Buddha Nature II Flashcards
Chapter 14 (272 cards)
1
Q
What does the first turning of the Dharma wheel present?
A
The first turning of the Dharma wheel presents the overall structure of the Buddhist worldview based on the four truths. [cite: 3]
2
Q
What does the second turning of the Dharma wheel explain in more detail?
A
The second turning of the Dharma wheel contains a more detailed explanation of the third and fourth truths and presents the emptiness of inherent existence and the bodhisattva path. [cite: 4]
3
Q
How is the essence of the third truth, true cessation, understood in the second turning?
A
The essence of the third truth - true cessation - is understood in the context of the emptiness of the mind. [cite: 5]
4
Q
What is the fourth truth, true path, in the second turning?
A
The fourth truth - true path - is the wisdom realizing that emptiness. [cite: 6]
5
Q
How does the first turning of the Dharma wheel discuss selflessness (anātman)?
A
The first turning of the Dharma wheel discusses selflessness (anātman) in a general way. [cite: 7]
6
Q
What did the Buddha say about true cessation in the first turning regarding its actualization?
A
The Buddha said that true cessation is to be actualized but there is nothing to actualize. [cite: 9]
7
Q
What understanding does the Buddha want us to have from the statement “true cessation is to be actualized but there is nothing to actualize”?
A
The Buddha wants us to understand emptiness, true cessation, and the unborn nature of phenomena. [cite: 10]
8
Q
How did the Buddha clarify the precise meaning of selflessness in the second turning?
A
In the second turning, the Buddha clarified that the precise meaning of selflessness is the emptiness of inherent existence (śūnyatā), the unborn nature. [cite: 11]
9
Q
How did the Buddha describe the wisdom realizing the unborn nature in the second turning?
A
He called it “objectless” or “nonobjectifying” wisdom because it has ceased the apprehension of any objectifiable basis or inherent existence in persons and phenomena. [cite: 12]
10
Q
From what perspective do the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras and the Ornament of Clear Realizations explain tathāgatagarbha (buddha essence)?
A
They explain tathāgatagarbha from the perspective of it being the ultimate nature of the mind, the emptiness of the mind. [cite: 13]
11
Q
What question does the third turning of the Dharma wheel delve into regarding the emptiness of the mind?
A
The third turning of the Dharma wheel delves deeper: The purified aspect of the emptiness of the mind is true cessation, but what mind is the basis of that emptiness? [cite: 14]
12
Q
Why is the ordinary mind we have at present not the basis for the emptiness that is true cessation, according to the third turning?
A
The ordinary mind we have at present, which is the basis of all our afflictions, is not that mind. [cite: 15]
13
Q
Why can our sense consciousnesses not be the basis for the emptiness that is true cessation?
A
Our sense consciousnesses also cannot be that basis, because they are not stable and continuous. [cite: 16]
14
Q
Why can afflictive minds such as ignorance not be the basis for true cessation?
A
Afflictive minds such as ignorance cannot be that basis because the continuity of ignorance is not present at buddhahood and thus the emptiness of ignorance is also absent then. [cite: 17]
15
Q
What characteristics must the mind that is the basis for true cessation possess?
A
The mind that is the basis for true cessation must be a pure mind—pure in that afflictions have not entered into its nature. [cite: 18] It must be beginningless and endless because its continuum must go without interruption to buddhahood and become a buddha’s mind. [cite: 19]
16
Q
What is the clear light mind that can become a liberating path, as presented in the third turning?
A
This mind is the clear light mind that can become a liberating path—the subject clear light realizing the object clear light, the emptiness of the mind. [cite: 20]
17
Q
How does the presentation of tathāgatagarbha differ between the second and third turnings?
A
While the second turning speaks of tathāgatagarbha primarily as the object, emptiness, the third turning presents it as the subject, the clear light mind that can realize emptiness, which is also the basis of that emptiness. [cite: 21]
18
Q
What does the second turning of the Dharma wheel provide a thorough account of?
A
The second turning of the Dharma wheel gives a thorough account of emptiness—the third truth, true cessation. [cite: 22]
19
Q
What does the third turning of the Dharma wheel present a thorough explanation of?
A
The third turning presents a thorough explanation of the fourth truth, true path. [cite: 22]
20
Q
What kind of mind does the Buddha introduce in the third turning?
A
The Buddha introduces the clear light mind, a mind that has always been and will continue to be pure. [cite: 23]
21
Q
What does the Buddha not explain in the third turning regarding the clear light mind?
A
He does not explain how to access and realize that mind. [cite: 24]
22
Q
Where can one find a deeper explanation of the clear light mind and the method to actualize it, beyond the Sūtra teachings of the third turning?
A
This is the key that opens the door to Tantra. [cite: 26] A disciple who wants to learn about this mind in more depth cannot find the explanation in Sūtra, so she is automatically drawn to Tantra. [cite: 27]
23
Q
Which of the four classes of tantra contains the real meaning of Tantra regarding the clear light mind?
A
The fourth, the highest yoga tantra (mahānuttarayoga tantra), which contains the real meaning of Tantra. [cite: 28]
24
Q
What does highest yoga tantra provide an explanation about?
A
The highest yoga tantra provides a clear explanation about how to access the fundamental innate clear light mind, utilize it, and transform it into a virtuous mental state, a true path that realizes emptiness. [cite: 29, 30]
25
What does the development of the wisdom mind in highest yoga tantra culminate in?
The development of this wisdom mind culminates in the state of union, the state of full awakening described in Tantra. [cite: 31]
26
How can Nāgārjuna's Commentary on Bodhicitta be seen in relation to the third turning?
Nāgārjuna's Commentary on Bodhicitta can be seen as a commentary on the third turning because it unpacks the meaning of a verse from the Guhyasamāja Root Tantra. [cite: 32]
27
What is the essence of the verse from the Guhyasamāja Root Tantra commented on by Nāgārjuna?
Devoid of all real entities; utterly discarding all objects and subjects such as aggregates, elements, and sense sources; due to sameness of selflessness of all phenomena, one's mind is primordially unborn; it is in the nature of emptiness. [cite: 32, 33, 34]
28
What does Nāgārjuna's Praise to the Sphere of Reality primarily comment on?
Nāgārjuna's Praise to the Sphere of Reality comments primarily on the subject matter of the third turning, the subject clear light mind, but hints at the meaning of clear light mind as explained in Tantra. [cite: 35]
29
What analogy is used in Nāgārjuna's Praise to the Sphere of Reality to describe the clear light mind and defilements?
Just as asbestos cloth that is filthy with all kinds of dirt, when put into fire, the filth is burnt but not the cloth. Similarly, it is the case with the clear light mind, which has defilements produced by attachment; the fire of pristine wisdom burns the defilements but not that clear light [mind]. [cite: 36, 37, 38]
30
What happens when fireproof asbestos cloth is put in fire, and how does this relate to the clear light mind?
When fireproof asbestos cloth is put in fire, the stains on it burn until they disappear completely, but the cloth remains untouched. [cite: 39] Likewise, when the ordinary mind of sentient beings, the clear light mind, is exposed to the realization of emptiness, the stains on the mind—attachment and so forth—are removed but the clear light mind remains. [cite: 40]
31
What does true cessation ultimately refer to?
True cessation ultimately refers to the emptiness of the subtlest clear light mind that has become an awakened mind. [cite: 41]
32
To what does the clear light mind mentioned in the third turning ultimately refer, even if not explicitly stated?
Although this is not explicitly stated in the third turning, the clear light mind mentioned in the third turning ultimately refers to the clear light mind of highest yoga tantra. [cite: 42]
33
Are the three turnings of the Dharma wheel disconnected teachings?
No, the three turnings of the Dharma wheel are not disconnected teachings on different topics. [cite: 43] Each turning is closely linked to the previous one; it builds on and unpacks the meaning of the previous turning in more depth and detail. [cite: 44]
34
How did the Buddha, as a skillful teacher, lead students to deeper understandings through the turnings?
The Buddha, a skillful and wise teacher, gradually leads us to deeper understandings. [cite: 45] Similarly, each turning hints at deeper explanations found in the future turnings. [cite: 46]
35
According to the Sūtra perspective within the context of the three turnings, what are the two types of buddha nature?
(1) The emptiness of the mind—the object that is perceived—as explained in the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras in the second turning. [cite: 47] (2) The mind that is the basis of that emptiness. [cite: 48]
36
What are the characteristics of the undefiled mind that is the second type of buddha nature in Sūtra?
This undefiled mind has existed beginninglessly and will transform into the liberating paths that perceive this emptiness. [cite: 49]
37
What does it mean to say this mind (the second type of buddha nature in Sūtra) is clear light?
Saying this mind is clear light means that the defilements are not an inherent property of this mind. [cite: 50]
38
As the third turning leads us to understand, what is the natural buddha nature?
The emptiness of the mind is the natural buddha nature. [cite: 51]
39
As the third turning leads us to understand, what is the transforming buddha nature?
The basis of this emptiness (the undefiled mind) is the transforming buddha nature. [cite: 51]
40
Besides the natural and transforming buddha nature, what other extremely subtle mind is also considered buddha nature according to Sūtra?
There is an extremely subtle mind that is the clear light mind and the seed of wisdom. [cite: 52] It, too, is buddha nature. [cite: 53]
41
Where is the full explanation of this extremely subtle clear light mind and how to access it presented?
The full explanation of this mind and how to access it is presented in Tantra, specifically in highest yoga tantra. [cite: 53]
42
Who confirms the way of describing buddha nature as both object (emptiness) and subject (mind)?
This way of describing the buddha nature as both the object, emptiness, and the subject, mind, is confirmed by the Seventh Dalai Lama in his Commentary on the "Pristine Wisdom on the Verge of Transcendence Sūtra" (Atyayajñāna Sūtra). [cite: 54]
43
What does the "pristine wisdom on the verge of transcendence" refer to, according to the Seventh Dalai Lama?
He explains that the pristine wisdom on the verge of transcendence refers to both the pristine wisdom realizing the ultimate nature as one approaches nirvāņa and the pristine wisdom realizing suchness that is at the heart of the practice that one must engage in at all times, including at the point of death. [cite: 55, 56]
44
What does the Atyayajñāna Sūtra state about realizing the nature of one's mind?
If you realize the nature of your mind, it is wisdom. Therefore cultivate thorough discrimination not to seek buddhahood elsewhere. [cite: 56, 57]
45
What are the three characteristics of the nature of the mind, according to the Seventh Dalai Lama?
(1) The nature of that mind is such that it is devoid of all conceptual elaborations (it is empty of inherent existence). [cite: 58] (2) Since the ultimate nature of all phenomena is undifferentiable, the nature of that mind is all-pervading. [cite: 59] (3) The nature is not polluted by any adventitious conceptualizations (afflictions). [cite: 60]
46
What does the Seventh Dalai Lama say about tathāgatagarbha existing in the mental continuum?
He then turns to the tathāgatagarbha, saying that it exists in the mental continuum of each sentient being. [cite: 61]
47
What are the three factors of tathāgatagarbha according to the Seventh Dalai Lama?
(1) The factor that allows for the buddhas' awakening activity to interact with sentient beings. [cite: 62] (2) The factor of the sphere of reality - namely, the mind's emptiness of inherent existence. [cite: 66] (3) The factor that is the seed that serves as the basis for the actualization of the three buddha bodies. [cite: 70]
48
Why is the first factor of tathāgatagarbha called the "essence or seed (garbha) of buddhahood"?
This factor is called the "essence or seed (garbha) of buddhahood" because it allows for sentient beings to enjoy and benefit from the buddhas' awakening activities, which are fruits of their awakening. [cite: 63] It is the aspect of the mind that is receptive and has the capacity to receive the buddhas' various awakening activities and influence. [cite: 64]
49
What is the potency referred to by the first factor of tathāgatagarbha?
This is the potency that exists in sentient beings that allows for the buddhas' awakening activity to interact with sentient beings and stimulate their progress on the path. [cite: 65]
50
What is the second factor of tathāgatagarbha?
The factor of the sphere of reality—namely, the mind's emptiness of inherent existence (T. sems rang 'zhin gyis stong pa'i chhos nyid gyi chha). [cite: 66]
51
What state is the mind's emptiness in, regarding the second factor of tathāgatagarbha?
This factor is the emptiness of the mind that is not free from defilements. [cite: 67]
52
Why is the second factor called "the essence of buddhahood"?
It is called "the essence of buddhahood" because the nature of the Buddha's dharmakāya and the nature of sentient beings' mind are the same in terms of not being inherently polluted by afflictions. [cite: 68] In terms of the mind being empty of existing from its own side, there is no difference between a buddha and a sentient being. [cite: 69]
53
What is the third factor of tathāgatagarbha?
The factor that is the seed that serves as the basis for the actualization of the three buddha bodies (T. sku gsum 'grub byed kyi nyer len sa bon gyi chha). [cite: 70]
54
Why is the third factor called the "essence of buddhahood"?
This factor is called the "essence of buddhahood" because from this cause the resultant three buddha bodies emerge. [cite: 71, 72]
55
What kind of mind is the third factor of tathāgatagarbha?
This is the subject clear light mind described in the third turning, which transforms into the three buddha bodies. [cite: 73] Here the tathāgatagarbha is a conditioned phenomenon, the clear light mind that will become a buddha's mind. [cite: 75]
56
What are the characteristics of this clear light mind (third factor)?
This clear light mind has existed beginninglessly, will continue endlessly, and is the basis of the emptiness of the mind. [cite: 76]
57
Why is it called "clear light" mind?
Clear light implies that the actual nature of the mind is undefiled. [cite: 77] The stains that presently cover the mind are adventitious; they have not entered into the nature of the mind and are not an inherent part of the clear light mind. [cite: 78]
58
What does Maitreya say about the clear and luminous nature of mind?
This clear and luminous nature of mind is as immutable as space. It is not afflicted by desire and so on, the adventitious defilements that spring from false conceptions. [cite: 79, 80]
59
Is the clear light mind permanent?
The clear light mind is not permanent, but the fact that the afflictions are adventitious does not change. [cite: 81]
60
What happens at awakening regarding the clear light mind?
In the sense of the clear light mind being a continuity, nothing new is created at awakening; the obscurations and defilements have simply been eradicated. [cite: 82, 83] At this point, this mind, which has existed since beginningless time and whose nature is undefiled, becomes the omniscient mind. [cite: 83]
61
When the Seventh Dalai Lama speaks of buddha nature in terms of Sūtra, what is he actually referring to, according to the author?
Looking deeper, I believe that he is actually referring to the fundamental innate clear light mind that has been present in sentient beings since beginningless time and goes on endlessly. [cite: 85]
62
Where must a practitioner seek a clear exposition of the fundamental innate clear light mind that acts as the seed of the three buddha bodies?
Because a clear exposition of the fundamental innate clear light mind that acts as the seed of the three buddha bodies is not found in Sūtra, a practitioner must seek it in Tantra, especially in highest yoga tantra. [cite: 86]
63
How does the Seventh Dalai Lama direct us to the tantric explanation of the innate clear light mind?
Without saying it directly, the Seventh Dalai Lama is directing us to the tantric explanation of the innate clear light mind. [cite: 87]
64
What is the progression of the sequence of the three turnings of the Dharma wheel?
In this way, the sequence of the three turnings of the Dharma wheel leads us from the basic teaching of the four truths, to in-depth explanations of the third and the fourth truths, and then eventually to the highest yoga tantra. [cite: 88, 89]
65
How do Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā usually refer to buddha nature?
Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā usually refer to a subtle mind, rigpa or the clear light mind, as the buddha nature. [cite: 90]
66
Among Gelukpas, how is buddha nature usually discussed in Sūtrayāna?
Among Gelukpas, in Sūtrayāna buddha nature is usually discussed from the perspective of the Ornament of Clear Realizations, where it refers to the emptiness of the mind, not to the subtlest clear light mind itself, as Tantra speaks of it. [cite: 91]
67
How does the Seventh Dalai Lama, a traditional Gelukpa, describe buddha nature in his commentary on a sūtra, similar to Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā?
However, here, commenting on a sūtra, the Seventh Dalai Lama, who is a traditional Gelukpa, also describes the buddha nature in a way similar to that of Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā. [cite: 92]
68
In which two texts by Maitreya is the verse "Nothing whatsoever is to be removed; not the slightest thing is to be added. Perfectly view the perfect [truth]; seeing the perfect will liberate completely" found?
The verse is found in the Ornament of Clear Realizations and the Sublime Continuum, both written by Maitreya. [cite: 96, 100, 101]
69
What does the Ornament of Clear Realizations comment on?
The Ornament is a commentary on the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras from the second turning. [cite: 97]
70
What does the Sublime Continuum comment on?
The Sublime Continuum is a commentary on the Tathagatagarbha Sūtra from the third turning. [cite: 98]
71
Why should the verse "Nothing is to be removed..." be interpreted differently in the Ornament and the Sublime Continuum?
If the meaning of this verse were the same in both texts, there would be unnecessary repetition. [cite: 101] To avoid that complication, the verse should be interpreted differently in each text. [cite: 102]
72
According to Abhayākaragupta, from the viewpoint of the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras, what does the verse "Nothing is to be removed..." refer to?
According to Abhayākaragupta (d. 1125), one of the great Indian commentators on the Ornament, from the viewpoint of the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras, the verse refers to the tathāgatagarbha from the perspective of the object, the empty nature of the mind. [cite: 103]
73
In the context of the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras, what is the element within sentient beings from which nothing needs to be removed or added?
In this context, the element within sentient beings from which nothing needs to be removed and nothing needs to be added—something the discovery of which will lead us to nirvāņa—is the emptiness of the mind. [cite: 104]
74
Why is there nothing to remove from the mind's emptiness?
There is nothing to remove from the mind's emptiness because inherent existence has never existed. [cite: 105]
75
Why is there nothing to add to the mind's emptiness?
There is nothing to add to it because it is the ultimate nature of the mind. [cite: 106]
76
What will seeing the mind's emptiness perfectly (directly without conceptual overlay) achieve?
It is perfect, and seeing it perfectly—seeing it directly without any conceptual overlay—will cleanse the mind of obscurations and bring awakening. [cite: 107]
77
What happens in the very next moment after one actually perceives emptiness with an uninterrupted path?
When one actually perceives emptiness in this way with an uninterrupted path, in the very next moment one will attain a liberated path. [cite: 109]
78
What does Nāgārjuna say about the Buddha's comprehension of suchness?
Referring to the Buddha, he says (LS 23): "There is nothing that you have brought forth; there is nothing that you have negated. You have comprehended that suchness, as it was before, so it is afterward." [cite: 110, 111]
79
Does the wisdom realizing emptiness remove something from or add something new to the mind's emptiness?
The wisdom realizing emptiness does not remove something from the emptiness of the mind that was previously present. [cite: 112] Nor does it bring a new reality to the mind. [cite: 113]
80
What does the Descent into Lanka Sūtra (Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra) say about reality?
As the Descent into Lanka Sūtra (Lańkāvatāra Sūtra) says, "Whether the Tathagata appears in the world or not, reality forever abides." [cite: 114]
81
Is buddha nature, understood as the emptiness of the mind, always present and unchanging?
Buddha nature—understood as the emptiness of the mind—is always present and does not change. [cite: 115] The only difference is that wisdom now realizes this ultimate nature of the mind. [cite: 116]
82
According to the Sublime Continuum, what does the verse "Nothing is to be removed..." refer to?
According to the Sublime Continuum, the verse refers to the clear light mind being the buddha nature. [cite: 117]
83
What attributes does the clear light mind possess, as described in the Sublime Continuum's interpretation of the verse?
The clear light mind is the basis that has many attributes, such as its being pure from the beginning and not newly created. [cite: 118]
84
How does the first line "nothing whatsoever to remove from it" relate to the clear light mind in the Sublime Continuum?
Its being pure from the beginning is described in the first line: because afflictions are not an inherent part of the clear light mind, there is nothing whatsoever to remove from it. [cite: 119]
85
How does the second line "not the slightest thing is to be added" relate to the clear light mind in the Sublime Continuum?
Its not being newly created is explained in the second line: it is not the case that once the clear light mind was absent and then it was freshly created. [cite: 120] Thus there is nothing to add to it because the clear light mind is eternal. [cite: 121]
86
According to Sūtra, how can nonconceptual experience of the clear light mind liberate us, as per the Sublime Continuum?
According to Sūtra, how can nonconceptual experience of the clear light mind liberate us? [cite: 123] The Sublime Continuum says that the ultimate nature is to be self-revealed: there is no need to use reasoning to understand it; one's own experience will reveal it. [cite: 124, 125]
87
What does Gyaltsab maintain the "ultimate nature" in the Sublime Continuum refers to?
Gyaltsab maintains that this ultimate nature refers to the emptiness of the mind, as it does in the Ornament. [cite: 125]
88
If the ultimate nature is emptiness, what does "self-revealed" mean?
If that is the case, what does saying it is self-revealed mean? [cite: 126] How can ultimate reality reveal itself? [cite: 126]
89
How does interpreting the "ultimate nature" as the clear light mind connect to Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā meditations?
Interpreting the ultimate nature mentioned here to be the clear light mind connects to the Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā meditations on the mind. [cite: 127]
90
How can the clear and cognizant nature of the mind be directly perceived in Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā?
By stopping memories of the past and plans for the future, the clear and cognizant nature of the mind can be directly perceived. [cite: 128]
91
What happens if one abides in the state of perceiving the clear and cognizant nature of the mind and has a prior correct realization of emptiness?
If one abides in this state and has a prior correct realization of emptiness, then the coarse levels of mind dissolve and the subtlest innate clear light mind—rigpa in Dzogchen—manifests; it reveals itself. [cite: 129, 130]
92
How does combining this manifested subtlest innate clear light mind with previous familiarity with emptiness lead to liberation?
Combining this mind with our previous familiarity with emptiness liberates us from afflictions and defilements. [cite: 130]
93
What is the relationship between the transforming buddha nature and the third factor of tathāgatagarbha (the seed for the three buddha bodies) as set forth by the Seventh Dalai Lama?
What is the relationship between the transforming buddha nature and the third factor of the tathāgatagarbha as set forth by the Seventh Dalai Lama—the factor that is the seed that serves as the basis for the actualization of the three buddha bodies? [cite: 131]
94
What analogy is used to explain buddha nature as a continuum versus its particular components?
Take the example of a rosary and the beads that form it. [cite: 132] When we think of a rosary, we think of one thing that is a continuum. [cite: 133] That is similar to buddha nature as presented by the Seventh Dalai Lama. [cite: 134] When we think of the individual beads, we focus on the particular components of the rosary. [cite: 135] The beads are analogous to the various consciousnesses that can be the buddha nature. [cite: 136]
95
What are some examples of specific mental states that can be instances of the transforming buddha nature?
At one time it is bodhicitta, at another time it is the mind realizing emptiness, at yet another time it is the mind restraining from nonvirtue, and so on. [cite: 137]
96
What is the Seventh Dalai Lama emphasizing when discussing the third factor of tathāgatagarbha?
The Seventh Dalai Lama is not referring to these specific mental states; he is emphasizing the continuum, the common feature shared by all of them. [cite: 138, 139]
97
What is this common feature, the tathāgatagarbha, according to this emphasis?
This common feature is the mental primary consciousness; this is the tathāgatagarbha. [cite: 140]
98
Can instances of this continuum (mental primary consciousness) that grasp true existence still be considered buddha nature?
Some of the instances of this continuum may grasp true existence, and from that perspective they are not buddha nature. [cite: 141] But from the perspective of that mind still being clear light—that which is clear and cognizant, whose obscurations are adventitious—it is the buddha nature. [cite: 142]
99
Why can the third factor of tathāgatagarbha (seed for the three kāyas) not refer to the transforming buddha nature as defined in Sūtra?
Looking deeper, this third factor of tathāgatagarbha cannot refer to the transforming buddha nature. [cite: 143] According to Sūtra, the transforming buddha nature is any mind that is not freed from defilements, whose continuity goes on to awakening and that serves as the basis for the emptiness that is the naturally abiding buddha nature. [cite: 144] The seed having the capacity to give rise to the three kāyas must be a pure state of mind that is not defiled. [cite: 146]
100
What kind of mind must the seed having the capacity to give rise to the three kāyas be?
This can only be a very subtle mind that has existed since beginningless time and will go on endlessly. [cite: 147]
101
Where is the explanation of this primordial clear light mind found in great depth?
The explanation of this primordial clear light mind is found in great depth only in highest yoga tantra, not in the Sūtra teachings that speak of the transforming buddha nature. [cite: 148]
102
In Tantra, what are the characteristics of the fundamental innate clear light mind of sentient beings?
In Tantra the fundamental innate clear light mind of sentient beings has never been mixed with defilements. [cite: 149] This innate, ever-present mind has two qualities: it is the subtlest mind, and it has existed beginninglessly, exists endlessly, and will go on to awakening. [cite: 150]
103
When do afflictions manifest in relation to this subtlest mind?
When coarser levels of mind appear out of this subtlest mind, afflictions manifest. [cite: 151]
104
What remains when coarser levels of mind (white appearance, red increase, black near attainment) absorb and cease?
But when the coarser levels of mind—including the white appearance, red increase, and black near attainment—absorb and cease, only the beginningless and endless clear light mind remains. [cite: 152]
105
What does the impossibility of afflictions arising when only the clear light mind remains indicate?
At that time it is not possible for afflictions to arise. [cite: 154] This indicates that the coarse minds are adventitious—they are not stable and enduring—while the innate clear light mind is eternal. [cite: 154]
106
What is the primordial clear light mind the basis for?
This primordial clear light mind is the basis from which an individual's samsāra evolves and it is also the basis from which the qualities of nirvāņa come about. [cite: 155]
107
How does the primordial clear light mind in Tantra differ from the clear light mind described in Sūtra?
The primordial clear light mind differs from the clear light mind described in Sūtra, which is together with afflictions in that afflictions manifest in it even though those afflictions are not an inherent part of that mind. [cite: 156] However, afflictions are never able to manifest in the primordial clear light mind presented in Tantra because this mind manifests only after the coarser levels of mind and wind have ceased, at the time of death or by means of special yogic techniques. [cite: 157]
108
In the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras, what is the nature body of a buddha (svābhāvikakāya)?
In the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras, the nature body of a buddha (svābhāvikakāya) is said to be an unconditioned, permanent phenomenon—the emptiness of inherent existence of the awakened mind. [cite: 158]
109
What is the wisdom dharmakāya of a buddha in Sūtra?
The wisdom dharmakāya of a buddha is a conditioned, impermanent phenomenon that is the continuation of the clear light mind described in Sūtra. [cite: 159]
110
In Tantra, what is the primordial clear light mind called?
In Tantra, the primordial clear light mind is called the "composite nature body of a buddha." [cite: 160]
111
Why is the existence of a composite nature body unique to Tantra?
Although the emptiness of the awakened mind—the nature body in common to Sūtra and Tantra—is a permanent phenomenon, the existence of a composite nature body is unique to Tantra because only Tantra speaks of the primordial clear light mind. [cite: 161]
112
What does calling the primordial clear light mind at buddhahood the composite nature body emphasize?
Calling the primordial clear light mind at buddhahood the composite nature body emphasizes that nothing is newly created at buddhahood. [cite: 162] This mind has been there all along, but now all the defilements, which were never an inherent part of it, are completely gone. [cite: 163]
113
From what perspective is the purified primordial clear light mind of a buddha called the omniscient mind, the wisdom dharmakāya?
From the perspective of it cognizing all veiled and ultimate truths simultaneously, the purified primordial clear light mind of a buddha is called the omniscient mind, the wisdom dharmakāya. [cite: 164]
114
From what perspective is the purified primordial clear light mind of a buddha called the composite nature body?
From the perspective of its existing from beginningless time and now becoming the purified basis of the emptiness that is the unconditioned nature body, it is called the composite nature body. [cite: 165]
115
How does the Seventh Dalai Lama refer to this primordial clear light mind?
The Seventh Dalai Lama refers to it as the "seed that has the capacity to give rise to the three kāyas of a buddha." [cite: 166]
116
What is the nature of the "seed" in this context?
Although "seed" usually refers to an abstract composite, here it is a mind that serves as the basis for the three buddha bodies. [cite: 167] This innate, primordial, ever-present mind also transforms into the wisdom dharmakāya. [cite: 168, 169]
117
In Tantra, what is the relationship between the composite nature body and the wisdom dharmakāya of a buddha?
Thus in Tantra, the composite nature body and the wisdom dharmakāya of a buddha are the same mind seen from different perspectives. [cite: 169]
118
To summarize, what are the two buddha natures spoken of in Sūtra?
In summary, Sūtra speaks of two buddha natures. [cite: 170] One is the naturally abiding buddha nature; the other is the transforming buddha nature. [cite: 171]
119
What is the naturally abiding buddha nature in Sūtra?
The naturally abiding buddha nature is the emptiness of the mind that is not free from defilements. [cite: 171]
120
What is the transforming buddha nature in Sūtra?
The transforming buddha nature is the mind that is the basis of that emptiness as well as any other neutral or virtuous qualities of mind that continue on to buddhahood. [cite: 172]
121
How might an intelligent person inclined toward Tantra understand the third factor of tathāgatagarbha (the seed for three kāyas)?
If an intelligent person who is inclined toward Tantra hears of the third factor of tathāgatagarbha as explained by the Seventh Dalai Lama—the seed having the capacity to give rise to the three kāyas—she will understand that there is some aspect of her own mind that is a composite phenomenon and the buddha nature. [cite: 173]
122
Why can this aspect of her mind not be the defiled coarse mind?
It cannot be the defiled coarse mind because that mind does not continue to awakening. [cite: 174]
123
What must this aspect of her mind be?
It must be a subtle mind that is hinted at but not explained extensively in Sūtra. [cite: 175]
124
Where does she turn for a lengthy and explicit presentation of this subtle mind?
She turns to Tantra, where there is a lengthy and explicit presentation of this mind. [cite: 176] In this way, she enters Tantrayāna. [cite: 177]
125
What statement from Nāgārjuna's Praise to the Sphere of Reality can cause potential confusion about tathāgatagarbha?
It stems from such statements as "Within afflictions, wisdom (jñāna) abides," found in Nāgārjuna's Praise to the Sphere of Reality. [cite: 178]
126
What does jñāna usually refer to, and what question does this raise?
Jñāna usually refers to āryas' pristine wisdom that directly realizes emptiness. [cite: 179] Does this mean that afflictions are in fact wisdom? [cite: 179] If so, are we already buddhas? [cite: 180]
127
In the statement "Within afflictions, wisdom (jñāna) abides," what does jñāna refer to?
Here jñāna refers not to āryas' wisdom realizing emptiness but to the clear light nature that can transform into the wisdom of the resultant state. [cite: 181]
128
What is the jñāna that is found even in an afflictive mind?
Jñāna is the aspect of the mind found even in an afflictive mind that can become the wisdom realizing emptiness. [cite: 182]
129
Why is the clear light mind of sentient beings called "wisdom" even before it becomes a buddha's pristine wisdom?
The cause—the clear light mind of sentient beings—will eventually become the result—a buddha's pristine wisdom—and for this reason the clear light mind of sentient beings is called wisdom even though it has yet to become that wisdom. [cite: 183, 184]
130
How is this aspect of the mind (clear light nature) transformed into nonconceptual wisdom directly realizing emptiness?
By means of learning, reflecting, and meditating on the Dharma. [cite: 186] This wisdom is generated in dependence on or in relation to the clear light mind. [cite: 187]
131
What is the practice of "giving the cause the name of the result" reminiscent of?
Giving the cause the name of the result is reminiscent of Nāgārjuna's discussion of the three kayas (buddha bodies) in the ordinary state, on the path, and at the resultant level. [cite: 188]
132
Does the expression "three kāyas in the ordinary state" mean the resultant kāyas are already present?
The expression "three kāyas in the ordinary state" does not mean that the three resultant kāyas are already present in us in our ordinary state. [cite: 189] Rather, in the ordinary state we possess the basis upon which we can actualize the three kāyas. [cite: 190] This basis is given the name of the result. [cite: 191]
133
What does Longchenpa say in Treasury of Dharmadhātu about what is primordially awakened?
In Treasury of Dharmadhātu (T. chos dbyings mdzod), Longchenpa says that what is primordially awakened becomes reawakened. [cite: 192]
134
How do some people misinterpret Longchenpa's statement?
Some people take such passages literally, thinking that we are already buddhas. [cite: 193]
135
What does Longchenpa's statement echo?
Longchenpa's statement echoes the notion of natural nirvāņa found in Madhyamaka texts. [cite: 195]
136
What does natural nirvāņa refer to?
Natural nirvāņa refers to the mind's emptiness of inherent existence. [cite: 196]
137
What are the characteristics of this ultimate nature of the mind (natural nirvāņa)?
This ultimate nature of the mind is pure and clear light; the defilements have not penetrated into it. [cite: 197]
138
Why is it possible to remove the defilements that obscure the mind's ultimate nature?
Because this nature is naturally untainted, it is possible to remove the defilements that obscure it. [cite: 198]
139
Is natural nirvāņa the same as the nirvāņa of liberated beings?
While natural nirvāņa is not the nirvāņa of liberated beings, it serves as the basis upon which actual nirvāņa can be attained. [cite: 199]
140
How is Nāgārjuna's statement that wisdom exists in the afflictions made from the Sutra point of view?
Nāgārjuna's statement that wisdom exists in the afflictions is made from the Sutra point of view where wisdom refers to the continuity of the mental consciousness. [cite: 201]
141
According to Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā, what does the wisdom present in afflictions refer to?
According to Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā, the wisdom that is present in the afflictions is much subtler and refers to the innate clear light mind. [cite: 202]
142
How do Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā describe this wisdom (innate clear light mind)?
They say this wisdom is a noncomposite phenomenon. [cite: 203]
143
What does "noncomposite" mean in the context of the wisdom described by Dodrubchen Jigme Tenpai Nyima?
Dodrubchen Jigme Tenpai Nyima (1865-1926), the Third Dodrup Rinpoche, explains that noncomposite in this context does not have its usual meaning of permanent and unconditioned. [cite: 203] Rather, wisdom is said to be noncomposite because it has existed beginninglessly and is not newly created by causes and conditions. [cite: 204]
144
How does the Sublime Continuum refer to buddhas' activities similarly?
In the same way, the Sublime Continuum refers to the buddhas' activities as permanent because they have existed beginninglessly and will exist eternally. [cite: 205, 206] Here "permanent" means eternal and unending; it doesn't mean unchanging or unconditioned. [cite: 206, 207]
145
What is Gyaltsab Darma Rinchen's view on the term "wisdom" in Nāgārjuna's statement?
Gyaltsab Darma Rinchen has another view. [cite: 207] He says that the term "wisdom" in this statement is not to be understood literally. [cite: 208] Rather it refers to the emptiness of the mind, which is noncomposite, permanent, and always present. [cite: 209]
146
Which interpretations (Dzogchen/Mahāmudrā or Gyaltsab's) are considered more applicable for understanding the Sublime Continuum's presentation?
I believe the Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā interpretations are more applicable when trying to understand the presentation in the Sublime Continuum. [cite: 210]
147
Is there much difference between the Seventh Dalai Lama's view of buddha nature and that of Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā?
There is not much difference between the Seventh Dalai Lama's view of buddha nature and that of Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā. [cite: 211]
148
From what viewpoint do Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā speak, and how does this differ from the Seventh Dalai Lama's approach?
However, Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā speak from the viewpoint of highest yoga tantra and thus they identify the innate ever-present clear light mind as buddha nature, whereas the Seventh Dalai Lama speaks from the Sūtra viewpoint that points to Tantra. [cite: 212]
149
From what perspectives can the causal clear light mind be spoken of?
The causal clear light mind can be spoken of from the perspective of both Sūtra and Tantra. [cite: 213]
150
In Sūtra, what does the causal clear light mind refer to?
Sūtra speaks of the continuity of the mental consciousness, which is present at all times. [cite: 214] The jñāna that abides in the afflictions refers to the continuum of this mental consciousness. [cite: 215]
151
Is the continuum of the mental consciousness (in Sūtra) actual pristine wisdom?
While the continuum of the mental consciousness is not actual pristine wisdom, it will become this wisdom as we progress through the paths and grounds to buddhahood. [cite: 216]
152
How does highest yoga tantra differentiate types of mind regarding the causal clear light mind?
Highest yoga tantra differentiates two types of mind: the temporary, adventitious consciousnesses and the innate ever-present clear light mind. [cite: 217]
153
When does the subtlest innate clear light mind become manifest in highest yoga tantra?
When all the coarser levels of mind—including the white appearance, red increase, and black near attainment—have dissolved, the subtlest innate clear light mind becomes manifest. [cite: 218] Only this mind remains. [cite: 219]
154
What does the dissolution of other minds indicate about them and the subtlest innate clear light mind?
The fact that all the other minds have dissolved indicates that they are adventitious, while the subtlest innate clear light mind, which has existed since beginningless time and continues on endlessly to awakening, persists. [cite: 219]
155
What underlies all consciousnesses from the viewpoint of highest yoga tantra?
From the viewpoint of highest yoga tantra, the clear and cognizant nature of the mind that is the fundamental innate clear light mind underlies all consciousnesses. [cite: 220]
156
Should clarity and cognizance in general be equated with the fundamental innate clear light mind?
But we should not equate clarity and cognizance in general with the fundamental innate clear light mind. [cite: 221]
157
Why are all consciousnesses clear and cognizant?
All consciousnesses are clear and cognizant because that is the definition of consciousness. [cite: 222]
158
What are the coarser minds of the waking state in relation to the everlasting mind?
The coarser minds of the waking state are derivatives of this everlasting mind. [cite: 224]
159
Are the coarser minds, despite having a clear and cognizant nature, the subtlest innate mind?
Although they have a clear and cognizant nature, they are not this subtlest innate mind. [cite: 225]
160
Is the continuum of the mental consciousness (Sūtra) or the fundamental innate clear light mind (Tantra) a soul or inherently existent self?
Neither the continuum of the mental consciousness spoken of in Sūtra nor the fundamental innate clear light mind spoken of in Tantra is a soul or inherently existent self. [cite: 226] Both are empty of inherent existence. [cite: 227]
161
To answer the question of who goes from an ordinary being to a buddha, what distinction is made regarding the "I"?
To answer this, we speak of the general I—the continuity of the merely designated I from one life to another—and the specific I of each lifetime that constitutes that continuity. [cite: 228, 229]
162
On what is the specific I of each lifetime designated?
The specific I of each lifetime is designated in dependence on the aggregates of that life. [cite: 230]
163
Since physical and mental aggregates change between lifetimes, what happens to the I designated upon them?
Since our physical and mental aggregates change from one lifetime to the next, the I designated in dependence on them also changes. [cite: 231]
164
What are examples of specific Is across different lifetimes?
In one lifetime we may be Susan, in the next John. [cite: 232] In one lifetime we may be a monkey, in another a human being, and in yet another a deva. [cite: 233] These are the specific Is of those three lifetimes. [cite: 234]
165
On what is the general I or person that goes from one life to the next designated?
The general I or person that goes from one life to the next is designated in dependence on the series of specific Is. [cite: 234]
166
How did the Buddha refer to the general I?
The Buddha spoke of the general I when he said, "In my previous life I was a king, in the present life I am Śākyamuni Buddha." [cite: 235]
167
What encompasses the specific Is of different lifetimes?
That general I encompasses the monkey of one life, the human in the next, and the deva in the life after that. [cite: 236]
168
What is the difference between the specific persons of individual lives and the general I?
The monkey, human being, and deva are the specific persons of those individual lives. [cite: 237] They are born and die; the general I goes from samsāra to full awakening. [cite: 238]
169
When speaking of the self that exists in the three times (past, present, future), is a distinction made between subtle or coarse self?
When speaking of the self that exists in the three times, we are not referring to a subtle self or a coarse self—no distinction like that is made. [cite: 239] It is simply the general I. [cite: 240]
170
Similarly, is there a distinction made for the general mental consciousness existing in the three times?
Likewise, without making any distinction in terms of subtle or coarse, we say there is a general mental consciousness that exists in the three times. [cite: 240]
171
Do the specific mental consciousnesses of sentient beings in a continuum go on to awakening?
Although the general mental consciousness goes from one life to the next and on to awakening, the specific mental consciousnesses of the sentient beings in that continuum do not. [cite: 241]
172
Is the consciousness aggregate of a monkey the substantial cause of the consciousness aggregate of a human in the next rebirth?
The consciousness aggregate of the monkey is not the substantial cause of the consciousness aggregate of the human being in the next rebirth. [cite: 242]
173
What is the relationship between the consciousness of one life and the next?
However, the last moment of the consciousness of one life is the substantial cause for the first moment of the consciousness of the next life. [cite: 243]
174
In what way is it said that the continuity of the mental consciousness goes on to awakening?
In this way, it is said that the continuity of the mental consciousness goes on to awakening. [cite: 244]
175
Is this mental consciousness a truly existent self or soul?
However, this mental consciousness is not a truly existent self or soul. [cite: 245]
176
Why can afflictions like ignorance not be considered buddha nature?
As discussed above, because afflictions such as ignorance are eradicated on the path and do not go on to awakening, they cannot be considered buddha nature. [cite: 246]
177
Although afflictions do not continue to awakening, what characteristic of afflictions does?
Although afflictions do not continue on to awakening, the clear and cognizant characteristic of the afflictions does. [cite: 247]
178
What are the two kinds of continuities helpful to understand here?
Here it is helpful to understand two kinds of continuities: (1) a continuity of type in which the cause and the result share similar characteristics, and (2) a continuity of substance in which one thing is the substance that transforms into another thing. [cite: 248]
179
Using the example of a log burning, explain continuity of substance and continuity of type.
For example, a log burns and becomes ashes. [cite: 249] The ashes are the substantial continuity of the log because the material of the log turned into the ashes. [cite: 249] The ashes are not the continuity of type of the log because the log and the ashes do not have similar characteristics. [cite: 250]
180
Applying this to afflictions and the awakened mind, is the awakened mind a continuity of type of afflictions?
Applying this to the question of afflictions continuing to awakening: the awakened mind is not the continuity of type of afflictions. [cite: 251] Afflictions are polluted, they are the true origin of duḥkha. [cite: 252] The awakened mind is unpolluted and is not the true origin. [cite: 253] The two do not share the same characteristics. [cite: 253]
181
Is the clear and cognizant nature of the awakened mind in substantial continuity with that of afflictions?
However, the clear and cognizant nature of the awakened mind is in the substantial continuity of the clear and cognizant nature of the afflictions. [cite: 254]
182
From the viewpoint of substance (clarity and cognizance), would ignorance and wisdom be in the same substantial continuity if the mind grasping inherent existence apprehended emptiness instead?
From one perspective, it seems that if the mind grasping inherent existence changed objects and apprehended emptiness, it would be a virtuous mind. [cite: 255] In that case, from the viewpoint of substance—clarity and cognizance—ignorance and wisdom would be in the same substantial continuity. [cite: 256, 257]
183
From the viewpoint of their characteristics, how do ignorance and the wisdom realizing emptiness relate?
But from the viewpoint of their characteristics, ignorance and the wisdom realizing emptiness are total opposites. [cite: 258]
184
Does the ignorance grasping true existence go to awakening?
The ignorance grasping true existence does not go to awakening; it is a totally distorted consciousness that cannot improve or become virtuous. [cite: 259, 260]
185
What happens to ignorance when the antidote of wisdom realizing emptiness is applied?
In fact, when the antidote of wisdom realizing emptiness is applied, ignorance degenerates and becomes nonexistent. [cite: 261]
186
When looking only at the clear and cognizant nature of ignorance, what can be said about its purification and continuum?
But when we look just at the clear and cognizant nature of ignorance, we can say that it can be purified and its purified continuum goes on to awakening. [cite: 262]
187
According to Sūtra, will meditation on the clear and cognizant nature of the mind or on the transforming buddha nature alone eradicate afflictions?
According to Sūtra, meditation on the clear and cognizant nature of the mind or on the transforming buddha nature alone will not eradicate afflictions. [cite: 263]
188
What confidence does meditation on the clear and cognizant nature of the mind lead to, according to Sūtra?
However, it does lead us to have more confidence that afflictions are not an inherent part of the mind and therefore that becoming a buddha is possible. [cite: 264]
189
What questions does this confidence, in turn, lead us to ask?
This, in turn, leads us to question: What defiles the mind and what can eliminate these defilements completely? [cite: 265]
190
How does seeking the method to purify the transforming buddha nature lead to the eradication of ignorance?
Seeking the method to purify the transforming buddha nature, we will cultivate the wisdom realizing the emptiness of inherent existence and eradicate ignorance. [cite: 266]
191
According to Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā, what could meditation on the clear and cognizant nature of the mind lead to?
According to Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā, meditation on the clear and cognizant nature of the mind could lead the coarse winds to dissolve and the subtlest clear light mind to become manifest. [cite: 267]
192
What do practitioners who have previously cultivated a correct understanding of emptiness do when the subtlest clear light mind manifests?
When this happens, practitioners who have previously cultivated a correct understanding of emptiness then incorporate that understanding in their meditation and use the innate clear light mind to realize emptiness and abolish afflictions. [cite: 268]
193
How do some people incorrectly understand the Sublime Continuum from a Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā point of view?
Some people take it literally, leading them to incorrectly believe that primordial wisdom is permanent, inherently existent, independent of any other factors, and does not rely on causes and conditions. [cite: 270]
194
What erroneous statements might arise from such incorrect understanding?
They then make statements such as, "If you unravel this secret, you will be liberated." [cite: 271]
195
According to Dodrup Jigme Tenpai Nyima and Tsultrim Zangpo, can the mere presence of primordial wisdom within us alone liberate us? Why or why not?
Dodrup Jigme Tenpai Nyima (1865-1926) and his disciple Tsultrim Zangpo (1884-c.1957), who were great Dzogchen scholars and practitioners, said that the mere presence of this primordial wisdom within us alone cannot liberate us. [cite: 272, 273] Why not? [cite: 273] At the time of death, all other minds have dissolved, and only the primordial mind remains. [cite: 274] Even though it has manifested in all the infinite number of deaths we have experienced in samsāra, that has not helped us attain buddhahood. [cite: 275]
196
According to these two sages (Dodrup Jigme Tenpai Nyima and Tsultrim Zangpo), what is necessary to attain buddhahood?
These two sages say that in order to attain buddhahood, it is necessary to utilize the primordial wisdom to realize emptiness; only that will liberate us. [cite: 276, 277]
197
With whose view is this consistent?
This is consistent with Tsongkhapa's view. [cite: 277]
198
What do some commentaries on Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā incorrectly assert about the wisdom abiding in afflictions and our current state?
Some commentaries on Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā say: This wisdom that abides in the afflictions is the true wisdom, and on this basis every sentient being is already a buddha. [cite: 278] Although we have been buddhas from beginningless time, we have to be awakened again. [cite: 279]
199
What further incorrect claims are made about the wisdom we have now and the three buddha bodies?
The wisdom that we have now is the omniscient mind of a buddha, and the three bodies of a buddha exist innately in each sentient being. [cite: 280]
200
What three aspects are attributed to the essential purity of sentient beings by these incorrect commentaries?
Sentient beings have a basis of essential purity that is not merely emptiness but is endowed with three aspects. [cite: 281] Its entity is the dharmakāya—the mode of abiding of pristine wisdom; its nature is the enjoyment body—the appearance aspect of that mind; and compassion is the emanation bodies—its radiance or expression. [cite: 282, 283, 284]
201
In short, what do these incorrect commentaries say about the presence of the three buddha bodies?
In short, they say that all three buddha bodies are present, fully formed in our ordinary state, but since they are obscured we are not aware of their presence. [cite: 285]
202
Who was Changkya Rolpai Dorje, and what was his approach to incorrect interpretations?
Changkya Rolpai Dorje (1717-86) was unbiased and pointed out incorrect interpretations in all four Tibetan traditions, including his own Geluk tradition. [cite: 286]
203
What did Changkya Rolpai Dorje say in his "Song of the Experience of the View" regarding assertions based on less rigorous philosophical investigation?
In his Song of the Experience of the View, he says, "I say this not out of disrespect to these masters, but perhaps they have had less exposure to rigorous philosophical investigation of the great treatises and were unable to use certain terminology appropriately." [cite: 287] That is, the difficulty in their assertions lies in a broad use of terminology that is not grounded in the authority of the great treatises. [cite: 288]
204
To whom do Changkya's comments not apply?
Of course, Changkya's comments do not apply to Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā masters such as Dodrup Jigme Tenpai Nyima and his teacher Awa Pangchu, who have done serious philosophical study and examination of the great treatises and who ground their understanding of Dzogchen in them. [cite: 289] Their interpretations and writings are excellent. [cite: 290]
205
What shared practice do all four Tibetan traditions teach regarding searching for the mind?
All four Tibetan traditions teach practices that search for the mind—where it came from, where it goes, what its shape and color are, and so forth. [cite: 291]
206
According to Changkya, what do meditators discover and experience after searching for the mind in this manner?
Speaking of this shared practice, Changkya said that after searching in this manner, we find that the mind is not tangible, lacks color and shape, and does not come from one place or go to another. [cite: 292] Discovering this, meditators experience a sensation of voidness. [cite: 293]
207
Is this experienced voidness the emptiness of inherent existence, the ultimate reality of the mind?
However, this voidness is not the emptiness of inherent existence that is the ultimate reality of the mind; it is the mere absence of the mind being a tangible object. [cite: 293, 294]
208
What is the consequence of mistaking this voidness for ultimate reality and meditating on it for a long time?
Although someone may think this voidness is ultimate reality and meditate in that state for a long time, this is not meditation on the ultimate nature of the mind. [cite: 295]
209
What are the two ways to meditate on the mind?
There are two ways to meditate on the mind. The first is as above, examining whether the mind has color, shape, location, tangibility, and so forth. [cite: 296] This leads to the sense that the conventional nature of the mind lacks these qualities. [cite: 297] The second is meditation on the ultimate nature of the mind, in which we examine the mind's ultimate mode of existence and discover its emptiness of inherent existence. [cite: 298]
210
What criticism might people who confuse these two ways of meditating on the mind make against masters like Dignāga and Dharmakīrti?
People who confuse these two ways of meditating on the mind and think that the mind's absence of tangibility, color, and so forth is the mind's ultimate nature may criticize masters such as Dignāga and Dharmakīrti for their precise expositions on debate, logic, and reasoning, saying these only increase preconceptions. [cite: 299]
211
What did Gungtang Konchog Tenpai Dronme find amazing about this criticism?
Gungtang Konchog Tenpai Dronme (1762-1823), another master who was impartial in his critical analysis of Tibetan Buddhist traditions, said he found this amazing. [cite: 300]
212
What belief do some people hold regarding the need for reasoning or investigation on the path?
Some people believe there is no need for reasoning or investigation on the path, that simply by having faith and receiving the blessing of a guru primordial wisdom will arise. [cite: 301]
213
What positive development has been observed regarding Dharma study?
In this light, I have been very happy to see the establishment of more shedras—academic institutes that teach the classical philosophical texts from India and Tibet. [cite: 302]
214
Why might some Westerners not value Dharma study and investigation?
Some Westerners similarly do not value Dharma study and investigation, perhaps because Buddhadharma is relatively new in the West. [cite: 303]
215
What tendency do people have without a comprehensive understanding of Buddhadharma?
Without a comprehensive understanding of the Buddhadharma, people tend to seek the easiest and shortest path to awakening, a path that does not require giving up their attachments. [cite: 304]
216
Does this attitude exist only among Westerners?
Such an attitude exists among Tibetans as well. [cite: 305]
217
What did Tsongkhapa say about people's reactions to explanations of how to attain the Buddha's qualities?
Tsongkhapa said that many people think that the Buddha's qualities are wonderful, but when a spiritual mentor explains through reasoning and scriptural citations how to attain them, they become discouraged and say, "Who can actually achieve such realizations?" [cite: 305, 306]
218
What did the Buddha explain in the Tathagatagarbha Sūtra about what each sentient being possesses?
In the Tathagatagarbha Sūtra, the Buddha explained that each sentient being possesses a permanent, stable, and enduring tathāgatagarbha that is a fully developed buddha body (kāya) replete with the thirty-two signs of a buddha. [cite: 307]
219
What questions arise if an already realized buddha existed within us?
Questions arise: If an already realized buddha existed within us, wouldn't we be ignorant buddhas? [cite: 308] If we were actual buddhas now, what would be the purpose of practicing the path? [cite: 309] If we were already buddhas and yet still needed to purify defilements, wouldn't a buddha have defilements? [cite: 310]
220
What contradiction would arise if we had a permanent, stable, and enduring essence?
If we had a permanent, stable, and enduring essence, wouldn't that contradict the teachings on selflessness and instead resemble the self or soul asserted by non-Buddhists? [cite: 311]
221
What doubts did Mahāmati express to the Buddha in the Descent into Lanka Sūtra regarding the taught tathāgatagarbha?
Mahāmati expressed these same doubts to the Buddha in the Descent into Lanka Sūtra: "The tathāgatagarbha taught [by the Buddha in some sūtras] is said to be clear light in nature, completely pure from the beginning, and to exist possessing the thirty-two signs in the bodies of all sentient beings." [cite: 312]
222
What was Mahāmati's concern about the description of tathāgatagarbha being wrapped in defilements yet permanent and stable?
If, like a precious gem wrapped in a dirty cloth, [the Buddha] expressed that [tathāgatagarbha] wrapped in and dirtied by the cloth of the aggregates, constituents, and sources; overwhelmed by the force of attachment, animosity, and ignorance; dirtied with the defilements of conceptualizations; and permanent, stable, and enduring—how is this propounded as tathāgatagarbha different from the non-Buddhists propounding a self? [cite: 313, 314, 315]
223
How do some Tibetan scholars interpret the teaching on a permanent, stable, and enduring buddha nature?
Some Tibetan scholars accept the teaching on a permanent, stable, and enduring buddha nature literally, saying it is a definitive teaching. [cite: 315]
224
How do Prāsangikas view this teaching, sharing Mahāmati's doubts?
Sharing the doubts expressed above by Mahāmati, Prāsangikas say this is an interpretable teaching. [cite: 316]
225
On what basis do Prāsangikas say this teaching is interpretable (by examining which three points)?
They say this, not on a whim, but by examining three points. [cite: 317]
226
What is the first point Prāsangikas examine: the Buddha's final intended meaning?
(1) What was the Buddha's final intended meaning when he made this statement? [cite: 318]
227
What was the Buddha's intended meaning when speaking of a permanent, stable, and enduring essence in each sentient being?
When speaking of a permanent, stable, and enduring essence in each sentient being, the Buddha's intended meaning was the emptiness of the mind, the naturally abiding buddha nature, which is permanent, stable, and enduring. [cite: 319]
228
Why is buddhahood possible according to this intended meaning?
Because the mind is empty of inherent existence and the defilements are adventitious, buddhahood is possible. [cite: 320]
229
What is the second point Prāsangikas examine: the Buddha's purpose for teaching this?
(2) What was the Buddha's purpose for teaching this? [cite: 321]
230
What was the Buddha's purpose for teaching a permanent, stable, enduring essence complete with the thirty-two signs?
The Buddha taught a permanent, stable, enduring essence complete with the thirty-two signs, in order to calm some people's fear of selflessness and to gradually lead non-Buddhists to the full realization of suchness. [cite: 321]
231
How do spiritually immature people feel about the idea of a permanent essence versus the emptiness of inherent existence?
At present, these people, who are spiritually immature, feel comfortable with the idea of a permanent essence. [cite: 322] The idea of the emptiness of inherent existence frightens them; they mistakenly think it means that nothing whatsoever exists. [cite: 323] They fear that by realizing emptiness, they will disappear and cease to exist. [cite: 324]
232
How did the Buddha accommodate these fears?
To calm this fear, the Buddha spoke in a way that corresponds with their current ideas. [cite: 325] Later, when they are more receptive, he will teach them the actual meaning. [cite: 326] This is similar to the way skillful parents simplify complex ideas to make them comprehensible to young children. [cite: 327]
233
What is the third point Prāsangikas examine: logical inconsistencies from taking the statement literally?
(3) What logical inconsistencies arise from taking this statement literally? [cite: 328]
234
What does accepting the teaching on a permanent, stable, and enduring buddha nature at face value contradict?
Accepting this teaching on a permanent, stable, and enduring buddha nature at face value contradicts the definitive meaning of emptiness and selflessness explained by the Buddha in the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras. [cite: 329]
235
What did the Buddha set forth in the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras that refutes this literal view?
In those sūtras, the Buddha set forth many reasonings that refute this view. [cite: 330]
236
What would be the consequence if this statement about a permanent essence were accepted literally regarding the Buddha's teachings and non-Buddhist teachings?
Furthermore, if this statement were accepted literally, the Buddha's teachings would be no different from those of non-Buddhists who assert a permanent self. [cite: 331]
237
What is it that exists in all sentient beings without distinction?
The emptiness of inherent existence—which is the ultimate reality and the natural purity of the mind—exists in all sentient beings without distinction. [cite: 332]
238
Based on this universal emptiness, what is said?
Based on this, it is said that a buddha is present. [cite: 333]
239
Does the ultimate reality of a buddha exist in sentient beings? Why or why not?
But the ultimate reality of a buddha does not exist in sentient beings. [cite: 334] While buddhas and sentient beings are the same in that the ultimate nature of their minds is emptiness, that ultimate reality is not the same because one is the ultimate reality of a buddha's mind—the nature dharmakāya—and the other is the ultimate reality of a defiled mind. [cite: 335]
240
If the nature dharmakāya existed in sentient beings, what else would also have to exist in them, and what would that imply?
If we said that the nature dharmakāya existed in sentient beings, we would have to also say that the wisdom dharmakāya, which is one nature with it, existed in sentient beings. [cite: 336, 337] That would mean that sentient beings were omniscient, which certainly is not the case! [cite: 338]
241
If the abandonment of all defilements existed in ordinary sentient beings, what would happen?
Similarly, if the abandonment of all defilements existed in ordinary sentient beings, there would be nothing to prevent them from directly perceiving the natural purity of their minds. [cite: 339] They would directly realize emptiness. [cite: 340] This, too, is not the case. [cite: 340]
242
What problem arises if one says the dharmakāya with two purities exists in sentient beings but is obscured?
Some people say the dharmakāya with the two purities—the natural purity and the purity of the abandonment of all defilements—exists in the mindstreams of sentient beings, but because sentient beings are obscured, they don't perceive it. [cite: 341] If that were the case, then whose mind is purified and who attains the freedom that is the purity of all defilements? [cite: 342]
243
If sentient beings already possess the dharmakāya, why would practicing the path be unnecessary?
If sentient beings already possess the dharmakāya, there is no need for them to practice the path and purify their minds, because from beginningless time their minds have been free of adventitious defilements. [cite: 343]
244
What does the assertion that a buddha complete with the thirty-two signs exists within all sentient beings echo?
The assertion that a buddha complete with the thirty-two signs exists within the continuums of all sentient beings echoes the theistic theory of an eternally pure, unchanging self. [cite: 344]
245
If the thirty-two signs were already present in us, what contradiction arises with practicing the path?
If the thirty-two signs were already present in us, it would be contradictory to say that we still need to practice the path to create the causes for them. [cite: 345]
246
If one says the thirty-two signs are present in an unmanifest form and need to be made manifest, what philosophical notion does this resemble and why is it problematic?
If someone says that they are already in us in an unmanifest form and they just need to be made manifest, that resembles the Samkhya notion of arising from self, because even though existing, this buddha would need to be produced again in order to be made manifest. [cite: 346] Nāgārjuna and his followers soundly refuted production from self. [cite: 347]
247
How did the Buddha respond to Mahāmati's doubts about the teaching of tathāgatagarbha?
Mahāmati, my teaching of the tathāgatagarbha is not similar to the propounding of a self by non-Buddhists. [cite: 347]
248
With what meaning did the tathāgatas indicate the tathāgatagarbha?
Mahāmati, the tathāgatas, arhats, the perfectly completed buddhas indicated the tathāgatagarbha with the meaning of the words emptiness, limit of complete purity, nirvāņa, unborn, signless, wishless, and so forth. [cite: 348]
249
For what purpose did they teach the tathāgatagarbha with these meanings?
[They do this] so that the immature might completely relinquish a state of fear regarding the selfless, [and to] teach the nonconceptual state, the sphere without appearance. [cite: 349]
250
What do we learn from the Buddha's skillful teaching approach?
Here we see that the Buddha skillfully taught different ideas to different people, according to what was necessary at the moment and beneficial in the long term to further them on the path. [cite: 351]
251
What must we do when studying the teachings?
We also learn that we must think deeply about the teachings, exploring them from various viewpoints and bring knowledge gained from reasoning and from reading other scriptures to discern their definitive meaning. [cite: 352]
252
What is the purpose of learning about buddha nature?
The purpose of learning about buddha nature is to understand that the mind is not intrinsically flawed and that, on the contrary, it can be perfected. [cite: 353]
253
What understanding about the mind does learning about buddha nature provide, beyond its transformability?
It is not just that the mind can be transformed; there is already part of the mind that allows it to be purified and perfected. [cite: 354, 355]
254
What does understanding this give us?
Understanding this gives us great confidence and energy to practice the methods to purify and perfect this mind of ours so that it will become the mind of a fully awakened buddha. [cite: 356]
255
What did Maitreya state in RGV 1.158 regarding the sūtras of the second turning?
[The sutras of the second turning of the Dharma wheel] state in numerous places that all knowable [phenomena] are in all ways empty like a cloud, a dream, or an illusion. [cite: 362]
256
What question did Maitreya pose regarding the Buddha's declaration of buddha nature in the third turning, after teaching emptiness in the second?
Why is it then, that in [the sutras of the third turning of the Dharma wheel] the Buddha, having said this, declared that the buddha nature is present within beings? [cite: 363]
257
How does Maitreya indicate he will explain buddha nature differently in the Sublime Continuum compared to the second turning sūtras?
Maitreya tells us that although the sūtras of the second turning characterize the buddha nature by giving the examples of an illusion and so forth to illustrate the emptiness of the mind, he will explain buddha nature slightly differently in the Sublime Continuum. [cite: 364] This is a clue implying that he will emphasize the clear light mind being the buddha nature. [cite: 365]
258
What doubt might this different emphasis cause in some people?
This may cause some people to doubt: "The Buddha taught emptiness extensively in the second turning, saying that was the buddha nature. Why in the third turning would he speak about buddha nature being the clear light mind that has beginninglessly been completely pure in sentient beings? Is there a contradiction between the second and third turnings?" [cite: 366]
259
Why did the Buddha speak of buddha nature being the clear light mind in the third turning, according to Maitreya?
Maitreya explains that the Buddha spoke of buddha nature being the clear light mind in order to help us sentient beings overcome five factors that hinder us from developing bodhicitta, realizing emptiness, and attaining buddhahood. [cite: 367]
260
What is the first hindering factor that awareness of buddha nature helps overcome, and how does it hinder us?
(1) Discouragement makes us believe that awakening cannot be attained. [cite: 368] Because we don't know that the buddha nature exists in us, cynicism and a lack of confidence prevent us from generating bodhicitta. [cite: 369] Even before beginning, we give up and don't make an effort. [cite: 370]
261
What is the second hindering factor, and how does it manifest?
(2) Having arrogant contempt for those we consider inferior comes from not knowing that the buddha nature exists in others. [cite: 371] With derision we judge and disparage others, abandon love and compassion, and abstain from engaging in the bodhisattva practices. [cite: 372]
262
What is the third hindering factor, and what do these distorted conceptions hold?
(3) Distorted conceptions incorrectly hold that adventitious defilements are truly existent, exist in the nature of the mind, and are impossible to eradicate. [cite: 373]
263
From what do these wrong views (third factor) arise, and what do they interfere with?
These wrong views superimpose true existence on things that are empty of true existence. [cite: 374] They arise from not knowing the existence of the buddha nature in all sentient beings and interfere with our cultivation of the wisdom correctly realizing reality. [cite: 375]
264
What is the fourth hindering factor, and what does this misconstrued deprecation repudiate?
(4) Denigrating the true nature is to deny the existence of buddha nature or to think the buddha nature has not been present beginninglessly. [cite: 376] This misconstrued deprecation repudiates the potential that exists within each sentient being and inhibits realizing the excellent qualities that are inseparable in nature from the buddha nature. [cite: 377]
265
What is the fifth hindering factor, and how does it affect our mind and actions?
(5) Self-centeredness makes us biased toward the self, quenching the equanimity that sees self and others as equally valuable. [cite: 378] Egocentrism obliterates the thought that buddha nature exists equally in ourselves and others. [cite: 379] Pre-occupied with our own concerns, we are unable to generate the love and compassion that regard ourselves and others as equal. [cite: 380] This, in turn, interferes with generating bodhicitta. [cite: 381]
266
How does understanding buddha nature counteract discouragement (the first fault)?
When we sentient beings hear about buddha nature, (1) joy, not discouragement, arises in our minds because we know duḥkha can be overcome. [cite: 382]
267
How does understanding buddha nature counteract contempt (the second fault)?
(2) in place of contempt arises respect for the Buddha and sentient beings who have this great potential. [cite: 383]
268
How does understanding buddha nature counteract distorted conceptions and denigration of the true nature (the third and fourth faults)?
(3-4) analytical wisdom that correctly views reality abolishes superimpositions and denigration of the actual nature, replacing it with liberating wisdom. [cite: 384]
269
How does understanding buddha nature counteract self-centeredness (the fifth fault)?
(5) great love for all sentient beings overcomes confining self-preoccupation by opening our hearts to others. [cite: 385]
270
In short, what does eliminating these five faults clear the way for?
In short, eliminating these faults clears the way to generating bodhicitta and engaging in the six perfections, especially meditative stability and wisdom, which are essential to overcome the two obscurations. [cite: 386]
271
How does Maitreya clarify the relationship between the description of buddha nature in the Sublime Continuum and the second turning?
In this way, Maitreya clarifies that the description of buddha nature in the Sublime Continuum does not contradict that of the second turning but speaks of it from a different perspective. [cite: 387]
272
What further purpose for teaching tathāgatagarbha in the third turning does Maitreya elucidate?
"He also elucidates the purpose for teaching the tathāgatagarbha in the third turning: it is to help sentient beings overcome the five faults and have enthusiasm and determination to practice the path and attain full awakening.
