supreme.” They derived this from the Uttaratantra's explanation of the reason why the Three Gems are “rare,” and the reason why they are called “gems.” It's quite interesting if one investigates how the Tibetans come up with their terminology. Often they derive it from various textual explanations or commentaries about why – as in this instance – these three are called a “gem”?

When we look at these Three Gems – the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha – we have three different levels of them. There is (1) the Apparent Gem, (2) the Deepest Gem, and (3) the Nominal Gem. The Apparent Gem is what we actually see. We can also think of the Apparent Gem in terms of it being the Conventional Gem, or the Relative Gem – the conventional truth. I think "apparent" is a much better way of translating it here, though, because this is what one sees on the outer level. The Deepest Gem means the deepest level of the Three Gems. The Nominal Gems are just those things that are given the name of “Gem” but that aren't actually sources of safe direction, or refuge. In a sense, they represent the Gems, but they are not the Gems; they are not the actual objects of refuge. So for each of these – Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha – we have three levels. 

The Apparent Buddha Gem: The Rupakaya

The Apparent Buddha Gem is the Buddha's Rupakaya. This is a “Corpus of Forms.” Sometimes, we hear it translated as a “Body of Forms.” But “body,” we have to recall, is not always just one body. I don’t know if the word “body” is used in German this way, but here, it’s like a body of literature or a body of knowledge. In English, “body” can refer to a big network of things. That's why I call it a “corpus,” because “corpus” in English means a big collection of a lot of things. So, we have this Corpus of Enlightening Forms, or Form Body. This is a network of bodies that have form, and there are many of them. Form Bodies fall into two categories: what is known as the Sambhogakaya and the Nirmanakaya. I'll explain these. They are the various forms that a Buddha appears in, and a Buddha appears in many of these simultaneously. 

Sambhogakaya

The Sanskrit word “Sambhogakaya” is not a very easy word. Very often, we hear it translated as “Enjoyment Body,” but this really doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. If we look in the dictionary, we can find that “enjoyment” is one meaning of the Sanskrit word “sambhoga.” As for the Tibetan term, it’s not clear that it means “enjoyment.” As I say, “enjoyment” is just a subcategory of it. It could also mean “to eat,” but nobody calls it the “eating body” either. The word actually means “to make use of something,” in the sense of “to experience” it. So, a consciousness makes use of an object in experiencing it; it utilizes it in order to have an experience of cognition. That’s the meaning of the word. If we look at commentaries as to why Sambhogakaya is called “Sambhogakaya” – at least in Tibetan – the commentaries say “it makes full use of Mahayana.” For this reason, we could call it a “Corpus of Full Use.” 

How does the Sambhogakaya make full use of the Mahayana teachings? It does so by having five things that are definite about it: 

• First of all, it is an actual, physical form that is definite in that it always has the 32 major and 80 minor physical features of a Buddha. 
• Next, it is always teaching the full Mahayana teachings – all the paths, all the teachings, all the way up until the final teachings to enlightenment. 
• Then, it always teaches to arya bodhisattvas, bodhisattvas who have already had nonconceptual cognition of voidness. 
• Fourth, it always teaches these bodhisattvas in pure lands. There can be a whole big discussion of what is actually meant by a “pure land.” We can understand it on many, many different levels, but let's not go into that here. 
• The fifth thing that’s definite about the Sambhogakaya is that it lasts forever, meaning that the mental continuum of a Buddha, being a mental continuum of an individual being, lasts forever; it has no end. Likewise, Sambhogakaya forms have no end. Let's not get into the whole theoretical discussion of what will happen when every sentient being becomes enlightened and the Buddhas don't have to teach arya bodhisattvas any more. They would still appear in pure lands because everything would be a pure land at that point. 

Just as there are always two truths, the conventional and deepest truths, there always have to be both a mind and a physical form of a Buddha. You can't just have one. And they are attained simultaneously. It's not that first one attains the Dharmakaya, and then one starts to emanate forms; they’re simultaneous; inseparable like the two truths. In anuttarayoga tantra, the highest class of tantra, the Sambhogakaya is defined as the enlightening speech of a Buddha, which also makes full use of the teachings because it expresses them fully. In Kalachakra, the Samboghakaya is defined as being both: these subtle forms with these five definite features (which, by the way, are defined differently in Kalachakra) and also the speech of a Buddha.

Nirmanakaya

Regarding the Corpus of Forms of the Buddha, we have the Sambhogakaya, and we also have the Nirmanakaya. Nirmanakaya is a corpus, or a collection, of emanations. “Nirmana” means “emanation.” These are emanations of the Sambhogakaya. Sambogakaya is forever, and from Sambogakaya various Emanation Bodies emanate, which are the Nirmankaya. They appear just for a short time and then pass away. There are three kinds.

• There is the Supreme Nirmanakaya, which, like the Sambhogakaya, also appears with the 32 and 80 signs, such as Buddha Shakyamuni. 
• Then there is the Artist Nirmanakaya, which appears and teaches in the form of either artists or musicians. This is very interesting, when one thinks about it, that the Dharma can be taught through art and music, not just through words. 
• Then there is the Nirmanakaya as a Person or Personage, like for instance, His Holiness the Dalai Lama. 

The Tibetan word “tulku,” by the way, is the translation of the Sanskrit word “Nirmanakaya.” This does not mean that tulkus, in the social sense of the Tibetan system of tulkus, are actually Nirmanakayas of Buddha Shakyamuni; they are given that name honorifically. Some of them might well be this, but, certainly, some are not. It is not at all a qualification for starting a line of tulkus that the first is an enlightened being. They don't even have to be aryas, having had nonconceptual cognition of voidness. All they need to be tulkus is to have very strong bodhichitta, very strong prayers to have a line of tulkus so that other people will actually look for them, and that they will be useful. They also need proficiency in the generation stage practices of anuttarayoga tantra, the highest class of tantra, in which one does various visualizations to familiarize oneself with the death, bardo, and rebirth process so that when one experiences them, there is a better chance to stay focused on voidness and bodhichitta throughout the whole process and not freak out. That's all that's required to start a line of tulkus. Also, it's enough that just the first one does this in a given line of tulkus; each successive incarnation doesn't actually have to do all of that.

Participant: What’s “all of that”?

Dr Berzin: “All of that” means that they have to do a lot of tantric practice in that lifetime. Whether or not they have bodhichitta, whether or not it continues – that gets into a whole discussion. Does bodhichitta continue on your mental continuum in future lives? Bodhisattva vows do, so, one could say that one also continues to have bodhichitta. How the tulkus manifest it is another question. There are certainly tulkus who in one or another lifetime drop out of Dharma practice.

Do you remember the verse in the first chapter of Shantideva where he says that once you’ve developed bodhichitta, then during the day or night, whether you are awake or asleep, or even if you're drunk, this stream of positive force continues to grow more and more? So, even in a lifetime in which you are not actively working as a bodhisattva – let’s say you’re reborn as an animal (it's quite possible someone could be reborn as an animal after developing bodhichitta and taking bodhisattva vows in this lifetime) – the bodhisattva vows are still there with your mental continuum. 

Then, of course, the question is: does an animal break the bodhisattva vows by the various transgressions? I think one would just have to say that they become weaker. I don't think one could say that an animal would lose the vow completely because, remember, you have these four factors that need to be complete in order to lose the vows. One of them would be that you rejoice in what you’ve done. I can't imagine an animal rejoicing in doing something negative. 

Participant: Why not? Why would it not rejoice? 

Dr Berzin: Well, regarding the bodhisattva vows or tantric vows… let’s take the vow to meditate on voidness every day. Is an animal going to rejoice in the fact that they didn't meditate on voidness today? 

Participant: No, but they might rejoice that they killed…

Dr Berzin: Well, killing isn’t one of the bodhisattva vows; that's a pratimoksha vow. 

Participant: OK, but if they are happy about it?

Dr Berzin: Even so, that’s a pratimoksha vow; it’s not in the bodhisattva vows. [You lose your pratimoksha vows when you die. Unlike bodhisattva and tantric vows, you don’t take them “from now until I attain enlightenment.” They don’t continue in your mental continuum after you die.]

Dr Berzin: And the bodhisattva vows, like not praising yourself and putting down others – I don't think an animal would do that. One would have to study the vows very carefully to see whether an animal does or doesn’t keep them or how an animal does or doesn’t keep them. Or is it that the vows are perhaps irrelevant to what one does as an animal? 

Participant: Abandoning the Dharma. Maybe an animal…

Dr Berzin: Abandoning the Dharma? You’d have to very consciously say, “This text of the Buddha or this text in the Dharma teachings is not taught by the Buddha. It is not a Buddhist text.” Come on. An animal isn’t going to do that. You have to look at the precise definitions of each of the vows in order to evaluate. 

Well, this gives us hope that even if we’re reborn as an animal… 

Participant: Carrying the robes away, taking robes away from the monks!

Dr Berzin: Taking away the robes from the monks? I would have to look. I don't recall the actual definition of how one breaks that vow. But, usually, in the breaking of every vow, the motivation is specified; there has to be a specific disturbing emotion. I think in the case of an animal, say a monkey in India taking a robe away… Well, first of all, in order for the act of stealing to be complete, one has to think, “Now it's mine.”

Participant: And rejoice in it. 

Dr Berzin: Do the animals have to rejoice as well? I don't know. Anyway, it's an interesting thing to debate – but not here. Also, taking the robes – I don't think just that is stealing. I think the vow actually means to kick somebody out of a monastery – taking their robes back in the sense of: “You can't be a monk anymore.”

Participant: So that’s the meaning!

Dr Berzin: I think that's the main meaning, yes. 

Dr Berzin: The vow that I think would be relevant here, much more than the one of taking the robes and stuff, which gets into technical problems, is stealing from the Three Gems. For example, a mouse takes offerings from the altar – that, I think, is a good example to analyze. The point that would come to my mind in a debate about this is that for a karmic action to be complete, one has to recognize the object. Would the animal recognize that this object belongs to the Triple Gem, that it has been offered to the Triple Gem? I don't think so. 

OK, another thing about these Nirmanakaya forms of the Buddha is they are only able to teach those who have the good fortune and the positive karma to be able to meet them. 

Participant: Do the Buddhas teach ordinary beings too, not only aryas?

Dr Berzin: Well, not every ordinary being because not everybody has the karma to actually be able to learn from a Buddha. That's why there is always great emphasis on the Maitreya prayer:

When the sun of Maitreya rises above the mountains of Bodhgaya, may it open the lotus of my intelligent mind so that I may satisfy swarms of fortunate bee (like disciples)

This is a very lovely prayer. But its aim is to establish the karmic connection to actually be taught by the next Buddha. 

This sums up the Apparent Buddha Gem, the Corpus of Enlightening Forms. 

The Deepest Buddha Gem: the Dharmakaya and Svabhavakaya

Then we have the Deepest Buddha Gem, this is a Buddha's Dharmakaya. “Dharma,” here, means “all things.” It is a corpus that encompasses everything. Sometimes it’s translated as “Truth Body,” but I don't think “Dharma” here means "truth." That doesn't make much sense. This network of bodies that encompasses everything includes both the omniscient mind of a Buddha and the voidness of that mind. The Sanskrit word for this is “Jnana Dharmakaya.” “Jnana” means “deep awareness.” It is a Corpus of Deep Awareness That Encompasses Everything. This is the enlightening mind of a Buddha, its deep awareness that is simultaneously aware of everything – of what exists and how it exists. 

The second part of the Deepest Buddha Gem is Svabhavakaya. This is a Corpus of Essential Nature That Encompasses Everything. “Essential nature” is voidness, and the voidness of everything is the same. Svabhavakaya is particularly referring to the voidness of a Buddha's enlightening mind. If we look more deeply at what this means, we can think of the four noble truths, particularly the true paths, the true pathway minds. 

The Jnana Dharmakaya, the Deep Awareness Body of a Buddha that Encompasses Everything, would be the corpus, or network, of all of the pathway minds. That would be the full fourth noble truth, the true pathway minds. Svabhavakaya would be the true stoppings, the third noble truth, in the mind of a Buddha. Svabhavakaya is both the voidness of a Buddha's mind as well as the true stoppings within a Buddha's mind. 

There is a whole, special presentation by Tsongkhapa, which is very, very difficult, I must say, of the assertion of the equivalence of voidness and true stoppings. It’s considered one of the eight most difficult teachings of Tsongkhapa's. But we won't go into that.

Here, in the Svabhavakaya we have the true stopping of the two sets of obscurations: the emotional obscurations that prevent liberation and the cognitive obscurations that prevent enlightenment. We can also look at the Svabhavakaya in terms of the “double-purity” of the mind of a Buddha. We often hear this expression, “double purity” (dag-pa gnyis-ldan). It refers to the fact that a Buddha’s mind is pure of the fleeting stains (these two obscurations, the emotional and cognitive ones – that would be the true stoppings), and it is also naturally pure of true existence, something which it has never had at all. This is the Deepest Buddha Gem. 

The Nominal Buddha Gem

The Nominal Buddha Gem would be paintings and statues of Buddhas. They just represent the Buddha Gem, but they are not actual Gems. We don't take safe direction from these paintings and statues; we are not idol worshippers. 

Participant: But I’ve heard that we should see these statues as the actual Buddha Gem…

Dr Berzin: This is a very important point because it is quite easy to get into so-called idol worship with these various statues, especially the big statues in temples. We start bowing to them, wanting to touch our forehead to them, and this sort of thing, in order to “get the blessings.” We circumambulate them and so on. I think that it is very important in such cases to try to remain mindful that they are only representations of the Buddha Gem. We show respect to them as representations of the Buddhas, but they are not actually sources of refuge.

The Apparent, Deepest, and Nominal Dharma Gems

As for the Dharma Gem, the Apparent Dharma Gem is the twelve textual categories of teachings proclaimed by the Buddha's enlightening speech. So, it’s the teachings divided into twelve categories. 

Participant: Sorry, which Dharma Gem are we talking about?

Dr Berzin: The Apparent Gem. This is what we come into contact with, what we see. The teachings themselves are the Apparent Dharma Gem.

The Deepest Dharma Gem is, again, referring to the third and fourth noble truths. Here, we are talking about the true stoppings and the true pathway minds on the mental continuum of an arya, whether a layperson or a monastic. An arya is somebody who has had nonconceptual cognition of voidness. Only aryas actually have true stoppings and true pathway minds. The true paths bring about the true stoppings. And when you have true stoppings, then you get resultant true pathway minds as well. So, these are on the mental continuums of aryas. An arya is anyone on the path of seeing  up to and including Buddhahood. That's the deepest Dharma Gem. 

We already discussed the Apparent Dharma Gem, which is the twelve categories of the Dharma teachings. The Nominal Dharma Gem is the actual books, tape recordings, etc. that contain the teachings themselves.

The Apparent, Deepest, and Nominal Sangha Gems

Dr Berzin: Now, the Sangha Gem. The Apparent Sangha Gem is any individual who is an arya, whether lay or monastic. The sangha doesn't have to be a group. Here, it's the individual person, either lay or monastic. So, they don’t have to be ordained. 

Participant: That’s an arya?

Dr Berzin: That's an arya, someone who has reached the path of seeing up to and including Buddhahood. A Buddha is an arya also. 

The Deepest Sangha Gem is, again, the true stoppings and true pathways of mind – so, the third and fourth noble truths on the mental continuum of an arya. That’s the same definition that we had with the Deepest Buddha Gem. 

The Nominal Sangha Gem refers to a group of four or more people from any of the four groups of the monastic sangha (full or novice monks or nuns). That's the Nominal Sangha Gem. They just represent the Sangha; they, the monastic community, are not our refuge. This is because the monastic community can be filled with all sorts of neurotic people. 

Participant: Lay ordination is not included at all in the Nominal Sangha Gem?

Dr Berzin: Lay ordination is not included at all here. I think you’re referring to the five lay vows.  Here, for the Nominal Sangha Gem, it has to be fully ordained or novice monks or fully ordained or novice nuns.

Ultimate and Provisional Providers of Safe Direction

Then, we can ask, “What are the ultimate providers, or sources, of safe direction, and what are the provisional ones?” There is this division as well. The ultimate providers of safe direction are only the Buddhas. This is said very clearly in many texts. If we look where within the Three Gems we find the Buddhas, we see that they are in the Apparent and the Deepest Buddha Gems, namely, the network of physical forms of a Buddha (Rupakaya), and the mind of a Buddha and the voidness of the mind of a Buddha ( Dharmakaya and Svabhavakaya). 

From within the Deepest Dharma and Sangha Gems, the ultimate providers of safe direction include the true stoppings and true pathways of mind – the third and fourth noble truths – only on the mental continuums of Buddhas. That means that within the Deepest Dharma and Sangha Gems, the true pathway minds and true stoppings on the mental continuums of aryas who are not Buddhas are only provisional providers of safe direction. They can only give us a safe direction up to their level of attainment; they can’t give us safe direction all the way to Buddhahood. 

Of course, the question needs to be asked: if the mental continuum of a Buddha, having actualized the third and fourth noble truths, is part of the Deepest Buddha Gem, part of the Dharma Gem, and also part of the Deepest Sangha Germ, what's the difference? Why do we speak of them as three different Gems? We find an indication of the reason for this in the commentaries and explanations of the tsog section in the Lama Chopa, the Guru Puja, where it speaks about the guru in terms of the guru being a Buddha. 

So, when we look at the true pathway minds and the true stoppings from the point of view of the Deepest Buddha Gem, we see that they are a source of inspiration. This Buddha aspect relates to us in terms of a source of inspiration. The Dharma aspect is the source of actual attainments. In other words, if we actualize the teachings, we have the actual attainments. From the point of view of the Sangha, the Buddhas are a network that brings enlightening influence. The Sangha serves to influence us to benefit others and so on. 

So, although we can speak about the true stoppings and true pathways of mind of a Buddha from the point of view of each of these Three Gems, and though it may seem as though they are all the same, they are actually emphasizing three different aspects of their influence on us when we’re going in the safe direction – as a source of inspiration, a source of gaining actual attainments, and a source of enlightening influence. 

In terms of an ultimate provider of safe direction – that is what we are really aiming toward; that's the direction we’re going in. Of course, this becomes a little debatable. However, there’s no need to get into a debate here about whether or not shravakas and pratyekabuddhas take their ultimate safe direction from the Buddhas and whether they are aiming for enlightenment. Notice here that we are not mentioning bodhichitta (you have to have bodhichitta with safe direction, and you actually want to become a Buddha yourself). But that's the direction that's indicated. 

When we talk about going in a direction, there should be an endpoint. Whether we are actually aiming to reach that endpoint, or we are just going in that safe direction up to the point of an arhat – as in the case of a shravaka, pratyekabuddha, or any other Hinayana practitioner who is aiming just for liberation – these are two different things. However, when we speak about “safe direction,” or refuge, we have to be able to explain it in a way that satisfies both Hinayana and Mahayana. Safe direction is common to shravakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas. So, don't confuse taking safe direction with bodhichitta. They’re different. 

Participant: The shravakas, then, don’t take safe direction in the Buddha though the bodhisattvas take refuge in them? Do they have a different conception of Buddha?

Dr Berzin: Do the shravakas have a different conception of a Buddha in terms of going in this direction?  I must admit that when it comes to the list of qualities of a Buddha's body, speech, and mind, I don't know whether or not they are listed the same way in the Hinayana texts. Certainly, they would have the 32 major and 80 minor marks. Those would be in the Hinayana texts, in the Pali literature. The qualities of speech and qualities of mind – that I don't know. Among the qualities of the mind of a Buddha, there are 18 that are not shared by arhats. However, it is true that the various Hinayana schools have different conceptions of what it means for a Buddha to be omniscient. What I was saying here, though, was that you have to define in some way the endpoint of the path. That endpoint would have to be defined as the ultimate attainment on the path, and that would have to be defined as becoming a Buddha. Everybody would agree with that.

Participant: But don’t pratyekabuddhas just want to be liberated and not to become Buddhas?

Dr Berzin: Yes, they only want to become liberated; they are not aiming to become Buddhas. However, they do assert that there are Buddhas, that somebody became a Buddha, and that people in the future will become Buddhas. The Hinayanas also accept that there is more than one Buddha and that there will be more in the future. But they are not aiming for that. 

In order to define a direction fully, you have to define what the final point of that direction is. Whether you are aiming to reach that final point or not is something else. There is a difference between something being the endpoint and something being your own personal goal: “This road goes all the way to Italy. That’s where it ends. I am only going as far as Switzerland; but it's the road that goes to Italy that I am going on.”

Participant: Do the Hinayana schools accept the definition of refuge like that? Or would they, in a sense, equalize the status of Buddhas and arhats for their purpose?

Dr Berzin: They don't equalize the attainment of an arhat with that of a Buddha. Everybody accepts that a Buddha is more developed than an arhat. This division of Apparent, Deepest, and Nominal Gems certainly is Mahayana. It’s not Hinayana because Hinayana doesn't accept the Three Bodies of a Buddha. That is purely Mahayana. How is it actually defined in Hinayana? I really must say that I haven't studied the Hinayana literature. Certainly the Three Gems are defined differently in Zen, by various Zen masters of China and Japan. There are many, many different presentations of the Three Gems. These are the presentations that come from Maitreya's text, which is Mahayana. Nagarjuna, after all, is writing a Mahayana text to the king.

Participant: Can one say, like in the analogy of the road to Italy, that even if you are heading for Italy, from Italy you can head for Roma, Napoli, and all sorts of different places, depending on where you want to go? Can you say, using this as an analogy, that the Buddhahood you are aiming for depends on the person and their individual goal?

Dr Berzin: Your question is, using the analogy of the road to Italy – that there are many places in Italy that one could get to, like Rome, Milan and so on – aren't there various different aspects of Buddhahood, different manifestations of Buddhahood or something like that one could have as one’s goal?

Participant: Or different types of Buddhahood. For instance, Zen practitioners might have a different conception of what it means.

Dr Berzin: That's actually a very good point. My analogy of the road to Italy was a bit stupid. It was too vague. It's more like if you want to go to Basel by train, you take the Zurich train, and you get off at Basel rather than Zurich. That's more precise. So, forget about the Italy analogy. But your question is a good one, which is that if you’re aiming for Buddhahood… Actually, I don't think this is a problem. We are not talking about bodhichitta. If it is bodhichitta that we are aiming to achieve, then, of course, our understanding of what Buddhahood is would affect what we’re aiming for. But Hinayana practitioners and Theravadans are not aiming for Buddhahood. 

Now, what Zen practitioners are aiming for with bodhichitta, since they have a different conception of Buddhahood, is very difficult to explain. There are so many different schools of Zen, and Maitreya's texts were also translated into Chinese. So, I think it depends largely on the teacher. However, I think that it’s true that if we are aiming for one type of goal, we don’t attain some different type of goal. As they say, if we pray to go to a Buddhist heaven, we are not going to end up in a Christian heaven. And if we aim to go to a Christian heaven, we are not going to end up in Buddhist heaven. Likewise, if we are aiming for a certain type of Buddhahood, we automatically wouldn’t achieve a type of Buddhahood that we are not aiming for. But if we are talking in terms of a safe direction in which we are not aiming for the final endpoint of the path, then I think we could include the different conceptions of Buddhahood along [as the endpoint of?] that path.

Within the 18 different schools of Hinayana, there are many different conceptions of Buddhahood. So, I think it is in Theravada that they say that a Buddha doesn’t know everything simultaneously. What a Buddha specifically does know are the skillful means to lead somebody to liberation, which an arhat doesn't know. Now, we’d have to include that in the Mahayana understanding of Buddhahood as well. There may be further things, such as Buddhas being able to multiply into countless forms simultaneously and such, that Theravada wouldn't say a Buddha can do, but I think the direction is the same. In other words, I don't think there are any qualities of a Buddha as defined by Buddhist schools outside the Indian Mahayana ones – whether Hinayana or Chinese Mahayana – that would be included in the description by Maitreya [in Uttaratantra, The Furthest Everlasting Continuum]. The most extensive description we find in Abhisamayalamkara (The Filigree of Realizations), which the Tibetans study for five years. There is a whole chapter on the omniscience of a Buddha with unbelievable divisions and categories of what it entails. Unbelievable detail. 

So, then there is a question about a guru. If the guru hasn’t had a nonconceptual cognition of voidness, they don't qualify as the Apparent Sangha Gem. They don't have Deepest Sangha Gem either. They’re not even a Nominal Sangha Gem if they aren’t a member of a monastic community, not a full monk or nun. So, how can we speak about the Guru as the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha? 

First of all, no one has ever said that one of the qualities of a guru is that the guru has to be an enlightened being or even that the guru has to be an arya. That's never listed in the qualifications of a guru. When we talk about seeing the guru as a Buddha, we are speaking primarily in terms of Buddha-nature (to put it in a very simple way, without getting into a huge discussion). 

Causal and Resultant Providers of Safe Direction

This gets into the last point that I wanted to mention this evening, which is the difference between causal and resultant providers of safe direction. The causal taking of safe direction is from those who have actually become the Three Jewels, the actual Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha – the aryas and Buddhas. They are causal providers because they act as a cause for us to become the Triple Gems ourselves. In the case of resultant taking of refuge, or safe direction, the ones who provide this are the Triple Gem of Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha that we ourselves will attain in the future based on actualizing our Buddha-nature. That's called the resultant Jewels, the resultant sources of safe direction, actually. 

So, when we prostrate to the guru, it’s to the ones who have actually achieved enlightenment. That’s the causal refuge. The resultant refuge is our own future enlightenment that we are aiming for and that we can attain based on our Buddha-nature. It’s our own Buddha-nature that will enable that enlightenment. This understanding of causal and resultant refuge is the source for the way that I do prostration. So, with the guru as well, we are seeing the guru in terms of the guru’s Buddha-nature. And if we can focus on the guru’s Buddha-nature – in other words, the resultant Three Jewels in the Buddha-nature of the guru – it gives us confidence and inspiration to achieve enlightenment ourselves. The teachings on the guru as a Buddha were never intended to be taken literally. 

Participant: Sorry, I didn't get the thing you said about resultant providers of safe direction at the beginning.

Dr Berzin: The resultant one is what we, ourselves, are aiming for. It is our own future enlightened state, the future Three Gems that we will become. 

Participant: And that result is based upon the causal one?

Dr Berzin: This is the resultant one. What provides the source of direction is the result that we are aiming for.