Tuesday 30 November 2021

Ideal Solitude

by Ayya Khema

In the Sutta Nipata we find a discourse by the Buddha entitled "The Rhinoceros Horn" in which he compares the one horn of the rhinoceros with the sage's solitude. The Buddha praises being alone and the refrain to every stanza of the sutta is: "One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn." (K.R. Norman transl. P.T.S.)

There are two kinds of solitude, that of the mind (citta-viveka) and that of the body (kaya-viveka). Everyone is familiar with the solitude of the body. We go away and sit by ourselves in a room or cave or tell the people we are living with, that we want to be left alone. People usually like that sort of solitude for short periods. If this aloneness is maintained, it is often due to people not being able to get along with others or being afraid of them because there isn't enough love in their own hearts. Often there may be a feeling of loneliness, which is detrimental to solitude. Loneliness is a negative state of mind in which one feels bereft of companionship.

When one lives in a family or community, it is sometimes difficult to find physical solitude, it's not even very practical. But physical solitude is not the only kind of aloneness there is. Mental solitude is an important factor for practice. Unless one is able to arouse mental solitude in oneself, one will not be able to be introspective, to find out what changes in oneself are necessary.

Mental solitude means first and foremost not to be dependent on others for approval, for companionable talk, for a relationship. It doesn't mean that one becomes unfriendly towards others, just that one is mentally independent. If another person is kind to us, well and good. If that isn't the case, that's fine too and makes no difference.

The horn of a rhinoceros is straight and solid and so strong that we can't bend it. Can our minds be like that? Mental solitude cuts out idle chatter, which is detrimental to spiritual growth. Talking about nothing at all, just letting off steam. When we let the steam go from a pot, we can't cook the food. Our practice can be likened to putting the heat on oneself. If we let off steam again and again, that inner process is stopped. It's much better to let the steam accumulate and find out what is cooking. That is the most important work we can do.

Everybody should have an occasion each day to be on her own physically for some time, so that we can really feel alone, totally by ourselves. Sometimes we may think: "People are talking about me." That doesn't matter, we are the owners of our own kamma. If somebody talks about us, it's their kamma. If we get upset, that's our kamma. Getting interested in what is being said is enough to show that we are dependent on people's approval. Who's approving of whom? Maybe the five khandha (body, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness) are approving. Or possibly the hair of the head, the hair of the body, nails, teeth and skin? Which "self" is approving, the good ones, the bad one, the mediocre one, or maybe the non-self?

Unless one can find a feeling of solidity in oneself, from the centre, where there is no movement, one is always going to feel insecure. Nobody can be liked by everyone, not even the Buddha. Because we have defilements, we are always on the lookout for everybody else's pollutions. None of that matters, it's all totally unimportant. The only thing that is significant is to be mindful; totally attentive to each step on the way, to what one is doing, feeling, thinking. It's so easy to forget this. There's always somebody with whom to talk or another cup of tea to be had. That's how the world lives and the inhabitants are mostly unhappy. But the Buddha's path leads out of the world to independent happiness.

Letting off steam, idle chatter and looking for companionship are the wrong things to do. Trying to find out what people are thinking about one, is immaterial and irrelevant and has nothing to do with the spiritual path. Solitude in the mind means that one can be alone in the midst of the crowd. Even in a large and agitated crowd of people, one would still be able to operate from one's own centre, giving out love and compassion, and not being influenced by what is happening around one.

That can be called ideal solitude and means one has removed oneself from the future and past, which is necessary in order to stand straight and alone. If one is attached to the future, then there is a worry, and if one is hankering for the past, there is either desire or rejection. That is the constant chatter of the mind, not conducive to mental solitude.

Solitude can only be fully experienced when there is inner peace. Otherwise, loneliness pushes one to try and remedy a feeling of emptiness and loss. "Where is everybody? What can I do without some companionship? I must discuss my problems." Mindfulness is able to take care of all that because it has to arise in the present moment and has nothing to do with the future and past. It keeps one totally occupied and saves one from making mistakes, which are natural to human beings. But the greater the mindfulness, the fewer mistakes. Errors on the mundane level also have repercussions on the supermundane path, because they are due to a lack of mindfulness, which will not allow us to get past our self-inflicted dukkha. We will try again and again to find someone who is to blame or someone who can distract us.

Ideal solitude arises when a person can be alone or with others and remain of one piece, not getting caught in someone else's difficulties. We may respond in an appropriate manner, but we are not affected. We all have our own inner life and we only get to know it well when the mind stops chattering and we can attend to our inner feelings. Once we have seen what is happening inside of us, we will want to change it. Only the fully Enlightened One (Arahant) has an inner life which needs no changing. Our inner stress and lack of peace push us outward to find someone who will remove a moment of dukkha, but only we, ourselves, can do it.

Solitude may be physical, but that's not its main function. The solitary mind is one which can have profound and original thoughts. A dependent mind thinks in cliches, the way everybody else does because it wants approval. Such a mind understands on a surface level, just like the world does, and cannot grasp the profundity and depth of the Buddha's teaching. The solitary mind is at ease because it is unaffected.

It's interesting that a mind at ease, which can stand on its own, also can memorise. Because such a mind is not filled with the desire to remove dukkha, it can remember without much trouble. This is one of its side benefits. The main value of a solitary mind is its imperturbability. It can't be shaken and will stand without support, just as a strong tree doesn't need a prop. Because it's powerful in its own right. If the mind doesn't have enough vigour to stand on its own, it won't have the strength and determination to fulfil the Dhamma.

Our practise includes being on our own some time each day to introspect and contemplate. Reading, talking and listening are all communication with others, which are necessary at times. But it is essential to have time for self-inquiry: "What is happening within me? What am I feeling? Is it wholesome or not? Am I perfectly content on my own? How much self-concern is there? Is the Dhamma my guide or am I bewildered?" If there's a fog in one's mind, all we need is a searchlight to penetrate it. The searchlight is concentration.

Health, wealth and youth do not mean no dukkha. They are a cover-up. Ill-health, poverty and old age make it easier to realise the unsatisfactoriness of our existence. When we are alone, that is the time to get to know ourselves. We can investigate the meaning of the Dhamma we've heard and whether we can actualise it in our own lives. We can use those aspects of the Dhamma which are most meaningful for us.

The solitary mind is a strong mind because it knows how to stand still. That doesn't mean not associating with people at all, that would lack loving-kindness (metta). A solitary mind is able to be alone and introspect and also be loving towards others. Living in a Dhamma community is an ideal place to practice this.

Meditation is the means for concentration, which is the tool to break through the fog enveloping everyone who is not an Arahant. At times, in communal living, there is togetherness and lovingness and service. These should be the results of metta not of trying to get away from dukkha. Next time we start a conversation, let's first investigate: "Why am I having this discussion? Is it necessary, or am I bored and want to get away from my problems."

Clear comprehension is the mental factor which joins with mindfulness to give purpose and direction. We examine whether our speech and actions are having the right purpose, whether we are using skilful means and whether the initial purpose has been accomplished. If we have no clear-cut direction, idle chatter results. Even in meditation, the mind does it, which is due to a lack of training. When we practice clear comprehension, we need to stop a moment and examine the whole situation before plunging in. This may become one of our skilful habits, not often found in the world.

An important aspect of the Buddha's teaching is the combination of clear comprehension with mindfulness. The Buddha often recommends them as the way out of all sorrow, and we need to practice them in our small everyday efforts. These may consist of learning something new, a Dhamma sentence remembered one line of chanting memorised, one new insight about oneself, one aspect of reality realised. Such a mind gains strength and self-confidence.

Renunciation is the greatest help in gaining self-confidence. One knows one can get along without practically everything, for instance, food, for quite some time. Once the Buddha went to a village where nobody had any faith in him. He received no alms-food at all, nobody in the village paid any attention to him. He went to the outskirts and sat down on a bit of straw and meditated. Another ascetic came by who had seen that the Buddha had not received any food and commiserated with him: "You must be feeling very badly not having anything to eat. I'm very sorry. You don't even have a nice place to sleep, just straw." The Buddha replied: "Feeders on joy we are. Inner joy can feed us for many days."

One can get along without many things when they are voluntarily given up. If someone takes our belongings, we resist, which is dukkha. But when we practise self-denial, we gain strength and enable the mind to stand on its own. Self-confidence arises and creates a really strong backbone. Renunciation of companionship shows us whether we are self-sufficient.

The Buddha did not advocate exaggerated and harmful ascetic practices. but we could give up -- for instance -- afternoon conversations and contemplate instead. Afterwards, the mind feels contented with its own efforts. The more effort one can make, the more satisfaction arises.

We need a solitary mind in meditation, so we need to practice it sometime during each day. The secluded mind has two attributes; one is mindfulness, full attention and clear comprehension and the other is introspection and contemplation. Both of them bring the mind to unification. Only in togetherness lies strength; unification brings power.



 Prajnaparamita Upadesa by Aryadeva


Through awareness free of artifice and corruption
Recognize your mind as the root of both samsara and nirvana.
It's not produced by causes or conditions,
Unborn, naturally serene, its nature is emptiness.
So with regard to all phenomena with form or formless,
Whether the karmic impact is positive or negative,
Don't turn anything into a fixed reference or support,
Not even so much as an atom.
The meaning of the Prajnaparamita
Is not to be looked for elsewhere: it exists within yourself.
It's neither real nor endowed with characteristics,
The nature of the mind is the great clear light.
Neither outer nor inner, neither god nor demon,
Not existent within samsara's cycles nor nirvana's beyond,
And neither manifest nor empty:
Mind is free from any such dual appearances.
This is the Buddha's true intention, his flawless view.
If looking for a simile, one could say it is like space.
The supreme method here to realize the nature of mind,
Is to unite space and awareness.
When thus mixing space and awareness,
You spontaneously purify all fixed notions
Such as a reality and characteristics, negating and establishing,
And you abide in the truth of suchness, dharmata,
Free from dualistic subject-object cognition.
With both body and mind thus in their natural state,
Without further intervention fresh awareness arises,
Extending just as far as the reach of empty space,
Within this vast expanse remain absorbed without constraints or limits.
At that time you will experience a state of consciousness
Free from any support or from any sort of foundation,
An awareness abiding nowhere,
Not absorbed in either the aggregates or any outer object.
Having moved to desolate places,
When magical displays of gods or demons, grasping or aversion arise,
Separate awareness from the gross material body.
The physical body is like a stone -- nothing can harm it
And mind has no real existence, being similar to space.
So who or what could then possibly be harmed?
Pondering this, remain in suchness, with no anxiety, no fear.
Attachment to a philosophical tenet is obscuration.
Non-dual, self-liberated is the ultimate nature of mind.
So take refuge in the essence of reality
And constantly generate the bodhi mind.



Monday 29 November 2021

儒家提倡孝道 佛教也重视孝道

印光大师

孝之为道,其大无外,经天纬地,范圣型贤,先王修之以成至德,如来乘之以证觉道。故儒之孝经云:“夫孝,天之经也,地之义也,民之行也。”佛之戒经云:“孝顺父母师僧三宝,孝顺至道之法,孝名为戒,亦名制止。”是世出世间莫不以孝为本也。

奈何世俗凡情,只知行孝之显迹,不知尽孝之极致。每见出家释子,辄随己臆见,肆其谤讟,谓为不孝父母,与荡子逆徒无异。

不知世法重孝,出世间法亦无不重孝。

盖世之所谓孝者,有迹可循者也。释氏之所谓孝者,略于迹而专致力于本也。

有迹可循者,显而易见。专致力于本者,晦而难明。

何以言之?

儒者服劳奉养,以安其亲,孝也。立身行道,扬名于后世,以显其亲,大孝也。推极而论,举凡五常百行,无非孝道发挥。故礼之《祭义》云:断一树,杀一兽,不以其时,非孝也。故曰:孝悌之道,通于神明,光于四海也。论孝至此,可谓至矣尽矣,无以复加矣!然其为孝,皆显乎耳目之间,人所易见。

惟我释子,以成道利生为最上报恩之事;且不仅报答多生之父母,并当报答无量劫来四生六道中一切父母;不仅于父母生前而当孝敬,且当度脱父母之灵识,使其永出苦轮常住正觉。故曰释氏之孝,晦而难明者也。

虽然,儒之孝以奉养父母为先者也。若释氏辞亲出家,岂竟不顾父母之养乎?

夫佛制:出家必禀父母;若有兄弟子侄可托,乃得禀请于亲,亲允方可出家,否则不许剃落。其有出家之后,兄弟或故,亲无倚托,亦得减其衣钵之资以奉二亲,所以长芦有养母之芳踪(宋长芦宗赜禅师,襄阳人,少孤,母陈氏鞠养于舅家,及长,博通世典,二十九岁出家,深明宗要,后住长芦寺,迎母于方丈东室,劝令念佛求生净土,历七年,其母念佛而逝,事见《净土圣贤录》),道丕有葬父之异迹(道丕,唐宗室,长安人,生始周岁,父殁王事,七岁出家,年十九,世乱谷贵,负母入华山,自辟谷,乞食奉母,次年往霍山战场,收聚白骨,虔诵经咒,祈得父骨,数日父骨从骨聚中跃出,直诣丕前,乃掩余骨,负其父骨而归葬焉,事见《宋高僧传》)。

故经云:供养父母功德,与供养一生补处菩萨功德等。亲在,则善巧劝谕,令其持斋念佛,求生西方;亲殁,则以己读诵修持功德,常时至诚为亲回向,令其永出五浊、长辞六趣、忍证无生、地登不退。尽来际以度脱众生,令自他以共成觉道,如是乃为不与世共之大孝也。

推极而论,举凡六度万行,无非孝道扩充。故《梵网戒经》一一皆言应生慈悲心、孝顺心。又云:若佛子以慈悲心行放生业,一切男子是我父,一切女人是我母,我生生无不从之受生,故六道众生皆是我父母,而杀而食者,即是杀我父母。因兹凡所修持,皆悉普为法界众生而回向之,则其虑尽未来际,其孝遍诸有情。

若以世孝互相校量,则在迹不无欠缺,约本大有余裕矣。

惜乎不见此理者,不谓之为妄诞,便谓之为渺茫。岂知竖穷三际、横遍十方,佛眼圆见,若视诸掌也。



It may be that you become rich,
But you will have a hard time being satisfied.
Be able to cut the knot of greed.
That is what really matters.

-- Terdak Lingpa





Sunday 28 November 2021

Parting From The Four Attachments 

by Khenchen Appey Rinpoche

Let us now briefly consider the instructions from Parting from the Four Attachments. This is a very important teaching. The first line says: 

If you cling to this life, you are not a Dharma practitioner.

We need to let go of clinging to this life by recollecting death and impermanence. The Sanskrit term Dharma carries the meaning of “keeping” or “holding.” At the very least, the lesser Dharma teaching has to be able to keep us out of the lower realms. The average one keeps us away from rebirth in samsara, and the great Dharma teaching of the Mahayana can keep us away from the extremes of both samsara and nirvana. Therefore, it is taught that whatever teachings we study, contemplate, or meditate on, if it is done out of clinging to this life, it is not the Dharma.

The second line says:

If you cling to the three realms, you do not have the spiritual resolution.

It is taught here that if one practices Dharma with the motivation to obtain a human or a divine body in the next life, then one does not have the spiritual resolution. This is not the path to attain liberation based on the spiritual resolution to leave samsara. Therefore, if we are motivated to practice Dharma for the sake of avoiding a rebirth in the lower realms or in order to be reborn in the higher realms in our next lives, then it is not the path to liberation, but a path to accomplish samsara. Thus, regarding such a motivation, it is said that if one clings to samsara, one does not have the spiritual resolution. However, since we need to accomplish Buddhahood, a rebirth in the lower realms is a great obstacle to the accomplishment of Buddhahood. Therefore, in order to accomplish that, it is fine to aspire to obtain a body of the higher realms and to practice virtue.

The third line says:

If you cling to your own benefit, you do not have bodhicitta.

In the Mahayana, our main aim is to benefit others. If we mostly benefit ourselves, then it is not the Dharma of the Mahayana and it is a mistake. Therefore, we need to engage in a lot of contemplation on the faults of acting for our own sake and the benefits of acting for the sake of others. Furthermore, we need to cultivate loving-kindness, compassion, bodhicitta, and so forth. Since the root of samsara is clinging to the self, as an antidote to this, we need to cultivate the wisdom that realises the ultimate nature. Alternatively, since the root of samsara is discursive thoughts, we need to cultivate the view in order to abandon them. In this regard, the last line of this teaching says: 

If there is grasping, it is not the view.

The “view” is the mind that realises what the ultimate nature is. Since this ultimate nature does not exist as anything whatsoever, we need to have no grasping at all. For example, if we were to think that “this is emptiness,” then this would not be the view. It would be grasping. It is taught that the view must be free of grasping toward anything whatsoever. When the practice of the Parting from the Four Attachments is well established in our minds, our minds are able to be transformed to some extent. If we, on top of that, engage in the tantric practices of recitations and other virtuous activities, these will become authentic practices. 




I see nothing to fear in inner space.

-- Yeshe Tsogyal



Saturday 27 November 2021

父母是眼前的活佛,行孝应当及时

证严法师

最近常在报上看到老人独居的问题,他们有些是没有子女;但也有人把子女栽培得颇有成就,后来子女侨居国外,自己独居在台湾,老而孤单,因此病了没人照顾,往生了也没人发现,这是现代社会的老人问题。这个问题的症结在哪里呢?最主要的是年轻人忘了父母的养育之恩。

今生我是你父,前世你是我母;人人都是我生生世世的父母。

几年前我曾讲过《父母恩重难报经》,开头是一个故事:

有一天,佛陀带着弟子阿难外出托钵。途中看到一堆白骨时,佛陀马上跪下虔诚地向这堆白骨顶礼。阿难觉得很奇怪,便问佛陀说:“佛陀啊!您是人天导师,无上尊贵的觉者,您为何要向一堆白骨顶礼呢?”佛陀回答:“因为这堆白骨是我生生世世的父母啊!”

人的寿命不论是长或短,总是有限。当一期的生命结束之后,灵魂(业识)还会再投胎到另一处,当他被生下后,又开始了另一期的生命;往生后,又再投胎……每个人都一样啊!说不定现在坐在你旁边的人,就是你前世的兄弟姊妹或父母。所以说,我们都是互为父母、互为子女。

我常说:人生就像一出戏。上了舞台,你演你的角色,我演我的角色──你是我爹,我是你子等。戏演完了,下台之后你还是你,我还是我。在人生的舞台上,我们都是不断地在上台、下台,角色也一直在更换。所以佛陀说,这些白骨都是我生生世世的父母。

佛陀又向阿难说:“阿难,你来将这堆白骨中的男众和女众分开。”阿难面有难色地说:“佛陀啊!人如果还活着的话,可以从他们的衣着分辨出男女;但死了之后只剩下一堆骨头,要如何分辨呢?”佛陀告诉他:“你把颜色较白的捡出来,把较黑、较黄的放在另一边;较白的便是男众,较黑、较黄的则是女众。”阿难问:“为什么呢?”佛陀说:“因为男众的生活较悠闲,有时间求道,所以骨头较白;而女众必须为传宗接代和生活操劳打拼,身心的折磨和烦恼较多,所以骨头较黑、较黄。”

《父母恩重难报经》是从女人怀胎开始说起。记得几年前讲这部经时,有位妇产科主任说我很像妇产科医师,因为从胚胎开始一直到生产的这段过程,我都描述得清清楚楚。我告诉他并不是我懂医学,而是看了佛经之后才知道的。可见,佛陀真是一位大医王。一个小生命要在母体中生长真的不简单,所以要感恩母亲啊!

除了感谢母亲,也要感谢父亲,更要感恩天地间的一切众生及万物!记得以前我种花生时,把种子丢到泥土中后,必须再用脚把土踩得扎实一些。隔天去看时,本来平坦的土地已经裂开出一条条的缝,第三天便看到地上已经冒出两片嫩芽了。大地孕育万物也是非常地辛苦,所以我们要时时抱持感恩的心,面对父母及爱惜天地万物。

现在的父母真的很难为!送孩子到学校念书,无论穿的、用的都要选名牌、赶流行、和别人比较。不知道大家在感叹现代父母难为时,是否也曾想到父母在养育我们的过程中也是历尽千辛万苦呢?所以,我一再强调世间有两件事不能等:一是孝顺,二是行善。

现在的孩子,大都在父母的羽翼呵护下成长,把父母黏得紧紧的;长大后,要他们向父母说句感恩、贴心的话,却认为那是肉麻的事而说不出口。

小时候黏着父母,为什么长大后却和父母产生疏离甚至还让父母独居呢?这是不对的啊!父母在家中,就如同活佛在堂上;对眼前的活佛不恭敬,反而到很远的寺庙去拜佛,这岂不是本末倒置吗?



Among Tibetans, there is a saying that a person who thinks he is better or above others because he is wiser, more capable, more knowledgeable or learned is like someone sitting on the highest peak of the highest mountain. And what is it like on the peak of that mountain? It is very cold there. It’s very hard. It’s very lonely and nothing grows there. On the other hand, the person who cultivates humility and puts himself in a lower position is said to enjoy living on the fertile land of the plains.

-- Khandro Rinpoche



Friday 26 November 2021

What Is The Sakya Tradition?

by His Holiness Gongma Trichen Rinpoche

The world in which we live is very vast and has many different cultures, religions, ideas and traditions, and so on. But one thing that everyone has in common is that they are longing to attain happiness and longing to eliminate suffering. Every individual, every organisation, every country is striving to achieve this.

We made so much effort to find happiness during the last century that huge progress was made in terms of technology and science, helping to solve many existing problems. For example, many of the diseases that could not be cured for centuries can now be cured easily; many of the places that we could not reach, we can now reach within hours, in any part of the world, and so on.

But at the same time, we cannot find real happiness; no matter how much material progress we make, we cannot find real happiness. This is because we lack spiritual practice. Spiritual practice and spiritual progress are very important. However, the spiritual progress that we make is not something that happens quickly. It takes time. And the spiritual progress that we make is not something that is visible straight away. On the other hand, the signs of the progress that we make in technology appear very fast, and we can see them very clearly.

It used to be that in many parts of the world, it was thought that spiritual practice was something kind of old fashioned, and that technology and science yielded very fast results, that they were the real thing, and that everyone should put them first. So many people lost their interest in spiritual pursuit and, in fact, in some countries, people are deliberately encouraged not to engage in spiritual practice.

But as time goes on, it is becoming clear that, no matter how much material progress we make, we cannot find real happiness. No matter where we go, whomever we associate with, what we own, how wealthy we are, how famous we become, how powerful we become, we cannot find real happiness. Real happiness we have to find through spiritual practice. Even in the countries whose citizens were discouraged from practising religion, so many people are now interested in doing so. This shows that without spiritual assistance we cannot find real happiness.

There are many spiritual traditions, many different traditions, and I personally believe that every spiritual tradition has its own beauty, its own way to help mankind. I respect every spiritual tradition. Every spiritual tradition is necessary because we are all different and everybody has their own tastes, their own ideas, their own mentalities, their own propensities and so on. So therefore one kind of spiritual tradition is not enough.

In the same way, there is not one single medicine that can cure all diseases, we need different medicines to cure different diseases. Not only that, but we need different protocols, different traditions, to cure different diseases. Similarly, a variety of spiritual practices is very important. For some people Hinduism is more suitable, for some Christianity is more suitable, for others Islam is more suitable, and for yet others, Buddhism is more suitable. We must respect every spiritual tradition, and then choose which one suits us by using our own wisdom, our own intuition. Then whatever spiritual path we practise, we must practise it diligently, according to its teachings.

According to Buddhism, the reason we need to practise Dharma is because in every sentient being, the true nature of the mind is pure. The true nature of the mind is never stained with obscurations and it is what we call Buddha Nature, it is natural purity, it is never stained with obscurations. But at the moment we cannot recognise this, and we cannot see the true nature of the mind because it is completely covered with obscurations. As long as we have obscurations, such as the obscuration of the defilements, and the obscuration of phenomena, as long as our view is obstructed by these obscurations, we are in samsara, which means the cycle of existence. And as long as we are here, we are not free from suffering. So that’s why no matter how much effort we make, how much material progress we make, where we go, whom we associate with, we cannot find real peace, real happiness.

Because the true nature of our minds is completely covered with obscurations, we must engage in spiritual practice. Dharma practice is very important. Although every sentient being has Buddha Nature, every living being has the opportunity to become a fully enlightened Buddha, human beings have the best chance to do so. Because the human mind is very sharp, very intelligent in comparison with that of other living beings, like animals, human beings have the best chance to become enlightened. And so therefore spiritual practice is very important.

Let us speak of spiritual practice from a Buddhist point of view. Buddhism, as we know, originated in India and then spread to many countries. It is through the kindness of the Tibetan Dharma kings, through the great blessing of the Indian masters, and through the hardship of the Tibetan translators that Buddhism was fully brought into Tibet, where we have Mahayana, Theravada, Vajrayana, as well as all the religious sciences. So it is that in Tibet we have the full range of Buddhist teachings and their practice, not only their study but also their practice. And so although the origins of Buddhism were in India, it became as strongly established in Tibet as it had been in India, and it is thanks to this that we are able to have this talk today.

Buddhism came to Tibet in two periods of time. The first one was during the time of Guru Padmasambhava, the great abbot Shantarakshita and the Tibetan Dharma King Trisong Detsen. Thanks to them, Buddhism was fully established in Tibet. When the great abbot Shantarakshita came to Tibet, he started to build temples and establish monasteries. Tibet had a lot of local deities that were very powerful, and they created huge disturbances. During the daytime, the human builders did a tremendous amount of work, but during the night all their work was dismantled, through storms and lightning and all kinds of problems.

The great Shantarakshita was unable to counter the power of the local deities and he resolved that the only way to overcome them was to invite Guru Padmasambhava, who had the power to subdue them. And so they sent messengers to India. In his omniscience, Guru Padmasambhava already knew this and he himself had already set out for Tibet and met the messengers on the road. He eventually arrived in Tibet and destroyed all the evil spirits and converted the helpful ones to Buddhism, exacting from them a pledge to protect the Dharma and to become Dharma protectors. They were then able to build temples and establish monastic institutions.

So it was that at that time no Tibetan had ever received Buddhist ordination. It wasn’t known whether Tibetans would be able to keep Buddhist monks’ vows or not. And so seven persons were chosen to be given the full-fledged Bhikkshu vows by Shantarakshita. Of the seven, three were older men, three were younger and one was middle-aged. Among the younger ones was a member of the Khön family.

The Khöns were originally believed to be the direct descendants of celestial beings from a realm called the Rupadhatu. From the Rupadhatu they came down to the high mountains of Tibet, where they settled. While the rest of them went back to the celestial realms, one of them stayed in Tibet and his hereditary lineage was established in this land. And at that time there was no Buddhism, there was only the Bon religion.

The Khöns were Bonpos. But when Padmasambhava and Shantarakshita came and established Buddhism, they became Buddhists. One of those chosen to take the vows was a Khön family member, Khön Nagendarakshita. And so Buddhism was established in Tibet and all the words of the Buddha and their commentaries were translated. He was also one of the translators. With his younger brother, called Dorje Rinchen, who was not a monk but a householder, they received many important empowerments and teachings from Guru Padmasambhava, and they did a lot of practice and attained very high realisations.

At that time the two main deities were Vajrakilaya and Yandak Heruka. Through these two deities, they had very high realisations as did many generations of Khön after them. Some thirteen generations down the line, there were two brothers called Sherab Zodzem and Konchok Gyalpo. During Sherab Zodzem’s time, one day there was a big gathering, where there was dancing and all kinds of games, and all kinds of shows. His younger brother went there to see and when he came back, the elder brother asked what the gathering was like.

He said there were many people, much dancing, and also all kinds of sports. But the most impressive one was the secret dance that was performed. He felt this was not right because the secret dances are very holy and they should not be displayed in public. They should only be performed in secluded places, with a limited audience. The elder brother said: “Now I’m old and I won’t be able to learn anything new, but you are young, so you can learn the new teachings. The time has come to conceal all our old teachings and find a separate school.

At that time, the most famous lama was Drogmi Sakya Yeshe. He was very famous, so the Khöns sent for him. But he was very strict. He didn’t give teachings to more than one person at a time. At the beginning, Konchok Gyalpo had difficulty learning, but he eventually succeeded.

When Drogmi gave a blessing on top of Konchok Gyalpo’s head, he said: “Touching your head, I can feel that your lineage has a special kind of quality that will benefit the teachings, spread the teachings. And so he gave him the teachings. And with that, Konchok Gyalpo established the Sakya Order.

The first Sakya monastery was built in 1073. This is more than 900 years ago. In Tibet, we have four major schools. The Nyingmapas, who was the original school, the ancient school. The new schools are the Kagyupas, the Sakyapas and the Gelukpas. These were the four major schools.

So now, what is the Sakyapa? What is the meaning of Sakya? Sakya means “Grey Earth”. As the town is called Sakya, the school is also called Sakya. It has a mountain that is in the shape of an elephant. And in the centre of it is a patch of grey earth. And this has three specialities. The first is that long before the school was founded, Guru Padmasambhava came there and predicted that in the future a great monastery would be established on that spot and that it would spread the Dharma in every direction, and also benefit an immense number of sentient beings.

And he erected four stupas, one in each direction, and blessed the earth. So the first monastery’s earth was blessed by Guru Padmasambhava. And that is the number one speciality.

The second speciality is that Palden Atisha once had made prostrations in an empty countryside. His attendants asked why he was doing prostrations and making offerings in that empty space. And he said ‘don’t you see, on this grey earth, there are seven syllables of DHIH, one syllable of HRIH, and one syllable of HUNG. This means there will be seven emanations of Manjushri, the Buddha of Wisdom, one emanation of Avalokiteshvara, the Buddha of Compassion and one emanation of Vajrapani, the Buddha of Power. And also in the future, there will be many emanations of these Bodhisattvas who will benefit immensely all sentient beings. And so this is why I’m making prostrations. So that is the second speciality.

The third speciality is that Khön Konchok Gyalpo, founder of the school, had a son when he was very young. He was called Sachen Kunga Nyingpo, was trained as a Lama and received many teachings. One day, t his tutor advised him: ‘You are the son of a great Lama, so you need to study. And in order to study, you need wisdom. And to acquire wisdom, you need to practise Manjushri. And so he received the initiations and their related teachings and then practised Manjushri in retreat. One day, in his pure vision he saw many rainbows and flowers, and in the middle of this, was Manjushri sitting on a throne as if sitting on a chair, with two legs down, one Bodhisattva on either side. And Manjushri said “If you have an attachment to this life, you are not a religious person. If you have an attachment to the realm of existence, you do not have the proper renunciation. If you have an attachment to self-purpose, you do not have bodhicitta or enlightenment mind. And if grasping arises, you do not have the View.”

These four lines actually contain the entire Mahayana teaching. He got a very high realisation from this teaching and he passed it on to his sons; it has continued up until now as preliminary teaching of mind training. And not only in the Sakya school, but the other schools also consider this as a very authentic and pure mind-training teaching.

And then Konchok Gyalpo received the Lamdre teaching from his Guru. Lamdre means — Lam means path and Dre means result. That is actually a short way of saying it. But actually, it means ‘base, path and result all together’. If the base and the result are separate, then it is not possible to accomplish (it). They have to be all together. They have to be linked. And so he received this from his Guru for many years and after fully transmitting the teaching to him, the Guru advised him that for 18 years he should not give this teaching to anybody, not to even mention its name.

And then after a few years, he should either teach it to other people or write it down. Previous to this, the Lamdre had no written teachings, it was all oral teachings. But after eighteen years, he should write it down or teach it; in any case, he was now the owner of this teaching. So he practised for eighteen long years. One time, he became very ill and had to take strong medicines, and due to these medicines, he forgot many of the teachings. He became very sad and felt desperate because his teacher was no longer alive, and there were no other Dharma brothers or sisters with whom he could discuss. And even if he did go to India, which meant a very arduous trip, things were kept so secret that he might not be able to find out anything. So what to do? He prayed to his Guru and his Guru appeared in his dream and gave him the teachings. And so he was able to revive many teachings. Then again, he prayed and prayed and prayed. His Guru appeared in person and gave him more teachings, and most of them he could revive. Again he prayed and prayed, and then one day, Mahasiddha Virupa himself appeared.

Mahasiddha Virupa was actually from Nalanda. He was the abbot of Nalanda. He later became a Mahasiddha, and he is the original Guru of Lamdre. Lamdre has 5 Indian Gurus. He was the first one. So five Indian Gurus, then the Tibetan translators. Virupa appeared and covered the mountain, leaning towards the grey earth. The whole mountain was covered with his body and he said: “This earth belongs to me.” So this was the third speciality. The first speciality was that Guru Padmasambhava blessed the land, the second speciality was that Palden Atisha gave the prophecy, and the third speciality was that Mahasiddha Virupa himself appeared and blessed the area and said “This earth belongs to me.” So Sakya has three specialities.

So now, what is Sakyapa? Sakyapa actually means one who holds the lineage of the four great translators. Buddhism first came from India, where it originated, through the translators. So the teachings that came through the translators are considered to be very authentic and very pure. There were four translators. The first one was Bari Lotsawa. Lotsawa means translator. Bari, I think, was his clan. His personal name was Rinchen Drakpa. He went from Tibet through Nepal to India and stayed years studying under the guidance of Indian masters. He received many teachings and collected them all together. There is one book called ‘The Collection of Sadhanas’. He brought that as well as many other teachings. Bari Lotsawa was a teacher to Sachen Kunga Nyingpo.

The second translator was Drogmi Lotsawa. As was just mentioned, Konchok Gyalpo consulted him and, with great difficulty, persuaded him to teach him. His personal name was Sakya Yeshe. He was the first Tibetan Lama to receive the Lamdre teachings. He gave to Sachen Kunga Nyingpo’s father many teachings, especially the Hevajra Tantra but he did not give him the Lamdre teaching. He chose another disciple because he did not give the different types of teachings to a single disciple. Lamdre belongs to what is known as a ‘pith instruction’. So he did not give pith instructions to those to whom he gave Tantra teachings. When he gave Tantra, he did not give pith instructions, and when he gave pith instructions he did not give Tantra.

He introduced his best disciple to the pith instructions, and it is from him that Sachen Kunga Nyingpo received them. In this way, the Lamdre became the main teaching of the Sakyapas. Most importantly, Lamdre means the path and the result, but it has everything. It has the Sutrayana path – the preliminary part is the Sutrayana path — and the main part is the Vajrayana path. It is a complete teaching, starting from the refuge up to enlightenment. And so in this way, it is a complete teaching.

And so this was the second translator. And then the third one was Mal Lotsawa, and his name was Lodoe Drakpa. He also received an enormous amount of teachings, especially Chakrasambara and Mahakala, etc. and gave them to Lama Sakyapa (Sachen Kunga Nyingpo).

The fourth one was Lotsawa Rinchen Sangpo. He was the most important translator during this new translation period. Through him also we got many, many teachings. So Sakyapa teachings all came through these four translators.

The Sakya monastery was first established in 1070 by Khön Konchok Gyalpo and then his son Sachen Kunga Nyingpo, as I said, received teachings directly from Manjushri and also from Virupa, as well as many other teachings during a period of one full month.

Kunga Nyingpo had four sons. The first son was called Kunga Bar. He went to India to study and passed away there. His second son was Loppön Sonam Tsemo, who was a very great scholar. His fame reached as far as the river Ganges. He wrote many books on Sutrayana, as well as Mantrayana and many rituals as well. And then the third son was Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen. He was a very great master. Especially for the Lamdre teachings. In terms of the Lamdre teachings, he is the most important Lama because Lamdre is a pith instruction and it has many hidden words, so it needs many explanations, detailed explanations, which he gave readily. He is the real owner of all the secret teachings.

The fourth son was called Pachen Yopo, and he had a son called Sakya Pandita, who is very well known. He was the first Tibetan to receive the full Pandita title. He also wrote many treatises and many commentaries, especially on the Parmana, or Buddhist Logic. Many books have been translated from the Indian text, from Sanskrit into Tibetan, of course, as every teaching had to be translated into Tibetan.

Sakya Pandita was unique in that he was the only Tibetan master whose works were translated into Sanskrit. Sakya Pandita wrote the Parmana in Tibetan, and it was so complete, so authentic, so great that it was translated back from Tibetan into Sanskrit. Sakya Pandita’s younger brother was Sangsar Sonam Gyaltsen. Sonam Gyaltsen had two official sons, one was Drogon Chogyal Phagpa and his brother was Drogon Chana. They became the royal priests of the Mongolian emperors. Drogon Chogyal Phagpa, especially, went twice to Mongolia. At that time, the Mongols had conquered China and so the Mongolian emperors were also the Chinese emperors.

They were invited to China and, for the first time, Vajrayana teachings were spread into China and Mongolia. Moreover, Drogon Chogyal Phagpa is the one who devised the Mongolian script. The Mongolians did not have a script at that time, so he created the Mongolian script.

These were called the Five Great Masters: Sachen Kunga Nyingpo, Loppön Sonam Tsemo, Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen, Sakya Pandita and Drogon Chogyal Phagpa. Chogyal Phagpa later became the ruler of Tibet. The Mongols gave all three provinces to Drogon Chogyal Phagpa as an offering. And so he became the first Lama King of Tibet.

And also, the Sakyapas had many very great scholars. There were nine great scholars. Three great scholars were very capable in the explanation of the Sutrayana path. Yangtön Sangyepa. He was actually considered as an emanation of Lord Maitreya, the coming Buddha. He wrote a lot of commentaries on Lord Maitreya’s teachings. The second one was Rongton Sheja Kunrig, another very brilliant scholar who wrote many books. It is said that whenever he gave teachings, fragrance prevailed and there fell a shower of flowers and rainbows appeared. The third one was Rendawa Shönu Lodrö. He was also a great scholar, and his speciality was Madhyamika philosophy, the Middle Way philosophy. He wrote special books explaining the Middle Way school of thought. So these were the three great scholars who explained the Sutrayana. The last one, Rendawa Shönu Lodrö was also the main teacher of Lama Tsongkapa, who is the father of the Geluk tradition. His main teacher was Rendawa Shönu Lodrö. He studied under him for many years. And then there were three great scholars who specialised in the Mantrayana. They were Ngorchen Dorje Chang Kunga Sangpo, who was the founder of the Ngor sub-school of Sakya. Sakya has three sub-schools — one of them is the Ngorpa school, founded by Ngorchen Kunga Sangpo. He was a truly great master. The Buddha himself in many sutras mentions his name very clearly. He says that at one point in time there would be a bhikkshu called Kunga Sangpo who would be able to spread the teachings of the Buddha and that he would have great discipline in keeping the Vinaya rules, etc.

Another great Lama was Tsarchen Losal Gyatso, founder of the Tsarpa sub-school of the Sakya Order. He was also a great master. From a very young age, he had a great speciality, he gave an enormous amount of teachings, wrote many commentaries, and especially the most uncommon teachings, not only Sakyapa but from all the traditions. He was the owner of the most uncommon teachings. So he was a very great master.

And the third one was Dorje Dempa Kunga Namgyal. He was the founder of the Dzongpa sub-school of the Sakya. He was also a very great scholar. The speciality of these three was the Mantrayana tradition.

Then there were three more great masters, and their speciality was both Sutrayana and Mantrayana. One of them was Gorampa Sonam Sangye. He was from a very young age a very great scholar and he wrote many books, and today in most of our philosophical colleges, we use his texts. He was excellent in the very detailed explanation of Sutrayana teachings, as well as Mantrayana teachings.

And then another one was Shakya Chogden. He was also very special, a great master. He wrote a great number of books and had a very special sharp mind in explaining in great detail the most authentic details of the very profound teachings. And the third one was Taksang Lotsawa. He was a great scholar and also a translator. He translated many important texts. He also wrote many important commentaries.

So through these great masters, so many teachings came down to the Sakyapas. And not only is Sakyapa considered great by the Sakyapas themselves, but it is also praised by masters of the other schools. For example, the 5th Dalai Lama wrote a poem that said that Tibet had many great scholars and practitioners, just like the sun and the moon, but the only ones who explained fully the Sutra, Mantra, as well as all the religious sciences, were born in the Khön lineage, such as Sakya Pandita. There are many great scholars who can explain part of the teachings — some can explain Sutrayana, some can explain Mantrayana, some can explain other religious sciences, but there is no one who fully masters complete teachings, apart from the ones born in the Khön lineage, especially Sakya Pandita.

So this was a brief explanation of the Sakya Tradition. But I feel that all the traditions that exist today, in terms of their first motivation of the enlightenment mind, and the main practice of the combination of Sutra and Mantra together, the final accomplishment of complete enlightenment, there is no difference between them. All are exactly the same. The only difference is that the lineage is different. It depends on who the original Guru from India was, how the lineage was passed down through the different translators, how the teachings came down through the lineage, etc. This is the difference. Due to this difference, there is a distinction in emphasis with each school. Some schools emphasise the practice of meditation, some emphasise study, and others emphasise both, and so on, but otherwise, there is no difference. All are the same.

In the same way, for example, all the deities are the same. All the Buddhas are the same, in terms of their compassion, in terms of their wisdom, in terms of their power, there is no difference between them. But due to our own karmic connection, there are certain deities who can help us accomplish more quickly, certain deities who take longer. This is because of our own karmic connection. If we don’t have a karmic connection with a deity, then it will take a longer time to achieve accomplishment.

The deity with whom we have a karmic connection will help us to attain swift accomplishment. So it is all due to our own affinities, our own karmic connections that there is a difference. Buddha also manifested in many different forms. There are many deities, some are very peaceful, some are very wrathful, some are very passionate, some have a consort and so on; some deities are very simple with one face, two hands, some deities are very elaborate with many faces, many hands, and so on. But they are all the same. There is no difference. If there were only one, we could say that one Buddha is enough. But it is not. Because of our own personalities, our own affinities and our own karmic connections, we have different needs. And so therefore there are so many different deities.

Similarly, the variety of different schools is necessary. We have Nyingmapas, Kagyupas, Sakyapas, Gelukpas – for certain people this school is more suitable, for certain people that school is more suitable, for certain people yet another school is more suitable. All are the same but it all depends on our propensities. One might ask ‘If they’re all the same, then why do we need so many of them?’

This is necessary because the approach is different with each school. The final accomplishment is the same, but the approach is different. So when we have different approaches, discrepancies also arise. Sometimes there is debate also. But this is only because the ultimate truth is so subtle and so difficult to comprehend that debate helps to throw light on it. So you have to explain in many ways with many examples, many logical reasons, in many ways. But the final conclusion, the final accomplishment, all are the same, all are the Buddha’s activities, all are the same, but due to our own affinities and so on, we need different schools.

A great master, who lived recently, wrote a book called ‘The Mirror of Jewels”. This book explains the Sakyapas’ view. The author clearly mentions that, although Tibet had many different schools, major schools, minor schools, all different kinds of schools, and although the four major schools use different terms, different approaches, the final approach, the final accomplishment are all the same. These schools debate among themselves, in order to comprehend, to understand better — because ultimate truth is so difficult to comprehend, so difficult to understand, it has to be presented in many ways — one way is through debate.

But he said that the final accomplishment is the same in all the schools. Every school has great masters, not only great scholars but also highly realised masters. If something were faulty in the tenets of their school, then they could not get high realisation.

Since every school produces greatly realised masters, it shows that every school is authentic, and every school is the same in terms of final accomplishment, it is all the same. But as said earlier, our karmic connections are what makes the difference.

Buddha himself said ‘my teachings should not be taken by faith, but by reason.’ You use your own intelligence and you test. Just like if you want to buy gold, you make sure that it is genuine gold. You test, you burn and you cut and you scratch until you are convinced that it is genuine gold. Then similarly, the Buddha said that ‘My teachings you should test, you should analyse’ as when you buy gold. And so Buddha is the only one, I think no other founders of a tradition ever said this. Everyone says I bless you, I save you, but no one says ‘You should test my teachings’. In Buddhism, our own wisdom, our own mind, our own intelligence are important. So we should test ourselves, we should examine ourselves and test ourselves. And when we’re convinced that it is a genuine teaching, then we choose to follow it.

And then we act according to that. At the same time, we respect all the traditions because every they’re all helping mankind.

In our Sakya teachings, the main teaching is the Lamdre. It is the most important teaching. It is taught through the four authenticities. Authentic teacher, authentic text of the Buddha’s words, authentic commentaries/teachings, and authentic experience. It is taught through that. The main way of learning is that we receive the teachings from our teacher, then we study, contemplate, meditate, and through meditation, we gain experience, special experience. When we gain this special experience, we’re convinced that our teacher is authentic. Because if our teacher is not authentic, we cannot have such an experience, such a wonderful experience. So we establish that our teacher is authentic. And the teaching he gave is also authentic because it’s the commentaries that Mahasiddha Virupa and many ancient masters gave, so therefore the commentaries are authentic. And thus we are convinced that the commentaries are authentic. And that also, based on the Buddha’s words. The Buddha’s words are also authentic.

So by gaining authentic experience by ourselves, then we can establish that our Guru is authentic, the teachings are authentic, and the Buddha’s words are authentic. So in this way, the four authenticities are established.

So, whatever we choose, we choose ourselves and then we practise. Once we start, we should not jump here and there. We have to continue until we experience, and as we experience, we gain more and more inspiration, more aspiration to do it more because we gain experience.

In this way, I have tried to present a brief history of the Sakya School and its teachings.



In analysing the mind with the reasoning of being neither one nor many, if you discard the clear aspect of mind’s nature, you will descend to the lower realms; while gazing at that suffering, you fall into its bottomless pit. How could one have anything but compassion for this?

-- Mahasiddha Saraha 



Thursday 25 November 2021

如何降伏其心

虚云老和尚

《金刚经》上须菩提问世尊:“善男子,善女人,发阿耨多罗三藐三菩提心,应云何住,云何降伏其心?”佛说:“应如是住,如是降伏其心。”

所谓降者,就是禁止的意思,使心不走作就是降伏其心。所说发菩提心,这个心是人人本具、个个不无的,一大藏教人只说此心。

世尊夜睹明星,豁然大悟,成等正觉时,叹曰:

“奇哉!一切众生具有如来智慧德相,但以妄想执着不能证得。”

可见人人本来是佛、都有德相,而我们现在还是众生者,只是有妄想执着罢了,所以《金刚经》叫我们要如是降伏其心。

佛所说法,只要人识得此心。

《楞严经》说:“汝等当知,一切众生从无始来生死相续,皆不知常住真心性净明体,用诸妄想,此想不真,故有轮转。”达摩西来,只是直指人心,见性成佛,当下了然无事。

法海禅师参六祖,问曰:“即心即佛,愿垂指谕。”祖曰:“前念不生即心,后念不灭即佛。成一切相即心,离一切相即佛。”

智通禅师看《楞伽经》约千余遍,不会三身四智,礼六祖求解其义,祖曰:“三身者,清净法身,汝之性也;圆满报身,汝之智也;千百亿化身,汝之行也。若离本性,别说三身,即名有身无智;若悟三身无有自性,即名四智菩提。”马祖曰:“即心即佛。”

三世诸佛,历代祖师,都说此心;我们修行,也修此心;众生造业,也由此心。此心不明,所以要修要造,造佛造众生,一切唯心造,四圣六凡十法界,不出一心。

四圣是佛、菩萨、缘觉、声闻,六凡是天、人、阿修罗、畜生、饿鬼、地狱。这十法界中,佛以下九界都叫众生,四圣不受轮回,六凡流转生死,无论是佛是众生,皆心所造。若人识得心,大地无寸土,哪里来个十法界呢!

十法界皆从一念生:一乘任运,万德庄严,是诸佛法界;圆修六度,总摄万行,是菩萨法界;见局因缘,证偏空理,是缘觉法界;功成四谛,归小涅槃,是声闻法界;广修戒善,作有漏因,是天道法界;爱染不息,杂诸善缘,是人道法界;纯执胜心,常怀嗔斗,是修罗法界;爱见为根,悭贪为业,是畜生法界;欲贪不息,痴想横生,是饿鬼法界;五逆十恶,谤法破戒,是地狱法界。

既然十法界不离一心,则一切修法都是修心。参禅、念佛、诵经、礼拜,早晚殿堂,一切细行都是修心。

此心放不下,打无明,好吃懒做等等,就向下堕;除习气,诸恶莫作,众善奉行,就向上升。

自性本来是佛,不要妄求,只把贪嗔痴习气除掉,自见本性清净、随缘自在,犹如麦子一样,把它磨成粉之后就千变万化,可以做酱、做面、做包、做饺、做麻花、做油条,种种式式由你造作。若知是麦,就不被包、饺、油条等现象所转,饽饽、馒头,二名一实,不要到北方认不得馒头,到南方认不得饽饽。  

说来说去,还是把习气扫清,就能降伏其心。行住坐卧,动静闲忙,不生心动念,就是降伏其心。认得心是麦面,一切处无非面麦,就离道不远了。

Training in compassion is a mental activity, but our mind should also be brought to the level where every action we take is influenced by compassion. That means engaging ourselves in compassion in action.

-- Gelek Rimpoche

Wednesday 24 November 2021

The Meaning of Refuge

by Khenpo Karthar Rinpoche

This will be a discussion of the refuge ceremony, with which some of the older students will already be quite familiar. Still, for those who have not taken the refuge vow or have not had any involvement in the Buddhist path, there is bound to be some question as to what "refuge" is, or what "going for refuge" means — what is the benefit of such a vow and what does it involve? Since people have different levels of understanding, Rinpoche will give a very general explanation. Hopefully, this will bring greater understanding to those already acquainted with the Buddhist path, and a basic understanding to those who are new to it.

Given our situation as Tibetans, the question of refuge and of refugees could seem rather ironic. People may wonder, "What are these people talking about? They are actually the refugees! This does not really apply to us; after all, this is a very rich and powerful nation and we already have everything we could possibly want. Why do we need to take refuge?" But we are not merely speaking about the literal sense of refuge, in terms of a general or worldly protection. Instead, we are concerned with certain existential realities that confront us, and which will continue to confront us.

We all try our best to hide those issues and pretend that we are not aware of them, but no matter what we do in the mundane world, however popular we may be and whatever credentials we may have, certain problems and confusions will continue to confront us. Nor will these confusions be remedied by our ordinary intelligence, our ordinary ability to know and make interpretations of the world. It is possible for us to live our lives quite busily, to constantly experience a flurry of activity, but in the end, we must face the fact that it did not bring any lasting meaning or purpose. At that point, all we are left with is a tremendous sense of regret and loss. As death nears, we may begin to feel alone and helpless, but desiring protection and guidance at that time will not help. It is important that we make preparations while there is time and while conditions are favourable.

With this in mind, taking refuge is the beginning of the sane spiritual path. This path offers not only the possibility but the reality of cutting through and transforming our limitations, negative patterns, and confusion. So when we "take refuge, " we make a genuine link with the path leading towards the experience of sanity. And sanity, in this context, means liberation from the actual and potential confusion and sufferings that beings experience.

As human beings, we generally feel some need for protection and seek stability in some form of refuge. Unfortunately, there is much ignorance, confusion, and lack of understanding as to what forms would actually serve us best. There may be a particular mountain that seems very stable, a particular lake that seems comforting, or a particular tree that seems to be different or unique, and because these things seem indestructible and beautiful, they may seem to possess that security we seek. We may therefore believe these to be suitable objects of refuge. Of course, they cannot provide any real protection, and we will only become dissatisfied and resort to old habits of paranoia and confusion.

There are others who turn to the evil beings or spirits that inhabit the world around them, assuming that they possess power. By seeking the protection of these forces and relating to them, these people hope these spirits will become friendly and assist them. They view power as a source of protective and beneficial shelter; yet, with evil forces, there is no certainty, except that there will be evil consequences. It is like putting your hand in the fire — what results do you expect? Attachment also plays a role in our misguided search, because it is easy to view our attachments as sources of security. For instance, by calling forth a dead relative or ancestor, we may hope that the relationship we had with them will cause them to protect and aid us. This is obviously of very little value.

The point is that everyone senses the need for a form of refuge, either because of attachments or because of some need of power and a feeling of helplessness. As human beings, we are so dependent on our surroundings that we feel the need of some form of protection and security, and yet we do not exactly know how to procure this for ourselves. Therefore, we indulge in these different solutions, but to no avail.

It is unfortunate that people seek protection and refuge in these ways. Not only are these objects of refuge inappropriate, they are potentially harmful as well. In order to propitiate these forces, one may mistakenly believe that it is necessary and desirable to make many blood sacrifices and offer the flesh and blood of other beings. Sadly, these confused and harmful notions are widely held in many parts of the world.

People fail to realise that the negative experiences they go through, no matter how confusing or painful, result from their own habitual, negative patterns. In addition, if one chooses to indulge in further harm to others and to oneself, one will intensify existing harmful patterns and tendencies, and increase the serious consequences. This is simply common sense. Therefore, discerning the proper path, the proper objects of refuge, and the proper examples of sanity is clearly very important.

A few wise, intelligent people may have some insight into the experience of sanity and wakefulness, and into the reversal of the patterns of confusion. Looking up to these men or women, we may seek refuge in their teachings. Still, beings relate to things in different ways and on different levels. The teachings and the profound examples they use may be similar to Buddhist teachings, but their attitudes and motivations will greatly differ. Some people are so completely concerned with their own experience that they relate to profound examples of sanity and wakefulness for the sole purpose of their own personal liberation. Without a greater vision or a more spacious motivation, the benefit is also limited. Although such a person may experience some degree of self-liberation, they will lack the depth and ability to adapt or extend the situation of liberation and inspiration to others. Thus, in a very real way these gains are selfish and tainted. The inspiration these examples could have provided, the abilities that could have been developed, are much more profound and all-encompassing than what has been achieved in such a case.

As we have seen, in our search for security there are many possible mistakes we could make and sidetracks on which we could be stuck. In addition, even if we are able to relate to the proper examples and the proper path, there are many limitations which may occur. For this reason, we will now discuss the Buddhist understanding of refuge. This will be done from the perspective of the Mahayana tradition, the tradition of the "greater vehicle."

The first point of discussion will be on the misfortune of not having had the opportunity or desire to take refuge. In such cases, one has been deprived of the inspiration of proper and perfect examples. In the mundane world, beings are constantly being born, only to die over and over, in fortunate and unfortunate circumstances. All beings are subject to rebirth because of the habitual patterns they have built up. Sometimes we experience less confusion and are able to involve ourselves in limited wholesome activities and attitudes, which then produce beneficial situations for ourselves. And sometimes we experience extreme confusion and paranoia. By indulging further and further, we strengthen our existing habitual patterns. As a result of this, we go through great psychological and physical pain and frustration.

We are continuously captured and bound by the chain of samsaric existence, experiencing the fluctuations of favourable and unfavourable conditions. It is mainly a question of intensity of the ever-present paranoia. And this is precisely because we have not been able to relate to the proper examples or integrate the skilful means of a proper path towards sanity and awakening. Even when we have done something wholesome and have generated some benefit for ourselves, the resulting favourable circumstances do not last and are of no permanent benefit to us.

This is best illustrated by pouring something into a pot without a bottom. However fresh and good the ingredients you pour in, no matter how much you pour in, there will only be the momentary satisfaction of the pouring because such a vessel will not retain its contents. Nothing beneficial will come of the good you have achieved, because — like the pot — you lack a foundation. This could also be compared to the sowing of seeds. In order to have a fruitful crop, first, there must be rich, fertile soil, and then whatever is sown will not be wasted. In our own situation, not being able to relate to the proper objects of refuge is like pouring ingredients into a bottomless pot or sowing seeds in infertile ground. Wandering in confusion, our habitual patterns become heavier and heavier. Consequently, the paranoia and suffering become more intense. That is the misfortune of not having taken refuge or of not having related to proper examples of sanity and awakening.

The second point of discussion will be the benefit of committing oneself to the proper path, and of following the examples of the awakened objects of refuge. To begin with, the Buddhas and bodhisattvas, the embodiments of awakened compassion, were ordinary beings exactly like ourselves. They were not higher or better than us, nor did they possess superior qualities that we lack. But by taking advantage of the opportunity to relate to the proper examples, and by sincerely committing themselves to the path that offers tremendous inspiration and encouragement, they became, in time, liberated beings. As a result of their accomplishment, they were able to benefit immeasurable beings with skilful means.

In the same way, we have the opportunity to free ourselves from the chain of cyclic existence by relating to the proper path and the proper examples, just as the Buddhas and bodhisattvas once did. The methods they used are as fresh and as relevant as they were in the past. Once we relate to these proper sources of refuge, then whatever spiritual practices we perform will be meaningful. We become like fertile ground because there is the possibility and certainty of producing flourishing deeds. Like a pot with a complete bottom, we have the capability of reaching our full potential, because whatever is poured in is retained, even if it is only a drop at a time.

There may be differences in our individual capacities for understanding. But, by laying the proper foundations, we are bound to experience the fruit of the practices we undertake. Once there is a solid foundation, all benefits are retained. In addition, by committing oneself to the Buddhist path one has the opportunity to fully utilise many skilful spiritual means and methods — first by understanding them and then by properly applying them. There are also different levels of the teachings, transmissions, and empowerments that one could receive, but unless one has been able to relate to the awakened objects of refuge, one does not have the ground for such relationships. The same is true if one desires to practice the bodhisattva ideals: the practice of loving-kindness and compassion, the development of the enlightened mind, and the vow to work for the liberation of beings. It cannot be done without the appropriate foundations. One may have good intentions, but not all good intentions are realistic or practical.

As one makes progress in the Mahayana, or bodhisattva path, there exists the possibility of being able to utilise the more advanced practices of Buddhism, the tantric or Vajrayana practices. But even if one sincerely desires to learn about the application of such practices, again, one must first have the proper grounding to be able to fully appreciate and integrate them. Otherwise, it would be like trying to grasp space, which would be quite useless.

In short, these are the benefits of taking refuge, of relating to the awakened examples of sanity, and of seeking awakening for oneself and others. Hopefully, we have conveyed some of the importance of seeking involvement with the Dharma.

Since we have discussed some of the possible sidetracks and misconceptions prevalent in the search for security, now we will briefly examine the awakened objects of refuge that are appropriate for our commitment. The awakened objects of the refuge are the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha. The Buddha is the Awakened One; the Dharma, the teachings of the Awakened One; and the Sangha, the assemblage of spiritual friends or teachers who have preserved the unbroken line of the Dharma. These objects are also known as the Three Jewels.

The Buddha signifies complete liberation, complete awakening. As was explained earlier, the historical Buddha was an ordinary being like any one of us. He was only able to attain enlightenment by relating to the correct examples of awakening and strenuously practising the Dharma. It was not something that just spontaneously happened. Therefore, he is a sign for all of us that it can be done. This is why we relate to the Buddhas as the ultimate objects of refuge and inspiration. Going for refuge to the Buddha means relating to the state of complete awakening and being inspired by our own potential to realise such a state of liberation.

If we relate to the Buddhas as the ultimate objects of refuge, then we relate to the Dharma as the path towards the experience of such liberation. Just as the awakened ones made use of the path and attained enlightenment, we can also make use of the Dharma as the path towards the experience of liberation. Their continuing influence over the centuries demonstrates the profound validity and effectiveness of the path of the Dharma.

Lastly, we relate to the Sangha, the assemblage of compassionate teachers, as the guides on the path towards the experience of complete awakening. Because of our incessant absorption in habitual patterns, we were unable to be contemporaries of the Buddha and to learn directly from him. Or, even if we were around at that time, we were unable to take advantage of his example and his teachings. This is why the great teachers of Buddhism have preserved and maintained the unbroken lineage of the Dharma through literature, practice, and the transmission. Since the Buddha is not physically present, and we cannot understand the teachings or receive transmissions of them by ourselves, we are compassionately given the Dharma by the great teachers. Thus, we relate to them as spiritual friends on the path towards liberation.

In a more mundane sense, one could make an analogy between physical illness and the ignorant condition of samsaric existence, and between good health and the experience of Buddha mind. When we are sick, we long for the experience of good health because we see the possibility of it and are inspired to get better. Therefore the Buddhas, or the awakened ones, can be regarded as examples of complete health, and the Dharma as medicine. We realise we have some kind of sickness and we need treatment, but we are not sure what is wrong with us or how to go about treating it. Therefore, we have need of a physician who can prescribe the right medicines and stages of treatment to follow, and this is how we relate to the Sangha, or spiritual friends. Once we have been cured of our illness and are experiencing good health, we no longer need treatment or a physician. In this way, we can say that the Buddha is the ultimate object of refuge, and the Dharma and Sangha are the temporary objects of the refuge.

In terms of time, there is some difference in motivation between the Hinayana and the Mahayana, although both relate to the same objects of refuge. With Hinayana motivation, one goes for refuge to the awakened objects for this lifetime only; whereas, in the Mahayana tradition, we remain committed to the objects of refuge from that point until absolute enlightenment has been achieved. The problem with the Hinayana interpretation is that it is like taking a very strong bow and arrow, aiming it right in front of your nose, and shooting it. It will not go very far, no matter how strong and straight it is. If one does not achieve liberation in this lifetime, what use is this commitment? With the Mahayana understanding, however, the point is that when we die, the stream of mind continues into whatever birth or stages of evolution that follow. And since the transmission is given to our mind, no matter how many lifetimes it takes to experience perfect liberation, we retain the benefit of the commitment. From rebirth to rebirth, we can thus build on prior accomplishments and go further and further on the path.

The enduring commitment of the Mahayana tradition is like a flower seed. When you plant the seed, it does not immediately sprout but remains hidden beneath the ground for several days until finally, a flower emerges. It takes time, but the seed is not lost; it turns into a beautiful flower. Our situation is very similar because reaching Buddhahood takes time, but it is not wasted time. So taking the bodhisattva outlook in relation to time, we vow to relate to these awakened objects of refuge, these inspirational examples, until we reach enlightenment.

Looking at the motivations for refuge in terms of space, there are also basic differences between the Hinayana and Mahayana outlooks. According to the Hinayana tradition, we relate to the awakened objects of refuge strictly for our own liberation, so it is a very limited space. In the Mahayana tradition on the other hand, the motivation is much more vast, because we relate to these profound examples for the benefit and liberation of all sentient beings, without exception. This demands a very spacious, all-encompassing attitude. In order to be a completely responsible being, capable of true egolessness, it is absolutely necessary for us to be responsible for others as well. Throughout time, we have been caught up in confusion and paranoia because of continual self-gratification and ego-clinging, which still left us extremely dissatisfied. Therefore, we exchange our selfish attitude for the spacious, enlightened attitude of the Mahayana tradition and make our commitment to the refuge with this motivation.

If one chooses to receive the refuge transmission, it must come from an unbroken lineage. This means that from the Buddha down to this day, the literal meaning of the teachings and the practice has to have been immaculately preserved. One should only receive the transmission from such a teacher or lineage, not merely from somebody who knows how to use words well. There is currently a great deal of spiritual materialism in our world, and many dubious teachings have been made by people who know nothing about spiritual endeavours. Unfortunately, those who become involved with these teachings have no idea what they are getting themselves into.

There is an inherent thirst for spiritual wisdom. Unfortunately, people will often follow anyone making claims to spiritual knowledge. There are teachers who will make all sorts of outrageous assertions. For example, they may just rub your forehead against their own, generating some warmth, and then say, "Yes sir, I have laid it on you and given you the transmission, because you felt it." And there are others who will say, "Okay, you sit there, and I'll sit here, and you meditate, and I'll meditate, and everything will be given." Because of this spiritual consumerism, there is much misuse of the teachings.

This is why it is important that the transmission come from an unbroken lineage, and from a teacher who has been authorised by such a lineage. In Buddhism, there are several different lineages and lineage holders. The lineage holder embodies the accumulated spiritual energy and awakening of the lineage. Authorisation is needed because, no matter how realised a teacher may be, there are important logistics and appropriate forms involved. Without these, actual transmission is not complete.

When one receives refuge, there is a transmission being given directly to the mind. If one merely picks up an idea and claims to have been given a mental transmission, then no benefit would result from it. For instance, if we turn on a light switch, the lamp lights because there is an unbroken wire running from it to the switchboard. An unbroken lineage is like this. But if the wire is broken, the lamp will not light, even if we turn on the light switch. Such is the case when the lineage is broken. These are important considerations one must take into account when contemplating making a lasting commitment.

So, this has been a very brief explanation of the refuge in terms of receiving the transmission. Additional questions, such as how one should relate to these examples in daily life, will be addressed when one formally participates in the refuge ceremony. Hopefully, this teaching has given you some idea as to what taking refuge actually means, in terms of attitude and lineage and so forth. In any case, whatever your present or future participation, may this be of some help to you.