Entering the Middle Way, 16 May 1991, part 2

So, it’s very necessary that we identify well these two objects of negation. Unless we are able to identify these two objects of negation we’re never going to be able to negate them to bring about their cessation. For example, if there was a thief in the room and we wanted to catch this thief, in order to actually catch the thief we have to be able to identify who in fact is the thief. But if, or we’re never going to be able to catch them, but even more so, if we just have only a rough impression, we say, Oh, she was wearing white clothes. Well, there might be many people that have been wearing white clothes and it doesn’t help us enough to be able to really catch the thief.

We have to know in detail what the thief is wearing. Then in terms of that proper identification we can catch the person we’re looking for. So if we identify well the thief, then there’s no problem. We think this will be of great benefit. So it’s extremely useful to identify well the object negation.

If we identify the object negation in terms of the object negated by reasoning, then we will be able to negate it and thereby we will be able to realize emptiness. But if we do not identify it then we will go about our understanding, our approach to emptiness in a very haphazard way and there could arise the faults of either nihilism or eternalism. So we are going to follow the view of emptiness in coming to our under follow the view of the Middle Way School in coming to our understanding of emptiness. And within the Middle Way School there are two schools. There is the Autonomy Middle Way School and the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school.

And each of these have a different presentation of the object of negation. And therefore, for us to be able to finally realize emptiness, it’s going to be necessary we be able to identify the differences in their presentation and the object of negation. What we are seeking to realize is the emptiness as set forth by the masters such as Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti, that their view of emptiness being presented is the most subtle. It is the highest view, the deepest view. But in order to recognize the object of negation as presented in their view it’s necessary that we be able to ascertain the object negation as presented by the lower school, that is to say the Autonomy Middle Way School.

Without understanding the object of negation, recognizing, identifying the object of negation as set forth by the Autonomy Middle Way School, we are not going to be able to identify a more subtle presentation of the object negation as set forth by the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school. So understanding the lower school is a method for understanding the view of the higher school. So, between these two schools there is a degree of difference in subtlety of the view and therefore this entails a degree in difference in subtlety of the object presentation of the object of negation. There is, comparatively, the object of negation as presented by the Autonomy School is coarser when compared to the object of negation as set forth by the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school. So we are talking about the object of negation which is negated by means of reasoning.

Therefore, the object of negation as set forth by the autonomy middle way school is easier to realize. That set forth by the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school is more difficult to realize. So I’m going to the what is the object of negation according to the Autonomy Middle Way School? So I just I give you the words and then we can work it out. That which is that which is objectively established by means of its uncommon mode of subsistence and is not merely imputed by conception.

That which is objectively established by means of its uncommon mode of subsistence and and is not merely imputed by conception. It’s the object of negation according to the Autonomy Middle Way School. That which is objectively established by means of its own uncommon mode of subsistence and is not merely imputed by conception. So what does this mean? If we take it by way of example of the flower.

First, they are saying that the flower does not exist merely by being designated, does not exist by means of merely being designated by terms. That is, it does not exist merely by means of being given a name, but in fact exists objectively from its it is established objectively from its own side that by means of its own mode of subsistence. It has its own mode of subsistence. It exists from its own side without and it does not exist by simply by merely being designated by a name. That’s what they mean by true existence.

Object of negation. So we have to examine to see see is the flower merely be is the flower established not merely by being given the name, being imputed by term, but does it exist in fact objectively from its own side by way of its own mode of subsistence? Does it or does it not? When we make this examination, we will come to understand that in fact the flower does not The way the flower exists is not by means of its own uncommon mode of subsistence. It doesn’t have its own uncommon mode of subsistence.

Why? Because it grows from causes and conditions. So if we reflect upon this again and again and again and we see that the flower cannot exist by way of its own uncommon mode of subsistence because, why, because it exists dependent upon causes and conditions, for example seed, water, etcetera. Therefore, when this dawns on the mind that the flower does not exist by means or by way of having its own uncommon mode of subsistence. When that appears to the mind, then one has understood emptiness.

So in order to understand emptiness we’ve been talking today about the object negation, and it’s very important that you reflect well upon what the object negation is. If you understand the object negation is, then you will realize emptiness very easily. So now you have one week to think about the object So we’ll stop there, but if you have some questions. When we say the uncommon mode of existing by way of its uncommon mode of subsistence, we mean that does not depend upon causes and conditions. It doesn’t depend upon anything other than itself that exists completely from its own side independent of all other factors.

So common mode of subsistence would be depending on itself. Tumtumawa. Tumtumawa, rang gi ngo bo. It would be depending upon itself? Yeah.

Arising from it. I mean What what’s if if that’s the uncommon mode of subsistence, what’s the common mode of subsistence? So, it’s common mode of subsistence is that it exists from its own side. Its uncommon mode of subsistence is that its existence does not depend upon anything else. What does that mean?

You mean the various would like to know the various divisions? Anything else about that? In terms of conventionalities, there’s things, there’s outer phenomena, inner phenomena, products, non products. There are many varieties of conventionalities. And with respect to them, can talk about the emptiness in terms of each of them.

We can talk about the emptiness of the table, emptiness of the flower. So there’s all these possibilities for the, to which, in terms of which emptiness can be spoken of. But the actual way of realizing the emptiness is the same for all of them. It’s just like, you know, we can put honey in various types of pots. When we put the honey in clay pot, it is the honey of the clay pot.

When it’s in a golden pot, the honey of the golden pot. When it’s in a silver pot, the honey of the silver pot. The, the honey remains the same, but it is referred to in different ways according to the container which is holding it. So what you say is partially true in the sense that it is difficult to realize emptiness, but it is also difficult for to gain continuity in your realization of emptiness such that it increases higher and higher. It’s like when you first light a small fire, if there’s wind, then even though you lit a fire, it can be easily lost, it can easily be blown out.

So though it is difficult to first get that first realization of emptiness, it still is difficult to maintain and increase that realization of emptiness. The main method for gaining the continuity of the realization is through meditation, it’s cultivation in meditation. Having initially realized it, we have to gain the ability to abide within that realization for longer periods of time. Today, our meditation on emptiness, we will be able to, tomorrow, be able to abide in our realization of emptiness for a longer period of time. And then this ability to remain in the realization emptiness will increase by maintaining the continuity of our meditation on emptiness and the power, the forcefulness of our realization will increase.

So presently, prior to having gained realization of emptiness, it’s necessary that we reflect, read various, that we listen, that read various books, reflect upon the meaning, and then meditate. So one is necessary to increase its potency so it does not degenerate, moreover it’s necessary to increase without increasing the forcefulness, the power of our realization of emptiness, it will not be able to eliminate the conception of true existence which is the enemy which we’re seeking to be rid of. So it has to increase in its potency, its power, in order to eliminate the conception of true existence. So in the case of a battle, it’s the force with the most power will prevail. And in this case there is a struggle between the wisdom which realizes emptiness and the conception of true existence.

And so, if our wisdom realizing emptiness is not stronger than the conception of true existence, then it will degenerate, it will be lost, and it will not be able to eliminate our conception of true existence. We have to develop the power of our wisdom realizing emptiness in order to overcome and finally eliminate our conception of true existence. If you generate patience once, does that mean you’ll never get angry again? If patient once, will you ever get angry again? If one realizes, if one generates patience?

Yeah? If one develops patience? Student: No. It’s just a development. Student: One develops the realization of emptiness, understanding.

So the question is, if you develop, if you generate tolerance once, will you ever get angry again? Have you generated tolerance once? If it’s warm in the room once, does that mean it will never get cold in that room? Generated one skillful action? Have you ever generated one unskillful action?

So they’re not parallel, they’re different. Generation and they’re not symmetrical. Generation and realization. They’re not symmetrical. They Okay, we can say to generate the wisdom of emptiness, generate the wisdom realizing emptiness.

Generate the wisdom realizing