LTF 34: Refuting True Existence; the 4 Distorted Views of True Stoppings

In order to really appreciate this, we have gone into a big discussion of what the four noble truths are. 

True suffering, we saw, is not just the ordinary pain and unhappiness that we all have. It’s also not just the ordinary type of happiness that we experience, which never satisfies, always changes and never lasts, Instead, it’s the fact that we continue to take uncontrollable rebirths (samsara)with a body, mind, and emotions that are the basis for that up and down happiness and unhappiness. So, that’s really the problem – having this uncontrollably recurring samsaric existence, having over and over again this type of body and mind. That’s called the all-pervading suffering. 

The true origins of that are, in general, karma and the disturbing emotions and attitudes. More specifically, we can speak in terms of the mechanism that drives samsara, our uncontrollably recurring rebirths, and that is described by the twelve links of dependent arising. Within those twelve links, there are very specific disturbing emotions and disturbing attitudes that not only motivate us to act in karmic types of ways but also that activate the karmic aftermath – the seeds, the tendencies, and so on built up by our karmic actions – that accumulate on our mental continuums. The activated karmic aftermath is what throws us into the next rebirth. So, the true origins of our suffering, of our continuing uncontrollable rebirths, are these factors that perpetuate – that act as causes and conditions for us to continue in – this terrible cycle of rebirth. 

The true stopping of this would be that we no longer have samsaric types of rebirths. The obscurations that involve the disturbing emotions, attitudes, tendencies, and habits – all of these would be removed forever. It would be a true stopping of them. 

The true pathway mind refers to the understanding of voidness, understanding the way that things actually exist, which is that they are devoid of existing in impossible ways. It’s because we are naïve about these impossible ways – either we don’t know how things exist or we know it incorrectly – and also because we don’t understand cause and effect in terms of what is going to result from our actions, that we perpetuate this samsaric existence. So, if we can develop the true pathway mind – which is the opposite of this not knowing; instead, it correctly knows how things exist – there will be nothing to activate the karmic aftermath; nor will there be anything to build up more karmic aftermath. Then, we will attain liberation. And if we go all the way with that, we will attain enlightenment as well.

We have discussed the sixteen aspects of the four noble truths, four aspects for each noble truth. Then we started to get into the discussion of the distorted ways of embracing, or understanding, these sixteen aspects. We went through the distorted ways of understanding suffering, and now we are in our discussion of the distorted ways of understanding the true origins of our suffering. We have done three of them, and now we are up to the fourth. 

The fourth distorted way of understanding the causes of our suffering is a little bit complicated. It is:

[4] Holding that, regarding the cause of suffering, there is something that is permanent by nature but that changes temporarily according to the occasion. 

This refers to the Jain school of Indian philosophy. The Jain School, like Buddhism, doesn’t assert any creator God as being the single cause for things, but they do speak, like Buddhism does, in terms of “living beings” (that’s the term that they use. In Buddhism, we would speak about “persons”). These are, according to this school, souls (if we want to use a simpler word for them), which have two natures. That sounds like Buddhism also – that there is the deepest truth about something and the conventional truth of it. The Jains say that their deepest nature is that they are eternal, perfect souls that experience peace forever. So, on the deeper level, they are permanent: they don’t change. They’re always experiencing peace, they’re perfect and so on. But because of their association with defiling matter, they experience temporary, changing sufferings. 

How Does the Jain View of the Dual Nature of the “Soul” Differ from the Buddhist View of the Two Truths?

The path in Jainism involves withdrawing from matter, withdrawing from having any involvement with the material world. In this way, they believe that the whole cycle of suffering and so on, which is temporary – because of the association with defiling matter – will cease. So, we have a double nature here, a dual nature of the soul, that is, on the deepest level, actually eternal and permanently at peace, but that is, on a superficial level, changing all the time and experiencing suffering. 

The question then is: what’s wrong with this view from a Buddhist point of view? We always say in Buddhism that on the deepest level, there is voidness, which is permanent, doesn’t change, is a state of peace, and that on the superficial level, we’re changing all the time and experiencing suffering. So, what’s the difference here? 

Participant: I don’t know how they define soul, but I don’t know if this definition would fit with the Buddhist idea of emptiness.

Dr. Berzin: Is the soul something that exists independently of a body in the Jain system? Yes, it certainly does. So, this is one thing that the Buddhists would object to. What else? 

Participant: Permanence – if something is permanent, it cannot be changed. 

Dr. Berzin: That’s right. Buddhism finds it very difficult that something can have two contradictory natures. In this case, why is it contradictory? Because Jainism is taking both levels to be truly existent. If something is truly existently permanent, how can it also be truly existently impermanent (let alone the fact that true existence is impossible)? And if you assert true existence, you are absurdly asserting two contradictory truly existent types of existences. 

So, you see that it’s quite easy to mistake a Buddhist point of view like this one if you haven’t refuted true existence. True existence is actually false. It’s a very confusing term, but what it means is that there is something on the side of an object that establishes its existence by its own power – which means that the thing is sitting there by itself and that there is something inside of it that makes it a person or makes it a chair or makes it a problem – as opposed to the object (the person, the chair, the problem, and so on) being established dependently on many causes and conditions. Things don’t exist isolated, establishing themselves. 

If you say that a soul (a being or whatever), on one level, is permanently at peace but that, on a superficial level, is changing, and you also say that it exists all by itself – the thing doesn’t work. That’s important to understand. This is a wrong view of the causation of suffering. The wrong view here is that suffering is caused by our temporary involvement with matter, with the physical world, and that if we renounce all of that and basically do no harm at all on an extreme level (the way the Jains do), there is no longer a cause or circumstance for suffering to arise. So, all you have to do is withdraw. 

Now, do we ever think like that? “All I have to do is go off to a monastery, go off to the cave, and meditate. Then I’ll be away from all causes for my suffering.” We can misunderstand renunciation that way, can’t we? 

The correct understanding of the fourth aspect of true origins corrects this mistaken view, the correct understanding being that craving and karma are the conditions for suffering. In other words, even if we withdraw, there is still the craving and the karma there on our mental continuums. So, that will continue to affect us and cause our suffering. 

We also might say, “All of our suffering is just an illusion because, basically, it’s Buddha-nature and it’s pure and it’s wonderful and it’s at peace. All I need to do is avoid this more contaminating level.” Do you ever think like that? 

Any thoughts? Any comments? Think about it for a minute or two, and, particularly, try to relate it to your own understanding of Buddha-nature. Is there something peaceful, eternal, and happy inside, and all this other garbage that we experience is just superficial garbage, but our true nature is Buddha-nature, which is permanent and eternal? What do you think?

Participant: I think it is a bit like a child. I have the feeling that we have a simpler way, actually. Vaguely, we think of keeping sight of Buddha-nature, to fix ourselves on it or to find it, but there’s a lot of this problematic garbage around it.

Dr. Berzin: Right. As he says, we tend to have a simplistic view, especially when we read about Buddha-nature and the examples that are found in Uttaratantra (Furtherest Everlasting Stream) – that Buddha-nature is like some gem in a garbage pile and a treasure buried beneath the dirt, that all you have to do is clear out all the garbage and that there you find Buddha–nature, which is perfectly pure and eternal and so on.

Can Abiding in Clear Light Mind Bring Freedom from Suffering and Its Causes?

Well, to bring this onto a level of tantra and to think in terms of the clear light mind – the clear light mind doesn’t make appearances of true existence, doesn’t grasp for true existence, and so on. But would it be sufficient to bring freedom from suffering and its causes? According to some presentations, Buddha-nature is an abiding Buddha-nature. Then the question is: if we could just stay with the clear light mind, would that be sufficient? This would be the same idea as, “I’ll just go down to the deepest level and stay there.” The problem is that we can’t stay there. The problem is that it’s like death. At death one also gets to the clear light mind. And sure, there is no grasping for true existence, there is no appearance making of true existence, but nevertheless the…

Participant: It’s not Mahayana.

Dr. Berzin: Aside from the compassion issue that it’s not Mahayana (Buddha-nature is a Mahayana presentation; we don’t find it in Hinayana), the point is that people abiding in the clear light mind – the clear light mind of death, for example – still have the tendencies and habits of craving and grasping and all these other things. So, it all comes back. So, the cause of suffering is not just coming out of the clear light mind or Buddha–nature (I am using the terminology; obviously, we don’t “come out”; there is no “me” that comes out). But leaving that state of mind and being in the garbage state of mind with all the conceptual thoughts, disturbing emotions, and so on – to say that that’s the cause of suffering is incorrect. Very often it looks like that when we read some of the teachings that say that the cause of suffering is the conceptual mind. How do we understand that? It is important, I think, not to make Buddha-nature into some sort of solid, transcendent reality – that this is the real “me” and it is transcendent above everything and pure and that all I have to do is go away from this truly existent appearing garbage here or the illusion-like truly existent garbage here. 

Participant: Could you say that conceptualization makes me do things that result in karma, both positive and negative, and that even if I can stop this conceptualization for a moment, it does not take away this suffering? 

Dr. Berzin: So, he’s asking if conceptualization is what…

Participant: If it’s what makes me…

Dr. Berzin: Causes me to generate karma, the disturbing emotions, and so on. Yes. The thing is that, even if we get rid of that, we’re still left with the baggage; we’re still left with the karmic aftermath. Yes, that’s true. 

The thing is that it’s impossible to stay in a clear light state, a non-conceptual, clear light state, without having the understanding of voidness. Just reaching that clear light state, like in death or when doing some fancy yoga, there are still going to be the forces of karma, the karmic aftermath, and we have habits and so on that can bring us out of that clear light state. 

Participant: But even when the Buddha reached that state for the first time, he probably still had some karma, no? Probably, he had a lot of merit in order to be able to understand voidness. But he still had some baggage, too, no?

Dr. Berzin: Well, not a Buddha, but a bodhisattva on the path. The first understanding of voidness certainly doesn’t get rid of all the obscurations; it doesn’t get rid of all the tendencies and habits. It’s still a long path after that point to gradually get rid of the different levels of obscurations. That’s true.

I think the problem that is being discussed with this wrong view is that we view our true nature as being truly existent, permanent, eternal, blissful, peaceful, etc. and thinking that the cause of suffering comes from the superficial level of the ”soul,” or being, that “I’m involved with matter, involved with all sorts of garbage things, and I just have to return to that transcendent state.” So, it’s returned… no, turned to that transcendent state. “Return” implies that we were once there and then fell. That’s not what the Jains are talking about, either.

Participant: Is it correct that conceptualization is not a problem?

Dr. Berzin: Conceptualization is the problem, but it’s a useful problem. The reason why it’s a problem is that conceptualization has, as part of it, not only making appearances of true existence but also grasping for that true existence and always believing it to be so. That’s always going to be there with conceptualization. 

Participant: Can’t have it without.

Dr. Berzin: Well, it depends on how you view arhats, on how you divide the path. An arhat, according to Prasangika, would have a conceptual mind that makes appearances of true existence but that doesn’t grasp at it or believe it to be true. That’s an exception. 

The point is that, again, according to Gelugpa Prasangika, bodhichitta is always conceptual, except when you are a Buddha because… how can you know enlightenment? Bodhichitta is aimed at enlightenment. How can you know enlightenment when it’s your own, not-yet-attained enlightenment? How do you fully know enlightenment unless you are enlightened? First, you have to know it through some concept of enlightenment. So, the concept of bodhichitta is helpful, but eventually, you have to get rid of the conceptual mind – the grosser level of mind. This is Gelugpa philosophy. 

The non-Gelugpa schools, of course, have a slightly different understanding. For them, the non-conceptual mind doesn’t make appearances of true existence. According to Gelugpa, it does. So, just to go from conceptual to non-conceptual doesn’t solve the problem in terms of giving you a free pass to get an understanding of voidness. They are slightly different.

Yeah, Karsten?

Participant: When high lamas die and they reach the point of the clear light mind, do they use this mind to meditate on emptiness, or do they apply it beforehand? Which comes first?

Dr. Berzin: OK. So, the question is: when high lamas do the death junction meditation on clear light mind, when do they have the understanding of voidness? Do they apply it only when they get to the clear light mind or do they apply it before?

There are two styles of doing the meditation. In mother tantra, like Chakrasamvara, Heruka, Vajrayogini, and Hevajra, you start with an understanding of voidness, which, obviously, is conceptual. Then, the mind gradually gets more and more refined so that you actually achieve the clear light mind with the non-conceptual understanding of voidness. In father tantra – Guhyasamaja and Yamantaka – the way you do it, at least on the generation stage, is to imagine the stages of dissolution getting to the clear light mind and then there to apply the non-conceptual understanding of voidness. That’s because in father tantra, the emphasis is on the dissolving of the winds, working with the winds, which is the illusory body side, whereas in mother tantra, the emphasis is on clear light. Now, the question of course is: do you apply the understanding of voidness at each stage of the dissolution when it is actually happening? To that, I think, you’d have to say yes – in either case. So, there may be a difference here between how you practice on the generation stage and how you practice on the complete stage. But at the time of death, I would tend to think… 

You see, there is another problem here. The problem is that even when you aren’t practicing tantra, but especially when you are practicing tantra, you try to have an awareness of voidness all the time. If you do any visualization practice, it needs to be within the context of some understanding of voidness. So, when it says in the text, let’s say, in father tantra, that it’s only when you get the clear light mind that you apply the understanding of voidness, you can’t say that there is no understanding of voidness whatsoever in the stages before that. It’s a matter of what you remind yourself of and when you remind yourself of it. But I would think that if you are advanced enough to be able to do the death junction meditation, your awareness of voidness all the time would be pretty strong. 

Anything else? OK, that completes the four distorted ways of embracing or understanding the true origins of suffering. 

Now we come to the four distorted ways of embracing, or understanding, true stoppings.

The first of these is: 

[1] Holding that there is no such thing as liberation. 

This is the incorrect view of the Charvaka School of Indian philosophy. These are basically the hedonists; they just say to enjoy yourself. They don’t believe in karma, nirvana, liberation, or anything like that. The discriminating awareness of the first aspect of true stoppings – that true stoppings are everlasting stoppings that occur through the power of opponent forces – eliminates this mistaken view. 

I think this is probably the most problematic and most difficult area – to be convinced that there can be liberation. There is, of course, a lot of discussion about that in the various texts. And it is very important to understand and become convinced. The first of these five forces is belief in fact and the conviction that this is true, that there is such a thing as liberation. If you have any doubts about it, you are not going to achieve it. Obviously, you won’t be able to put all your energy into achieving liberation if you are not totally convinced that it is possible. 

How Does Non-Conceptual Understanding of Voidness Act as an Opponent to the Incorrect View That a True Stopping – Liberation – Is Not Possible?

What opposes this wrong view is understanding that everlasting stoppings can occur through the power of opponent forces. How do we understand opponent forces? If we needed to name one opponent force that is the main opponent for overcoming sufferings and their origin, what would that be? Please answer this without going into the wrong view that things happen just from one cause (that if you apply one cause, it will get rid of all your problems) – so, not going in that over-simplified direction. What is the main opponent? 

Participant: Correct insight of voidness.

Dr. Berzin: Correct understanding of voidness. Conceptual or non-conceptual?

Participant: Non-conceptual.

Dr. Berzin: Why non-conceptual?

Participant: You said that conceptual is not enough.

Dr. Berzin: But why is conceptual is not enough? 

Participant: Because conceptual is always together with true existence.

Dr. Berzin: Because conceptual understanding of voidness makes an appearance of voidness as if it were a truly existent, isolated thing, by itself, and it believes in that appearance. So, how could that understanding possibly get rid of wrong understanding? So, it needs to be non-conceptual. But how does that work? How is it an opponent? 

Participant: When the correct understanding is present, it can’t be the wrong understanding…

Dr. Berzin: Right. You can’t have, at the same time, in one moment of mind, wrong understanding together with correct understanding. And what, specifically, is the correct understanding? What do we mean by voidness – in very simple words? I’ll give you a hint: negation phenomenon. Do you remember?

Participant: Absence of true existence.

Dr. Berzin: Not only an absence of true existence but a much stronger understanding: there is no such thing. Not only is it absent in the next room, it’s that there’s no such thing, that there never was and never will be. It’s impossible for things to exist isolated. When you have that understanding and focus of “no such thing,” you can’t have at the same time, “there is such a thing.” Either on or off – there either is or isn’t. And it isn’t simply either/or: it’s no such thing. 

We are dealing here with the belief in true existence. Is there such a thing as true existence? No. No such thing. However, you have to be convinced of that, not just mouth the words, not just believe it because “my teacher said so” or “Buddha said so.” In the seven ways of knowing, that’s called “presumption.” You presume it is true, but you don’t really  understand it. It’s a good guess, but you have to really be convinced. 

What is discriminating awareness? Discriminating awareness – what’s usually translated as “wisdom” – is more than just distinguishing. Remember, “distinguish” is how we translate “recognize.” To distinguish is to distinguish between what something is and what something isn’t. You distinguish something from the rest of the sense field. Discriminating awareness adds certainty to that. It distinguishes with complete certainty that, “It is not like that. There is no such thing.” 

As His Holiness the Dalai Lama says, that type of understanding is like (though, maybe, he doesn’t use this exact word) a guillotine. It just cuts off completely the belief that there is such a thing as true existence. That’s hard to imagine unless you really are convinced of why there is no such thing. So, how does that tie in with true stoppings?

Participant: What was the question?

Dr. Berzin: How does what we have just discussed about the understanding of voidness being the opponent of the causes of suffering fit in with the true stoppings? How is that a true stopping? 

Participant: Because the chain of twelve links of dependent arising is broken by that.

Dr. Berzin: That’s right. How is it broken?

Participant: I think it’s the starting point.

Dr. Berzin: It’s the starting point. You can’t build up any more karmic actions, any more karmic aftermath. Is it broken at another place as well?

Participant: Between grasping and existence?

Dr. Berzin: Well, you are very close. It’s also broken at the links of craving and the obtainer attitude. That’s because what underlies them is grasping for true existence. If you don’t have that, then you can’t activate karmic aftermath either. So, it’s not only that you don’t build up any new karmic aftermath; you also can’t activate any old karmic aftermath. 

So, it’s really only when you have a good understanding of true suffering and true causes, and you understand them in terms of samsara and the twelve links – the whole process of karma and rebirth – that you can understand a true stopping of that. And in theory at least, you could maintain that understanding non-conceptually – so, not just be in a clear light state, not just be blissed-out in Buddha-nature but be in that state with understanding. That, actually, would be the opponent for the true cause. 

That’s the understanding. This clear light mind, the opponent for grosser levels of mind – is it the same as the understanding of voidness that is the opponent of ignorance, of not knowing? 

Participant: Not in itself.

Dr. Berzin: Not in itself. That’s  because it is not the conceptual mind that is the true cause of suffering. The true cause of suffering is what comes along with conceptual mind, which is grasping for true existence and the appearance-making of true existence. So, you have to oppose that. Just to oppose the package that it comes in is not sufficient. 

OK? Do you understand it a little bit? It’s not so easy. Not easy at all to really become convinced that liberation is possible, let alone that I am capable of achieving it… let alone that you actually do achieve it. If we are really going to follow the Mahayana path, we need to be convinced that everybody can achieve it; otherwise, what are we doing? It’s not specifically Buddhist to just help everybody superficially, although it’s an important thing to do. However, that’s not the extent of the help that we want to give. 

Let’s think about this point and try to understand this distorted view – that there is no such thing as liberation. Can we actually work with that and overcome this wrong view? 

Any questions or comments? 

Liberation Is Very Difficult to Attain. How Can We Not Get Discouraged?

Participant: I believe that it is possible to attain liberation, but it is really difficult to get there. What would be a practical thing to not get discouraged? 

Dr. Berzin: Right. We might believe that liberation is possible, nevertheless, it is incredibly difficult to attain. So, what do we do in order to not get discouraged? Well, we can quote Shantideva (though I don’t think that that will necessarily help), which is that if that mind of ants, flies, mosquitoes, and so on can attain liberation, why can’t somebody like myself with a precious human rebirth and so on not achieve it? It just requires hard work. 

Again, if you make a big deal out of nirvana and make it into a truly existent thing, then, of course, you have hopes and expectations. Then, if you don’t achieve it, you have disappointment. We always, find in meditation instructions to meditate without expectations and without disappointment. Just do it. I think that if you feel that you are going in that direction – not just refuge in the sense that “I orient myself in that direction,” but also understanding that “I am actually taking some steps in that direction” – then, even though it will take an unbelievable amount of time, it’s worthwhile taking the steps. 

Now, of course, as I have repeated over and over and over again, samsara goes up and down. So, progress is never linear. Sometimes it’s going to go well; sometimes it’s not going to go so well. We have the teachings on the eight transitory things in life, like don’t get super excited when things are going well or get super depressed when things are not going well. Again, just continue. Particularly, if we are following a Mahayana path, we think that it is worthwhile, even if it’s very slow, because it’s enabling us to benefit others more and more. Discouragement comes from thinking, “Poor me, I can’t do it.” Again, it’s making a truly existent “me,” a truly existent path, a truly existent “how terrible it is,” or “how difficult it is.”

Participant: Well, what about… like with me, if I don’t forget to make a dedication as well as I can, I always think that it saves up somehow. It’s always said that if you do things with a bodhichitta motivation, it doesn’t ever get lost until you reach Buddhahood. Maybe this is a kind of trick, but actually, sometimes it works to trick yourself and think…

Dr. Berzin: So, what Karsten is saying, is that if you actually motivate yourself with bodhichitta and dedicate with bodhichitta, then you feel confident that it’s “put in the bank,” as it were – safely invested – and will not run out until enlightenment is achieved. That’s very true. That can help in terms of feeling that we are building up by steps. 

I must say, that even before we become completely convinced that there is such a thing as liberation, we can still proceed in that direction. We might think, “I don’t know whether it’s really true or not that I’m going to achieve liberation. But going in that direction enables me to benefit others more and more, so I’m going to go in that direction, whether or not it’s possible to actually achieve it.” It’s like one of these things in mathematics – that  you can only approach zero or infinity or whatever it is but  that you can’t actually reach it. Well, for many us that might be sufficient, but it would be hard to go all the way with that. However, it may be sufficient to start with. You know, “I don’t know if it’s possible to become a Buddha or whether His Holiness the Dalai Lama is a Buddha, but it doesn’t matter to me because if I could become like His Holiness, that would be enough.” So, there is that way of thinking, which can certainly motivate us in a very positive way. The question is whether it can take us all the way. 

The Importance of the Inspiration of the Guru

Participant: I just want to say that what inspires me greatly is reading biographies of the great masters. 

Dr. Berzin: Of course, you can also think, “Well, they are so wonderful,” and worship them, and “I’m just this lowly worm over here.”  

Participant: But they started out like me, also.

Dr. Berzin: “They started out like me.” One can think this way, as well. So, for this, we have the standard verse from Shantideva (8.130) “But what need is there to elaborate more? Just look at the difference between the two: an infantile person acting for his own self-aims and Sage (Buddha) acting for the aims of others.” So, that’s true. 

I must say, what I find very inspiring are actual living examples, people that I have known, like His Holiness or like the late tutors of His Holiness. If one has had the privilege to actually see them in action, to get to know how they actually lead their lives, it’s incredibly inspiring. And inspiration is a very important factor that helps us to avoid getting discouraged. We can receive inspiration, and inspiration is uplifting.

I think we know this as well – that if you’re just leading your humdrum, ordinary life, you can get pretty discouraged. But then, if you go to some intensive course of a great lama, you feel very inspired; you’re not so discouraged anymore. So, this is a factor that is always emphasized in terms of the importance of the relation with the guru and the importance of that on the path – that the guru is a source of inspiration. We may be inspired by the story of Milarepa or Guru Rinpoche, but then we start to wonder, “Were they really like that?” That’s why the actual spiritual teacher, if you have a fairly well qualified one, can make a stronger impression. 

Participant: Can I ask a question?

Dr. Berzin: Of course, you can.

Participant: On the way to liberation, do we need a teacher, a spiritual teacher, or can we learn from books or our own meditation experience?

Dr. Berzin: You actually do need a teacher. Books can’t answer questions. Books can’t check to see if we are meditating and practicing correctly or not;  We need some supervision. And the most important role that teacher plays is to inspire you. The spiritual guide “inspires you in the beginning, middle, and end.” That’s the standard way of saying that. The spiritual guide is a role model. And you see, “Wow, look at what this person has achieved! Wouldn’t it be wonderful to be like that at least?” So, the teacher is actually very, very crucial. This is emphasized very much in the Indian and Tibetan traditions of Buddhism. 

Participant: What about the pratyekabuddhas? Did they have a tight guru-disciple relationship in the past?

Dr. Berzin: Pratyekabuddhas are the ones who achieve these great attainments during the dark ages when there are no Buddhas, there are no teachers. Well, yes. They’re able to make progress based on their habits and instincts built up way, way in the past. But they did have close relations with teachers and Buddhas; otherwise, where would the instincts come from that would allow them to meditate and gain insights without a teacher?

So, in theory, one could become a pratyekabuddha. But if you look at the bigger picture, the only way that you could be successful as a pratyekabuddha is if you had a strong relation with a teacher in a previous life. Otherwise, you could sit, read books and meditate by yourself and get nowhere. Even if you sit and listen to a teacher, you might still not get anywhere. Just listening is not enough.

Can You Receive Initiations from Afar? In Any Case, Without Taking a Vow, There Is No Initiation

Participant: In these days, with video… maybe its purpose is also like an inspiration. 

Dr. Berzin: Is watching videos sufficient? I must say, I asked His Holiness the Dalai Lama about this because, at the Kalachakra initiation in Graz, they webcast the initiation. So, then the question comes, “Well, did people who watched it in Australia actually receive the initiation?” So, His Holiness said at one point, “Well, if they really strongly believed that they were receiving the initiation, you can’t say that the distance affected that.” You know, if you were up to row so and so, you received it, but anybody past that row didn’t? That’s hard to say. However, subsequent to that, His Holiness said he won’t do that again – have initiations broadcast like that – because that can lead to a tremendous amount of misunderstanding. Also, if you think about it, watching a war on the news on television versus actually being there can make a very, very big difference. Listening to a concert on a recording or actually being there are different experiences. 

Participant: Wasn’t it also said that if you’re present at the initiation but you can’t follow the visualizations and don’t understand the words, you don’t receive the initiation?

Dr. Berzin: Right. So, even if you are there, there is no guarantee that you actually receive the initiation. It’s not that you have to follow everything, though. The thing is that you need to do, first of all, is to sincerely take the vows. If you don’t sincerely and consciously take the vows, then, as Sakya Pandita said, “No vows: no initiation.” So, you have to take the vows. You have to know what you’re doing – consciously take them, not just repeat some “blah, blah, blah,” without knowing that you were taking the vows, and then the next day people tell you, “Oh, by the way, you took the vows.” 

Participant: “Now you have to shave your head.” 

Dr. Berzin: “Now you have to shave your head.” Right.

So, that’s one thing. And then you need to try in some way to have some sort of experience during the thing. It’s not necessary that you do all the complicated visualizations, but at least have – from the Gelugpa point of view – some vague understanding of voidness with a happy state of mind. Or have, from a non-Gelugpa point of view, some sort of feeling of Buddha-nature. That’s necessary. Then, in combination with that, you need the inspiration from the teacher – being open-minded about that.

Participant: Then, that is the question. When you are looking at television, and you have this understanding, you really do…

Dr. Berzin: Well, you can have that understanding. This is a hard thing to know. Do you actually receive the initiation or not? I don’t know. There is something about a live experience. I mean, His Holiness seems to have changed his mind on this, so it’s obviously not an easy issue. It’s like with an oral transmission. Do you receive it from a tape recorder, or do you have to receive it from a live person in a live situation? I don’t see the Tibetans rushing to get somebody to tape-record all the oral transmissions – that this would count. I must say, though, it is a very, very mysterious thing. And it gets into the whole issue of vows. It’s difficult, and I can’t say that I understand it. 

Discussion about Vows

In terms of non-revealing forms – a vow is a subtle form that we generate on the mental continuum. Then, remembering our discussion of karma, we can say that certain actions are stronger or that their karmic aftermaths are stronger or weaker, depending on various circumstances that are there. It depends on your level (whether you are a monk or a layperson), the level of the person that the action is directed at or who is involved with the action. So, for a vow to actually be present, it has to be pretty strong. 

Now, this becomes a problem, because, for Pratimoksha vows, you need somebody there. Actually, you need not only one person. For monks’ or nuns’ vows, you need  five or ten people, and they have to be a certain level of rank in terms of seniority (this differs in the different traditions). For bodhisattva vows, there are two ways: either you take them with a teacher or without a teacher – so, just with a visualization. However, you have to be pretty, pretty certain that you actually believe that the Buddhas and bodhisattvas are there and that you are taking the vows in front of them. Now, tantric initiations have to be taken with an actual teacher. Or if you’ve done the full retreat and the fire puja and done them very well, done them properly, then you can take the self-initiation. In that case, you take the tantric vows in a situation in which you’re actually also visualizing the guru giving you the vows. 

It’s quite mysterious, I must say, why one set of vows requires somebody actually being there and another set doesn’t in terms of the strength required for a vow or (to answer your question) an initiation actually developing on your mental continuum. These aren’t very easy questions. One has to ultimately rely on Buddha. Buddha said so, so who am I to say it’s something different? How in the world do I know? I don’t know. Obviously, though, there is enough confusion about this whole internet issue, which then would be that you get the CD, just buy the CD, and then [claps his hands] you’ve got the initiation.

Participant: So, it would have to be with it being live.

Dr. Berzin: Well, that was one point – it had to do with it being live or not. But again, in Australia… what was it called, a delayed transmission? It would have been three o’clock in the morning in Australia. I don’t know, Jorge. I didn’t have a chance to ask this question. His Holiness had a terrible cold at the time, and I was very limited in the amount of time I had in the audience. However, I would think that it would be much stronger if you were actually in the presence of someone when receiving an initiation.

Participant: Does this come from the mind of the person who is taking the vows, or is it also because it’s a relationship? 

Dr. Berzin: Is it coming from the mind of the person taking the vows or from the relationship? It has to be a dependent arising – in terms of the relationship. 

Does the inspiration and visualization of the guru stop with the wall, though? If you go out into the hall, beyond the wall where the guru is… well, the guru is visualizing a mandala, not the wall of the auditorium. So, is the guru visualizing the whole world as a mandala, and is everybody inside the mandala? I don’t know. These get into very difficult questions.

OK. Are there any other points relevant to this discussion? Is liberation possible? Or do we think that there is no such thing? I think that there is a difference between saying “There is no such thing,” which is a very distorted view, very close-minded view, and saying “I don’t really know. It could be, but I must say I haven’t really understood it yet. So, I will…” in English, we say, “give it the benefit of the doubt,” which means that “I will assume for the moment that it is correct – there is such a thing – and aim for it and see where it takes me.” 

I think that is probably the most realistic attitude we can have, and then from that, we to try to understand more and more deeply. It all hinges on understanding what the origin of suffering really is, understanding what unawareness and ignorance of reality is, understanding voidness and seeing how the understanding of voidness gets rid of this incorrect understanding, which, of course, means that we have to understand how the incorrect understanding brings about suffering – which is not so easy. I’m going into this in depth in these classes because what I would like is for us to really appreciate how deep the four noble truths are and how you really could spend your whole time on the path working with them and going deeper and deeper.

You might say, “Hey, where is compassion and bodhichitta and these things in here?” But what I’m talking about are the things that you need to even start this process. In other words, to develop the first level, this building up pathway mind, you first have to have renunciation in an unlabored way, meaning that you don’t have to build it up through a line reasoning; it just comes automatically and is there all the time. Same thing with bodhichitta. This is a Mahayana path. And, of course, in bodhichitta, we get love and compassion. So, that’s there – the state of mind and what’s going on with that mind as it’s going through the analysis of the sixteen points. 

The second wrong view concerning true stoppings is: 

[2] Holding that certain specific tainted phenomena are liberation. 

I don’t think it’s necessary to go into the details of this; you have it in the handout. There’s a technical term here: “balanced absorptions” (snyoms-‘jug), which are the actual states of the four levels of mental stability (the four dhyanas) associated with the form realm, as well as the balanced absorptions associated with the formless realm. Without going into a list of these, basically, this wrong view is saying that these states of very, very deep absorptions in which the mind becomes more and more refined – so, temporarily, certain things are absent – are states of liberation. That’s not so, because, although we might take a vacation for a while from some of these disturbing emotions and attitudes, they’ll recur after arising from such a state. 

Now, most of us, certainly, are not able to achieve these high states of absorbed concentration. However, there are some people who go in that direction; they just want to go deeper and deeper, to be more absorbed. We can also look at this from a very worldly point of view of thinking that we could escape into some sort of drug-induced trance and that would be liberation; that we could just stay high all the time or in a narcotic state all the time and that would be liberation. That, obviously, is not the case. What helps us to get rid of these kinds of ideas is the understanding, the discriminating awareness, that true stoppings are pacifications of the disturbing emotions and attitudes. These deeper states of absorptions don’t pacify, don’t get rid of the disturbing emotions and attitudes; they just temporarily suppress them, in a sense. That’s important to understand.

The third one is: 

[3] Holding that some specific states of suffering are liberation. 

This refers to being reborn on the plane of formless beings and thinking, “Well, if I become a formless being – that will be a state of liberation.” Formless beings only have four aggregate factors; they don’t have gross bodies. But they (at least as explained in the highest tantra) have at least a subtle energy aspect to them, so, you can’t say there is no form whatsoever. So, they don’t have bodies. They are in the formless realm, and during that lifetime, they have no suffering or unhappiness. They have no suffering of change, but they still have the all-pervasive suffering of the aggregates. So, that will recur. 

The discriminating awareness of the third aspect of true stoppings – that true stoppings are superior states – eliminates this mistaken view. So, true stoppings are superior to any samsaric state. If we understand that, then we realize that to achieve a formless realm rebirth is certainly not the goal. A more simplistic view of this would be to think that if we go to heaven or paradise – that’s liberation. That’s not the goal either; it’s not a true stopping.

The fourth one is: 

[4] Holding that, although there may be a depletion of suffering, it’s something that will recur. 

That’s a heavy one – to think that we might be able to get rid of our suffering but that it is going to come back again, that we can’t get rid of it forever. What helps to overcome that is realizing that true stoppings are a definite emergence from samsaric suffering – we definitely get out. And it can never return again because we are focused forever on voidness. So, it couldn’t recur. 

Then, of course, you can ask, “How can you guarantee that you are going to stay focused on voidness forever?” It’s because you have eliminated all the causes for distraction and dullness. But that gets into a very tricky discussion. Very tricky. But it is important to really try to become convinced that this true stopping is a definite emergence – that you’re definitely out of the recurring existence of samsara, that it’s not going to come back – if you stay totally focused on liberation and voidness all the time.

OK? Those are the four wrong views in association with true stoppings. So, maybe this is the time to make a true stopping of the topic… well, not a true stopping because it will recur, will come back again! Let’s just take a minute or so to reflect on what we’ve been discussing.