Tenets, 11 August 1994, part 1

Well, now we are on the point where according to lines from the source text the description of the seven types of mind explained are direct perception, inference and subsequent perception are knowing mind. The other four are non knowing mind. So that was the context in the text. In meaning what it says is generally of course there are many different types of mind. Yet if we are from one perspective to classify different types of mind then we can say they can be classified into seven types of minds among which the first two minds types of mind direct perception and inference.

These two are valid knowledge or valid perception, valid knowledge. The other four, other five including subsequent perception are non valid mind. In our previous classes on Thursday evening we finished the first two types of the mind which are valid mind, direct valid perception and inferential valid perception. Now tonight we continue the remaining five parts of mind which are classified as non valid mind and the first amongst the five is subsequent perception. As regards what is valid knowledge, well according to the original Sanskrit etymological meaning of the word it has its specific meaning.

Firstly the word in Sanskrit is called Pramāṇa, valid knowledge, where the pra part means first and mana part means know or perceive and together it means it is is a type of mind which perceives or knows for the first time and therefore it is described this definition of valid knowledge. Let’s take an example, the flower at the front. The first time the mind perceives flower, the first time mind knows flower, the first time mind identifies the flower they all can be called valid perception, valid knowledge where the flower, the object is perceived for the first time. And then next time after having already perceived it once in the past, next time if one perceives or knows or identifies the object again then that is re knowledge or knowing whatever was known already and that becomes non valid perception, it becomes a subsequent perception, a perception subsequent to what already was perceived earlier. In this way we then have the two types with regards to the same object.

First is the valid perception perception or valid knowledge when it is perceived for the first time. The second type is the subsequent perception where the perception or the knowledge of the object is a kind where it is a knowledge of something already known in the past. Perceiving or knowing the object second time does not become valid knowledge. Valid knowledge is only when something is unmistakenly known or perceived for the first time. With regards to the second time knowledge, it is obviously knowledge of something which one has already known in the past.

Not only the second time perceiving of the object even the third, fourth, fifth, sixth and so forth all the subsequent perception of the same object they all uniformly becomes non valid mind. They are subsequent perception because of the same reasoning that they are perception of something already perceived in the past. The the first three are the types of mind which realizes the term meaning which understands its object whereas the other remaining four types of mind are mind types of mind which do not understand or know their objects. Here when the term understand or know is used it has its specific meaning because it means to know or understand the facts about the object. For example, if the flower is the object of perception then the valid valid mind and subsequent perception which understands the object would mean that they understand that they are definite that they ascertain about the facts about the object, in this case flower, that it is quite certain that this is the fact about the object being perceived.

So that is a meaning of understand or know, and opposite of that is not knowing, not understanding, such as in the case of the remaining four types of not knowing mind. In their case, they are not able to ascertain or understand the actual fact about the object they perceive. Out of having ascertained the object well comes the capability to recollect the object afterwards. For example, if yesterday something which one has seen or perceived was with full force of ascertainment or which one has perceived quite definitively then one is able to recall what one has seen yesterday, today. For example, if yesterday one saw a flower quite nice and at the time of perceiving it if one has a strong definitiveness, the ascertainment about the flower being perceived then one is able to recall that today as well one is without forgetfulness able to recall it tomorrow, day after tomorrow and so forth.

In this way we can perhaps say that good recollection capability is an outcome in the first place when one perceives or has ascertainment or understanding of the object that it is done in the full force that ascertaining of the object being perceived is done well. For example, when one is trying to understand emptiness, if one ascertains emptiness its meaning quite well then that brings about in one’s mind the valid knowledge perceiving or understanding emptiness. Subsequent moment of that understanding does not become valid knowledge but they can be subsequent perception and if one as a practitioner consistently does the if one as a practitioner consistently puts the effort in maintaining the continuity of that subsequent perception then eventually through having maintained the continuity of that subsequent perception understanding emptiness there will come a time one would actually attain the wisdom directly realizing emptiness. Sorry to interrupt the laughter. Therefore, if one maintains well in one’s practice the continuity of the subsequent perception understanding emptiness then one would be able to directly realize emptiness.

Out of that direct realization of emptiness will come the capability to remove the ignorance and all other impure thoughts produced by ignorance gradually gradually and one can through that way have improvement of mind becoming purer and purer, free of impure thoughts and eventually one would even attain liberation. We achieve are liberation or higher up state of Buddhahood, we not only we not only need the practice of maintaining the subsequent perception understanding emptiness but in the first place we need to have the valid knowledge directly perceiving emptiness or the term meaning a valid knowledge directly understanding emptiness because if we look backward in the process how it happens the whole thing in the process happened this way. Firstly, one through analysis on emptiness actualizes the valid knowledge understanding emptiness and that valid knowledge understanding emptiness produces the inference, inferential valid knowledge understanding emptiness and out of that comes the subsequent perception understanding emptiness and if continuity of that subsequent perception is maintained well then that gradually would bring about direct realization of emptiness out of which comes removing of ignorance impure thoughts and attaining liberation and so forth. In that way we can conclusively summary in essence can say to attain liberation and omniscient state free of all impure thoughts and complete with all aspects and qualities of mind there is no it is indispensable that one must at any rate have those valid knowledge understanding emptiness.

In this way, those types of minds meaning the valid knowledge understanding emptiness those types of mind are extremely noble mind, extremely good types of mind because they really are the most helpful state of mind as a practitioner when one actualizes through which all benefits and all good outcome can happen as so to repeat, then we can say, yes. These are extremely good types of mind. The other remaining four types of mind are the types of mind which are not good, of mind which are detrimental to our well-being of mind, the types of mind which are bad. In this way we can say there are are two types of mind our state of mind can be. One which are good type and one which are bad types.

Then the remaining four types of mind which are non beneficial mind which are detrimental mind, bad types of bad type of mind, they least start with the wrong perception. Now this perhaps will need a reminding that in the list of the seven types of mind we finished three already, the latest finished was the subsequent perception now we are on the fourth one which is wrong perception as regards wrong perception what it is well wrong perception perception is not only a perception which does not know or perceive the object, instead it is completely opposite perception of the object, completely distorted. The exact word is completely opposite perception of the object. With regards to the wrong perception, the opposite to go describing about it firstly the opposite of it would be correct perception, valid perception, such as the realization of emptiness, understanding of emptiness and so forth. Now with regards to the wrong perception it is not only not understanding the object not perceiving object it is complete opposite perception or understanding of the object.

Now what are the examples of wrong perception? Well, the examples of wrong perception is such as such as the perception thinking that the person exists truly with identity, with ego, whereas in actual case there is no person existing, there is no self of a person. There is no identity of a person existing truly. Now the latter part here was because in explaining the wrong perception the teaching almost went with break faith with the context, broken, break as if as we were explaining in the context of the Prāsaṇgika whereas here it is Vaibhāṣika so we should retreat back and talk in the context of Vaibhāṣika. So that’s where the latter part was.

Now in accordance with the Vaibhāṣika the wrong perception would be perception mistakenly thinking that the self of a person is truly there because in Vaibhāṣika theory there’s no self of a person existing in its substance or substantially existing by its own self. Anyway, so whatever perception which is opposite to that is a wrong perception and if one has that wrong perception then that would bring about all other impure thoughts such as attachment, hatred, jealousy so forth which in turn would hinder one from attaining any realizations and excellent qualities of mind and in doing so would hinder one from attaining liberation and state of enlightenment and so forth. In their place, by having such wrong perception and producing all of the impure thoughts, one would instead engage continuously in ignorance based actions and through that would would continuously be our reborn in saṃsāra experiencing continuous sufferings. Similarly, our aggregates, our body is unclean, but to perceive it as clean is wrong perception. Likewise, aggregate or body is impermanent.

To perceive it as permanent is wrong perception. Now in the same way, there’s a whole list of so many. For example, there are four truths or what is called four truths of the aryas, four noble truths. And each of the four truths in turn has four divisions or four features, four attributes about it. Therefore, there are 16 attributes of the four truths.

The understanding correctly about the 16 aspects or attributes of four truths are valid perception and the perception or understanding which oppositely understands the 16 are wrong perception. For example, with regards to the true suffering, it has the four features as impermanent, suffering without self, and emptiness. And in contrary to that, if one perceives the true suffering as happiness, true suffering as permanent, suffering as having a self, true suffering as not emptiness, then they are all wrong perceptions. So together we can say yes, there are so many so many countless types of wrong perception a person can have. To start with it is important that one identifies what are good types of mind and one identifies what are bad types of mind.

Having identified then the next step to take is to put effort towards removing the bad types of mind and put effort towards improving and acquiring the good types of mind. The next type of mind which does not understand its object is the is doubt. And doubt, by its very nature does not understand its object properly. For example, doubt can have or doubt doubt can appear in the aspects such as when emptiness is being explained. Doubt would doubt or the doubt would doubt whether there is emptiness or not.

When impermanence is being explained, doubt would doubt whether there is impermanence or not. And when the nature of suffering when the previous and next rebirth are being explained as existent, meaning the theory of rebirth is being explained, doubt would doubt whether whether it is so or not. So it is in a state of lingering, not being ascertained of its object. In that way, it does not understand well its object. For example, when it is being explained that saṃsāra or impure thoughts and their result in sufferings can be removed, as consequence, one can attain liberation.

When such is being explained, if one has doubt, then one would still one would still not accept that explanation and be doubting whether it is really true that saṃsāra can be removed and liberation can be attained. So one would continuously remain in that state of not believing and if that happens it is quite certain as long as there is that doubt the person would not make any progress to actually attaining liberation. The great teacher Vasubandhu says, not wishing to go, taking the wrong path or being doubtful, these are the causes not making one progress ahead towards liberation. The meaning of that advice is one may not make up to attaining liberation in one way if one has to start with if one does not have the wish to go to liberation at all, caused by not knowing or understanding things wrongly and therefore not having the wish to go ahead. So that would be one cause or it could be by taking wrong path or as it would be by taking wrong path to describe what is wrong path we first describe what is correct path.

The correct path towards liberation is the realization of selflessness and if one by not knowing or understanding wrongly the realization of selflessness as the correct path to liberation if one takes any other training or method of the mind apart from that, then it is the wrong wrong path. It is like wrong path which would not lead one at all to liberation. Or it could happen in the third possible way which is being doubtful even if one is shown the correct path towards liberation of the mind, if one keeps still doubting whether that is true or not and in that indecisive state of doubt if one does not take it up then that would again another way would not make one attain liberation. So there are these three major hindrances described or explained for a person’s attaining of liberation. Either one does not have the wish or one takes a wrong path or one is with doubt.

America, then one would never reach there. Or the second way is, even if one does have the wish to go to America but if one takes the wrong path and ends up in Switzerland, then one would not be able to reach America at all. Or the third is to be doubtful, always thinking, is it true or is it a lie that there is a place called America, and if one keeps on thinking that way, again, one would never arrive in America. I think And and due to such hindrances by doubt, the great teacher Atisha of tenth century eleventh century says, all doubt should be removed. And the advice on this point about doubt that all doubt should be removed comes from his one of the one of many inspiring writings called the Jewel Garland. Now with regards to the types of doubt, there are three types of doubt.

The first type of doubt being doubt leaning towards fact. How that type of doubt can be, for example, let’s say with the topic of impermanence impermanence of sound. With the the topic impermanence of sound. Now firstly, if there is a doubt, then the doubt would doubt would doubt whether sound is permanent or impermanent. If the doubt is leaning more towards thinking, is the sound permanent or impermanent?

Perhaps it may be perhaps it’s probably probably it is impermanent. If one thinks that way, it is a doubt leaning towards fact. And then the second type of doubt is with regards to the same example, if the doubt thinks, is the sound permanent or impermanent? Probably it is permanent. If it thinks that way, then it is a doubt not leaning, not leaning or not pertaining, not leaning towards the fact because sound is impermanent and the doubt is more towards its permanence.

And the third is the balance of the doubt not leaning to either permanent or impermanent, where doubt is simply thinking whether the sound is permanent or impermanent and not siding to either side. So it is called a balanced doubt. So doubt has not understood its object. Now the next types of mind is assumption. And assumption is defined as a mind which is deceptive and clinging towards its object.

Now what this definition means is assumption by its nature is clinging clinging attached clinging. Clinging is the word clinging towards its object. But because it does not perceive its object correctly, so it is deceptive. And that’s why it has in the definition the term deceptive. And briefly, that’s how it is assumption.