Entering the Middle Way, 29 August 1991, part 2

And then uncommon assertion of the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school is that the conception of true existence is an afflictive obstruction, an afflictive conception of true existence is an afflictive obstruction, sometimes translated as obstruction to liberation. All of the lower schools, the lower tenets assert that the conception of true existence is a knowledge obstruction sometimes translated as obstruction to omniscience. It is a knowledge obstruction. For example, as to whether the pot, that the conception which holds that the pot truly exists is for the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school merely an afflictive obstruction whereas for the lower tenets beneath them, it is a knowledge obstruction. So what is the reasoning behind this unique assertion of the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school in saying that the conception of conceiving of the self of phenomena is not a knowledge obstruction but is merely an afflictive obstruction.

That’s because as was just previously mentioned, that for them the conception of the true existence of persons and the conception of the true existence of phenomena are merely different from the point of view of taking different bases on the basis of a particular base. There is no difference in their degree of subtlety, that they’re exactly the same except with respect to they each take a particular different base. So the afflictive obstructions are the main object of abandonment of the lower tenet systems. That is to say that they are the obstructions to a liberation from existence, the afflictive obstructions. So if we were to ask, well if the conception of true existence is an afflictive obstruction for the consequence of middle way school, then isn’t there any knowledge obstruction?

The knowledge obstruction is that obstruction which prevents the direct simultaneous realization of all phenomena in the universe. That is just as in the way that if something were in the palm of our hand, we could see it directly. Likewise, the obstruction, that which obstructs us from the direct realization of all phenomena in the universe is what is meant by the knowledge obstruction or sometimes translated as obstruction to omniscience. Knowledge obstruction? It is the latency laid down by the conception of true existence.

The latency, the predisposition. What we mean by this predisposition and latency to true existence? By way of analogy, if we were to, if we had a cup and we poured whiskey in the cup and then we threw out the whiskey. Even though there was no whiskey in the cup, it would still have a smell of whiskey. And likewise, though we can remove the conception of true existence from our minds, it remains a stain, a smell of the conception of true existence.

And this stain acts as the obstruction to the knowledge of all phenomena. How are we to remove this latency or predisposition? It is by the mutually assisting, assistance of the method and wisdom of the wisdom realizing emptiness and the awakening heart. Through these mutually assisting method and wisdom then we can eliminate the stain of the conception of true existence. We thereby achieve Buddhahood because by this means we are able eliminate all our various faults and bring to consummation all excellent qualities.

By the removal of the stain, then there are there remain no obstruction to the direct realization of all phenomena. A Buddha directly realizes all phenomena. So this is another attribute of the consequence of middle way school in that the conception of true existence is an afflictive obstruction. Then the next difficult point is that of the refutation of self knower. Roughly all of the lower tenet systems assert the existence of a self knower.

They assert it to be a valid cognition. For it to exist it must naturally exist. But the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school because they say nothing naturally exists, then therefore there is no self knower. So with respect to seeing the flower, there are two factors involved. First, there is the eye consciousness which sees the flower.

That is seeing the flower, it realizes the flower, it understands the flower. But there is a second factor which is asserted which is a self knower. There is the eye consciousness which sees the object being one factor and then there is another consciousness which understands the eye consciousness. There is the knower of the flower and then there is the knower of the eye consciousness realizing the flower. There are two factors.

So there is the factor of the knower of the flower. That is to say the unconscious which knows the flower. But this consciousness does not know itself. It knows the flower but it does not know itself. Therefore it is called an other knower.

But additionally, there is a factor which knows the knower of the flower. That is, it knows the consciousness which knows the flower. And this is what we mean by self knower. But the consequence of middle way schools says it’s not necessary to have these two factors. That the knower of the flower, this eye consciousness which knows the flower, it directly knows the flower and it indirectly knows itself.

Therefore, it’s not necessary for there to be two factors. One factor is all that’s necessary. One factor, the eye consciousness knows the object or the flower directly and knows itself indirectly. Therefore there is no self knower because no phenomena naturally exist, there is no self knower. The next difficult point is the non-existence of autonomous signs.

In Autonomy Middle Way School and down through the lower tenets system, If it is a correct reason, it necessarily must be an autonomous sign. There are two types of valid cognitions. There is direct valid cognition and inferential valid cognition. An inferential valid cognition is generated in dependence upon a reason. We say this is this, this is this and we come to understand a particular phenomena in dependence upon reasoning.

This reason is a sign. This sign in the lower tenet system is an autonomous sign. It is naturally existent. It is by means of this that cognitions are generated. Give an example.

I’m talking to someone and they become red in the face as I talk to them. Then I say, Oh, they must be angry at me. And we come to understand that this person is angry and this understanding is an inferential cognition. We’re inferring it and it depends upon a reason. What is the reason?

It’s because of the red face. The red face is a sign that this person is becoming angry and dependence upon that sign I come to infer and I gain an understanding. So how did we come to understand that this person was angry? in dependence upon a sign. And in dependence upon that sign, that is the red face, we develop a valid cognition with respect to that person being angry.

So the tenet systems from Autonomy Middle Way down hold that in dependence upon that a valid cognition is generated in dependence upon a naturally existing object. This naturally existing object serves as a naturally existing sign for the generation of naturally existent inferential valid cognizers. Because the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school asserts that no phenomena whatsoever are naturally existent, therefore there are no naturally existent signs. The tenets of the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school are in keeping with the ways of the world. And because the peoples of the world, they hold that there are inner phenomena and outer phenomena. Likewise, this is also asserted by the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school.

Because this is commonly held in the world that there are internal and external phenomena, this is the view of the consequential middle way school accords with this. Say that there is an inner mind and there are external phenomena. Because there are external phenomena, there is an inner mind. Because there is an inner mind there must be external phenomena. That these two are mutually reliant upon one another.

That the external and internal are mutually reliant upon one another. Because there is an inner mind, there must be external phenomena. So it would be extremely difficult to go into detail on these eight difficult points and the Prāsaṇgika Madhyamaka school. We’ve just gone over them very roughly just to implant some kind of latencies with respect to them. So we’ve implanted the latency of the predispositions whereby we will be able to in the future understand this uncommon view of the consequence of middle way school.

It’s because we have listened to this view with our hearing and we have heard it, it has been implanted in our mind, a latency has been implanted and in the future it will be very much like pouring water on a seed and a flower blossoming that we will come to realize and understand what we have heard. So in terms of with our ear we hear and through hearing with our ear and contemplating with our mind, we implant latency. In listening to types of things, healthy types of things and contemplating those, we implant healthy latencies within our mind. On the other hand, by listening to negative things and contemplating those negative things we listen to, we implant latencies within our So in the process of listening, contemplating and meditating on that which is positive, we are going to implant positive latencies within our mind. If we cease to listen to that which is negative and don’t think about it, then we’re going to cease implanting negative latencies in our mind.

Proceeding in this way our positive latencies are going to increase, our negative latencies will decrease. So there’s some really good advice which is given by the glorious Atisha is that when within a crowd, watch your speech. When you’re by yourself, watch your mind. So, you know, when we’re with a group of people and if we begin to speak haphazardly, there’s then a chance that we can harm others, that we can cause others to become angry and thereby we simply are creating negativity for ourselves. Therefore, when we’re with a group of people, we ensure that what we say is beneficial.

And then when we are alone, for example within a room, we should examine the state of our mind, what it is that we’re thinking about. When we’re alone, we should examine the state of our mind. If our mind is in a skillful state, if it’s positive, then we should rejoice in that fact and this will even increase the skillful actions that we are creating. On the other hand, if our mind is unskillful, then we should immediately cease that unskillful state because if we don’t examine our mind we’re sitting in our room, there’s all types of thoughts, various types of thoughts arise in our mind. And if they’re negative, it’s not just that they have no consequence but fact they are planting negative latencies within our mind as they run through our mind.

And therefore they will create the latencies for future unhappinesses. But on the other hand, if we cease them and start to generate positive states, then we are creating the cause of future happinesses. So this is what is meant by a meditator. Someone who examines their mind, ceases negative states and promotes positive states. To be a meditator one doesn’t have to sit bolt upright.

This is the presentation of consequence of Middle Way school. You have some questions? Recognizing? So when they recognize the reincarnation, what are they recognizing? So they are recognizing the continuity of the type, that this is the continuity of a type having taken rebirth, that this person is the taker of the rebirth in the same continuity as the person of a previous life.

There is a continuum of type. So the body can be thought of as analogous to clothing. Yesterday you put on a particular clothing, say white clothing, and then you took it off and you put on black clothing. But you had different clothing, but there was a continuum of a similar type of person from the person who wore white clothing to the person who wore black clothing. You throw away your old clothes and then you put on new clothes.

But there has been the connection between that person who wore the old clothes and the new clothes is that there was a continuity of similar type between the old wearer of clothes and new wearer of clothes. And likewise with respect to the taker of rebirth, the body becomes exhausted, it is thrown off and then the being type of that being continues on and takes a new body in rebirth and just as in throwing away old clothes and putting on new clothes. Some unchanging factors? So, there’s no unchanging factor going from life to life. Just as in the case there’s no unchanging factor who wore the old clothes and then put on the new clothes.

That person is a different person than that wore the old clothes, the person who put on the new clothes. And likewise, the person is impermanent, they’re constantly changing, from the previous life to the present life. There’s no unchanging factor in their continuum. Impermanent, that is to say momentarily arising and disintegrating. I was asking what the etymology of the word ultimate truth.

It has three syllables in Tibetan. Means the object which is the object of the superior meditative equipoise. The object which is the object of the superior equipoise is dam. Dam, dam means supreme and here it means the final mode of abidance, the final mode of abidance that is the concordance between the way the And so, it is the final mode of abidance or the ultimate mode of abidance, supreme. And then dharma means that there is no contradiction between the mode of abidance and the mode of appearance.

That it is incontrovertible or there is no conflict between the mode of abidance and mode of appearance. That’s the etymology of the word ultimate truth.