49 Pointing out the Relative Nature of the Mind

Olasso. So, we’ll be returning to the text right after this first session. And if you recall where we left off, the author, Panchen Rinpoche had just given a very brief, very concise reference to two methods. The first being very familiar and that is simply observing whatever comes up, letting it be. But the second one I’ve really not dealt with much in this retreat, where he says, “Whatever thought comes up cut it right off.” And he says like a, like a swordsman, right. So some of you have been listening to podcasts or listening to teachings that I’ve given over the years you’ll be familiar with the, the metaphor here. A little tiny bit of a parable. I’ll narrate it ve[ry] very shortly. It’s very simple. The metaphor here is that of a duel between an archer and a swordsman, right. And the type of swordsman, of course there are a lot of kinds of swords. There’s a sword of William Wallace. I think his sword is about six feet long and broadsword. You could cut off three people’s head in one stroke you know. I like that kind. William Wallace yeah my my forebearer. [chuckling] Ah but the other one is like the three musketeers. I think it’s called a foil. So, it’s it’s it’s so it’s very for very quick work. You skewer them rather than, you know you shish kebab them rather than decapitate them. That’s very French. [Laughter] Whereas the broadsword, it’s very Scottish. Just cut off the heads. It’s very straightforward. So this is the French, bien sur. And so the the metaphor you can visualize it so easily. Give the, um, swordsman a chance here. So maybe they’re at 50 paces, maybe 100 paces, right. And so they’re squaring off. And it’s kind of a one-sided battle really because the the the archer has a whole quiver full of arrows and he gets to shoot them whenever he feels like it. He doesn’t, it doesn’t have to be every five seconds he can pause for 10 seconds and then shoot off three in rapid succession. The swordsman is entirely defensive. Yeah. The swordsman is entirely defensive. He’s not going to throw his sword.

[02:02] So he’s there and just like Rhonda’s right in front of me. So I tend to, Rhonda’s a bit too close. If she were an archer she could skewer me before I could before I could you know deflect. But that’s the whole idea. If she’s maybe 50 paces, 100 paces away and I’m very intent on her, as if my life depends on it and she, she brings the brings the arrow to the bow she’s waiting me for me to waiver, to blink, to be distracted. When she thinks she has an in, she will loose the arrow. And if I’m right if I’m very attentive I will see the moment that she looses the arrow. I will see the moment in which the arrow is in flight. I will have my sword poised ready to deflect the arrow before it can get to me, right. And I’ll be waiting. So she can wait. She could wait wait and then boom boom boom or one and then you know whatever she likes. So there’s no telling when she’s going to loose the arrow. So it’s entirely defensive on the part of the swordsman. But don’t get distracted because then you’ll be aware of the arrow after it’s already skewered you. A bit too late, right? So it’s a nice metaphor. It’s very straightforward. And I think you’ve already figured it out. What are you attending to? You’re attending to the space of your mind. You’re attending to the, the flow of consciousness from which emerge thoughts, desires, memories, emotions, and so forth. And as soon as something comes up, and here’s the real point, we’re going to go into the practice and I will give guidance in it.

[03:42] Here’s the real point. If this is a very skilled swordsman it takes very little effort. That is he has to be very attentive. But, when the arrow is in flight and it’s just about to get to him he doesn’t need to go you know like, like that, [Alan indicates with a hand gesture] some big gross movement, it’s just [Alan indicates with a hand gesture] like that, something very subtle and just enough, just enough to deflect the arrow. And then that’s all that’s needed, right. And so similarly, as you’re poised there hovering in the immediacy of the present moment, your awareness turned right in upon the mind, this flow of consciousness from which thoughts, desires, memories, and so forth will emerge forth. As soon as you see one coming up, please bear in mind it takes very little effort to deflect it, to cut it off. It’s kind of like a little, it’s not, it’s not a big effort but it’s very subtle, it’s very precise and it’s exactly precisely poised in the present moment, right. So that’s a quality of awareness. So it’s a very different ambience than just, let it be, let it be. This is not letting be at all. Whatever comes up deflect it. So it gets one moment in the sun and then it’s snuffed out. Once, one moment of flashing in the light of your awareness and then it’s, it’s gone, okay. And then you rest in that stillness, in the absence, in the aftermath of a thought coming up. You simply rest in that silence but you rest not slacking off, not waiting, but just poised right in the present moment, aware of what’s left over. That is you still must maintain the flow of cognizance. And Brendan what are you maintaining full of cognizance of? [Brendan’s response: luminosity and cognizance] Exactly right. The luminosity and cognizance of your own awareness, that’s exactly right. Or I can rephrase it but in no way different. Just you’re aware of the flow of consciousness, the flow of awareness itself with these two distinctive characteristics. So you’re not attending to the space of the mind or the events that are going to appear to you. You’re right there ready to be, to note immediately whatever subjective impulse comes up. So these thoughts, emotions are called in Tibetan, sem jung. They’re events that emerge from sem jung, mind emergences. They are events that emerge from the flow of the mind. And you see them as soon as they come up and then [click sound] like that, okay, that’s it.

[06:26] So final point, I will give guidance hopefully not a lot so you can really be attending to the practice. But I first really kind of immersed myself in this practice when I went down to Sri Lanka, after six months in India retreat. And I remember this, this was 1980 so it was just four years earlier Geshe Rabten had taught it. And I remember I remember so vividly like it was yesterday. What I did. I was living in a little hermitage up in the mountains outside of Kandy. I was doing this practice. And you can’t see but listening, people listening by podcast you can’t, you can’t see but everybody else watch very closely. I’m about to do what I did then 36 years ago. I’m going to. I will actually do it. Did anybody see any problem with what I just did? [Retreatant response: You weren’t breathing.] That could be a problem? [laughter] Yeah, breathing would be such a distraction. Like, there’s no time to breathe. It could come up when I’m breathing out. What do I do then? So I’ll just, I’ll not, I’ll not breathe. That’ll work out fine I’m sure. Yeah, that’s very easy to do. You get so intent that you just suppress quietly, unconsciously, you suppress the breathing. Bad idea. Bad idea. And it’s not only in this practice. I’ve often told of this professor at Stanford that I saw in a video where he asked everybody in the audience, bring out your smartphones and check your email. And like 300 people did this, after they did it he said, Okay how many of you were holding your breath? And that was like lots. Checking email.

[08:10] Oh what. Oh could be oh. [laughter] Very common, really unhealthy, okay. So it all the more emphasizes settling body, speech, and mind sequentially, coarse to subtle and all the way through that breath just flowing like you’re on a vacation in Tahiti. No worries. Just breathing in, breathing out, like that. It’s relaxed as Tahiti and as sharp as a blade [chuckles]. Olasso. Get comfortable.

[Sounds of shuffling as retreatants get comfortable to meditate]

[09:34] [sound of bell ringing three times]

[09:45] With the motivation to penetrate through to the sign of your own mind. To that indwelling joy and sense of well-being that emerges from the ground state of your awareness, as a step along the path to full awakening. For the sake of all sentient beings arouse such a motivation. With that motivation settle your body, speech, and mind in their natural states.

[13:02] Then let your eyes be gently open. Evenly rest your awareness in the space in front of you. For a very short time simply rest sustaining this flow of mindful presence without an object, without doing anything, without meditating on anything. Simply sustaining the flow of mindfulness without distraction, without grasping.

[15:16] Then invert your awareness right in upon consciousness itself this flow of awareness from which emerge all discursive thoughts, memories, desires, and emotions, all subjective impulses. Non conceptually attend to this flow of awareness itself. And as soon as some mental activity emerges from this non conceptual flow of luminosity and cognizance, cut it off immediately. And sustain the flow of awareness, of cognizance, of what continues on in the aftermath of the mental emergence that occurred. Of central importance is to maintain the flow of cognizance, non conceptually. Non conceptually aware of the non conceptual flow of awareness. To maintain such fine tune, such precise, utterly present-centered discerning awareness, for this to be sustainable there must continue to be a deep sense of ease, of looseness and relaxation in the body. Your body should be still like a mountain. The breath should flow as effortlessly and as unimpededly as if you were deep asleep. Let’s continue practicing now in silence.

[33:34] Bell rings three times

[34:57] Olasso. We return to the text. And right now we’re looking at the root text. So just to read again the last verse very briefly that was covered yesterday, extremely concisely, focusing on these two, these two methods, kind of yin and yang. “Whatever thoughts arise identify each one.” So there’s more passive. “Alternatively like a swordsman immediately cut off any thought that comes up.” Obviously more yang. So then we continue. “When you are resting after they’ve been cut off without losing mindfulness, loosely relax,” [and then the aphorism is tightly focus and loosely relax] “It is there that the mind is settled.” That’s an aphorism from the Mahamudra tradition on shamatha. So I won’t, I won’t comment a lot here he’s going to give his own commentary. But it’s very important and that is once you, once a thought arises and you do nip it in the bud, just cut it right off, that you’re not waiting. The word wait should never enter into this practice because waiting already is sending your mind to the future in anticipation of something that may or may not occur, which means you’re not here. So the notion of waiting never happens in this practice authentically. Because you’re getting, it’s like instant gratification. And that is, what you want to do, is be right in the present, being fully attentive, and you’re doing it right now so you’re totally satisfied. So it’s instant gratification right. That’s that. That’s nice, um but this means as soon as the thought is cut off, you’re totally on and you are totally present sustaining the flow of cognizance of what remains after the thought has been snuffed out. And of course that is precisely that flow [of] of luminosity and cognizance.

[36:56] So, “without losing mindfulness”. But then, don’t be freezing up, it’s very easy to do. Don’t be tense. Don’t get your continuity that way, that’s the old-fashioned way that leads to burnout. But as you’re doing this, this is where you have to have that core really kind of an existential sense of looseness, of relaxation, of ease, without losing mindfulness, without losing stability, without losing the continuity of focused attention. Loosely relax. And now we see this theme and it’s clearly common both to the Dzogchen as well as the Mahamudra traditions, the oscillation. Tightly focus and loosely relax. “It is there that the mind is settled.” Okay. So it’s not just Padmasambhava, this is really quite generic in the Dzogchen and Mahamudra traditions. So it is said. So as I said that’s an aphorism, well-known aphorism in the traditions. Cher gyis gtad la lhod kyis glod. So easy everything is shorter in Tibetan [clicks fingers quickly], very concise. So what it says, “And elsewhere it says” here’s another aphorism coming up [this mound] “this mind bound by entanglements no doubt attains freedom when relaxed.” So, it’s like, yeah. I can’t remember exactly what the image is but if you’re snared, if you’re snared and you struggle, the snare tightens up on you. You struggle more and afterwhile you’re just totally frozen and locked in totally. And the only way to release is you know the only way to get out of the snare is by totally loosening up. Well that’s exactly this here, okay. No doubt the mind attains freedom when you loosen up which and how do you do that? By releasing all the grasping. It was the grasping that bound you up in the entanglements in the first place. As taught here “you should relax without distraction.” So, very pithy. Another verse. “Whenever thoughts arise if their essential nature is observed they naturally disappear and a clear vacuity arises.”

[39:09] So we’re back to [to] method one, simply observing whatever thought comes up. And I’ve changed the translation a lot here. “Whenever thoughts arise if their essential nature is observed” there are two terms here in Tibetan, ngo bo and rang bzin, and this is the ngo bo, it’s the essential nature. Essential nature. And rang bzhin is, I’ve changed the translation a lot here just because I think it’s an important distinction and it didn’t come through in the translation. Rang bzhin is manifest, a manifest nature. And the essential nature is right down to the core not talking about intrinsic nature or inherent nature which doesn’t exist at all. But we can say that the, the, the essential nature of consciousness, bare bones, cut back to its kind of raw core, luminosity and cognizance. It’s not to say they’re inherently existent but if you cut them out then you don’t have consciousness anymore. You can cut out a awful lot of the padding, you know, the coverings, the cloakings, the configuration. You can cut them out. Conceptualizations, memories, fantasy, gen, gender oriented thoughts, and so on, you can cut that out. But if you should cut out luminosity or cognizance, then you, then you’ve, then the baby’s, the baby, killed the baby, you know. Throw out all the bath water you like, but if you throw out then, the baby’s gone. So that’s the essential nature. One says the essential nature of fire is hot. If it’s not hot, it’s not fire. It’s burning. If it’s not burning it’s not fire right. Now there are many types of flame. There are blue flame, yellow flame. There are blow torches, there are candles, there are suns, there are nuclear explosions, there’s all kinds of ways that the fire element manifests. Right? Those are the manifest nature, right. But the essential nature is if you take that away then you don’t have one.

[40:58] So this becomes very important when we’re observing thoughts. And that is we observe the manifest thought. Oh, that’s a thought about the vacation my family had when I was 14 and we’re traveling all over Europe in a VW van. I remember my grandma was there. It was really, it was. Okay, I got caught in the narrative. That’s the manifest. That was the story. That was the memory taking me down memory lane, right. That’s the manifest nature. How is it displayed? What are its distinct, of this particular thought? Oh that’s a memory from my perspective only I have. My siblings, and my parents, my grandma were in the, in the, in the van all together but my perspective is unique. So that’s manifest, right. There’s not a whole lot to be learned about them unless you want my biography. But in this practice we’re not interested in personal narrative. This is quite an impersonal practice. It’s not like I want to get my to get to know myself better. [laughter] Bullshit. Why? You’re going to be dead soon. What’s the big deal? You know. Why are you interested in this short story it’s going to be over anyway, what’s the big deal? Why not worry about the essential nature. If anything continues on, it’s not going to be your story. It’s going to be something much more raw, primitive, primal than that. You might think along the lines of luminosity and cognizance. Now if that continues and you fathom that, that could be meaningful all the way through. All the way through life, all the way through the dying process, through beyond the dying process, that’s a keeper. That’s essential nature. So whatever thought comes up simply observe its, its nature. The thought as a thought, not as a thought as my thought, about this event, with these people, and blah blah blah. But, just a thought as a thought, an emotion as an emotion. A desire as a desire. Without even labeling it, just see it naked. Gone, here, gone, okay. Keep it clean. Keep it simple. “If their essential nature is observed” which means you’re not cognitively fusing with it. Otherwise if you are then you’re not observing it. You’re not getting caught up in the drama. Otherwise you’re identifying with it. “If their essential,” see he’s packed a lot into these few words and it’s much shorter in Tibetan.

[43:06] “Whenever thoughts arise, if their essential nature is observed they naturally disappear.” They are rang byung, rang grol, they arise by themselves, they disappear by themselves. “they naturally disappear and in their wake upon their disappearance” this is as you’re tending the space of the mind and whatever comes up, upon the vanishing, the disappearance of the mental event, the thought, the image and so on, “a clear vacuity arises.” Okay. Space of the mind, clear as in the sense of having no appearances in it. Sustain the cognizance of that. “Likewise if the mind is examined when it is still,” so if you’re observing your, if you’re inverting right in upon the mind upon that which is observing, right. If the, and it’s still, it’s your unflickering candle flame. The candle flame is inverting in upon itself illuminating and knowing itself. If you do that, “if the mind is examined when it is still, a vivid unobscured luminous vacuity is perceived.” That awareness is not in a tight space. It’s not a point. It’s not inside your head. It’s not inside a pea. It’s not confined. And so as you’re attending to that, then a sense of space may also arise, as he says, a vivid, unobscured. So I think back to Gauche’s comment, it is unobscured indeed. Luminous, it’s by nature bright as your own awareness. Vacuity, that awareness itself is empty. That’s the thing that awareness itself has no content. That awareness itself has no referent. It’s not about something else. It’s just resting in its own nature, right. So it’s clear, it’s empty of any referent. It’s not about anything, “and that is perceived. This is known as the fusion of stillness and movement.” So there’s that very familiar phrase by now. Gnas ‘gyu zung jug again it’s always shorter in Tibetan. Gnas ‘gyu zung jug, means union, fusion, coming, coming together, convergence even.

[45:11] So I think what he’s getting at here in this, in this context is he’s saying you may be observing thoughts, that kind of like yin approach. Observing thoughts, observing their essential nature, they vanish and then a clear vacuity arises. But of course that clear vacuity is suffused by your awareness. Otherwise you wouldn’t be aware of it. That’s what you wind up with right. On the other hand if you invert your awareness right in upon the mind observing when it’s still and you penetrate through that and you don’t tighten up, you don’t constrict into thinking somehow the mind is something small, the mind’s a point, the mind is confined, but you observe it free of concepts you come to that same vacuity, which is indivisible from the luminosity of your own awareness. So it’s like two different approaches. They are different approaches, right. One’s observing thoughts, the other one’s just cutting them off. That’s not the same but when he says, think of the fusion of the union of stillness and movement, I think he’s saying these two approaches converge in upon the same point. Okay. “Whatever thought” so now we’re back to method one. We’ll just call it that, method one. “Whatever thoughts arise do not block them, [do not block them], but recognizing their movements focus upon their [what did I call it before] their essential nature. Focus upon their essential nature.” Again their manifest nature would be, oh, I was thinking about my, it was something you might talk to a therapist or a person who’s going to analyze your dreams. I had a dream last night. This was the story. Oh, I just had a wandering thought. I just had an emotion come up. I just had a memory come up. Let me tell you about it. There’s nothing wrong with that, nothing trivial, but it’s something different, because it’s telling you about the content. Oh tell me what was your thought about? What was the emotion about? What was your dream about? Good, no problem. That’s not bad. That’s manifest nature.

[47:08] But here we’re coming right to the core of the essential nature. We’re not interested in the referent. We’re not interested in the storyline. We’re just observing the mental event as a mental event. Just keeping it that simple, right. So, “Whatever thoughts arise do not block them, but recognizing their movements, [their comings and going,] focus upon their essential nature.” Like the analogy of a raven on a ship. Just as a raven that flies and here’s the aphorism. “Just as a raven that flies from a ship circles in every direction and alights there again.” Okay. I’ve told this, this metaphor many times but not necessarily everybody’s heard it and so I’ll tell it now but I’ll try to keep it quite short. This is again classic, a classic parable and the parable is actually reality based. And that is, in olden times, thousand, fifteen hundred, two thousand years ago maybe longer, the Indians were seafarers back during the time of the Buddha himself. They were the seafarers. They were heading out on their ships onto the high seas and making their way to the near east to Alexandria to Cairo or whatever, Alexandria and so forth and so. But of course they didn’t have the star charts, they didn’t have the navigation devices that were later developed. And so, when they were far out at sea, uh, and they’re running short of supplies, especially water, then at some point they know, we’ve, we’ve got to get water fast otherwise the crew’s gonna die and we’ll all be dead. And so, as part of their navigation tools they would cage ravens, one, probably more than one raven. Don’t want one to get sick and die. So they would cage, rage, ravens, ravens, crows, same, the same word in Tibetan bya rog and they would cage them. As they set out on the high seas and then when they are really running sort of supplies they need to find landfall soon like within a day or two otherwise they could be in deep trouble. Then they would release one of the ravens. And very important, they’re releasing a raven, not a seagull or a duck, they’re releasing a bird that cannot swim in the water.

[49:10] And the bird knows it cannot swim. If it it lands in the water, it knows it’s going to die. A wet raven is a dead raven on the high seas, right. And so they release the raven. Well you can imagine the raven’s been cooped up there for days or weeks. The raven takes off and the thing, the clever thing about this is, the navigator knows the raven wants what everybody on the boat wants. Where’s the nearest land? Now if you’re right on the surface of the ocean, what I’ve been told is you can see about 10 miles, the horizon is about 10 miles away. That’s not very far. But a raven, what’s the smart raven, they’re very smart birds. What’s the raven going to do? I’m making this a long story but it’s, it’s a cool story. What’s the raven going to do? They’re smart birds. The raven’s not going to just you know hover against the waves and say I think, meenie meinie, I’m kind of feeling west. (laughter) We’re not stupid, you know, the raven’s going to, gonna be smart and the raven’s gonna go straight up. Because the higher you go the farther the horizon. The raven’s got that figured out. So the raven is just gonna circle up up up up up up as far as it can go until it sees land. As soon as it sees land it wants what the navigator wants. It’s going to make a beeline and to head right for the land. That’s where food is, drink, and freedom, right. And then of course the navigator is watching that raven with intense curiosity because if it, if it gets very high and it turns into a dot and the navigator’s attention wanders, get the next raven. You blew it. You just blew one of your ravens. [laughter] So don’t let your mind wander. But of course don’t shoot the raven, keep that archer at home, you know. [laughter] Don’t mess with the raven. Don’t throw bread crumbs in the water. Just, just watch the raven and don’t get distracted because if that raven takes off, hard a port, follow that raven because you can be very confident that raven is heading in the direction that it saw, which is also the direction you want. But now, alas, in this metaphor the raven goes up and up circling around higher and higher and higher but alas, even if it goes up a mile it still sees no land and so what does the raven do? The raven is faced with a decision. I may, I can either commit suicide andnd just go off, and bye bye world and just you know guy, until he just kind of gets exhausted and falls into the sea and dies. That’s a possibility. Or he can come back to this, the lesser of two evils, and come back to the boat which he really doesn’t want but it’s better than dying. So what the raven will do is circle up up up up, disappointed raven circles down down down and lands on the mast. From that from which it arose. To that it returns.

[52:03] The thoughts emerge from the space of the mind, they circle around, they tell their story, maybe it’s a short story, maybe it’s a long story. But in this very yin approach, this very passive approach you don’t mess with the story. You don’t alter it, you don’t prolong it, you don’t censor it, you don’t block it, don’t mess with it any more than the navigator is messing with the raven. But he’s certainly watching very closely, right. And then as a thought emerges from the space of the mind, the thought having nowhere else to go, I wish they did, I’d give all mine away. Mary Kay, have a ton of thoughts, I’ve got some excess, bl, bl, bl. Doesn’t work that way. Having nowhere else to go the thought comes and dissolves back into the space of your own mind from which it arose. And you watch, if you’re really on and you’re very soft, very relaxed like the navigator is, just watching, you can actually watch the thought emerge you can be lucid from the first moment it arises, watch the thought circle around, whether it’s 3 seconds or 30, but with no grasping, no preference, no identification, no perpetuation or termination. It circles around, it tells its story, like overhearing somebody talk in the adjacent room or just like hearing some speech on the radio, you’re just not part of it at all. And then it just fades out and you just watch it. And then the thought comes [makes sound: hewoooo] and dissolves right back in the space of the mind. That’s the metaphor, okay. Very passive, very passive and very different of course, diametrically different to cutting them off as soon as they come up, okay. So now we have these two metaphors. The duel between the swordsmen and the archer, and the navigator and the raven. Two nice, very nice metaphors, okay.

[53:45] So now we go to his commentary. “As for the nature of the concentration,” the term samadhi which I really like, the word samadhi. He’s translating quite correctly as concentration. So I’m just keeping to that. “As for the nature [of concentration] of the concentration [to become] to be accomplished, samadhi has two limbs, the power of clarity,” clarity also means luminosity. So there’s one, “and single-pointed non-conceptuality.” So these are the two elements power of clarity-luminosity and single pointed non conceptuality. Bear in mind non conceptuality is not just spacing out and [having] having no thought. Single-pointed non-conceptual cognizance that’s not what it says here but that is certainly implied. “Such authentic serenity” again serenity being his translation for shamatha, “Such an authentic shamatha must have both of these two. It must have the power of clarity” and [or] you just phh to dullness, stupor “and it must be single pointed” otherwise it’s not samadhi “and it must be non-conceptual” otherwise it’s not turning into shamatha. “Such authentic shamatha arises from single-pointed concentration of a desire realm mind” a mind that is embedded in, is at home in, the desire realm versus the form realm or formless realm. “Such authentic shamatha arises from single pointed samadhi of a desire realm mind of one on a stage that is not yet complete equipoise.” Equipoise is mnyam gzhag in Tibetan I prefer meditative equipoise but equipoise is certainly fine. So it’s, so there is some degree of balance this meditative equipoise, free of the extremes of laxity and excitation but is not yet complete. You don’t have that that really sublime extremely fine-tuned balance of having achieved shamatha. In which case your mind slips over from being a desire realm mind and crosses the threshold to becoming a form realm mind, okay. “The guardian” or the protector, “Maitreya says it arises from a cause that is abandonment. Abandonment of the five flaws and a reliance on the eight”, I’m translating as interventions, “eight interventions.” I think he said engagements that’s certainly not incorrect, I simply prefer.

[56:12] So, I just want to list these shortly. Anybody who’s studied lamrim knows exactly where to go. My book might actually, my one, my doctoral dissertation at Stanford was, uh, now called Balancing the Mind. It has Tsongkhapa’s complete presentation of shamatha. It covers all of these five powers, the eight, eight interventions, the, the four types of mental engagement, all definitively laid out. It’s laid out of course in the Lamrim Chenmo, the great exposition. Volume three has extensive discussion on that. So it’s all there and it’s in Gen Lamrimpa’s book, Calming the Mind. So, there’s no reason to really linger here. We could really, we could spend a day on this very easily. So I’m just going to list the five. five flaws or five faults. either way is fine. They are and they’re interesting and and you’ll have these, you know, you’ll have these, this by this evening. Spiritual sloth, I translate it as spiritual sloth, and not just laziness. Ah, it’s I think it’s acedia in Latin, the Christian contemplatives use this term a lot acedia. I’ll just give the briefly the three types, we could linger here I just want to go bump bump like stiletto, [Italian word, meaning a shoe with a long, thin, high heel] three types of spiritual sloth, it’s le lo in Tibetan. There is bya ba ngan zhen gyi le lo and this is, and this is the one that this is why I say spiritual sloth because the first one hardly anybody would regard as laziness. Bya ba zhen gyi le lo is the spiritual sloth of fixating on bya ba ngan pa, negative activity. Well negative activity in this context means the pursuit of any mundane concerns - money, fame, wealth, reputation. These are not evil but if you’re a shamatha practitioner these are definitely not on the positive side of the ledger, they’re on the negative side. They’re complete distractions. And so people from this contempl, from this contemplative perspective, from the perspective of a person who’s committed to entering the path and proceeding on the path looking from that perspective.

[58:07] If you, for example, in California you go to Silicon Valley and you find people with their startups and they’re working 16-hour days and they’re just burning the candle at both ends and they’re working incredibly hard. For what? To, well, financial success, coming out with a good product, fame, reputation, and more success, and more money, and so forth. You say well that’s a great big exercise in spiritual sloth because all of that’s going to be worth nothing when you’re, when you’re dying. However, however many products you’ve made. I mean for, for other people maybe there’s benefit. If you had a motivation to be of benefit then it’s dharma, that’s good. But if it’s just basically I’m gonna start up a company because I want to be rich and famous and powerful and influential and that’s my motivation, well you maybe succeed, maybe you won’t. But whether you succeed or not everything you’re doing is completely a waste of time, [chuckles] from a dharma perspective. And we judge that by when you’re facing death. Now what? Does it matter how much you have, how many people love you, respect you, how famous you are, how many facebook friends you have, and so forth? [laughter] All it means is they’re going to have one less facebook friend. That’s all it really means. Really. [laughing] And so that’s one type of laziness, fixation on mundane concerns. And it could be 16 hour days, you know workaholic and you’re still just a lazy, lazy bum, from a dharma perspective. That’s one. Sgyid lug gi le lo, that’s one we all, we all resonate with. Sgyid lug gi le lo, is just the, the laziness of lethargy, of just I don’t feel like it, you know. Kind of the couch potato. Just I, I just don’t feel the initiative. Like that. And then brnyas pa’i le lo, this is self-effacing laziness. It’s an interesting one. It’s not humility, not humility. His Holiness, Gyatrul Rinpoche, so many of the great llamas I know, they all basically all of them, they’re incredibly humble but there’s no self-effacement. Self-effacement is the lack of self-worth. The sense that well why should I even try to practice shamatha? I know I’m not going to accomplish it. How many people accomplish it? Why should I be special? I’d probably waste my time. I would never get anywhere. Why should I try to learn Tibetan? It’s a really hard language, very different probably I’d never get it anyway. And and, and, you know, just that. You come up with any idea that I, I probably can’t do it. And sometimes that masquerades as humility. It’s just laziness. So those are the three types of laziness. So that’s longer than I intended to spend but that those are kind of important.

[1:00:44] Now we’ll move quickly through the other ones. So, first one is spiritual sloth. “Forgetting the practical instructions.” So you receive them. I give the guided meditation and then afterwards what? In one ear out the other, don’t have a clue okay. Then what was the, what was the point? Listen to a recording. I don’t need to be here. I can sit at home in my, my little meditation hut. If you forget them what’s the point? “Laxity and excitation.” Those you know well. “Non-intervention.” This is why I use the word intervention, non-intervention. And that is when laxity or excitation arise if you don’t do anything about it, you just go oh I’m supposed to be as they say in the you know the mindfulness movement. So my mind is becoming very relaxed like getting, my mind is very it has a lot of excitation but I just have to accept it all. I just have to be, be here now. Whatever’s coming up I shouldn’t be judgmental you know. If my mind is lax, I just say well I, I wouldn’t want to judge you mind. Heavens but you might object. [laughter] And if you’re getting really excited you know completely rambling well yeah I just but it’s okay, it’s okay, let’s be friends. [Laughter] That’s non-intervention. You should have done something about it stupid. That’s not the practice that’s just stupid. It’s just falling into the same ruts and being complacent about it. And you’re calling this a spiritual practice. Um, Why? There’s a bit of sarcasm. If you’re not aware of sarcasm, I’m being sarcastic right now, this is vintage sarcasm. So that’s non, when you should be intervening, you’re not, because you have some cockamamie notion that you’re supposed to be non-judgmental all the time. I’m very judgmental of being not judgmental. I think it’s bullshit. [laughter] And then, this is up on stage eight out of nine stages preceding shamatha. We know in stage eight neither subtle laxity nor excitation arise at all. They just don’t happen. And if you’re still there as an eager beaver watching for them, watching for them. Intervening, introducing introspection are they there? Are they there? It’s kind of like, hey, eager beaver, give it a rest. It’s okay, the storm’s over. Chill, give your introspection a gold watch, tell him to retire because everything’s fine. So don’t intervene when there’s no need to, that’s non-intervention. It’s a fault. Intervention is a fault depending on the time. “These are regarded as the five faults.” Those are the five faults.

[1:03:18] And then, we have, so those are faults, right. And then we have the eight interventions. So we have the basis, the eight intervention, “The basis is specifically yearning for samadhi.” If you, and that’s conative, has to do with aspiration. If you don’t wish to develop your attention skills, you’re not going to. That’s the first thing. If you don’t want to you’re not going to. “And then the second one is that which is dependent upon it, and that’s striving.” If you give no effort to it, if you don’t sit down, actually implement any of the teachings, you’re not going to get anywhere. You just have this, I’d like to achieve shamatha, I’m not going to do anything about it, but I like it. If it just lands on my head well okay. That’s the second one, striving. “The third one is the cause of that.” Why would you strive? It’s very, very, very smart. This goes back to Asanga I believe. The cause of that, what is the cause of striving? “It’s faith.” Faith in the teachings. Faith in the method. Faith in yourself. Call it faith, call it confidence, call it trust, but if you don’t have that, then you won’t strive. If you think these teachings are just nonsense and nobody’s ever achieved it anyway. And even if I tried I wouldn’t make it, then you won’t strive. So there has to be some confidence or faith okay. That’s the third one. “And then there’s the result”. These are the types of interventions, “and that’s pliancy.” This is that prasrapta, the pliancy, suppleness, buoyancy, the malleability of your mind. That’s what comes out of this. “The fifth one of the interventions is not forgetting the meditative object.” So, that would be coarse excitation. If that happens the “sixth one is recognizing laxity and excitation.” “The seventh one is intervening to eliminate them when they do occur. And the eighth one is when laxity and excitation are calmed there is tranquility.” Tranquility is the time when you do not intervene, you give it a rest. You’re tranquil, you just be at rest, job finished. You basically cruise to the finish line. If you continue practicing shamatha, quite effortlessly you move from stage 8, stage 9 and achieve shamatha. So those are the eight interventions. And we’re finished with those.

[1:05:26] And again you can get lots and lots of commentary. They’re all over the place. So then we return to Panchen Rinpoche’s commentary. He said, “It is taught that the mind that arises through reliance on the eight interventions that are antidotes to the five flaws'' [so you can match those up] “is accomplished [through nine] through the nine stages”, which I’ve referred to many times and you have that whole word file on the the nine stages uh and the bullet points - the powers by which they’re achieved and so on. Those, those nine mental stages are also taught by Arya Asanga in the Treatises on the Stages. So I’m almost certain that refers to the the bodhisattva bhumi The Treatise On the Stages of the Bodhisattvas, or the grounds the bhumis of the Bodhisattvas and the sravakabhumi. Do you recall, I think there’s just two, do you remember Glenn? Is there anything more or is that it? I think that’s probably it. So, “and they are accomplished through the six powers.” So we’ll call those out as well. These are all those six powers by the way are are included in that word file I gave everybody. But they’re very simple. Here they are. The six powers are first of all hearing. And that is hearing this is old-fashioned which is an aural lineage. It goes back for thousands of years in India. You don’t start out with reading, you start out with hearing from somebody who knows what he or she is talking about. You hear the instructions. Having heard about them, the second power and from that comes the understanding of hearing. I know what the person said. I understood. I understand what the person said. I understand what the instructions are. But now as you integrate them, as you integrate them, you, you go to a deeper level of understanding. And that’s the power of thinking, reflecting upon, considering. The power of thinking is the third one. So now you’ve really got it. You have the understanding from hearing. You have the understanding from thinking. And now it’s time for meditation and for that you need to draw on the third power which is mindfulness. You know what that is. The fourth power is introspection. You know what that is. The fifth one which really gives you that oomph, this, for the staying power to get you all the way to the finish line is the power of enthusiasm. And the sixth one is the power of familiarity.

[1:07:33] When you get up there to stage eight you don’t really need enthusiasm you just cruise, just cruise, float on through okay. Those are the six powers. So, those nine stages are accomplished through the six powers and possessing, “is accomplished through the six powers and possessing the four kinds of mental engagement”. Thehe way you engage with the meditative object, there are four. And they are and then we’ll be finished. The four mental engagements are first of all focused engagement. This is right at the very beginning. When before you go into the main practice your mind is probably wandering here and there, a bit of fuzzy, bit of noise, a bit of activity. And then you give it a task. Like having a dog that’s just wandering in the yard and say okay sit. And then the dog runs away or whatever the dog does. But you’ve just given it a task you know. That’s it. [laughter] So there’s something to do. So watch sensations of the fluctuations of the breath throughout the body. Okay there it is. Do it. Focus, okay, that’s it. Simple. Engage with it, engage with the meditative object. Focused engagement. But then as you do so the first thing you discover is that you, you’re not there for very long, just like when I was growing up my dog would sit for about three seconds then it would say that was boring and go on and do something else. And so that’s called, the second type is interrupted engagement. Interrupted. You’ve given your your mind a command and it follows it for three seconds and then it’s off into coarse excitation or coarse laxity or medium excitation or subtle. Any of those, any of those is a type of interruption to the flow of, pristine flow of mindfulness. So even subtle laxity and excitation they’re still interrupted, right.

[1:09:25] And so that when you get to stage eight this this this notorious stage eight, then the flow of your mindfulness, flow of Samadhi is uninterrupted even by subtle laxity and subtle excitation. So that’s the point in which you have uninterrupted engagement. And then, and then, there’s, it’s said, at the very beginning of the session in stage eight, very beginning, like, like the sleds you use in the Olympics, a little bit of effort just to get them over the lip, and then down they go and nobody’s hopping you know, [makes sound: whooch] getting on the back of the sled and trying to push it downhill because you’re already going 30 miles an hour, right. But it takes a little bit of effort at the beginning. And then like that, just like that, the beginning of the session a little nudge to engage with the meditative object, then as soon as you, you’ve, you’re in, then [whooch] for the rest of the session, three hours, four hours, whatever, effortless and impeccable. So that’s effortless mental engagement. So it’s uninterrupted but takes a little bit of effort on stage eight. Stage nine the difference between stage eight and stage nine is it doesn’t take any effort to get in. It’s effortless in, effortless out. Effortless maintaining. It’s all effortless. And that’s how you cross the finish line to shamatha, effortlessly. So it’s, it has a nice ending, has a happy ending. Okay. Four kinds of mental engagement.

[1:10:52] Back to the commentary. So we’re kind of moving on briskly now because a lot of this you’ll be familiar with. Well focusing on what sort of object? What does one cultivate? Concentration. Again the word sgom doesn’t always mean meditate on. It doesn’t make you’re not meditating on concentration as if that’s your object. You’re cultivating, cultivating concentration. So,, what sort of object does one, on what sort of object does one cultivate concentration? His answer; “In general, the blessed one, the Buddha, The Bhagavan taught countless objects for accomplishing flawless concentration such as,” [and he’s just giving a list here we’ll not go into. It will take us forever to get through it] “such as pervasive objects, objects that purify,” [those would be the kasinas by the way. The kasinas of earth water, fire, air, and so forth. You start out small and it goes pervasive] “such as pervasive objects, objects that purify analysis, objects for the wise,” [that’s actually the scholarly or the pundits] “objects that purify mental afflictions” [I really prefer that over defilements. It doesn’t mean defile it means affliction] “objects that purify mental afflictions and so forth. However,”

[1:12:04] So there’s a wide variety. “However, the previous gurus of this instruction lineage” [now we’re back to Mahamudra, let’s get focused here, there’s an awful lot out there but we’re going to be very selective to the types of shamatha that are strongly emphasized in this Mahamudra lineage.] “The previous gurus, the former gurus, the lineage gurus of this instruction lineage usually explain that one should focus on the mind and then identify it.” So that same way of explaining concentration also will be used here. So it’s inter[esting], he and these great scholars, they really choose their words carefully. I noticed this early on when I started studying Tsongkhapa, Panchen Rinpoche, Dudjom Lingpa, Padmasambhava, they use words like like like scalpels. I mean they really do tend to be very precise. And he is here. There’s a difference between focusing on something and identifying it, right. If you’ve never seen an orange before or a um, you know, any anything else could be an orange. If you’ve never seen that, if you’ve never seen it before, you could look right at it and you’re seeing something orangish and round and it’s gonna like I don’t know whether that’s a paperweight or a football. But I am focusing on it. To identify it is something more, okay. It’s not just you have a label for it, you can always call it a round orange ball. You can always give a label but what is it? Oh, oh, it’s an orange. So you can you can you can you can focus onthe mind, you can focus on the sp on the space of the mind, not really identify it. You can focus on awareness itself and not really identify it. Have you identified its salient features? Its defining characteristics? Have you identified what is unique about this phenomenon that you’re attending to, that sets it apart from computer programs, silicon chips, neurons, robots, and so forth? Have you identified what is distinctive here?

[1:14:05] And this as we’ve seen with the earlier reference this morning about identifying the sign of the mind, if you’ve gotten a sign of the mind, you’ve really identified its core, right. And I would say again that the avenue to that, the breadcrumbs, the fragrance, is follow the flow of luminosity and cognizance. Take that right down to its source, as your mind which is derivative, secondary, not essential. Your mind evaporates away and you’ve just followed the scent, the fragrance of luminosity and cognizance right to the source. It’ll take you right to the substrate consciousness because the luminosity that you’re attending to right now where is it coming from? Well not neurons, not photons. It’s coming from the luminosity which is a core distinctive quality of the substrate consciousness, right. And cognizance well that’s right there. It’s coming from the substrate consciousness. Cognizance doesn’t arise from neurons. It’s a crazy idea that everybody, so many people, are accustomed to now and they’re just assuming because other people said it must, somebody must actually know that to be true. It’s one of the biggest hoaxes in the history of science that neurons know something. It’s bizarre. But if you only think physical, it’s kind of like that’s the best candidate. It’s like, if nobody else is running for president, vote for Trump. [Laughter] If you want either anarchy or Trump you might consider Trump. Maybe I’ve shown my hand. I’m not a really big fan of his in terms of his being a politician. [laugher] But if you’ve actually ascertained the essential nature, the defining characteristics, what makes consciousness consciousness. And in so doing you see it, where it comes from, and what its nature is, and how it influences other phenomena like illuminating all appearances. If you’ve ascertained that from the very beginning you’d never become a materialist. It would be impossible. You’d just start laughing. You say, you’ve got to be kidding. People believe that that’s why you know. I’m not sure. I’m not respectful at all to materialism.

[1:16:17] It strikes me just such, so much nonsense that I’m amazed that so many people take it seriously but it’s for a very good reason. They haven’t ascertained the nature of consciousness. Philosophers, psychologists have something like 200 definitions of consciousness. Of course they don’t agree with any of them and I’ve checked out some of them, I just found them completely useless. They’re nice intellectual exercises but none of them that I’ve encountered would actually give you a clue of how to recognize consciousness when you saw it. I’ve heard one, he’s a very smart psychologist, very nice fellow as well, but no criticism of people who advocate these views at all. But he gave this very elegant, very intellectual, utterly abstract completely intellectual definition of consciousness. He was very happy with it, but I thought if I didn’t know what consciousness was and I used your definition I’d never know it when I bumped it into it. It’d be completely useless. But then if a definition, if I, if I give you a definition of orange or pineapple and you go to the grocery market and you’ve memorized my definition and it doesn’t give you any idea at all how to recognize a pineapple when you see one, what on earth would that definition be good for? And I feel the same thing is true for consciousness. If the definition doesn’t help you when you focus on it, identify it, then it’s useless. It doesn’t matter how elegant it is. And the fact that none of these definitions agree with each other is rather telling. So this a very crucial point. He chose his words very carefully. “One should focus on the mind and then identify it.” So he’s going to follow this tradition.

[1:17:57] So now we go back very briefly to the um, preliminary practice, practices. And again I changed the translation a lot throughout this here. “With tears flowing” [and this, this term I’ve never heard in my life. I thought it must be a, (laughter) I thought it must be a typo. And I’m sure he’s got it. I’m sure it’s exactly the right word. But if nobody knows what the referent of that word is, then really, I mean with due respect, I mean you know I appreciate people with big vocabularies but if nobody else knows the words you may as well just talk in Swahili you know. And so my words, you’ll understand it’s Buddhism for Dummies approach okay.] “With tears flowing and one’s hair standing on end,” that’s what that actually means. Like when you whether it’s like it could be romantic longing or it could be passionate spiritual longing where there’s such passionate devotion and gratitude and reverence and so forth that tears flow and you just feel your hair is going your body hairs, not the hair on top of your head, that’s different. It’s a different word in Tibetan it’s [?Tibetan 1:19:04] but you all know what I’m talking about right. It’s like just like, okay, you already know. Okay. He’s talking about real passion here, with tears flowing, “with tears flowing and one’s hair standing on end, while focusing on the guru with intense admiration and reverence,” [that’s a very precise translation] “you should make fervent appeals to the guru from the very bottom of your heart for a long time.” Okay. So I’ve commented on that earlier. And just before I walked over here I saw, because I check out the New York Times regularly, there was one more article on meditation. And I wrote to a friend of mine because we just go back, back and forth, and I said gone from bad to worse.

[1:19:51] It was cited in this article, it’s right there, it just came on a couple of hours ago. It cited somebody. It sounds like a Buddhist monk, but I have to say tragically uninformed. But there he’s got the name of Buddhist monk (? name 1:20:04), he’s being written up in the New York Times. He got a Buddhist monk name he must certainly know what he’s talking about. You want to know what the, the, the root of all suffering is? Desire. You want to know what desire is? Desiring things to be different from the way they already are. I just want to go into my room and start crying. I mean the word, the word bullshit, doesn’t even cover it. It doesn’t even suggest how bullshitish this is. This is orders of magnitude beyond bullshit. This is a herd of bulls all crapping simultaneously into the same cup. [laughter] I mean such nonsense. Like, I’m serious here. Like gender inequality, like slavery, like terrorism, like bigotry, like dishonesty, like corruption in the government, the Buddhist response is, well I don’t want anything to be different because I’m desireless. No. You’re an asshole that’s what you are. If you look at the world and you don’t want, this means you have no compassion. Compassion is wanting things to be different. That’s why I have passion about this. This person is representing Buddhism and he’s doing such a bloody awful job of it, it makes all of Buddhism look like it’s stupid. In the New York Times with a person who has a Buddhist monk name. That makes me upset. I don’t like that. I do not desire that. I desire that to stop. I wish no harm on anybody, but gosh this is what they still print. Desire is not, imagine the Buddha sitting under the tree of enlightenment and not wanting anything to be different. He wouldn’t move. The world would go to hell in a handbasket and the Buddha would say but it’s not my problem. I have no desire. Oh, I’ve just made myself absolutely irrelevant to the entire world.

[1:22:00] So what was the point of becoming a Buddha? To be totally irrelevant. So this is desire. This is passionate longing. This is a desire that overwhelms all other desires and don’t tell me it’s not desire, it is, of course. But it’s not attachment. It’s not clinging. It’s not craving. It’s not grasping. It’s a yearning for freedom. And when we see someone who’s worthy of devotion like the Buddha himself, for heaven’s sakes, let, let the devotion flow and the aspiration, “May I too realize such an awakening.” And that is certainly a desire. And to snuff out that desire, that’s really horrific. To snuff out people’s desires, to achieve enlightenment, to cultivate virtue, to find greater happiness, and tell them no, no, no. That’s a cause of suffering. Oh it’s moronic. So that’s it. Those, these are the times we’re living in where that got published. Is that something we should take seriously? This is a good account of Buddhism. Amazing. “Afterwards, imagine that you are blessed by the guru dissolving into you.” We’ve covered that. “In the midst of evanescent appearances” [we covered that as well] “do not” [all the appearances coming to the mind right? Coming going, coming going], “do not contrive anything”. Do not make up anything, don’t construct, don’t create anything. “Do not contrive” [manufacture] “anything, with thoughts such as” [Alan speaks sotto voce] thoughts hmm. I just have to modify, modify my own modification with “do not contrive anything with thoughts, entertaining such things as [such things as entertaining such such things as] “achieving temporal and ultimate goals and fearing that undesirable events might befall you in the present or future.”

[1:24:05] So that was really core. That was really quintessential. okay. Here you are, you’re settling the mind in its natural state. So don’t conjure up any thoughts of your own here, you’re here to watch, not to enter into the drama. So, “don’t conjure up any thoughts entertaining such things as achieving temporal goals,” like if I meditate really well I can become a meditation teacher, I’ll make a lot of money, I’ll get a big reputation blah blah. “Or ultimate goals” oh if I practice this I’ll reach the path, I’ll become an arya bodhisattva, maybe I’ll become a Buddha, I’ll become a rainbow body. Okay, that’s good, but not now. “don’t anticipate future”, not while you’re resting there “in between sessions” as I said so many times between sessions arouse the enthusiasm, the aspiration, the motivation, call for blessings, supplicate 100 times, all good. But, when you’re on the spot, on the cushion doing the practice leave all that behind. No desires for ultimate. “No explicit desires articulated and pursued while you’re on the cushion doing this practice.” Everything in the future, release it. You’re just doing the practice and you’re “releasing all hope of achieving temporal and ultimate goals, and all fears that undesirable events might [events might] befall you in the present or future.” So a very pithy, pithy statement there. And then more pithy statement. “Without following after what has gone before” [so don’t follow after those thoughts, don’t go down memory lane, don’t move from the present, without doing that] “or anticipating what has not come” [so no waiting]. Waiting is exactly anticipating what may or may not come “settle for a little while”. The words are so carefully chosen “settle for a little while”. When you’re sitting down don’t think okay I’m now going to be here for an hour, I’m going to be here for an hour, two hours, I can be here for 24 minutes, just have the notion I’m here for a little while. Then you don’t burden your mind with, I wonder if I can sit for a whole 20 minutes or 40 minutes. I wonder if I can go for longer this time. It’s more anticipation, more throwing dirt in your gas tank, okay. So “settle for a little while in equipoise, in the present devoid of movement.”

[1:26:19] That’s a lovely paragraph. “Thus at the time of focusing the mind you should not cease all mental activity as if you had fainted or fallen asleep.” That is what should be maintained of course is discerning mindfulness. That is a type of mental engagement. Maybe mental engagement would be better. I think mental engagement would be a bit better. I’m going to say that because I know the term. It’s gsal zhing rig pa. So, “you should not cease all [you should not cease all] mental engagement” [in other words just space out, zone out you know. Okay I’m here now and lose that flow of cognizance.] “One should not cease all mental engagement as if you had fainted or fallen asleep.” So this is a point I’ve been making all along. Sustain the flow of cognizance. “Without being distracted from resting in [in] just that unwavering mind.” “Without being distracted from resting in just that unwavering mind you establish from afar, mindfulness free of even the slightest forgetfulness. Although the object may be tied with the rope of mindfulness, if mindfulness weakens there is a great danger that the thoughts of the moving mind will proliferate.” So “When the power of mindfulness declines it is necessary to post the sentinel of introspection as to how the mind moves or does not move and focus there.” Okay. This is very, very dense, really clear, but very dense.

[1:28:04] So, but it’s so familiar also isn’t it? “Without being distracted from resting in just that unwavering mind” [there’s the candle, there’s the, there’s the index finger straight up] “you establish from afar” [as attending to the, like the shepherd attending to the flock spread out over the plain] “you establish from afar free of even the slightest forgetfulness” [and all the] “the object is tied with the rope of mindfulness” that is you are engaged that you remain engaged, connected. Although that may, it’s still possible of course that mindfulness will weaken you’ll fall into forgetfulness or distractedness and in that case if that occurs “there is a great danger that thoughts of the moving mind will proliferate.” Of course you’ll be carried away. So when the, and I’m going to make a full stop there, period. So, “When the power of mindfulness declines, it is necessary to post the sentinel of introspection” it’s a much more common metaphor than posting a sentinel of mindfulness. You [you] fasten your mind with a rope of mindfulness to the meditative object and you post the sentry of introspection; those are more common metaphors. “It is necessary to post the sentinel of introspection as to how the mind moves or does not move.” That is the mind here is your awareness of the events taking place. Are you slipping off into distraction or forgetfulness or does not. Mind moves is this rank [?] the mind does not move. Could be you, you’re non-moving but you’re radiantly clear or the mind does not move and you’re falling into laxity. But you attend there and you focus there. “As it is said in Bhavaveka’s Essence of Madhyamaka, the straying elephant of the mind should be bound to the fixed pillar of the object with the rope of mindfulness and subdued by the iron hook of introspection.”

[1:29:55] Classic, classic metaphor that’s for all of shamatha okay. The elephant of the mind, very powerful, but very rambunctious. You tame this wild rambunctious mind of yours by by fastening it, tethering it, to the fixed pillar of your meditative object [which could be a Buddha image your breath or anything] “with the rope of mindfulness.” And as it’s still, you know, jerking around it doesn’t like it, it’s going to kind of, it’s kind of going to revolt against that. “You subdue it with the iron hook of introspection.” Okay, Classic metaphor. And we continue moving right along briskly here. “In brief the attainment of flawless concentration [or samadhi] occurs by way of nothing but the maintenance of mindfulness and introspection.” That’s it. Those are the two tools. The two faculties of mind that you utilize and refine. This is really I must say classic Tsongkhapa. He’s so clear, definitive, precise, accurate. This is just, to rephrase Tsongkhapa. But, he’s not speaking on his own, he’s drawing from these great great scholars and adepts of classical India. “Between mindfulness and introspection mindfulness is the principle of the two. When mindfulness has arisen, introspection is taught as its result.” So it is a derivative. Mindfulness is primary, introspection is derivative. Sustain the flow of mindfulness, introspection will be right there on call. Lose mindfulness, introspection’s gone. Now we move back to method two. “At that time, once you have blocked all other thoughts” okay, we’re back to that cutting them off. And the one thought so to speak is, I shall continue attending to sheer luminosity and cognizance. That too is a kind of thought although you’re not cogitating about it. You’re doing it and it’s driven by the intention. But all other thoughts “out with you!”. “Once you’ve blocked all other thoughts when the aware clear mind is ascertained” okay.

[1:32:03] Well, the aware clear that’s sel shin rigpa, that is cognizant and luminous. He’s just, and here mind is consciousness okay. This is consciousness focused upon itself, awareness of awareness. And what’s the nature of the awareness of which you are aware? It’s cognizant and clear or cognizant and luminous. So, “when the aware, clear mind” he’s just given the defining characteristics of consciousness, “is ascertained” you’re not just focusing on it, you’ve identified it. So this on the relative level, on the relative level, is analogous to the pointing out instructions that you receive when you are a suitable vessel. Optimally you would have achieved shamatha and had gained insight into emptiness poised ready to fully receive and sustain the pointing out instructions. That is ascertain rigpa and then maintain that flow. But you receive what are called rig pa ngo sprod pa’i man ngag, the pith instructions of pointing out rigpa. Okay. And so, if it’s to be sustainable then of course you’re coming in with a suitable vessel of a mind very well trained in shamatha-vipassana. You can receive pointing out instructions and there are some lamas who give it and some of them give it very effectively. And I think it’s very worthwhile. It’s good to inspire people. We need as much inspiration as we can get you know. There’s so many things to be depressed about, pissed off about, unhappy about and so forth. Ah, we’re living in degenerate times in so many ways that if a lama can authentically inspire people to wish to practice that’s good, and, and for pure motivation. And I have some lamas in mind when I’m saying this. I think motivation is beautiful. I have no criticism, nothing to say, thank you for inspiring people, guiding people with loving kindness, compassion, wisdom, authentic teachings. Good and there are lamas who, you know, you come to the first teaching and it’s a weekend teaching they give you pointing out instructions on rigpa, you know, often inspires.

[1:34:06] How’s that just for an objective fact. It often really inspires people. So who would, you know, be complaining about that? Not I. I never do. Can they sustain it? Virtually never. But in a way, so what? Whatever works to inspire people, to encourage people to set out on an authentic path. If they can’t sustain it well okay. I lead weekend shamatha retreats and people in a weekend can get a little bit more stability and vividness than they had before and then they go home. Can they sustain it? Maybe? Probably not, but they can try. And if they really continue then of course it can get better. But will they, you know, will they sustain the level of stillness and clarity that they achieved in a weekend or a week, when they’re meditating five, six hours a day and then they’re back to working full-time and so forth? Almost certainly not. Does that mean it was a waste of time? Well if it did, then I would just stop teaching. I don’t think it’s a waste of time but so this is intending to point out rigpa, Buddha nature, which is pretty deep, and not for me to say, you know. Some people may have really quite a profound identification of rigpa, not for me to say. I have no way to judge. I have no desire to judge. But that’s rig pa ngo sprod pa pointing out pristine awareness, Buddha-nature, primordial consciousness, right. “This is pointing out the relative nature of your mind.” Like pointing out a pineapple, you know. It’s the same level, the same plane of reality. It’s conventional reality. Pineapple, an entity in samsara. Consciousness, an entity in samsara. Pineapple has these defining characteristics. Consciousness has this. But in our world especially, the materialistic world we’re living in, actually identifying the defining characteristics of consciousness, focusing on it and identifying it, that’s a pretty big deal. When so many people are talking about, you know, it’s just a function of the brain or an activity it emerges from chemicals and so forth. Then you actually, you don’t have to argue it, say I don’t really feel like debating with you because I actually know what I’m talking about because I’ve observed consciousness. I’d have identified it’s salient characteristics. So I have nothing to debate. If you want to believe that. Okay, knock yourself out.

[1:36:28] So “when the aware clear mind is ascertained focus mindfulness closely just on its nature” [that’s its essential nature. I’m going to say essential nature again because it’s useful]. “and observe it single pointedly and nakedly.” you know the word nakedly, without elaborating, without thinking about it, without labeling, associating, putting all your conceptual junk on it. Just take it straight. It’s the taste of lemonade. Just taste it. Period. “Looking thus, identify every single moment or thought that occurs.” This is interesting, well this is identified every, so this sounds like you might be doing the two things simultaneously. Stillness and motion. You have now established your beachhead, if I use a military analogy. You’ve established a beachhead. You’ve come in, and come to settle your mind in its natural state. Your awareness is resting in its own place, It’s vivid. It’s self-ascertaining. It’s luminous. It’s clear. It’s still. It’s relaxed. And then you let the light of your awareness overflow and illuminate the space of the mind while resting in the stillness. And from that perspective of stillness you observe the movements. So that sounds familiar doesn’t it? Sounds like what he’s describing here. “Looking thus, identify every single movement or thought that occurs.” So now we’re not talking about cutting them off.

[1:37:58) So once he’s blocked, it’s interesting strategy. This is all strategy. He’s saying in order for you to establish your beachhead. Okay, I’ll be presuming you know what that means. If you’re not a native english speaker but you’ve established your your launching pad. It can be helpful at the very beginning, block all the thoughts because every single one that comes up is going to pull you away. So cut them off. Cut them off right. You might do that with mindfulness of breathing. That’s why mindful breathing is often taught as a preliminary exercise. That’s to cut off all those thoughts and just get into a flow of non-conceptual awareness of the breath, 10 breaths, 21 breaths. You’ve cut them off and then you found, aha, this is what it’s like, you know, seconds on end, ha, still, clear, aware of awareness, identifying awareness, knowing awareness. Okay I’m ready to go. And then the light of, you let the light of your awareness illuminate the space of the mind or whatever thought comes up. Strategy. “Looking thus identify every single moment or thought, movement or thought that occurs. Doing so depends on introspection.” “Alternatively as taught in [in the vin] in the vinaya scriptures [because I think it’s not just one. I think it’s multiple ones] as taught in the vinaya, vinaya scriptures, meditate as in a duel between an archer and a swordsman.” Now you know that one. “When you’ve aroused the power of mindfulness and introspection any thought that arises is at its occurrence severed abruptly and not allowed to proliferate further.” Okay, I guess he really is, he’s really focusing on one method here. I thought maybe he’s going back and forth but now this is pretty much awareness of awareness. So he says, “You recognize every single thought but you don’t go along with them.” You recognize them with introspection and then we’re back to the, the duel not the raven, that’s letting them let them be let them be let them be. No. The arrow’s coming, cut it off. So “once you’ve aroused the power of mindfulness and introspection any thought that arises is at its occurrence severed abruptly and not allowed to proliferate further.” That’s awareness of awareness, this is definitely a yang approach.

[1:40:05] “When you rest motionlessly after the proliferation of thoughts has been severed, then, without losing mindfulness and introspection inwardly vigilant you should relax into the present, relaxing into equipoise.” Relaxing but not losing the flow of very very sharp clear mindfulness, cognizance. Machig, the great yogini says, “Tightly focus and loosely relax.” So this is centuries ago. So she, I don’t know if she coined this phrase but certainly goes back a long time “tightly focus and loosely relaxe and there the mind is focused. Also, as is taught elsewhere by the great brahman Saraha,” [the great, the great mahasiddha, Indian mahasiddha.] “This mind bound up in knots when loosened attains freedom, no doubt.” So this is the same as before. So I think both Roger Jackson and I should make this homogenous because it’s exactly, he said bound up in entanglements, remember. Now, it’s knots. They’re both correct but I think we should homogenize those. Either way they’re fine, but if it’s a translation of the same words then we should give it the same translation. So I’m going to put a little note there just to homogenize. This one’s fine, the other one’s fine, they’re both correct. Oh wait, okay,, that’s it’s now ten past, I got carried away. But no doubt. So that’s good. It’s a nice note to end on. The mind can feel so dense, so constricted, so tied up in knots, right, and the way to find freedom, loosen up. That’s why the initial instruction, when you find that your attention is wavering, the first one is loosen up, relax, then release. Don’t try to release before you’ve relaxed. Relax, then release. It’s easier. If you’ve relaxed first, it’s easier to release than if you’re still bound up, right. If you’re still bound up and you try to release that could be a lot of effort, but if you’re already relaxed then the releasing is easy. And if you’ve released, then it’s easy to return. Often we try to skip the first two and just say return and that can be very arduous, fatiguing, frustrating, irritating, exasperating, and we don’t want that. That’s not helpful. Olasso. That’ll do.

[1:42:45] An orange, I recognize it.

Transcribed by Kriss Sprinkle

Revised by Rafael Carlos Giusti

Final edition by Annette Dorfman

Discussion

Ask questions about this lecture on the Buddhism Stack Exchange or the Students of Alan Wallace Facebook Group. Please include this lecture’s URL when you post.