Tenets, 25 February 1994, part 1

Four kinds. They are and they are called the four tenets. Starting from the lowest to the highest, the four are Vaibhāṣikas, Sautrantikas, Cittamātrins, and Madhyamakas, or alternatively, as we’ll call them those who assert external objects. And their Sanskrit equivalents are Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntika, Cittamātra, and Madhyamaka. Now in our last week’s tenet Thursday evening, we dis we discussed briefly the first tenet, the specific exponents of Vaibhāṣika, and the definition we came across of that school in the case of a person belonging to that school, described or defined as a proponent of a lower vehicle tenet who does not accept own knower, but accepts external things as truly existent.

So that was the definition of the specific exponent. And in a way, we can say a person who explains a tenet as a specific exponent is bound or can be explained as confined or within that definition. And then within the specific exponents, there are sub schools. And, of course, the specific exponent school do have ways of classifying their sub schools in different ways. For example, in one classification, there could be as many as 18 different sub schools.

But here, in accordance with the line we are following, we can say briefly that the subschools can be of three types. First one are called those of the Central Region, or Magadha, the Central Region. And this means the practitioners who belong to that tenet who lives in Bodh Gaya, the present day Bodh Gaya. So Central Region refers to the the site of Buddha’s enlightenment. And next is the or those of the in one way, they’re as well called the Western Region.

Or they can as well be called those around or nearby. And that means these the the second groups are those who are quite who were at that time close within the area of Bodh Gaya. And then third one in the original text are called the those of the Outlying Regions because in the past what is now India, there are also areas which were very densely populated by followers of Islam religion. So the specific exponent groups who happened to live in the regions where there were Islamic followers, they were called those of the Outlying Regions, and which, in the interpretive translation, were as well called the Kashmiri specific exponents, those belonging within the Kashmir region, where which also is Islamic region. Region.

And the school or this tenet is called the specific exponents. And why they received this name was because there was a teacher called Mahavibhasha. That was his name. And he had composed a text called an ocean of specific explanations.

An ocean of specific explanations, or explaining things in particular. And in this tenet, the practitioners and the philosophers, so they’ve and others, they followed that main text of reference because whatever was explained in that text was very much in their liking. And in brief, that’s how they’re they’re called by this name. Specific exponent followers are claimed to be middle way followers because they claim their explanations and viewpoints is free of the two extremes, the extreme of eternalism and extreme of nihilism. And and they therefore claim to be in the middle and accordingly middle way.

But then, of course, the next school higher up to them, the Sautrantikas, they also claim that in their viewpoint, they are the middle way followers, again, claiming to be not fallen into the two extremes. So in this way, it is a point to keep in mind that in their according to their own explanation, each of the four Buddhist schools claim to be the middle way path and middle way explainers. Explainers. Oh, well, then in the case of specific exponent, they will have to explain how they how they explain that they are not fallen into the extreme of eternalism or extreme of explaining things as permanent. Permanent.

Well, they explain in this way that that in their perspective, their viewpoint is not fallen into extreme of permanence because we can explain, say, with a with a with a thing in question and, say, a thing. Now when the thing becomes a result as produced by a cause, at that time, the cause has ceased. Therefore, the permanence or eternalism is not there. It’s so it it is not eternal, which means that specific exponent explained because when causes produce their result, at the time the results are produced, the cause is ceased. Therefore, there is it is things are not permanent.

Things are not eternal. And in that way, their understanding that things are not eternal in that way is their way of explaining that their explanation is free of extreme of eternalism. And because after the cause, there is the result, therefore, it is free of the extreme of nihilism. Now this means, let’s say, if after the cause, if there is no result, that means there is a kind of nihilistic explanation, nihilistic view about things. Now the very fact that with a product the very fact with a product that after its cause, the result are produced, meaning the results are produced from cause causes, that very that very fact explains the lack of nihilism or nothingness lack of nothingness in the nature of things.

So that’s the way to, what’s called, forsake the extreme of of nihilism. Nihilism.. And now we look at the next school higher up, the discourse discourse school’s explanation of the how it how it forsakes the two extremes. Discourse groups the discourse group tenets. Well, in their explanation, they all compounded things continuously exist.

Therefore, there is no extreme of nihilism. And this, in their explanation, means a compounded thing or alternative translation is the product. A product is something which has been coming in existence from yesterday till today and continues tomorrow. And the very continuity of its existence implies it is not a it’s not a what’s called terminating or annihilating thing. So the brief statement put forth by them is because compounded things continuously exist, therefore, the extreme of nihilism is forsaken.

And then at the same time, because compounded things disintegrates moment by moment, therefore, that very fact forsakes the extreme of eternalism. And this then, of course, implied it implies if the compounded things things do not disintegrate moment by moment, then it would imply a kind of eternal nature with them. But that’s not so. And that’s the very reason the discourse groups explains how that very fact that very fact forsakes the extreme of permanence extreme of permanence, extreme of eternalism. And now according to the mind only school, firstly, how firstly, how it explains way how it explains the forsaking of the two extremes before going that, firstly, is to be remembered that in mind only school, all phenomena or things are classified into three things, imputed phenomena, dependent phenomena, and fully established phenomena, which actually are what’s called defined in the tenets of Cittamātra.

Now now the mind only school explains mind only school explains imputed phenomena are not truly existent. Now the the very fact that they are not truly existent forsakes the extreme extreme of eternalism, extreme of permanence. If if the imputed phenomena are truly existent, then that would mean things the conventional things, which is another way to look at imputed phenomena. They are permanently there, eternally there. So it would mean that one is one is professing extreme of eternalism, extreme of permanence.

And now how mind only school forsakes extreme of nihilism is that the dependent phenomena which are truly existent in their viewpoint. Now the very fact that dependent phenomena are truly existent forsakes the extreme of nihilism. Now in the previous one, extreme of eternalism. If and it explains. If dependent phenomena are not truly existent, then it would mean that there is of nihilism, extreme of extreme of negation.

So it’s the same word in our like, obviously, in English, same. Extreme of termination, extreme of nothingness, extreme of nihilism, so it’s the same point. In this way then the mind only in this understanding explains how to forsake the two extremes. Now according according to the middle way school, the higher school, in their explanation, they say, because all phenomena exist nominally or exist in mere convention, mere label, label. Therefore, it forsakes the extreme of eternalism.

And then at the same time, because all phenomena do not truly exist, therefore, that fact forsakes the extreme of nihilism. So in this way, each of the four tenets explain in their own interpretation how they how their view is therefore middle way or ex free of the two extremes. And those details you can ask for review by going through the text Cutting Through Appearances. And now with all four Buddhist tenets, the explanation about their tenets come into being because, firstly, in all four, the practitioner needs to develop the thought wanting to definitely exit out of saṃsāra, out of the cycle.

And the practitioner, through that way, has to develop the thought to has to develop the thought to escape from saṃsāra. And then in the next phase of practice, the practitioner inquires, how should I escape? And that’s and when it comes to the point how, that’s where the four schools come into the method, the actual method how one can escape. As regarding the method how to escape, how to liberate from saṃsāra, the Buddha Śākyamūni has the Buddha Śākyamūni has explained that firstly, needs to very well understand about the basis, about the field, field of practice. So there are technique scripturally called the basis.

And then one needs to understand very well the actual part. And then through that way, one can come to the third part, which is actual attainment of the results, accomplishments. And in this way, as a means to or as means to escape, to liberate oneself from saṃsāra, there are these three, let’s call, ways of gradual process one can look into as explained. By by going through the first part, which is to understand well the basis, one can very well one can very well understand what are the faults and the defective things and the defective things one has to overcome in the course of practices, as well one can, through that way, understand what are the qualities or beneficial outcome one can attain by by doing the practices and so forth. And one can as well understand the dissatisfactory or faulty nature of saṃsāra.

So in brief to paraphrase, because it needs a paraphrase in brief to paraphrase, by looking into the basis, one would come to understand what is required for one’s practices and what faulty avenues one has to avoid and so forth. The five are called the the field of the appearing form, or field of visible form. And second, the field of the primary minds. Third the field of secondary minds, and fourth the field of the compounded things, and fifth the field of uncompounded things. And in the case of uncompounded things, it would include such permanent things.

So in brief, these are the five major fields inclusive to what is covered by the first part, the basis. And this is still speaking in the context of the first tenet, the specific exponent. Within the appearing form field, it there there comes under other avenues of study and so forth. And what are included included are are things things such such as as of of body, body and of the five senses organs and the objects of the five senses, such as different colors of form the eyes can the eye which are object of the eyes, and as well the size, the long and the shortness of the visible forms or things appearing to the eyes. And then the sounds heard by the ears, smells, object to the nose, and the taste to the tongue, and feeling a sensation of hot, hot, cold, and so forth to the body.

And these are what is covered within the appearing form field. By understanding about how these things are disintegrating moment by moment, how they are impermanent, how they are bound to be miserable, one then feels wanting to exit from saṃsāra. And in that way, the looking in or the or the observation into these topics can be can be in or can be beneficial beneficial to one’s path, to one’s mental development. Similarly, water, a room, trees, the things which we can obviously see, they also come under the first topic, the appearing forms. So it is really a vast field.

Then amongst the five topics of basis, the second is the field of primary mind. And here, the term primary mind, alternatively, is explainable as referring to everything relating to the first topic as being based primarily on the mind. For example for example, a being’s a a being’s mind can be any of the three types, a virtuous mind, non virtuous mind, and a neutral mind. And then in that’s the let’s call it the explanation. Accordance to the second topic that it is primary mind field, what it means is whatever form appears and what and as for whatever forms are existing there are are formed or are existing primarily because of mind.

And that means if it is form, a good visible thing, a good form, then it is a a good form because of having being formed or existing because of existing due to a virtuous mind. And if it is not a good mind, it is because of non virtuous mind. And in this way, like and and in this way, other aspects of visible things such as shortness and length of the appearing form, they are and appearing form are because they happen to be with those diverse aspects due to this mind on which those entities primarily depend on. So anyway, that’s the alternative explanation according to this the second topic, the primary mind field. The neutral mind would produce things which are of no effect are of no effect because it is without without any power.

For example, if it is a virtuous mind or if it is a non virtuous mind, then they are powerful, and therefore, they would produce things which would affect the person’s happiness or unhappiness. And that’s what happens with those two. But that’s that’s not the case with a neutral mind. And then mind in its in its nature can be of two kinds, two classifications. One is mental mind as well called mental consciousness, and second is the sensory mind or sense consciousnesses.

And the sense consciousnesses are five such as eye consciousness through which one sees forms, and then nose consciousness through which one smells things, and ear consciousness through which one hears, and tongue consciousness to taste, and body or physical consciousness which one can experience sensations. And then the second, non sensory consciousness, which is the mental consciousness, that’s the consciousness or mind which has to do functions apart from those five sense sense consciousnesses. But then there are some but then there are some groups or people or tenet explainers explainers who are of opinion that there is not any separate two minds to be divided into mental mind and sensory mind. They are one. And the analogy they give is a same resident, just one person as a resident in a five windowed house.

So it is the same person, but he sometimes appears from the front window, sometimes from the right window, sometimes from the left, sometimes from the back. And in the same way, in that example, those who explain in that way, they say the same mind sometimes functions through eyes, sometimes through nose and ears, and the rest of the sensory doors. And that’s how they explain, but that is not right. For example, that’s not so because when when we function through these doors, we function them separately. For example, when we look at things or, for example, when we hear sounds, each of these functions are separate.

Otherwise, it would imply if they were one, then it would imply one can do all five at the same time. But we can say that the all five functions separately, even though maybe same time, but separately. So that can be