51 “Tightly Focused, Loosely Relaxed” - The Shamatha Practice of Awareness of Awareness

B. Alan Wallace, 27 Apr 2016

The theme for this session comes from the pith instructions that we’ve recently covered from the Panchen Rinpoche’s text (stanzas 16 to 23), which are prevalent in the Mahamudra lineage. Alan’s prelude to the meditation returns to the question concerning whether the space of the mind is either a sheer absence of appearances or whether it does have characteristics that can be ascertained i.e. it is transparent and 3-D. We will continue investigating the nature of consciousness through the practice of awareness of awareness, withdrawing from all appearances and then tightly focusing on the affirmative qualities of cognizance and clarity of awareness. Another element of consciousness that we are seeking to enter into or unveil is that which is free of conceptualisation. Alan therefore suggests that the quality of the awareness that we are seeking to access is a complex negation as there are two affirmative qualities (cognisance, luminosity) and an absence of a quality (non-conceptuality). The tightly focused part of the practice is on the affirmative qualities and then the loosely relaxing part is releasing the awareness into non-conceptuality.

Alan also speaks briefly on his new interpretation of the phrase “taking the impure mind as the path”, and similar phrases, where a more literal translation from the Tibetan on his opinion could be “taking the mind as my ride on the path”.

The meditation is guided on awareness of awareness, oscillating the awareness from being tightly focused to loosely relaxed.

Following meditation, Alan resumes the Panchen Rinpoche’s text transmission including some comments that: what we are reading we are immediately integrating into our current practice; the achievement of shamatha leads to mental pliancy and physical well-being due to the shift of the whole subtle energy system; and the ultimate reality of the mind cannot be apprehended conceptually.

At the end of the session, Alan says he has received requests for instructions on dream yoga (night-time vipashyana) which he will occasionally provide. His first instruction is to commit to prospective memory: upon awakening from sleep anytime, (1) recognise that you are waking up without further conceptualisation and (2) stay still physically and mentally. Then direct the attention backwards in time, and check: what is the last image you recall? If it was the last image of a dream, pursue it, see if you can recall your dream. This is the first step in the practice of lucid dreaming, and in this way the dream recall will gradually increase.

Meditation starts at 12:35


Please contribute to make these, and future podcasts freely available.

Download (MP3 / 50 MB)

Transcript

2016 – 51 Tightly Focused, Loosely Relaxed

Olaso. So, the theme I’d like to focus on for the next session is a core instruction, (Tib. men nag), or pith instruction in the text, Panchen Rinpoche’s text, that he’s taken from the whole Mahamudra lineage. It’s classic and you’re familiar with it already. In Tibetan it’s [Tibetan 00:19], tightly focus and loosely relax. So, that theme. Then with just a little bit of commentary or prelude, because I will guide the meditation. Um, we looked earlier at the space of the mind, and with a very simple question, which I think there was some clarity, and that is whether the space of the mind is a sheer absence of appearances and there’s nothing more to it, or whether it is not a simple negation like a sheer absence of appearances but rather a complex negation. And that is, the space of the mind does in fact have its own characteristics that can be ascertained. Two are pretty straightforward - transparent and 3d. Those are qualities you can observe, right? But empty of appearances, when the space is indeed empty.

[01:16] I would like to suggest as a parallel here, in the type of awareness, type of concentration that we’re seeking to access, to unveil in this practice, as we tightly focus, and in this practice it is a continuation of the, it’s a variation on the theme of the awareness of awareness, where we are withdrawing from all appearances and tightly focusing, concentrating, arousing, you’ve heard the inverting, you’ve heard these verbs before, right in upon the very nature of awareness, which has these affirmative qualities. You can observe them, they are affirmative at their affirmations, and that is awareness is cognizant. It does have the quality of cognizance. That’s not an absence, that’s a presence of cognizance clearly. And it has a presence of clarity, of luminosity, in the sense of making manifest or illuminating all manner of appearances and experiences. So those are affirmative, clearly, right? But then there’s an element that is being negated here. And that is we’re seeking to enter into or unveil a dimension of consciousness that is empty of conceptualization, empty of conceptualization. So, it’s empty of one thing but it is filled with or there is present in it other qualities, a negation and affirmation. So therefore, I’m suggesting the quality of attention we’re seeking to access and to dwell in is a complex negation, right?

[03:00] Now three qualities of the substrate consciousness. Kirsty what are the three qualities of substrate consciousness when you enter into it, you have achieved shamatha. The three qualities are what? Kirsty answers – [inaudible] Sorry, I am just gone blank.

[03:18] That’s right! [Laughter] Very good. Blank, non-conceptual. [Laughter continues] Why you apologized for the last part, I’m not quite sure. Spot on, blank, like “What?” [Laughter continues] Perfecto. Molto bene. So what does this tell us? That when we’ve come to the destination, we’ve come to the end of the line of taking appearances and awareness as the path, we’re resting in a mode of consciousness that has two affirmative qualities – blissful and luminous. The luminous of course implies cognizance, but it’s empty of something, it’s non-conceptual, non-conceptual. So that mode, that substrate consciousness is a complex negation, right? So, [Tibetan 04:18] (Tibetan, rlod ki lod). [Tibetan 04:22] as when we’re tightly focusing, there are different adverbs one might use here. ‘Intently’ would be fine, ‘tightly’ is fine because it corresponds nicely to the counterpart to loose. The other one really is loose so that’s why I chose tightly. Tightly focused, sharply focus and then loosely relax. Sharply focus - what are you focusing on? The affirmative qualities. You’re coming right in on that sheer luminosity and cognizance, right, which are affirmative.

[04:49] But then when you’re releasing, [exhales a breath] like that, you’re releasing, well, what you’re releasing? One thing is you’re releasing any kind of conceptualization, noise, that kind of stuff, okay? It’s like if you’re in a room and you have a room with a lot of dust in it, but you open the window like on a day like this and then the breeze, or in this case, wind, blows from the back. From the back and it just goes [AW blows like wind] and you see all the dust go out the door, right? Two doors, right, in the back and the front, and the breeze is from behind you, or a sharp wind like this. And it blows all the dust out. And there’s emptiness. It’s a vacuity, an emptiness, a lack of, a freedom from, conceptualization, noise, chit chat, all of that. And so, that’s what we’re releasing into, a space, an expansiveness, an emptiness, a vacuity, which is an absence of, a lot, conceptualization as starters. And so that’s the (Tibetan, rlö ki lö), that loose relaxation, that releasing, [AW exhales a breath] like that. But then, there’s the arousal, the inversion, the focusing, the concentrating, the giving some effort, appearing right into the nucleus of awareness, focusing on and identifying the luminosity and cognizance, seeing the referents of these terms. And then loosely relaxing. So that’s the practice. So, I’ll guide you a little bit.

[06:25] But just now, I’m going to speak very briefly as a translator and then we’ll go to the practice. But for years and years now, many, many years, there’s this phrase [Tibetan 06:35 Lam du ker wa]. Oh 20 years ago or so, maybe longer, I translated the text transforming felicity and adversity into the path, [Tibetan 06:45]. And I was quite content with that, had been for like 20 years. And then we have [Tibetan 06:51] in Dudjom Lingpa’s teachings - taking the impure mind as the path, right? And then we saw that little series that Panchen Rinpoche alluded to very briefly - taking suffering as the path, transforming suffering into the path, transforming mental afflictions into the path. A common theme in the Mahamudra literature is, taking the obsessive ideation as the path, rather than something to terminate, to cut off. Taken as the path. That’s how I’ve been translating it for a long time and it just struck me there’s a better way, at least from my perspective. I don’t think that was misleading, so I’m not going to have to recite a hundred thousand Vajrasattva for this. I think it’s going to be okay. [laughter] I don’t think it led anybody astray but I think there’s a better translation.

[07:39] And how I came upon it was thinking back to my hitchhiking days and my greatest hitchhiking ride of ever, from Bergen to Oslo, and being picked up by a buddhist monk. So, there I was by the side of the road and the little black VW bug pulled over and I took that as my ride. That’s what you do if you hitchhike, you take that. ‘Would you like a ride?’ ‘Sure, I’ll take your car as my ride.’ As my ride, I think that’s it actually. (Tibetan, lam du ker wa) means taking as or taking onto, it’s one of those prepositions that can be translated validly in different ways. It’s taking onto the path. I think it’s closer. Especially when we take this [Tibetan, sem lam du ker wa]. I don’t think it’s quite anything like an A minus. It’s not quite taking the mind as the path, but taking the mind on the road. How are you going to… Here’s the road from here to shamatha. Shamatha is down there, just nine stops away, you know. And how are you going to get there, because that’s your path, that’s your path. But what’s your ride? Are you going to walk? on a bicycle? a unicycle? What’s your ride? You got a ride? And yeah, I’m going to catch a ride. What are you going to ride on? I’m going to take my mind as my ride, as my vehicle. It’s going to be my ride. I’m going to take it as my ride on the path.

[9:10] And I think that’s what’s happening here. So, and then, within that context you can… What really caught me about this that came in the back from my mind was, you have the Shravaka vehicle, that’s a chariot, it’s a ride, it’s a vehicle that takes you on the path, right, takes you on the path to arhatship - the Pratyekabuddha vehicle, the Mahayana vehicle, the vajra vehicle. Vajrayana is vehicle. It’s a car, it’s a chariot, it’s a bicycle, it’s a motorcycle, it’s mode of transport to take you along the path, right? And here, in this very naturalistic way, that is rather than, I’m adopting Buddhism as my ride, or Hinayana Buddhism, or Christianity as my ride. This is very naturalistic. I’m going to take something I already have and that’s going to be my ride. I’m going to take my mind. And I could be a Muslim, a Christian, an atheist or whatever. I’m going to take my mind as my ride, because that’s something I’m sure is there. I don’t have to believe. I don’t have to adopt some creed. I know I’ve got a mind and I’ve heard about shamatha. I’m going to say, I believe I can achieve that. And that’s going to be my ride. I’m going to take my mind as my ride. I’m going to take it onto the path.

[10:25] The mind can take me everywhere. It goes around in circles, circles of samsara, yeah. But I’m going to take my mind as my ride, onto the path. That actually, you can sit on that wall for a while Glen. [laugh] Yeah, because it’s new, yeah. I’ve never seen it translated that way but it’s very literal. Lam du ker uwa, taking onto the path. Very literal. But I think it catches what we’re seeking to do here, is that even if mental affliction is coming up, we take them as the ride. Anger comes up, instead of saying, ‘oh I wish you’d go away, oh,’ I mean, appear right in, I’m going to go right into your heart, I’m going to penetrate your nucleus, and I’m going to see sheer intensity. I can use that. I see craving, lust, and desire, and attachment coming up. I can use that. I’m going to hop onto you, instead of you hopping onto me and, you know, riding me around, like putting a nose, a ring through my nose and pulling me around. Attachment does that a lot. I’m going to put a ring through your nose. [laughter] I’m going to ride you. Hey attachment, giddy up, you know. Take it for a ride by going into its nucleus, not letting it strangle you and wrap you up in knots. Go right to the bliss of it and that will be your ride. And even delusion, even confusion, even muddle-headedness, sloth and torpor and all that business, take it for a ride. See right to its nucleus, its non-conceptuality. But when you get to that level, maintain the flow of cognizance, and then you’re riding your delusion rather than just being ridden by it. Yeah. Oh yeah, let’s have a guided meditation.

[12:49] Meditation starts

[13:31] Settle your body, speech and mind in their natural states and for a short time calm, soothe, quiet, subdue the conceptual mind… with mindfulness of breathing.

[17:09] Then let your eyes be at least partially open, gently, softly. Let your awareness come out into the space in front of you, evenly, spreading out in the space without latching onto or focusing on any object, not even space itself. Just releasing into space evenly.

[18:47] And for just a short time, rest there without doing anything, simply being aware, sustaining this flow of mindful presence without distraction, without grasping.

[20:09] And then begin the oscillation. You set the rhythm. If for a while it’s helpful to link the rhythm of the oscillation with the rhythm of the breath, of course you can do that, maintaining just a peripheral awareness of the in and out breath. But if you don’t need that, then simply set your own rhythm, slower or faster than the rhythm of the breath. So, first phase, tightly focus. This does not mean a contraction coming into some small cramped space but rather simply a withdrawal from all appearances to the mind, and a withdrawal into the luminosity that illuminates all those appearances, makes all those appearances manifest. So come to the light, as the old phrase goes, come to the light, come to that which illuminates all of experience, that which knows everything you know.

[21:27] Come into that stillness non-conceptually. Focus on and identify, ascertain luminosity, the cognizance of your own consciousness. Know it nakedly, without mediation, without cluttering with any thought, or labeling. Take it straight.

[22:34] Then loosely relax. Insofar as you’re aware of the body, relax the body, release the breath, release your awareness into an open object-less expanse devoid of thought, release your awareness into that emptiness, silent, open, empty.

[23:34] But that objectless open expanse is saturated by the luminosity and cognizance of your own awareness. So then, tightly focus in right on that subjective experience that is clear and knowing. It is apprehending the apprehender.

[24:46] So invert in upon the luminosity of awareness and release out into the objectless non-conceptual space. Invert into luminosity, release into emptiness.

[26:32] Non-conceptual in, non-conceptual out, all the while throughout the cycle, sustaining the flow of cognizance.

[33:51] As you invert your awareness, you focus your awareness upon the luminosity of your apprehending consciousness, do not disengage from the expansiveness of space. And as you relax into, release into that objectless expanse, do not disengage from the luminosity of your own awareness. So, you see that the luminosity itself is empty, spacious, and the emptiness itself, that open expanse, is luminous.

[35:43] Then release the oscillation and simply rest simultaneously in the luminosity of your own awareness and in the emptiness of your own awareness, the non-duality of luminosity and emptiness. Simply rest there.

[36:46] Meditation ends.

[37:09] So as you can see, and I think it’s pretty obvious, that as we are going through this text, we get further guidance from Panchen Rinpoche, I try to elucidate it, not clutter it up or obscure it. So, something’s coming in and then we immediately put it into practice, right, and then we read a bit more, and immediately put it into practice. It’s just integration all the way through, right? We’re not reading 50 pages and then okay, now. Remember what you did for 50 pages? Now let’s practice that. I think it’s very awkward to do that and, yet, frankly I’m going to be a bit critical here. This is how Buddhist education is very often given in Theravada countries and in the monastic colleges in Burma, Thailand, Sri Lanka, in all four schools of Tibetan Buddhism. People go for a Khenpo training, a Geshe training, study years and years and years, sometimes 10, 15, 20 years. Very little time for meditation, frankly, I know that, I’ve been through a lot of that training, very little time for meditation. But you certainly do acquire an awful lot of information, you know, and then hopefully after you’ve been there for 10 or 20 years, or six years master’s program, whatever, then you remember what you learned for the last six years? Okay, now start, now start. That’s hard, that’s hard. I think this is much easier and I’m lazy. So he gives me the easy way - study a little bit, integrate, study a bit more, integrate. Integrate. That also is an advantage because I almost died when I was about 23 yeah 23, I mean, right on death’s door and I was just in the midst of that training. And I thought it was really, really come home. I’m going to be very brief here. But, boy, if I die during this training and I was postponing the practice part until the training was over then I blew it. I really, really, totally blew it. I just memorized a lot of text, clapped my hands a whole lot, showing how smart I am on the debating courtyard, and I’m dead. I thought, boy, I don’t want to do that. So, I think integration, like death, can come each day each time, you know. So, whatever we learn, integrate. Quickly. That’s what we’re doing here. I love it, and it keeps it fresh too. Like, what does he say next, what does he say next?

[39:15] So, I think I’m in the right place. Please correct me if I’m wrong. Uh, “this mind bound up in knots when loosened detains freedom no doubt”, is that where we’re left off? Yeah? Good. Okay. All right, now we’re going to continue right on. “While inwardly vigilant, you should relax [So, it rings a bell, yes? You don’t have to go back into ancient archives to remember when you might have been doing that] thinking insofar as the mind is too tight, excitation arises, relax a bit. [Okay? you know exactly what that is] That’s the intelligence of introspection monitoring the flow of mindfulness, recognizing that when it gets too tight, [which means then agitated excitation is sprouting up] excitation does arise, then what do you do? First thing, relax. Then you might get around to, releasing and returning. On the other hand, with introspection insofar as the mind is too loose, getting bored, slack, complacent, sloppy, laxity arises. So, focus a bit more tightly. That way the balance would be just right.” Sounds like, sounds like an old fable, [jokingly] ‘not too much, not too little just right.’ [laughter] Some of you there, your old fables will come out. [Someone answers – The Tree Bears] Yeah, The Three Bears, right? Yeah. Too much, too little, oh, just right, yeah. That’s okay. This is, “between those two boundaries, between those two extremes [I think extremes is better, I’m just going to put in extremes] between those two extremes, [this is exactly what they are they’re attentional extremes, laxity and excitation] between those two extremes, release your mind from the movements of thoughts [so you know exactly what that means] and being on the lookout [you know that’s referring to introspection], being on the lookout for laxity when stillness occurs, you must focus.” [Arouse, remember? Refresh, refresh, restore, retain.]

[41:19] “This accords with the verse from master Chandragomin [one of the great Indian pundits, poets and contemplatives, very, very, famous verse, Tsongkhapa quotes this] ‘If I resort to effort, when I really strive, excitation will occur that stirs up the mind. [Well, you know about that. You’re going for stability and you’re losing relaxation, right] If I abandon that, then slackness will arise. So, then I throttle back and then I’m relaxing. But I’m losing the clarity with which I began. When it is difficult to find the proper balance, my mind is perturbed, frustrated. So, what shall I do?” He just ends up, he ends it right there. What shall I do? I think [he got now] “On those occasions when you are suppressing thoughts and when you are observing the nature of each thought as it arises” In both cases, when you’re suppressing thoughts immediately there’s a vacuity, because you just knocked out the thought, and what remains in the absence of the thought is the clear vacuity. But when you’re observing the nature of the thought as it arises, of course, there are intervals. You don’t get just, you don’t just get spaghetti like a continuous stream. They come in pulses, bursts and you do get intervals, right? That interval is, “In either case a clear vacuity arises right where those thoughts have naturally disappeared [whether you’re snuffing them out as they come or whether you’re noticing the intervals between the thoughts, a clear vacuity arises right where those thoughts have naturally disappeared]. Moreover, if you examine the mind when it remains thus, without wavering, there is an unobstructed, clear and vivid vacuity. The perception of the former and the latter as being indistinguishable is known and called, is known as and called the fusion of stillness and movement by great meditators.” So that’s, oh yeah [Tibetan 43:26], I guess one of those pith phrases that comes up a lot.

[43:29] So I think what he’s getting at here is these two methods of suppressing thoughts or simply observing their nature, they just converge right on the same point, that fusion of stillness and motion. “Alternative here is another method for cultivating mental stillness. Whatever sort of thought arises, without terminating it, you should note when it moves and where it moves, and observe and engage with the essential nature of that thought.” Okay, I’ve covered that a lot, right? You’re not looking into the storyline, the referent, the thoughts about, but just the thought as the thought. So, we’ve already covered that. So, you note when it moves and where it moves. From the vantage point of the stillness of your own awareness, you observe and engage with the essential nature of that thought, not as storyline, not as referent. “By resting like that, eventually movement will cease. And there will be stillness.” So now all so familiar feels kind of relaxing, isn’t it? “This is like the analogy of a bird that has long been captive on a ship on the great ocean, that flies over the sea.” Okay? You know that. Then we have the Treasury of Dohas by Saraha, says: “It is like a raven that flies from a ship, circles in every direction, and then alights there again.” You know that.

[45:02] “So you should maintain concentration.” Also, there is this from Yang Gonpa he was one of the great Mahamudra masters of Tibet. “The mind should not regard thoughts as faults. Without meditating for the sake of non-conceptuality rest the mind in its own nature and view it from afar, and your meditation will alight upon serenity.” That’s a very nice, very clear, succinct description of taking the mind as the path. That’s all very clear. No commentary, I think, needed now. “Moreover, when present-day disciples maintain serenity or shamatha by way of the six methods of settling the mind, they become kings of instruction. How are they practiced?” So here are six methods of settling the mind. And how are they practiced? What are these six methods of settling the mind? This is very nice. It is said, so this is quoting right from the Kagyu tradition, the Mahamudra tradition. “Settle like the sun free of clouds. Settle like a garuda soaring in the sky. Settle like a ship on the great sea. Settle like a small boy looking at temple paintings. [Each of these has a nice commentary. He’s going to get to it, so I won’t I won’t interject.] Settle like the tracks of a bird flying in the sky. Settle like spreading out cotton wool. By these methods of settling the mind, you’ll get the point of yoga.” You’ll see what it’s all about, yoga as in meditation here.

[46:55] So, he’s going to unpack each of these very succinctly, so I’ll just read what he says here in terms of the first metaphor of settling like the sun free of clouds. “For example, just as the sun that is free of clouds, remains supremely luminous and bright, so is the clear light nature of the mind, not obscured by conceptual grasping to signs, excitation, laxity, and so forth.” So, I changed that translation quite a bit. I’ll read it once again but I think it’s very clear. “For example, [or] “As an analogy, [as an analogy is probably better] just as the sun that is free of clouds remains supremely luminous and bright, so is the clear light nature of the mind not obscured by conceptual grasping to signs, excitation, laxity, and so forth.” So, we have this whole notion, once again, we have five obscurations, you remember them well, that included excitation and anxiety, laxity and dullness, uh, all manner of grasping to signs, attending to signs, reifying signs, all of that obscures the clear and luminous nature of your own mind, substrate consciousness, the bhavanga. So, the mind is like the sun, it’s always bright. Remember? The Buddha himself said that. The mind, this brightly shining mind is always bright, it’s always luminous, but it does adventitiously now and then get obscured by various obscurations. But it doesn’t get blotted out. It just gets obscured.

[48:24] There’s the first one. Then we go, “For example, just as a garuda moves through the sky, soaring naturally without needing to exert much effort in flapping his wings, and so forth, [soaring naturally without needing to exert much effort in flapping his wings and so forth] so the mind, without too much tightening or too much relaxation, possesses the sharpness of the clarity aspect of internal vigilance. And by relaxing slowly into the present, it maintains an unbreakable seal of mindfulness and introspection.” So, each of these is worth kind of gently just contemplating, resting with, letting kind of brew in your mind, but I think given all of the instructions given so far, I think these are very clear. I don’t think they need further commentary. Third one, for example, “just as waves arise a little when the great sea is buffeted by winds, but the sea cannot be moved in its depths. So, the mind may be moved a little by subtle thoughts when it is focused on its object but it focuses without being moved in the slightest by coarse thoughts.” I think [it’s] quite clear.

[49:54] “For example [and then this one’s a lovely one, Tsongkhapa uses this one in his lamrims. It’s very, very nice. It’s a lovely image, actually, when you imagine it, it’s very nice.] For example, when a small child” This would be like, it’s like a pre-verbal child, like a two-year-old but perfectly intelligent, just is not adept in language yet, right? So, imagine taking a little toddler, a two-year-old, bright, little perspicacious little two-year-old into one of these magnificent Tibetan temples. I must say, just with praise, Sogyal Rinpoche’s temple in Lerab Ling – amazing! His taste for art has got incredibly good taste. It’s one of the most beautiful temples I’ve seen anywhere and all of the art, all of the thangkas, everything, such exquisite taste, you know. You just go in and go [making a face of astonishment]. You really. Just oooaaahhh. And you know I’ve been around for a number of decades now, so I have an idea, you know, this is, ‘oh there, a beautiful Vajrasattva, there’s a Manjushri.’ But imagine now that you’re a two-year-old coming into the same temple. And the colors are just gorgeous, you know, just gorgeous. But imagine a two-year-old having no idea about Buddhism or iconography or deities, but a two-year-old can enjoy the splendor of just looking around. And so, you’re just taking it all in, you’re not categorizing, you’re not labeling, you’re not asking what century it is, whether this is kriya tantra or, you know, anuttara yoga tantra, and so forth. Just like that. That’s the image here. So, “just as when a small child looks at temple paintings, he or she does not investigate or analyze the subtle details of the picture, but looks unwaveringly at the painting in a general way.” This is shamatha, not vipashyana, right?

[51:37] “So, when the mind is focused on its object, pleasant or unpleasant objects of the five sense consciousnesses may appear [pleasant or unpleasant objects of the five sense consciousness may appear] but one remains focused single pointedly on the object, without investigation, analysis, attachment or aversion.” It’s a very, very clear, very clear reference to settling the mind in its natural state, just observing the nature of whatever comes up, without categorizing, judging, evaluating, without liking or disliking, without investigating or analysis, but taking with interest. The child is amazed, fascinated, really enchanted by just ‘whoa’, like that, right? So, no boredom, no spacing out, very attentive, just not cluttering on, cluttering up the perception with a lot of verbiage, and language, and history, and associations, and so forth. So that’s like maybe my favorite analogy there.

[52:44] Fifth one, “For example, just as a bird flying in the sky leaves no tracks. So, whatever kinds of pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral feelings arise, one rests in meditative equipoise, without falling under the sway of any attachment, anger, or confusion.” So that’s that point of just resting hovering in the present moment, leaving no tracks. So, you’re not drifting off, you’re not tracking back a thought pertaining to the past, or anticipating thoughts of the future. No tracks, just there. And the sixth one. “For example, just as cotton wool, when spread out, [when you lay it out], is soft and very loose, so when it is settled in meditative equipoise the mind rests evenly, free of the manifest three poisons and the core sensations of excitation and laxity.

[53:51] So, they’re really lovely. Nice just to go back to the text and just linger on those and then relate them to your own practice. You might read one of those and just go back and try it immediately, you know, for like for a minute. See, okay, what’s it like. Okay, bird flying in the track, bird flying in the sky leaves no track. Let’s go, let’s try that. Yeah, got it. Good. Have the next one, okay, spread it out soft wool. Yep, got it. You know, something like that. So, we don’t just memorize them but guess the taste for each one. “What sorts of imprints” The word is (Tibetan, la zhe), like a handprint, or an imprint. Imprint is good. But what sort of imprint? He’s not referring to vasana, or habitual, habitual, what do I call them? Propensities, yeah. It’s not the word. It’s (Tibetan, la zhe), literally means hand print. So, what results from, what’s the impact? What sort of impact is there? Something like that. Imprint is fine but what sort of impact results. That might be a little bit better, because otherwise imprint sounds a lot like habitual propensities. “What sort of impact [results] results from practicing like that?” Now we go to the root text.

[55:06] “Not being obstructed by anything, the nature of meditative equipoise is lucid and clear. Not being established in any way as any physical entity, it is a clear vacuity like space, where everything appears vividly.” Boy, that’s pithy, and it pertains exactly to the practice that we just did, right, exactly to that. There’s this term, I think I thought I’d unpack it tomorrow morning just so I don’t try to jam everything into one afternoon, but I will return tomorrow to this one short pith term – (Tibetan, sel tong, sel tong). I’ve talked about it many times in the past. Sel is the clarity or luminosity and tong is emptiness or vacuity. So, luminosity and emptiness. Luminosity, emptiness and then sel tong is (Tibetan, lhündrup), the union, the fusion, the indivisibility of luminosity and emptiness. That’s what we just did, right? We break it apart just so we make sure we’re not missing anything, right, just like attending to thoughts and then attending to the space, so we make sure we got both, and then you just attended to both.

[56:28] So we come in single pointedly, okay. Right now, I’m going to focus on that luminous or clear aspect inverting right in tightly focusing. Okay, got it. And now [phew – AW blows], releasing into vacuity and emptiness, in objectless open expanse. So, ok, got that. And then the oscillation subsides, subsides, as the vacuity is filled with luminosity and the luminosity itself is spacious and open and empty. That’s what he’s referring to here. And not established in any way as any physical entity. I just don’t see how one could possibly do this a lot, you know, really get familiar with it and remain a materialist. It’s inconceivable to me, really. So, materialists beware, if you cherish your worldview don’t come here. It’s going to deeply disappoint you.

[57:23] Just cleaning up my text here. Okay? So now, to his commentary. That was the root text, here’s his commentary. So, I’ve changed it a fair amount. “By practicing like that, the nature of meditative equipoise, not being obstructed by anything, is lucid and very clear.” Now this is the thing. When we’re attending to something else, attending to the breath, attending to an object, a referent, where there’s my awareness is here and I’ve tethered my awareness with a rope of mindfulness to an object, okay? Most shamatha practices entail that, okay? When that happens… So, Jeffrey is my object, here’s my awareness and my awareness is tethered to Jeffrey with a rope of mindfulness, right, that is maintaining my awareness of Jeffrey without distraction, without forgetfulness, right? You know what can happen, because Michelle can come over with a pair of scissors, and she can obstruct, interfere, get in between, (Tibetan, bar-ché), cut in between, bar, like in bardo means in between; ché means to cut. Che, ché, they both mean cut. So, she could not only bring in her scissors, she could jump between us, and go like this [AW makes funny sounds] [laughter], like that, you know. She does that all the time, you know. Oh, look at me, you know. I say, Michelle, get out of the way. You’re obstructing my view. You’re a big obstruction, you’re obscuring what I want to do. You got between me and my object. Sit down.

[58:57] But what’s she going to do, you know, the great obstructor Michelle. What’s she going to do? If I’m resting in awareness how is she going to get between me and my awareness? How do you bar-ché? How do you cut between, like if two people are dancing? I mean, they used to do that when I was a kid, you know, men and women actually danced together. [laughter] Full dancing. They wouldn’t just gyrate like in there, you know, in solitude, but they actually danced together, you know, their arms would be around each other. That’s what they used to do. [laughter continues] You young people wouldn’t know about that but that’s what they used to do. And then in the real old days, you know, someone, a gentleman, might cut it, ‘Might I cut in?’ And you tap the gent, the guy on the [shoulder], and ‘Might I cut in?’ And if they’re all very gentlemen, you should, ‘sure be my guest’. The woman has no choice. [loud laughter] The women never, you know, they never did that, did they? The women never tap the girl on the shoulder and say, ‘can I cut in?’ Never happens! We know who’s in charge here. This dance was designed by men, right? But that’s called ‘cutting in’, right? You’re cutting in, in the gentleman old fashion, ‘may I cut in?’ And then one steps back and the other one steps in, right? That’s cutting in. So, it’s like that. All kinds of things can cut in, Bar-ché, cut in between, if your attention is focused on something outside of itself, on a sign, but if you’re resting in awareness, then your meditative equipoise is not being obstructed by anything. Because nothing can possibly obstruct, nothing can possibly get in between you and what you’re attending to. That’s a great advantage if you’re living in a noisy environment. Yeah.

[1:00:40] “Not being established in any way as any physical entity, it is a clear vacuity like space, illuminous vacuity. [This is the non-duality of luminosity and emptiness] Also whatever good or bad objects of the five senses occur [pleasant, unpleasant sounds, and so forth, whatever occur], they appear as clear and vivid as if they were reflections in a lucid mirror. [They’re just empty appearances] An experience occurs, that is free from such identifications as this is or this is not. You’re not engaging that conceptually designating mind, the labeling mind, the associating mind, the proliferating mind. [You’re not doing that] Such a concentration, however stable, if not imbued with the bliss of mental and physical suppleness, It’s said to be single pointedness of the mind of the desire realm.” So, for example, that single-pointed attention stage eight out of nine stages prior to shamatha. He just referred to it, right? Not explicitly but, that is a really, really stable samadhi. Eighth is really great! It takes that little flick of effort at the beginning and you slide, stay in two, three, four hours, [1:02:04?]. Easy peasy, as they say.

[1:02:07] But if it’s still on stage eight, you’re still in the desire realm. And so, what’s the problem with that? Well, the thing is, as you read and I’ve given, you know, a detailed account of this in one of the files you have online, when you actually achieve shamatha, then it’s not just that somehow you’ve moved from the desire to the form realm, crossed the threshold. But also, in that process of achieving shamatha, something I’ve not seen highlighted, or so nearly, so clearly, set forth in the Theravada or Pali literature as I have in the Mahayana and the Tibetan tradition. And that is the arising of the physical and mental pliancy, prashrata, and physical mental bliss. Tsongkhapa just nails it like, once you finish with him, you say, ‘Okay, I think we’re done here’. I mean, it can’t be said any more clearly than that, right? I mean, it’s definitive. And the sutras, and Mahayana sutras, and Tsongkhapa, and here we have Panchen Rinpoche, saying, ‘This is why you want to go all the way, not just be satisfied with this incredibly good samadhi on the eighth stage, but go all the way because that’s when there’s this phase shift.’ It really is very distinctive. You’ll remember it. If you achieve this, you’ll never forget it. Because it’s going to be like on a Tuesday afternoon, it’s going to be a very specific memory event. And it’s not just, oh wasn’t that great? That’s the whole deal that you’ve shifted the whole energy state, like you’ve just got upgraded from a really old operating system to a brand new one, which is so spectacularly better. Your whole energy system is shifted to a higher state, which brings it pliancy and a sense of physical well-being. That’s the term - well-being.

[1:03:40] But your mind being profoundly entangled with the body, your mind being specifically entangled with the energy system, the prana system. Elevate one, the other one gets elevated. So, both are raised, elevated, in terms of that suppleness, pliancy, malleability, and the sense of well-being, physical and mental. That’s the big thing. That’s the real key point. What’s the big deal about achieving shamatha? It’s that. And of course, by the power of that, the five observations are out for the count. Not eliminated but they’re like, it’s like being in the boxing ring, you just knock them out. They’ll come to, you knock them out again if you need to, but, you know, they’re out. Which means then you can do a lot of things. You can do, in terms of, we go back very briefly to the military analogy, when, you know, one whole line of defenses, they’re all just, let’s not say chlorine gas, that’s malevolent, but just imagine just anesthesia and you have to chloroform and they all just fall asleep. Boy, then you can go much, make much greater inroads to achieving final success. If one whole line of defense of the five obscurations, and they’re pretty formidable. If you think about them one by one, those are major defenses that will prevent us from getting to the clear and luminous nature of our mind, let alone realizing emptiness, let alone realizing rigpa. So, it’s really worth getting that line of defense out of the way. And here’s the point, okay.

[1:05:05] “The bliss of physical, and mental and physical suppleness is crucial. On the other hand, a concentration, a samadhi, that is imbued with mental and physical suppleness is said to be serenity. That’s shamatha. Serenity or shamatha will be the source of many positive attributes or qualities, such as extrasensory perception, paranormal abilities, and so forth.” So, you’ve heard this many times, they’re all saying the same thing, converging on this. It’s a consensual truth. The Hindus know about it, Theravada Buddhists know about it, all schools of Tibetan Buddhism know about it. It’s not a matter of metaphysical or religious dogma. This is what happens, right? “In particular the arya paths of all three vehicles - Shravaka, Pratyekabuddha, Bodhisattva, in particular the arya paths of all three vehicles, are obtained in dependence upon it.” Well, I don’t know any more clear, succinct, absolutely definitive statement than that one right now. Whatever your path is, you want to become a Shravaka arhat? Good, that’s very noble. Pratyekabuddha? Awesome. Do you want to follow the Bodhisattva path to its culmination? Great. They’re all authentic paths. And none of them exist without shamatha. That’s pretty straightforward.

[1:06:30] Well, “how is this path to be identified in terms of its own nature? [Boy, he’s really asking really good questions, like inquiring minds want to know. How do you know whether you’re on your path or not?] How is this path to be identified in terms of its own nature? “Thus the ultimate reality of the mind” That’s the dharmata.” Real nature is fine but I think it’s vague. I wouldn’t know, I just read in ‘real nature’, I don’t know what that’s referring to. But, of course, it’s just getting accustomed to the terminology of one translator versus another, so I’m not saying my translation is better, it’s just, I’m very familiar with it. “Thus the ultimate reality of the mind” Well, this, of course, in this context refers to emptiness. It’s ultimate mode of existence, emptiness, shunyata. “Thus the ultimate reality of the mind may be seen directly but cannot be apprehended or taught as this.” In other words, it’s like [Tibetan 1:07:31] - Shantideva, ninth chapter. [Tibetan 1:07:38], the ultimate, (Tibetan, dön dam), the ultimate is not in the field of experience of the intellect, it’s not in the domain of the intellect.” The intellect is one that says, ‘oh this!’ You know, brings out the label, brings out the conceptual designation, you know, category. Oh yeah. I’ve made something here [? 1:07:58], I got it. I got it.

[1:07:58] That’s how we know things that I said so many times before. That’s how we just normally, habitually, almost ubiquitously, know anything at all. Oh yeah, I got it. And we’ve locked it into a grid. It’s familiar now and we know it conceptually. And that’s what we mean by know. And it’s absolutely true. This is not a criticism at all of science but that’s exactly how science operates. You don’t know it unless you can articulate it. And you don’t know it publicly until - this is a very interesting thing in science - you don’t know publicly until you’ve written your paper, submitted it to a peer-reviewed journal, it’s been reviewed by peers and accepted by peers and published. That’s when the discovery was made. When it’s peer-reviewed and published. On that date, that’s when the discovery was made. You may have made it six months earlier but until you can articulate it and it passes through all the screening and gets published in a reputable peer-reviewed scientific journal, it doesn’t count. Doesn’t count.

[1:08:58] So I might read it just briefly, but Einstein’s life is so fascinating. He was coming down to the finish line, he was already very eminent. He’d already published the special theory of relativity, already had his miraculous year of 1905 when he came out with three, four brilliant papers. Each one should be worth a Nobel. But then he spent the next 10 years working on the general theory of relativity, right? Big deal and it was awesome, enormous amount of work. And he was coming right down to the finish line, he was living in Germany. I think he had his position at the university of Berlin at the time. And he came right down, but then he heard, I think it was Weyl, I think it was Weyl, I think it was he, but it was a brilliant mathematician and a theoretical physicist, I believe in Göttingen, in Göttingen. And Weyl was an extremely bright, outstanding mathematician. And he knew what Einstein was working on and he got the fragrance, he got the scent, he picked up on it. And it was a race because Weyl was very, I think it was Weyl. I could be wrong there but it was a brilliant German mathematician, theoretical physicist. And he was crunching the numbers, he’s working on it, and they’re both. And then Einstein heard about, ‘He’s taking all my work for the last 10 years and if he publishes first, he’s going to get all the credit.’ That’s the way it works. It’s not fair, that’s the way it works. Whoever presents it publicly then you get the credit. And so, Einstein was really pressed at that end just, he hadn’t finished yet but he had to finish it. And then he finished and he ran off and presented it publicly. And then he got the credit for it, which he deserved, every bit.

[1:10:29] So, there’s no criticism of anything but that’s how it works in science. It’s a very public venture, very public. There’s no such thing as private science. And this is why. There’s very understandable resistance, suspicion, conservativism, and sometimes flat-out closed-mindedness to introducing contemplative inquiry or introspection into the scientific domain because it just seems the antithesis of scientific third-person inquiry, where it’s so public. They say, ‘We can’t deal with that, we don’t want to deal with that. Please go away. We’re getting by here’, you know. I read an article this morning that really gave me some hope. I’ll share it with you later. Tides turning. If you’re investing, don’t invest in scientific materialism. Sell short, [laughter] really, sell short. You’ll be very happy five years from now. Thank goodness, Alan Wallace said sell short. I’m cashing in. [laughter]

[1:11:31] “Thus the ultimate reality of the mind may be seen directly [you see it directly, again like the taste of lemonade] but cannot be apprehended or taught as this. And that is once you’ve apprehended it you can’t go back to your conceptual mind and reconstruct it. [It won’t be the same thing] And you also can’t convey it to another person. [‘I just had this experience, let me relay it to you.’ Hopeless. Doesn’t matter whether you’re the most articulate person on the planet. You will not be able to do it. Not possible.] Focusing gently without grasping on whatever appears [focusing gently without grasping on whatever appears] is unanimously proclaimed by most present-day great meditators of the land of snow to be the instruction that leads to holding Buddha in your palm.” Okay, Mahamudra tradition, Dzogchen tradition, this was clearly a very common aphorism. It was in the air. A lot of people just kind of, this is it, this is it. What do you do? Just focus gently, no grasping on whatever appears, just be present, no grasping. A lot of people say, that’s it. If you want the fast track to enlightenment, Buddhahood in the palm of your hand, that’s it. It’s unanimously proclaimed by most present-day great meditators of the land of snows, this refers to Tibet, of course, to be the instruction, the pith instruction that leads to holding Buddha in the palm of your hand. To lead you in a direct route to Buddhahood itself.

[1:13:03] And he’s going to challenge that. Because, of course, he’s, the whole presentation he’s given thus far he’s just about finished now with shamatha. The whole presentation has been pretty much summed up in that. Sooner or later, you don’t have to focus tightly. That’s in the earlier phases. But as you proceed along those nine stages, I mean, you’re just needing less and less and less effort, until it’s effortless, right? Stage nine is completely effortless, stage eight a tweak of effort at the beginning then it’s effortless. Relatively speaking the most effort is the beginning. That’s when you need to tightly focus. But you can’t do that too long, it gets stressed out, you get drained, fatigued. So, don’t just keep on pushing. Tightly focused, yes. And then, these many short sessions. Years ago, I was at a conference with, um, who was there? with Tsoknyi Rinpoche. He’s lovely. I’ve enjoyed every encounter I had out with him. And that’s one of the first at least. And he was leading a little meditation and I can’t, I won’t try to paraphrase it all but I remember the gist of it. He said, ‘all right, now everybody let’s’ - it was something like this, okay? He says, ‘all right now, everybody now just rest in your awareness. I’ll snap my fingers, we’ll start, and then when I snap it the second time then the session’s over. Ready? just rest in your awareness. We’ll start when I snap my fingers. Ready?’ [AW snaps fingers and do that again after three seconds] [laughter]. Ever experience that? It’s kind of like, ‘oh, can you just do that again? I wasn’t quite ready’, you know. ‘Okay we’ll do it twice.’ [AW snaps fingers and do that again after three seconds].

[1:14:31] That notion, that’s not hard. That’s not hard. In fact, if I give you an advanced warning for five seconds, let’s do it. Why not? It takes five seconds. For five seconds just rest your awareness in the way he’s described. We’ll start now. [AW snaps fingers and does that again after five seconds]. So easy, yeah? Oops, I’m not going to ask who found that hard. It would be embarrassing to say. But not hard, yeah? 24 minutes, oh that’s hard. Oh, so many of you come to me, ‘oh, it’s a tough week, oh it’s a tough week’. [laughter] Tough week. I want to send you over to the rock, you know, the rock. If you want a tough week, [laughter continues] spend a week in the rock quarry and get back to me afterwards. How was your week in the rock quarry? How did that go? Did you enjoy it? Was it fun, rewarding, satisfying? That’s hard. There are many things harder than having been in a rock quarry in Tuscany, I mean, it’s a lot worse than that, right? But there it is. [AW snaps fingers] When you keep it short and then just enter the session, whether it’s 24 minutes or whether it’s four hours, just have that notion [AW snaps fingers], right now. That’s not hard. The idea of 24 minutes, that’s hard. But [AW snaps fingers], that’s not hard at all. And that’s what he’s saying here. When you’re right there, it’s gentle, it’s almost and then it eventually is effortless.

[1:16:05] “Focusing gently without grasping on whatever appears is unanimously proclaimed by most present-day great meditators [gomchen, uh, contemplatives, I would say] of the land of snows to be the instruction that leads to holding Buddha in the palm of your hand. [Straight route, this is Mahamudra, this is Dzogchen] That may be. [He’s not refuting them] But this way [that he’s just described and now he’s finished], this way I’ve just described [and I must say that was very succinct, enormously clear and complete] that may be but this way I, Choekyi Gyaltsen, state is merely a marvelous method for a beginner to accomplish mental stillness, and is a way of introducing the relative nature of the mind.” So, it’s very interesting. He’s writing this as one of the most prominent, eminent, uh, pundit contemplatives in the entire Gelugpa tradition - Panchen Lama, the fifth guru to the fifth Dalai Lama, uh, and he’s saying this in the 17th century, and lo and behold essentially the same message is given in the 19th century, through Dudjom Lingpa, that is Padmasambhava by way of Dudjom Lingpa, saying, “And some people,” It’s exactly the same. It’s amazing. And maybe not, if in fact Panchen Rinpoche was the speech emanation of Padmasambhava, and it’s the Lake-Born Vajra speaking through Dudjom Lingpa, okay? Well, then there’s no surprise at all. They’re saying exactly the same thing.

[1:17:45] And Padmasambhava says, the Lake-Born Vajra in the Vajra Essence says, and referring exactly to this state, the mind is now settled in its natural state, you’ve achieved shamatha. He says, “Some people call this the one taste, [That’s the third of four yogas of Mahamudra. Very high, very far advanced, way up on the aryabodhisattva level, some people call it that] some people call it freedom from conceptual elaboration. [That’s the second out of four yogas, way up on the path, way, way, way under] Some people say that, [But I call] and some people say it’s ethically neutral. And what I say is, you’ve come to the essential nature of the mind.” And we know exactly what he means by that. He’s not referring to emptiness and he’s not referring to rigpa. What he calls the essential, the mol e [1:18:30?], the essential nature of the mind, is exactly, exactly the same as what Panchen Rinpoche here is calling the relative nature of the mind, okay?

[1:18:41] You’ve identified its distinctive characteristics. You’ve not questioned its ontology - Does it exist inherently? Does it exist only relatively? Does it exist only by the power of conceptual designation? Does it exist in the manner that it appears? Those are very powerful questions. They’re all vipashyana questions, right, all vipashyana questions. This is pure phenomenology. This is just like the ‘what does an orange taste like?’ That’s not going to liberate you, to know what an orange tastes like. And it’s not going to liberate you, to identify the distinguishing characteristics of consciousness. That’s not going to liberate you at all. It’ll be more helpful, more interesting, more central than knowing the nature of an orange. But it’s on the same level - same level, the distinguishing characteristics of an orange, of a pineapple, of a planet, an asteroid, consciousness, elementary particle - all in the same plane, none of those liberate. But it can be interesting; it can be useful as well. And also, so you don’t mistake it for something that it’s not, like confusing a computer program for consciousness, or saying that robots know something. Well, that means you don’t know what it means to know, if you think a mere computer-driven facsimile is actually identical to what it’s creating a cheap imitation of, with no subjectivity whatsoever. So, it’s helpful to avoid that whole massive vortex of materialism that sucks you into a black hole and never lets you out.

[1:20:12] So, it’s useful for that, but that’s what he’s saying here. “This is the method of introducing or identifying the relative nature of the mind, the conventional nature, it’s phenomenological nature. [But then begs the question, all right?] But if this doesn’t liberate or, as Dudjom Lingpa says, if this realization alone does not take you one hair’s breadth onto the path, [And he’s just asked what is the nature of the path, right? He’s just said. I mean, this is so, the Gelugpas are so incredibly powerful when it comes to logic. I’m actually not seeing anything to compare with them, uh, not putting it on anything, but those are the ones I’ve studied, are just, it’s very powerful. So, he states that this, in particular the arya paths of all the vehicles, are obtained in dependence upon this. So he’s shown the absolute indispensability of this for venturing onto and proceeding along any of the paths to a liberation or awakening. And the very next question is, “How is this path being identified in terms of what’s the nature of a path?” And then he points out, “This isn’t it, [not yet] this isn’t it, this is not the path. So, some people say it is. Well, maybe they’re right, maybe they’re great prodigies, maybe this practice just going into awareness, maybe they just cut through, they just cut through all the obsessive ideation, they cut through the substrate, they cut through reification of the mind, and they cut right on through all the way down to the ground. It’s possible, who’s to say?” Is that normal? Is that generally the case? No way, no, not at all. But are there exceptions? Are there prodigies? Sure, who’s to say? So then, it’s very profoundly non-judgmental. So, who’s to say? But generically, overall, in general, is this all you need? No, no way, no you’ll need more than that. Unless you’re extraordinary prodigy. So that’s what he’s saying here. This is how the answer is expressed.

[1:22:14] And then he goes to vipashyana. We finished with shamatha for this retreat, now half over. We’ve finished with shamatha. That’s what was to be said, it has now been said. And so, the rest of this retreat now focuses on vipashyana and then Mahamudra. And we can’t avoid Dzogchen, we got to come in there. So now I promise to specifically demonstrate the method for recognizing the ultimate reality of the mind. That’s exactly, precisely there in both Dzogchen, and I’m referring specifically to the teachings of the Lake-Born Vajra by way of Dudjom Lingpa, it’s exactly there, that you start speaking about setting out on the path, okay? Achieve shamatha, you finally found the on-ramp. And he says, Bear in mind - it was so brilliantly said, it was, it was Dudjom Lingpa, Padmasambhava saying - that those seeking the path will have to go, undergo – remember? I’m paraphrasing - great difficulties, great challenges, it’s going to be a long time. Don’t expect it to be easy to find the on-ramp, to get to, just to get to the path. To be right there at the end of the on-ramp, where the lights turning green and red and green and red. It’s going to take you, don’t think that’s going to be easy to get there, right, to find the path. It may take lifetimes; in one lifetime it may take decades. And trying this, and trying that, and dead end here, and that didn’t work there. It’s like Thomas Edison’s famous, famous story. I’ve seen different, uh, different, very slight variations on it but it’s a good story, and I just read it recently. Again.

[1:23:57] But Thomas Edison was incredibly persistent. I mean, he’s just dogged, tenacious, and when he was trying to work on an electric light bulb, the story - and it was actually a true story, I might have missed the details because I’ve seen different details - but the story I’ve just read was, okay. He’s been working on this for years, trial and error, trial and error. And the story goes. He tried ten thousand different ways and none of them worked. It was just failure, I mean, ten thousand failures of not getting what he wanted. He knew exactly what he wanted to achieve. This is technology, right? You either get it or you don’t, you know exactly what you’ve got. It’s like shamatha - you achieve it or not. That’s it. That’s the end of the conversation. So, some reporter came to him - and somewhere in my notes I could find out exactly who that was, I have it here in my external brain. And the reporter came to Thomas Edison and said, ‘Mr Edison, you’ve failed ten thousand times to create a light bulb. Don’t you think about moving on, maybe trying something else, maybe it’s not possible, you know, but you’ve failed all these times.’ And Edison’s response was, ‘I have not failed ten thousand times, I’ve not failed once. I’ve succeeded ten thousand times in finding out how not to make a light bulb.’

[1:25:15] That’s a very close analogy, isn’t it? We’re seeking the light bulb of the substrate consciousness [laughter], and you try this, and you try that, and you try this, and you go so rich in experience of ways of not achieving shamatha. As you get older and older, you know, until eventually, if you meet the right circumstances, then the light turns on, okay? But all of the time before was not a waste. You wouldn’t have what comes later if you didn’t have all of that in between. It would never happen. And if you don’t have enormous motivation, great aspiration, you give up. I’ve seen it many, many times. You’ll give up. Some other thought, ‘Oh, I could be doing this’. And then, with a kind of a sigh of relief, ‘I don’t really need shamatha that much. It was never that important, and I’m going to do this, you know, it’s much easier.’ Once you’ve achieved it, you’re so close, you’re so close to the path. And then he’s going to go right to the nucleus, the ultimate reality of the mind, the emptiness of the mind. So specifically, now I promise to specifically demonstrate the method for recognizing the ultimate reality of the mind. And I just hope I don’t die before tomorrow, because we’re finished. So, I’m sure Glen will fill in for me. No problem. Good, good.

[1:27:12] As we’re packing up somebody asked me if I’d give a little bit of pith instructions on lucid dreaming - dream yoga. So I’ll give it little increments. Because it is a way, now that we’re, as of tomorrow we just crossed the threshold, right? We just crossed the threshold from the shamatha presentation and all that preceded it into vipashyana then on to the path itself. And dream yoga is clearly an expression of vipashyana, as a type of vipashyana and it has daytime practice, which is flat out vipashyana, and nighttime practice, which is vipashyana. But many people don’t even remember their dreams, so they remember only sporadically and in little snippets here and there. So, following the very gentle, graduated path of modern lucid dreaming research, which is really sweet in the sense that it makes it accessible. If you go to classic dream yoga, it can look like you’re a high jumper, like in track and field, you’re a high jumper. You just don’t need to be a high jumper, you’re like 10 years old and the first one they give you is six feet, okay. Jump over that - and you’re only four feet. You can’t do it. Yeah, can you make it lower? How about three feet? You know.

[1:28:27] And that’s what this modern discipline does. So, one of the first things that he says is the following, really, really short, and we’ll get off to dinner. Uh, if you’re interested in opening up this, so that you can have more of a 24 7 type of practice, that you continue practicing not only all day, but through the night as well, vectoring towards lucid dreamless sleep, lucid dreaming sleep. The whole thing, it just becomes flooded with light, you’ve turned on the light bulb day and night, then the first thing would be, as you fall asleep do so with anticipatory, or what’s it called, uh, prospective, prospective memory - remembering to do something in the future, remember? There’s retrospective memory, recalling what you had for breakfast this morning; there’s present centered memory, which is remembering the flow of the in and out breath from moment to moment. It’s mindfulness. There’s prospective memory, or mindfulness, which is anticipating the future and remembering to do something in the future. ‘Honey when you come home tonight please buy some milk.’ And then you do, if you exercise prospective memory. Eight hours later after you’re asked, after you’re requested to do so. That’s prospective memory. We do it all the time, right?

[1:29:33] So here’s prospective memory. As you’re falling asleep, let one of your last thoughts be that, tonight, when I’m waking up, whether I wake up in the middle of night to pee for example, or I just wake up, or whether I just sleep right through the night and I’m slept out and then I’m waking up - either way. But whenever it is that I’m waking up - I’m putting that in the in the present tense - when I’m waking up, not after I’ve awakened but when I’m waking up, when I have a sense that I’m coming from the sleeping state and I’m in transition, I’m in the bardo between sleeping and awaking, being awake, right, in that transition. When I note in the present moment, introspectively, that I’m waking up - and I don’t know when that’s going to be, whether it’s going to be at 2:30 or 5:30 or whenever - but when that happens, I’m going to recognize it as swiftly as possible. This is my resolve. I’m going to do something. When I’m waking up, as soon as that happens.’ [AW snap fingers] Like that! Just like recognizing excitation or laxity as soon as they arise, introspectively. You’re monitoring your own mind, right? You’re introspectively monitoring the experience of waking up, being in process of waking up, emerging and fully into the waking state. And as soon as that starts, as soon as possible, I’m going to recognize that I’m waking up.

[1:30:54] And as soon as that recognition has occurred - I’m waking up - I’m going to do something. This is the crucial two-step - I’m going to recognize and do. If I don’t recognize the doing never happens. If I only recognize and don’t do, it’s insufficient. I’m going to recognize I’m waking up, and as soon as I’ve recognized I’m waking up, I will do something. And what I will do is, I will be still. My body lying in bed. I will be still, which means I’m not going to move, right? And mentally, I’m going to be still. I’m not going to be thinking, thinking, thinking, what, okay, what time is it, blah blah blah. I’m not going to be launching into the conceptual activities of the day. I’m going to stop right in my tracks. I’m waking up and I stop, physically and mentally. Poised, hovering right there, in process, like getting off a train. Right there. And then I’m going to do something else. Here’s a series of instructions here but they’re very simple. I’m going to do something else, and that is, I’m going to direct my attention backwards in time. And I’m going to recall the last image that was in my mind. What was the last thing I remember? Was it being awake six hours earlier, or was it the last image of a dream? I’m going to recall that, and if it was indeed the last image, the last, yeah, just that, last image of a dream, I’ll then pursue that. What was before that, what was the story? This was the last page of a story, what was the page before? And see if you can recall your dream, okay. So, it’s taking an interest, it’s taking an interest, and that’s the strategy. It’s been tried now for 30, 40 years. Pretty good. And then your dream recall will gradually increase. And that’s the first step. Stephen LaBerge so wisely says, because he’s quite an expert here, he says, you know, if you don’t remember your dreams you won’t remember whether they were lucid or not. You could conceivably have a lucid dream and not remember having it, which would be such a bummer, you know. Okay [phew]. Done my work. Finish with shamatha. Enjoy your day. See you tomorrow morning.

Transcribed by Sueli Martinez

Revised by Kriss Sprinkle

Final edition by Rafael C. Giusti

Transcript formatted and posted on the website of the course by Rafael C. Giusti

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.