Bodhisattvacaryavatara, 28 November 1988, part 2

The consequence of the Middle Way is that, in fact, all phenomena do not inherently exist. By coming to understand that all phenomena do not inherently exist, this acts as an antidote whereby we can abandon all, we can rid ourselves of all the afflictions and in this way eliminate all the afflictive emotions within our mind. By eliminating all the afflictive emotions, we cut off the continuum of suffering and can attain liberation and Buddhahood. So, you know, if we were to briefly, in a summation, then, you know, whoever the person might be, whether it’s our enemy, whether it’s our friend, our relative, our husband, our wife, upon their becoming angry at us, upon their inflicting some kind of harm at us, then we are simply just not we are simply to see that, in fact, these people are not under their own control. They’re under the control of various causes and conditions outside of themselves, that they have no freedom.

And in this way, understanding this, we do not become angry at the person themselves, understanding that they’re under control of something else other than themselves, and our mind will remain happy. We ourselves will not become angry. So these people are not they have no freedom. They’re under the control of other conditions and themselves. Now if in fact, you know, we were to if in fact they had a choice in the matter, if people had a choice of what states of mind arose in their own mind, then since nobody wants to have suffering, then suffering would simply not exist.

They would choose not to suffer. But since they don’t have this choice, they don’t have this control, and likewise, have they don’t have this control over their mind. And and when they bring harm to you or they become angry at you, they’re under the power of something else in which they have no choice. So some people due to though we do in fact we do not want to we do not want to suffer, have no choice to harm ourselves. Oftentimes, in fact, we do Because of carelessness, because of lack of conscientiousness, people, in fact, do bring harm to themselves without any choice.

If, for example, through carelessness, you might step on a thorn and hurt yourself. And, you know, simply by not being watchful, one hurts oneself. Also, because of some obsession, you know, wanting to, through attachment to a man or a woman, one might engage in actions which in fact deprive, you know, people would deprive themselves of food. I don’t know, maybe it’s a go on diets or something. Cause all kinds of harm themselves just to attain a particular object, that they would hurt themselves without either in carelessness or with lack of foresight into what the lack of understanding of what they were doing.

So, coming to understand the actions of others and that it’s not surprising that in fact they may bring us harm. Some people, they in fact cause harm to themselves. They, you know, through such a, you know, some people actually jump off cliffs, some people eating poison, some people eating unhealthy foods. These are this is they do this, they bring all this harm to themselves coming under the influence of afflictive emotions. And if people actually kill themselves, they commit suicide under the influence of their afflictive emotions.

And if people are so unfree that they actually kill themselves due to the force of other conditions, that is their afflictive emotions, then they should be the object of our compassion, not the object of our anger the sense that they have no complete choice and they have no choice. If if in fact they’re going to kill themselves, hurt themselves, then what to say that they’re going to hurt others, that they may even try to kill others? So people bring unimaginable sufferings to themselves, so it shouldn’t be surprising that they may bring suffering to others. Now nobody wants to suffer, so they have no choice in bringing all these sufferings to themselves. In fact, they’re under the afflictive emotions, even when it comes to their own welfare, what to say of how they react, relate with others.

And therefore, it is the afflictive emotion which is the enemy of of is their afflictive emotion which is both our enemy and their enemy. It is actually what’s bringing us everyone’s suffering, and this is what is to be destroyed. So if people are so enslaved that they’re actually they will go to the extreme of killing their most treasured self, then how can we hold it against them? How can we generate anger when they bring us they might bring us some harm? Since no one would want to no one who had the control would want to bring suffering to themselves.

In fact, they’re under the power, they have no freedom, have no choice in this matter. They’re completely under the influence of the afflictive emotions to the extent that they’re willing to kill themselves, to bring great sufferings to themselves. Therefore, understanding that beings have no freedom, in fact, they’re enslaved to their afflictive emotions, that rather than being objects of our anger, they should be the objects of our compassion. So, you know, seeing that people bring the people bring great harm to themselves, they bring they also bring harm to those who their closest companions. Understanding seeing this, that they have no freedom, that they’re completely enslaved to their afflictive emotions, and that by seeing the fact that they’re choicelessly they bring harm to themselves and their closest companions, then even if we can’t develop compassion for them, we at least, you know, at least the last thing we should do is become angry at them.

And then on the other hand, if we were to suppose the case of that of a childish a childish person, that is someone who had little understanding, if it was they were if it were their nature to cause other people harm. So, if someone a childish person who has lack of little understanding, has a nature of causing harms to others, then this is it would still not be proper to become angry at such a person because this would be similar to the case of begrudging fire to have the nature of burning. You know, if we’re burnt by fire, if we burn our finger in a fire, can’t begrudge the fire that it burns because that’s its very nature. We can’t hold it against That’s in its nature to be that way. And likewise, if there’s a childish person who hurts others, if we say, Well, that’s their nature.

We’re thinking that that’s their nature, well, how can we begrudge them their nature in the same way same way we don’t begrudge fire. It’s burning quality. On the other hand, if we were to criticize someone who is normally a reliable person, someone who is in general, a kind hearted person, if we were to become angry at them, when they temporarily harm us, they’re overcome by a particular afflictive emotion, and therefore they become angry and they harm us. If we were to criticize them for this, then this would be in the same way as begrudging space or sky for allowing smoke to arise in it. You know, that it is the nature of space or the sky that temporarily smoke, it allows space for something to arise within it.

It’s temporary, a condition may arise, such as smoke. If we were to say, oh, to the sky that you shouldn’t allow that smoke to arise, you would be grudging it, it’s very nature, allowing it that it temporarily creates the condition whereby smoke arise within it. Likewise, this person who is generally kind hearted and reliable, that they have the condition of their mind as such that from time to time they may there may be the space or the opportunity for an afflictive emotion to arise in their mind. And we can’t begrudge them in the same way. We can’t begrudge space for allowing smoke.

We can’t begrudge them for allowing temporarily afflictive emotions to arise since these are dependent upon conditions which they have no control over. So another case would be where and becoming angry at a person who hits us with a stick. That is the stick, the stick which actually brings us harm. But we don’t become angry at the stick since the stick is secondary. It’s the wielder of the stick that we become angry at.

And likewise, if we’re going to be angry at the wielder of the stick, that is the that we don’t see the stick as being the primary cause of our suffering, but only as a secondary. Well, the actual source of the suffering is that person’s own hatred, that person’s own anger. So that person also is only a secondary. The primary source of the cause of our suffering is that person’s hatred and anger. That’s where we should it’s only suitable to become angry at their their own hatred.

So in the, like, in the sense that we don’t become angry at the stick, we don’t become angry at his hand, why do we become angry at the person when in fact he’s governed he or she is being governed by another secondary factor, the ultimate cause being their own hatred. And that’s the ultimate cause for this harm and therefore not the ultimate, that is the cause of the primary cause of this harm and that that is the object of our anger. Also, in the face of being harmed by others, we should understand that this is simply harm being returned to us that we have committed previously. That before, you know, that we, through not having practiced patience, that we hurt others through actually physically hurting them, hurting them with our words, that these harmful actions that we created before are now simply returning to us now to bring us harm. That because of our lack of patience previously, we’re now experiencing suffering.

It’s one of the basic teachings of the Buddha. One of the basic teachings of the Buddha is the law of cause and effect. And essentially, it is simply that by doing wrong to others, then harm will come to ourselves in return. By by benefiting others, then benefit will come to ourselves in return. Whatever actions that we create, we will experience their future results.

If we harm others through harmful, for example, through harmful speech, through harmful physical actions, then this will, we will have to later, this same type of action will eventually be returned to us. If, on the other hand, we benefit others through, for example, saving life, through generosity, other types of skillful actions, then it’s definite that in the future, these same types of actions will return to us. This was what the one of the the most basic teachings of the Buddha. So we can understand through reasoning that there’s always a similarity between cause and effect. That if we plant a barley seed, then a barley sprout will arise.

If we plant a wheat seed, then a wheat sprout will arise. If we plant chili seeds, then we’re going to get something fruit which is very hot. If we make something is very if we make something from sweet ingredients, we’re going to have what we end up with will be very sweet. If we make something with sour ingredients, our product is going to be sour. There’s always going to be a similarity in type between the cause and the effect.

Yeah, Okay. Is that sound good? Do you have some questions? Can there then be anger without a person to feel the anger? Can there be anger can there be anger without a person?

And then be angry without do you wanna explain a little bit more? Well, Rinpoche was saying, don’t look at the stick. Look at the the person wielding the stick. Yeah. And then he’s saying, don’t look at the person wielding the stick because, really, they’re controlled by afflictive emotions.

Alright. If they’re not controlled by afflictive emotions, is there such thing as an afflictive emotion when they’re not under its control? Is that in your point before that? Yes. Then they’re not under the the last part?

They’re not under? They’re not under. When they’re not under the control of the afflicting emotion, does that emotion exist somewhere else? Does it exist somewhere else? Is it in existence?

So in situations, for example, where you have very have a very happy mind, you, for example, you’re you have meditated on compassion or you have some faith or something like that, and your your mind is very happy. Even at those times, there’s still afflictive emotion. You still have afflictive emotion, but it’s not manifested afflictive emotions. It’s the latencies or the predispositions for for afflictive emotions. The latencies.

It’s not manifesto. It’s just like a disposition. So you could be sitting there very peacefully and happily, and someone comes up to you and suddenly says, you’re a thief. And I’m like, what do you do you mean by that? What do you And all of a sudden this anger can arise very suddenly and it shows that’s a sign that it was latent.

It was you were disposed to that anger even though at that moment it wasn’t manifest. So, I was pointing out to him in particular that also afflicting emotions are not self powered. They’re not under control of themselves. Nothing so, whatever is a product is synonymous with being other powered, or that’s another word another way to translate it is dependent is a dependent phenomenon. That everything all products are dependent upon causes and conditions, and therefore even afflictive emotions.

When we meet certain conditions, certain situations, then that acts as a cause for afflictive emotions to arise. You know, when afflictive emotions do not choose to arise themselves, they’re not creating themselves, they also arise dependent upon something else. They also arise on causes and condition. So, all production depends upon causes and conditions. When certain causes and conditions are present, they aggregate, come together, then a specific effect will arise.

But, and we think that, we think that in order for cessation or destructions to occur that we have to add special types. Have to generally think that we have to create the various causes and conditions necessary to destroy something for something to cease or to undergo cessation. But the very factor of production is the condition necessary for cessation or destruction. That it’s in the nature of all things after that when they’re produced that they’re that that they will abide and that they will finally cease, that the very fact of being produced is the condition necessary for them to cease. That is to say, another way of looking at it is that birth is the cause of death.

So, all these various there are many synonymous terms such as product, conditioned phenomena, impermanent phenomena, transitory phenomena, these are all and though they’re different names, we’re talking about the same thing. They’re just synonymous terms for the same object. So having been born is the the condition for is the condition necessary for something’s construct that the mere factor of production acts as the condition necessary for that phenomena’s, without the necessity for any other conditions acts as the cause for that phenomenon’s final cessation. That no matter who the person might be, for example, in India, you know, the Buddha and the various sixteen arhats, all the great masters of Tibet, that simply by their very birth, no matter how long they may have lived, they were still their existence was transitory since they had as a nature of that which is produced to experience cessation and to become nonexistent. So it’s extremely important to meditate on impermanence.

You know, it’s extremely beneficial to our practice of Dharma. It is