As always, it is very important to cultivate the right and proper motivation on the side of the teacher and the listener.

Transcription

1 HEART SUTRA 2 Commentary by HE Dagri Rinpoche There are many different practices of the Bodhisattva one of the main practices is cultivating the wisdom that realises reality and the reason why this text is called the heart of the perfection of wisdom is because it contains the essential/principle points on the perfection of wisdom. Hence Heart Sutra. As always, it is very important to cultivate the right and proper motivation on the side of the teacher and the listener. As the great master Shantideva said, all the branches (of the 6 Perfections) were taught for the purpose of cultivating wisdom. The excellent wisdom that realises emptiness is a crucial factor in liberating suffering sentient beings from cyclic existence and due to this, the Buddha taught emptiness extensively. Sentient beings are trapped in samsara and experience suffering due to being unable to cut the root of suffering = ignorance. The only means to totally uproot ignorance is the wisdom that realises emptiness. We will begin where we left off yesterday In the 2 nd para of the text, the great Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara was analysing the 5 aggregates whether they exist inherently or not. I m quite sure you are familiar with what the 5 aggregates are, namely form, feeling, discrimination, compositional factors and consciousness. At that time, Avalokitesvara was analysing the reality of these 5 aggregates. Generally speaking, one can do the meditation on emptiness on any phenomena but here, why the Buddha established emptiness in relation to the 5 aggregates, the 12 sources, 18 elements and so on, was because there are greater chances for us to develop misconceptions of reality when looking at the 5 aggregates, the 12 sources etc. The 5 aggregates are also called the 5 heaps. When talking about the form aggregate, it is the aggregation/collection of many parts that brings about form = hence, heap. The aggregate of form, it is on the basis of things that we can see with our eyes. The aggregate of feeling refers to internal feelings (happiness, suffering, neutrality). The aggregate of discrimination the aspect of consciousness which distinguishes one thing from another. The aggregate of consciousness has 6 divisions (that in relation to the eye, nose, tongue, ear, touch and mental consciousness). The aggregate of compositional factors refers to phenomena that are not included in the earlier 4. The reason for compositional is because they are composed or come about due to causes and conditions. Here Avalokitesvara was contemplating on the reality of the 5 aggregates. To us, the 5 aggregates appear to exist inherently (exist on their own). If they do exist

2 inherently, they ought to be able to exist without depending on any factors i.e. they can independently. However, if we examine closely, we realise that things do not exist independently nor inherently but rely on various factors to come into being. Hence things do not exist inherently as they appear to us. In para 2, the line starts with Also at that time.. this implies that Avalokitesvara was not only examining the 5 aggregates but the selflessness of person too. Everything that exists in this world exists by way of dependence. All things come about through dependent arising and not independently. E.g. a child he came into being in relation to the parents; without parents, there cannot be a child hence, the existence of a child is dependent on parents and conversely, parents are called parents by virtue of having a child. Therefore, the existence of parents and child are dependent on each other. Likewise when we talk about a seed and its flower, we generally refer to one as the cause and the other as the result. However, if we exmaine more closely, whether the seed is the cause or result, there is no clear answer because if we regard the seed as being produced from its own cause (e.g. a prior flower), then this seed is a result. On the other hand, if we think about the result to come from this seed, then this seed is a cause. Cause and effect are dependent on each other. Everything in this world is dependent upon factors for their existence. If things existed inherently, they would be able to stand independently and not need to depend on any factors. The conclusion therefore is that all things exist dependently and not independently nor inherently. Another example is that we talk about existence in relation to non-existence and vice-versa. When we talk about good, it is relation to bad; hen we talk about east, it is in the contect of other cardinal directions. Without one, the others cannot exist. This is how everything is dependently designated. At one time, Ananda had a younger brother who had difficulty practising the Dharma because he was very attached to his wife and that attachment prevented him from making spiritual progress. In order to help him in his practice, the Buddha asked the question Who is more beautiful? Your wife or that blind monkey? The man answered, Of course, my wife is more beautiful than that monkey. Buddha then emanated a beautiful goddess and asked Now tell me who is more beautiful your wife or that goddess? The man answered, The goddess and privately thought his wife looked like a frog in comparison to this goddess. In this way, the man s attachment was reduced. Similarly, beauty and all things come about in dependence on other factors. The 1 st & 2 nd paras of the text were the prologue. From the 3 rd para, starts the main part of the text: Then through the power of the Buddha... The main part of the text can be studied under 4 headings: The 1 st heading is where Shariputra asks a question to Avalokitesvara on how a person should practice if he wishes to train in the perfection of wisdom.

3 The 2 nd heading is Avalokitesvara s response to the question asked. Virtually the entire text is the response of Avalokitesvara but is nevertheless regarded as the words of the Buddha because both Shariputra s question and Avalokitesvara s response were inspired by the Buddha. This kind of teachings are in the category of teachings that arise through the blessings of the Buddha and are thus regarded as the words of the Buddha. The 3 rd heading is the verse spoken by the Buddha himself which appears towards the end of the Sutra, where it is said Well said, well said... That section is called the Buddha s rejoicing and approval of the words spoken by Avalokitesvara as being correct and precise. The 4 th part is at the end of the sutra The Bhagavan having thus spoken... where the audience showed their delight in having received the teaching and pledged to uphold the practice. The 1 st part the question asked by Shariputra to Avalokitesvara: How to train in the perfection of wisdom. As you know, Shariputra is one of the 2 chief disciples of the Buddha (himself and Maudgalyana). Shairputra was well known for his supreme wisdom. The question on how should any son or daughter of the lineage train in the activities of the perfection of wisdom. The term lineage refers to the Mahayana lineage and its practitioners who have great admiration and faith in profound emptiness. This however excludes beings like hermaphrodites (a hermaphrodite is a being which has both male and female organs within its body) as for them, there are obstacles to developing spiritual abilities or actualise the paths and grounds in that life as a hermaphrodite. I believe that certain physical aspects of a being can affect the way that being thinks or engages in practices. The 2 nd part on Avalokitesvara s response. This is divided into 3 sections namely (1) The answer in relation to how a Bodhisattva of lower intelligence should train in the perfection of wisdom (2) The answer in relation to how a Bodhisattva of great intelligence should train the perfection of wisdom (3) A summary of the points from both types of training. The Heart Sutra explicitly teaches about emptiness and implicitly teaches the 5 Paths, as can be seen from Avalokitesvara s response on how Bodhisattvas should train. The 5 Paths are the Path of Accumulation, the Path of Preparation, the Path of Seeing, the Path of Meditation, the Path of No More Learning. Avalokitesvara s advice covers the Path of Accumulation and Preparation together; then the Path of Seeing; the Path of Meditation meditation in general and vajra-like meditative concentration; to the Path of No More Learning. When Shariputra asks the question, Avalokitesvara answers that one should see the 5 aggregates as being empty of inherent nature i.e. they do not exist independently but exist by way of dependence on other factors; they are each a dependent-arising. Avalokitesvara goes on to say that one should behold the 5 aggregates as empty of inherent nature this is a very important sentence to remember

4 because it is followed by the passage which refers to there being no eye, no ear, no nose etc.. This does not literally mean that one has no eyes and no nose but rather that there is no inherently-existing eye, nose etc. if something exists independently, then it ought to be able to remain the same [and not be affected by anything/factors]. E.g. if something is good, it should remain good forever; or if bad, then bad forever but the fact is that changes do occur. Likewise, if our mind exists inherently, it means our minds will always remain the same i.e. it will not change nor be able to be transformed and if so, there would be no possibility of attaining enlightenment that is clearly not the case [as seen from the Buddha s own life]. We can achieve enlightenment because our minds can be transformed and this shows that mind does not exist inherently nor independently. How should one analyse the emptiness of form? The answer is given, Form is empty; emptiness is form. Emptiness is not other than form; form is also not other than emptiness. This passage is referred to as the emptiness that is endowed with the 4 aspects (each statement on the passage is one aspect). One shouldn t interpret the words literally. The conventional reality of form and the ultimate reality of form exist upon one entity. It is important to understand this statement. In monasteries, there are classes on philosophy on valid cognition which are steps towards understanding the profound view on emptiness. What is direct perception? What is conceptual perception? Direct perception means perceiving the object directly without any intermediary. Conceptual perceptions however rely on something in-between to arrive at a view/perception. Whatever is perceived by conceptual thought comes about through the generation of a mental image e.g. when we are asked to think of a flower, we close our eyes and create the picture of a flower in our mind. That image of the flower is conceptual perception and not direct perception. Conceptual perceptions arise due to various reasons e.g. from what we have heard about the object from others. The label flower - is that label the flower or not? The name/label flower is not a flower [but a mental label imputed onto a base, an object which can serve the function of a flower]. If we were asked, What is a flower? We would point to a flower nearby, wouldn t we? However, let s think - is the object we point to as being a flower, an [inherentlyexisting] flower or not? According to 2 Buddhist philosophical schools of thought called the Vaibashika and Sautrantika, they would say yes, there is such a real [inherently existing] flower. However, according to the highest philosophical school of the Prasangika, it asserts that the object we point to as being a flower is not actually the flower but the basis for designating/imputing the term flower. So the flower that we see and point to, is only the basis of he flower and not the flower itself. If we try to identify flower on the basis of designation, we will not be able to find t find flower. Hence to the Prasangika, what we call flower is merely the basis of imputing flower. When we try to find the flower in the object we call flower starting from the

5 stem, the leaves, the petals etc we won t be able to point to one thing which we can call flower. For anything to exist, there should be a perceiving consciousness. Do you think that there would be an object, if there were no subject (mind)? Without the subject, there can be no object. Everything that appears does so because of the subject. In general, whether things exist or not, depends on whether it is realised by valid cognition. If we say that there are horns on a rabbit, this would be contradicted by valid cognition, which is aware that there is no such thing as rabbit s horns. Whether something exists or not, is determined by the valid mind as it can confirm or disprove existence. We cannot say things don t exist simply because we cannot see them. Similarly, we cannot say that just because we see something or perceive something based on one s perception, it exists. E.g. there could be a confusion in perception such as seeing two moons or blue-coloured mountains. Whatever appears to our sensory perceptions may not be true. I know a person who had visions. Once we were walking together he said he saw an old woman, who was not visible to anyone else. It was a mis-perception. In this way, when we begin to analyse a flower and try to find out where the flower which appears to us really exists, we will discover that we cannot find it and this is the absence of inherent existence. This is the reality of the flower. If flower were to exist inherently or truly, it should be able to exist on its own without depending on any other factors. Clearly, a flower does not exist independently but is dependent on many other factors. Therefore when we talk about the absence on inherent existence, it should be understood as meaning that all existence is based on dependentarising/dependence. Here, in the Sutra, the words Form is empty, emptiness is form shows the appearance of form as well as its emptiness. The dependent arising of form and its nature of being lacking in inherent existence. We should understand that if something exists, it does so as a dependent-arising. Emptiness is not other than form and form also is not other than emptiness refers to the 2 truths = the conventional truth and the ultimate truth. This illustrates the interconnectedness between form and its emptiness. They are one in nature. Form which is the basis of emptiness, is not other than emptiness itself. The features of form and the empty nature of form are one entity. The (physical) book itself is the basis for the qualification book. The shape of the book, the pages inside it, etc are features/qualities of the book. What is meant by one entity? When we talk about the qualities of the book, we cannot find these qualities apart from the basis (the physical book) itself hence form and its nature of emptiness are not separate entities. Just as we cannot find the qualities of the book apart from the book itself, likewise, when we talk about emptiness of form and form, they do not exist separately. The conventional nature (form) and ultimate nature (emptiness) are not separate and are there together on the same spot. The whole examination of the absence of inherent existence must be done on this book itself and not elsewhere. It s not a case of the book being here and the emptiness of the book is

6 somewhere else. The form is the basis but the nature of that form is that it does not exist inherently. The conventional and ultimate nature of any phenomena can be found upon the same basis. If we understand this explanation in relation to one object (here, the book), one will be able to understand emptiness of all objects. What is the ultimate nature of this book? The lack of inherent existence; the book is a dependent arising because it exists as merely labelled by mind and is a mere mental imputation onto a base. If any object is dependent on mental imputation, it shows that that object does not exist on its own but relies on other factors [causes and conditions for the physical form to come about, the perception of the mind perceiving the book etc]. Hence the terms dependent- arising and lacking inherent existence are crucial points to understand and can be applied to all phenomena. Understanding the conventional appearance of phenomena [i.e. how they come about from causes and conditions] avoids nihilism (a viewpoint which denies the existence of everything); understanding emptiness/the lack of inherent existence, avoids the extreme of believing in true existence. Likewise with form, all the other aggregates are empty. The way in which emptiness is analysed on the basis of form, is the mode of training in the perfection of wisdom cultivated during the Path of Accumulation and Path of Preparation. Next: Paragraph 6 - The first 2 lines : This refers to the 3 doors of liberation. Para 6 this refers to the Path of Seeing. The line Shariputra, likewise all phenomena are emptiness explains emptiness in terms of its nature and is the 1 st door of liberation. Without characteristic, unproduced, unceased, stainless not without stain refers to the 2 nd door of liberation of signlessness. This is emptiness explained in terms of the cause i.e. there is no truly existing cause. The term unproduced means there is no truly existing result. If there is something that exists inherently, it should be totally independent and can exist on its own without relying on other factors. Yet we know that things exist in reliance upon factors. Unceased means there is no inherently existing phenomena; stainless refers to emptiness of the afflicted class of phenomena such as the origins of suffering, which do not exist inherently. If they did exist inherently, then they cannot be changed and if so, there would be no liberation, which is not the case. Not without stain refers to the pure state of abandonment of afflictions. Generally speaking, there is the state of freedom from suffering and affliction and so on but remember that such states likewise exist dependently and not inherently.

7 Not deficient, not fulfilled is the 3 rd door of liberation through wishlessness. This talks about emptiness in terms of the result. There is no inherently existing result. Through practices, one can reduce defilements and increase our knowledge to the level of the fully omniscient one but the decrease or increase exists at a conventional level but is not truly existing, not independently nor inherently existing. These first 2 lines of para 6 explain emptiness in terms of the 8-fold profundity (the 8 points/8 terms just explained above). When we learn about emptiness and try to develop the direct realisation of emptiness, it should be done in a gradual manner i.e. first we need to study about emptiness, then having developed an understanding based on study, we contemplate on that and then move on to familiarising one s mind with the meaning that one has contemplated upon = meditation. In this way, when we reach the Path of Seeing we will gain direct insight into emptiness. During the Path of Seeing, one will have the direct understanding into emptiness and the kind of realisations one will have will enable one to see everything there is to know about the reality of phenomena. One s awareness/realisation of emptiness will be like the sun which rises above the mountain to its peak i.e. it won t get any bigger or brighter right until the time of sunset. 1st bhumi/ground of Great Joy (which occurs when the Bodhisattva first enters the Path of Seeing) is the experience gained by the Bodhisattva. This 1 st ground is named Great Joy due to the great bliss experienced. After the Path of Seeing, the Bodhisattva body changes into the mental body i.e. the contaminated body ceases and in its place is the mental body in great bliss. At this time, the Bodhisattva is able to give his body as a means of charity because of the bliss he feels; hence when giving up his body to benefit other beings, he is able to do so willingly. Q&A: Responses from Rinpoche: - Inherent existence means existence that is not dependent on any factors. There is nothing that exists on its own in this way. One should try to examine on whether things exist inherently or not. - To get the proper understanding of merely imputed by conceptual thought it is important to know the difference between conceptual thought and direct experience and so on. Most of the mental-labelling we do is based at a conceptual level e.g. calling something a flower. The whole process of identifying an object is mostly done by the conceptual mind. So when we talking about this conceptual labelling process, it needs to be done on an appropriate base e.g. we call Ken as Umze, which is the label of chantmaster onto a suitable base of a person who leads the chanting. Existence arises due to this process of labelling onto bases. Understand however, that the mind that does the labelling is itself also empty of inherent existence.