ACI 7 «Обеты бодхисаттвы», занятие 7

Class Seven– The Secondary Offences – part one
August 1995

Transcriber - Su Foo
Proof – Llysse Velez



[cut]
{nyi je} [repeat] {nye} means bad. {je} means did. Did something wrong. Okay. It’s the
name for the secondary offences. The secondary offences against your Bodhisattva vows.
We’ve finished how many root vows? [student: eighteen] Eighteen and now we’re going to
do forty-six {nye je} Now you know the main difference between a {nyi je} and a {tsa tung};
what is it? A {nye je} and a root downfall. What’s the difference between these forty-six and
the other eighteen? [student: one is [unclear]] What’s that? [student: one is [unclear]] Yeah,
that’s the basic … that’s the bottom line. You do a {tsa tung}, it destroys your vows. You
lose your vows. You have to take them over again. You do a {nye je}, you can restore them.
[student: Michael, can you talk a little bit about the characteristic of that one [unclear]] They
have to … one thing in a confession always they have to understand that gravity of what
you’re saying and they have to take it seriously. If they’re someone who doesn’t take their
vows seriously then it’s not good to confess in front of them. It has to be somebody who
understands how serious it is. [student: so they have to be Buddhist?] Yeah. I, normally in
this kind of thing then they’ll understand what you’re … you can’t confess something that the
other person doesn’t even know what is means to break it, normally. But I’ll look more
carefully and see if there’s anything else. [student: [unclear] perceive as a bad deeds] What’s
that? [student: you don’t have to Buddhist to understand the …] Oh yeah, but you’re
confessing breaking a vow and not just committing a bad deed and it’s much more serious.
[student: [unclear]] [student: I’m sorry …] He says, what is it about process of telling
somebody that restores them? It’s mainly the fact that you have the four forces in your mind
in order to want to tell somebody. So if you didn’t have those four forces in your mind and
you just told somebody, I think the main point is that telling someone indicates that you have
the four force… you’re sorry you did it. You know, you somehow … you’re trying to make
up for it. By telling someone you’re almost necessarily implying that you intend not to do it
again. So I think it’s all those … it’s really the four forces that repair it and I think any time
you do an honest {shakpa}, opening your heart to somebody and telling them what you …
admitting what you did, then it … it almost assumes that you have the four. The four
definitely remove the karma. Okay. We gotta … tonight we gotta truck along. I’ll stay till
midnight but I don’t think you will. [student: no.] [laughs]
[cut] {konchok} [repeat] {sum la} [repeat] {sum me je} [repeat] Okay. {konchok} means what?
You know, {konchok sum}. It’s the Three Jewels. The Three Jewels. Who are the Three
Jewels. [student: Buddha, Dharma, Sangha] Same as Buddha, Dharma, Sangha, okay. The
Jewel of Buddha; the Jewel of Dharma; the Jewel of Sangha is not the same as the Buddha, the
Dharma and the Sangha. Okay, but we’ll get into it. {konchok sum la} means to them {sum}
means three, {me je} means not to offer. I personally used to mix this one up with a … with
another kind of vow that some of you might know, and don’t mix it up, okay. It’s not that
one. {konchok sum la sum me je} means failing to offer the three to the Three Jewels. Failing
to offer the three to the Three Jewels. And now I’ll explain what the three are. Three here
means to make offering in your body, speech and mind. It doesn’t mean to make offering
three times a day for example. It means to make some kind of offering in your body, speech
and mind. [student: [unclear]] Yeah, and I’ll tell some examples. Je Tsongkapa says at
minimum, you know, you have to make some kind of prostration or do anything, something
physical – bow to the altar, do some kind of physical … within a twenty-four hour period
you must do something once, bow to the statue of the Buddha, just do any kind of reverence
to it physically. That’s the first part. Verbally means say, say any kind of minimum four lines
about, about the Three Jewels. You know, about the Buddha, like when you do an offering,
you’re supposed to offer everything you eat or drink. There’s an offering in your notebook.
At minimum you’re supposed to say something nice about [unclear] here right now. They
know the best thing to teach you right now. That’s their quality. So you just think of them.
And then … the text says you can also bow to an image. So you’re either bowing down to
the real Buddha which is what I just talked about or you can bow down to the image, and it’s
enough. [student: if you don’t have an image, can you imagine the image?] Yeah … no,
they’re saying that. So that’s body. Speech … say something good about, oh, so Dharma,
what is Dharma? {gok lam} {gok lam} this is the true Dharma. True Dharma is {gok} and
{lam}. {gok} means permanently stopping any bad quality within you; the permanent … it’s
what they call cessations and I hate that word, because you know, do we use it normal
English, I don’t know. Cessation of bombing of Serbia … Bosnia, okay, yes. Cessation
means stopping. But in Buddhism cessation means a permanent state that you reach that you
will never again have a bad … one kind of bad thought. For example, you can reach …
when you see the emptiness directly you reach true cessation. Remember what they were?
You only get rid of two bad … you only get rid of two mental afflictions permanently at that
point; one is doubt about Buddhism, why? [student: because you have seen Buddha] You
saw Buddhas. You saw your past life; you saw your future life. You know how many future
lives. You saw the day that you’re going to become enlightened. You know what they’re
going to call you and what they’re not going to call you. You know, you see the Buddha
directly. You see the Dharmakaya. So … and you see your past lives. So who’s going to
talk you out of it after that? What do you care what anyone says after that? You know.
Anybody can come with any half baked new age philosophy to you and you just laugh. You
just say, you know, it’s not right, I saw, I saw it. I saw it, what are you going to tell me?
And then what’s the second one? [student: intellectual belief in self existence] Yeah,
intellectual belief in self existence which means you realize that every perception you ever
had was … infected with seeing things as self existent. And you realize that after you come
down out of seeing emptiness directly that’s going to reassert itself in your eyeballs, okay,
and in your mind. In other words, again you’re gonna see everything as self existent but
there’s one big difference between before and after; you know you’re wrong. There’s little
comfort but at least you know you screwed up. You know that your perceptions are wrong.
So that’s at least some advantage … some advance. Then the whole journey to nirvana and
the whole journey to Buddhahood is removing that tendency. Taking all that time to remove
that tendency. So that’s … those are two mental afflictions that you … that you achieve at
{gok pa}. {gok pa} means it will never come in your mind again: doubt about Buddhism and
… [student: through Dharma, Michael?] … I’m getting to that. [laughs] And intellectual
belief that you’re … that things are the way they look. You …s o at that moment you
achieved two {gok pas} There are many … there are thousands of {gok pas}, I just gave you
two examples. That is the real Dharma. When you go for refuge, when you pray to the
Dharma, to the Three Jewels, when you think about the Three Jewels, when you read books
about the Three Jewels, that’s what they’re talking about and that’s one of the most important
{gok pas}, those two. You know, so what are you praying to? It’s not a person. You’re
praying to a condition. It’s very interesting. That’s the real protection. Who else can protect
but your {gok pas}. It’s not like some being is up there you know, oh, here I’m a refuge,
come [unclear] I’ll protect you, you know. [student: you’re saying all the {gok pas} are what
you go to refuge through, or the Dharma?} Yeah, half of the Dharma. The other half is
[{lam}. {lam} means what? [student: path] Path. True path, meaning one of the great
realizations of Buddhism. For example, perceiving emptiness directly; that’s a {lam}. So
when you pray in Buddhism, I mean, like if you go to the temple and you sit down and
you’re making prostrations, you’re making prostrations to the perception of emptiness
directly. You’re making prostration to the condition of getting rid of your anger forever or
your jealousy forever or … it’s very interesting. You’re not going to refuge … for refuge to a
person, when you go to the Dharma Jewel. You’re going to … you’re throwing yourself at
the feet of those perceptions and those cessations. It’s very beautiful. It’s very interesting.
That’s the only thing that can really protect you. Is some person gonna put his hands on you
and keep you from getting old? No, but those two things can. Perceiving emptiness directly
can keep you from getting old. Can really protect you. So that’s the Dharma Jewel. Sangha
Jewel is very simple. Yeah? [student: so the two Dharma you’re saying is the {gom pa} and
…] The Dharma Jewel. [student: the two Dharma Jewel is the {gom pa} and the {lam}] Yeah.
[student: okay, so I got {gom pa} [unclear] cessation of the [unclear]] The condition of that.
[student: I got a little lost when you said {lam} is [unclear] prostration …] {lam} and {dokpa}
are synonyms in Buddhism. [student: {dokpa}] {dokpa} means a realization, a spiritual
realization. A level of spiritual realization. For example, when you finally reach
renunciation about this life, you, you’ve achieved {lam}. That is {lam}. {lam} is not ‘the path’
in general. It’s those specific ideas in your ideas in your own mind. [student: it’s those
specific ideas] That’s {lam} in, within your own mind. Here {lam} does not refer to that
whole process of [unclear] things; you are, you are prostrating to those ideas. You are
prostrating to those realizations as other people have them or as you may have them some …
you will have them some day. And that’s taking refuge. It’s very interesting. [student: isn’t
it the same as cessation?] No, not at all. Cessation is like space. It’s the simple absence of
the thing and {lam} is a changing consciousness. It is your consciousness. It’s a mental
function. One is a living changing thing. One is a simple absence of something, like an
empty room. It’s very interesting. One never changes, the other one changes all the time
and always will. That’s what you’re supposed to make offerings to at least once every
twenty-four hours. Who is Sangha? Nominal sangha is the people who are ordained but the
real Sangha is … you can guess. [student: people who have seen emptiness. Who are
Buddhas [unclear]] No, no, no, you got it, you got it but a little bit more. [student: who have
seen direct emptiness] yeah, [laughs] okay. Big difference. I mean, zillions times difference
is the Buddha …. is the Dharma … Sangha Jewel. Anyone who has seen emptiness directly
automatically becomes the Sangha Jewel. So really when you … the day that you perceive
emptiness directly you become two of the three [unclear]; what are they? I mean, you
become the Sangha and you have the Dharma. So it’s interesting. People are taking refuge
to you. It’s very interesting. It’s a weird idea to think of. [student: but then at that point
you’re no longer you.] No, you’re very much you but you’re … you’re an Arya, you’ve
seen emptiness directly. You become the refuge [unclear]. Yeah? [student: [unclear] what
good does that do taking refuge in this way [unclear]] Taking refuge means, {ra way…..} it
means putting all your hopes in this life in that object. You know, we had it out in California,
it’s very interesting. We had all these lectures about emptiness; seeing emptiness directly.
Five people came up afterwards and said, if I came to New York city and … you know, I’m
a certain age now, if I gave up my house, my family, my kids, if I came there could I learn to
see emptiness directly within like six weeks or a year or two years or … they said … and
what it means is at that moment they took refuge. They have real refuge. That was real
refuge. Very interesting. I mean, real refuge was generated in their mind; I’ll give up
everything if I could see emptiness directly in this life. There’s some way that you could say,
okay, you know, come to New York, in six months you see emptiness directly. That, that
was the act of taking refuge; those people have got refuge. It’s very nice. [student: [unclear]]
[laughter, laughs] [student: you can [unclear]] Oh, very possible, very possible. That’s the
whole idea. But it takes a lot of work on their side. Like you … you have to meditate an
hour a day, period. Must meditate an hour a day. Cannot see emptiness without meditating
an hour a day; impossible. So if you’ll give fifteen minutes, you just disqualified yourself.
You’ll never see emptiness. [student: even an hour a day takes years though, right?] No, I
don’t mean pure concentration for an hour a day. I mean, sitting down for at least one hour
a day to practice getting into a deep state of meditation. And if you don’t do that you’ve
disqualified yourself. You will suffer more. The suffering doesn’t have a limit. You know,
the Buddha can’t come and say, your suffering now has … will, will … has this limit ‘cos if
you disqualify yourself for seeing emptiness directly the Buddha has to say, I can’t, I can’t
tell, I don’t know when, when you’re gonna stop your suffering; I can’t say. Yeah? One
more question. We didn’t get past the second … the second [unclear] [laughs, laughter]
[student: Michael, I just want to ask you, if you meditate [unclear] what is that?] It’s not
seeing emptiness. [student: what is it?] Uh, we’ll get there. If I don’t get there by the end of
the secondary vows, let me know. Okay, there are vows that relate to that. There are vows
in the Bodhisattva vows … [student: [unclear]] We’ll get there … no, but you’ll learn. You
have to … you have to have some more classroom hours and then you’ll know the answer
but it’s important to know. If I don’t cover it by the end of the forty-six vows, ask me again,
okay. So you must make offerings to them in those three modes at least once in every
twenty-four hours. And those are the real things you’re offering to. I think it’s much easier
to offer to those things because it makes sense, you know, it just makes sense. You know,
who cares if you put a banana in front of a Buddha image, you know, but if you truly in your
mind are … [laughter] … are tuned into … if when you take refuge or when you make an
offering it’s really remembering the essence of that realization, that’s true … that’s something
that’s gonna really change your future. It’s an important act as a Buddhist, you know. Also
when you achieve the Path of Seeing, when you see emptiness directly you will gain a new
appreciation for Buddha images because they really do represent an enlightened being that
you met so when you see one you’re kind of affectionate towards to it, okay. [laughs]
[laughter] I mean, they take on a whole different meaning. They’re not just little plaster
things there on the table anymore. They represent the Godhead that you’ve met and they’re
very important after that. Twelve-thirty, if you want. [student: [unclear] for an arya?] No,
it’s mainly the act of remembering the arya’s qualities. It’s not that the arya can come and oh,
oh, [unclear] [laugher] [laughs], there’s a blessing. There is a blessing, there is a blessing by
an ignorant putting a banana on an altar, there’s a great blessing. But the blessing of
understanding what the arya is while you give it, while you offer the banana is fantastically
effective. So you have to do it every day. Okay. {[unclear]]} You don’t have … it’s not on
your homework, okay. But these are coming. They are not in Asanga’s root text. These are
coming from Chandra Gome’s twenty verses on morality. He wrote a book named {b:
Twenty Verses on Morality] and these are coming from them. They’re … if you want to
memorize something to keep your vows with, this is what people usually … everybody is so
tired. I’m tired. We’ll just all be tired. {de pe sam} means ‘thoughts of desire’. Thoughts of
desire, thoughts of desire. Thoughts of something you’d like to own; lustful thoughts;
thoughts of that you’d like to eat something, I mean, thoughts of any kind of improper
thought of desire. [student: [improper] {de pe sam kyi je sem jug} {je sem jug} means to let it
go on, okay. So the second … the secondary vow is to allow thoughts of desire to go on.
[students: [unclear]] We’ll get there; we’ll get there. He gives three examples. He says, Je
Tsongkapa says, {dupa chewa} which means excessive desire for something, you know, like
sensual desires. And then secondly he says, {chok …} which means the state of mind in
which you never allow yourself to be satisfied with what you have and the third one is an
attachment to other people’s honor, like especially if you’re teaching or something. Get
attached to having other people pay respect to you and say what a nice guy you are and offer
you things. Second one was the human tendency never to be satisfied with what you have.
Is it wrong to have those thoughts? No. I mean, it is but it’s not breaking a Bodhisattva
vow. If you let it go on without fighting it, you break a Bodhisattva vow. So {je …} means
just to ride along with a thought of desire and not struggle against it, not try to stop it. If you
… Je Tsongkapa says and he says it very clearly and he says it for several other vows, if that,
if that thought is starting to control your mind, you have some desire, say a sexual desire and
it’s getting stronger and stronger, and you’re going to do something wrong, like a monk for
example, and it’s getting stronger and stronger, and if you just ride along with it and let it go
and let it take over your mind you’ve broken this vow. If you put any kind of fight, you
don’t break the vow even it overwhelms you. Even if it leads you to commit a bad deed, he
says, that bad deed that you do is very bad and you commit a very bad karma but you don’t
break your Bodhisattva vow. Because the Bodhisattva vow is to put up a good fight. Even
put up any kind of fight, okay [laughs]. And if you’re a person who has been trying to be a
good Buddhist you know what this means, I mean, there’s times when you get angry or you
get desire and you … anger is gonna come later but you have a desire for something, you
know it’s not right, at least you’re fighting it. As long as you’re fighting it you don’t break
your Bodhisattva vow. If you put up the whimpiest kind of fight you don’t break your
Bodhisattva vow. [student: you say your desire for something that’s not right; what about
like just chocolate cake as an example, you know.] I think the {tse}, okay, you want to know
the {tse}. {tse} means at what point does it become not right. [student: yeah] When you
would do something wrong to get it. [student: wrong meaning violating morality orr
something like that] Any of the bad deeds, yeah. Simple enjoyment of a … as long as it
doesn’t create any kind of mental affliction. Dalai Lama enjoys chocolate cake, I guarantee
you. Rinpoche likes it when the Mets win, you know what I mean. It doesn’t mean you
have to avoid all pleasures. No. It means avoiding any destructive ... [student: it would be
like taking like a big share of it and not sharing it, type of thing] Yeah, stuff like that. Any,
any kind of … [student: what was the third?] Third example he gave, Je Tsongkapa was;
attachment to gain or fame. [student:[unclear]] By the way, just so you know, the structure
here is that we’re going through the six perfections. All of these so far have been against the
perfection of giving. The first perfection. All this first group that we’re going to do are things
that ruin your, your practice of the perfection of giving. Say {gyan pa…} {gyan pa} means
elders. {gyan pa nam} means elders. {gu me che} means not respecting [unclear] no idea.
Here {gyan pa} doesn’t mean elders in general, it means elder in the sense of vows. For
example, when you become a monk one of the most important parts of the ritual is that
someone has to mark the time and the vows are given by the abbot and he goes … ‘ting’ –
somebody has to look at the clock real fast and write it down. Like … I took my vows at
eight, eight fifty-two … seven fifty-two, sorry, on this date, why? Why is it such a big deal?
What it means is around the world at that moment anyone who takes their vow one minute
later has to respect me [laughter] in the monk’s code. In the monk’s code, he can be ninety
years old but if he took his vows one minute after I did, I’m senior. So when there’s an
assembly I sit in front of him. If there’s a food distribution, I get mine first. You know, these
are all monk’s rules. It’s the same among bodhisattvas. This elder refers to someone who
took their vows before you. Someone who is elder to you in the sense that they’ve had their
Bodhisattva vows longer. What does respect mean? I mean, if you’re making tea you offer
them the first tea. If they walk in the room, you stand up. It’s almost like what we used to
do for women in the west, I think, you know what I mean? We used to wait till they started
to eat before we ate. We used to open the door for them; we used to stand up … you know,
things like that. That was sort of the kind of behavior. Just to show respect for that person;
they’re older than you in that sense. And that’s a Bodhisattva vow. {Tibetan} [repeat]. {tipa}
means a question. {len me dep} means not answering. Okay, failing to answer a question.
You break this when you either don’t give an answer to, to a sincere question or when you
give an irrelevant answer to a sincere question; either way. So even if you give an answer
it’s not enough. It has to be a, a serious answer. It has to be a, some kind of answer that, that
tells them what they’re asking. [student: what kind of question [unclear]]. Any question, not
just Dharma questions. [student: so if somebody asks you directions …] What it means is this
is some kind of a diss of other people. [laughs] You know, and I do it all the time, you
know, and it’s kind of showing that you’re superior or something, you know. They’re
asking you a question and you just joke around and you never answer it clearly or, or you
don’t even turn to them and address their question, just a … it’s a diss of sentient beings and
as a bodhisattva you’re not allowed to do it anymore. You know, you have to pay attention
to other sentient beings and when they ask you a question you have to answer them. And
it’s very interesting, I mean, I did it … now I have answer all my voice mail and everything.
[laughter] [student: let’s say … let’s say someone asks a very serious question about tantra or
secret teaching …] I’ll give you … now I’m going to tell you … I’m going to teach
something called {nye me}. {nye me} [repeat] {nye} stands from {nye je} which means what?
[laughter] We got about a twelve minute retention tonight. [laughter] [student: I, I didn’t
hear the first part] {nye} means {nya je} – bad deed, breaking a secondary vow. {me} means
not. So what is a {nye me}? {nye me} means no problem, you do not break the vow. {nye
me}s are lists of exceptions. The Vinaya is full of them. {miksels} they call them in the Vinaya
{miksel}. Like I can wear my hair … I’m not supposed to wear my hair longer than that. If
there’s a purpose and if my abbot tells me to, I have to wear my hair longer than that. So
that’s … that’s a {miksel}. That’s a {nye me}. I did not break my monk’s vows. If, if I’m
under that instruction to do that. So, I will give you a list of {nye me}s for these last two
which are … oh boy, not answering a question and not respecting your bodhisattva elders.
He says, both of them okay if you’re sick and you just can’t get up. He says you don’t break
answering question if you’re asleep and you’re like groggy and you … it’s not quite clear in
your mind whether he asked a question or not. And you can extend these to other
circumstances. And it’s important to know because the …. it’s good to know when you’ve
broken the vow and when you haven’t broken the vow. It’s very important in Buddhism to
know when you have broken a vow and when you haven’t broken a vow. He says certain
situations like if I’m teaching Dharma, like and, and it would be interrupting the flow of
things for me to talk to someone who is asking a personal question, I don’t break my vow if I
say, well later or you know, I’ll talk about it later. You don’t break it if you’re listening to a
Dharma talk and someone asks you a question and you know it would distract you. And
that happens a lot in, in Dharma talks. Someone is trying to ask you a question, it’s not
related, you know, like, what movie are you going to see tomorrow. And [laughs], and you
say, no, no, I’m trying to listen and you don’t answer. That’s okay. {nyeme}. {Nye me}. He
says if getting up or showing respect to that person would disrupt a Dharma teaching, you
don’t have to do it. You know, like in a monastery we’re all sitting like that, there’s a
thousand monks crushed into a temple and if you stood up you’d step on people and it
would interrupt the teaching and the person might be upset, who’s teaching. And lastly,
very carefully, there’s a special bodhisattva {nye me} that covers almost all the {nye je}s and
this {nye me} is if you want to teach the person a valuable lesson, [laughter] but you have to
be very sure of yourself. You can make … you can fool yourself and you know that, okay.
You can really fool yourself. It means if you’re aware that that person has a problem with
being too proud and you’re aware that if you dissed them, okay, if you didn’t stand them
they might reflect about their pride and maybe it would help them, lead them away from
pride, then it’s a {nye me} if you don’t get up and if you don’t show them respect. But be
very careful. Make sure it’s not just your own … [laughs] pride or your own … you don’t
feel like it or something like. Yeah? [student: and if you’re angry at them for they’re trying
to be good then you’re not … you’re breaking one of your primary vows.] Yeah. Also the
reasons you break these vows can be two; and that’s on your homework One is alled
afflicted and one is called non-afflicted. In other words, in one case you have an active bad
thought and in the other case you don’t have an active bad thought. In either case you break
it, okay. In either case you break your vows. An example of breaking your vow with, with
a bad thought would be if you’re angry and you didn’t want to respond to the person.
[student: don’t want to respond to what?] To the person’s question. And an example of …
in general, okay and they … they shift around but in general if you just forget, you still break
the vow but it’s non-afflicted, okay, you don’t have a bad thought in your mind but you still
break the vow. It’s not as bad but you still break the vow. If you just forget or if you’re too
lazy, you don’t feel like getting up. Okay, that’s not like anger. It’s not like we would
consider a heavy mental affliction in this case but you do break your vow, if you just don’t
feel like getting up, you’re not sick or anything else. [student: would being lazy be much
worse than forgetting?] He doesn’t distinguish these … I mean, he puts them both on the
same level of less bad than anger. You know, he grades them about the same. [student:
[unclear] destroying something [unclear]] I, I …probably it’s little bit … I don’t think, I
don’t think unless … I don’t believe with a {nye je}. It’s more serious. [student: [unclear]]
Yeah, yeah. I think [unclear] there would be a difference. One would be easier right?
[students: [unclear]] Eexcuse me? [student: is the last one also [unclear]] Yeah. Say {dun be}
[repeat] {dak ker} [repeat] {nye je} [repeat]
{dun be} means guest. {dak ke nye je} means not to agree to be. And what it means is not to
accept a sincere invitation. [student: [unclear]] We’ll talk about it. [student: [unclear]] No, it
could be anything, I mean, it could be … what it means is if someone invites you to their
home or monks invite you to a monastery or anything, they ask you to come to dinner or
things like that, a bodhisattva has to agree. [student: that’s assuming they’re virtuous though]
We’ll talk about the {nye me}, okay. You’re ready for {nye me}s? [student: yeah] [laughter]
Okay, by the way, it has to be out of pride or anger. It has to be out of some kind of anger,
or laziness, he says, okay [laughs] or not feeling like it. [student: you mean for it to be a
violation] It’s a violation whether your mind is afflicted or whether it’s just lazy. It’s still a
violation. Now he gives the {nye me}. The {nye me}s are the following: if you’re sick you
don’t have to go. So everybody will get a headache, right? [laughter] If you’ve already
accepted another invitation. If it’s too far to go and it would be difficult to go, very difficult
or somehow dangerous to go like Thirty-ninth Street. Or if you’re aware that the person who
is inviting you is inviting you for some kind of bad motive like they want to hurt you when
you get there [laughs] or something. [laughter] Like if you’re aware that they don’t have a
very pure motive for asking, you don’t have to go. Or in very, very extreme cases, where
you’re a very, very wise bodhisattva, you can refuse them in order to … [students: teach
them a lesson] teach them a lesson, somehow divert them to virtue from non-virtue by
refusing to go. That somehow they would … they would get some inkling in their mind, oh,
why don’t they want to come? Well, maybe I’ve been doing something wrong, you know,
that they would somehow be pushed a little closer to goodness if you dissed them, all right,
so then you’re allowed, you’re allowed to not accept them. [student: you have to know that
that would be the consequence [unclear]] You have to really be … you’ll see later today, I
think it comes tonight, you really have to be highly qualified to make those distinctions.
Most … I think it’s true most of the time that people overrate their qualifications. [laughs,
laugher] [student: obviously there’s a danger but if someone motivates you with a well
intentions, but they have vices and stuff which you should stay away from …] Yeah I mean,
if you’re aware that there’s going to be pot smoke there, you don’t have to go. It’s a bad
motivation. It’s also … you know, people get arrested …[student: but what if you don’t like
the person, I mean, you’re really not] If they’re sincere you have to go. That’s part of being
a bodhisattva. Bodhisattva is not … it’s obviously not like being a … [laughter] it’s not like
the monk’s vows, Bodhisattva vows, you can smell now, they’re different; it’s reaching out
to people. It’s embracing people, you know, you have to go. That’s different from the
monk’s vows. Bodhisattva vows are very much … they’re your children now and you can’t
put down your children … your child is asking you [unclear] you have to supply it.
Bodhisattva [student: if you had dharma commitment, a practice and that conflicted, would
you go then and [unclear] the dharma?] No, no problem. No problem. By the way, it does
say that if it would divert you from some virtue that you’re engaged in … you’re engaged in
an important virtuous act and it would divert you or interrupt that, you don’t have to go.
[student: [unclear]] {Tibetan}[repeat] {la sopa} [repeat] {len me je} {Tibetan} means goal; {la
sopa} means etc; {len me je} means not to accept it. ACC, okay. Not to take it if someone
offers it to you. It means money and things. If someone comes to you and sincerely offers
you something, as a bodhisattva you must graciously accept it. This especially relates to
monks like in India, we were not allowed to touch money, we’re not allowed to, to {….la
sopa nye je} we’re not allowed to own money; we’re not allowed to touch it. But if someone
comes to you, very sincerely and offers you some, some money or some thing or something
like that, as a bodhisattva, to make them feel right, you have to accept. There’s a lot of {nye
me}s here, okay [laughter] and I’ll go over them [student: that’s literally currency or is it any
kind of …] meaning any, he says, {yo je …} it means anything of value. [student: so it’s like
not to accept either a gift or an offer] Right. So here’s all the {nye me}s They’re kind of
cute, okay. If you know you’ll get attached to the thing after you took it, okay [laughs], all
right. If you know that you would get attached to it after like … if somebody gives me a …
anyway, some certain kind of music, okay. If you, if you’re pretty sure that the person who
gives it to you would later regret it because that’s a very bad deed for …? [student: for them]
For them – it’s a particular kind of bad deed to … in a fit of generosity to give something and
then … and regret it for six months. It’s a special kind of bad deed in Buddhism, okay,
[laughs] [laughter]. If you, if you believe the person … I’ve seen it happens with lamas, I’ve
seen people offer houses to lamas and they took it, you know, and then two weeks later the
person’s like, oh my God, you know, I don’t have a place to stay and the lady was living in a
car. And you know, she regretted it for months. And the lama shouldn’t have taken it; the
lady shouldn’t have given it, you know, it was just a … shouldn’t take it if the person is
gonna to change there. And you know pretty well that they’re going to change there.
[student: won’t the lama know?] Well I mean, you have to judge the situation. In general
we’ve seen like with teaching emptiness as long as you make your best judgement even if
you’re wrong it’s not … on the basis of that I’d say it’s not bad but you have to make an
attempt to judge whether or not the person might go back on their generosity later and then
don’t let them do it. Okay. If you think it might not belong to that person. Okay. [laughs]
[laughter] Obviously, stolen good,s all right, I’ve seen this happen. We took a stupa that
someone offered us and later we found out that he was a Mongolian and he has … thinking
that it was a noble thing to do, had stolen it from a New York museum to restore it to a
Buddhist temple [laughter] and we were like in a spot, you know. [laughter] If you think it
might hurt the person financially, you know, if it might get them into a financial bind, you’re
not allowed to take it. It’s not … you don’t break your vow if you don’t take it, I should say.
If you have any reason to believe that they have already dedicated it to some other temple or
dharma center, you know, something like that; it’s already been dedicated to some other use.
We have this too down in New Jersey where they give it, the same thing, to three temples at
the same time and then it’s like … causes a big problem. Like they go out and give three
different wills to three different temples. After the person passes away then there’s always this
big confusion, you know, [laughs]. If you think any kind of problem could come out of
your accepting it and he gives the example of, you know, accepting a big sword or you
know, and if you kept it in your house people would … or accepting a gun and keeping it in
your house then it might cause a problem later. You know, somebody sees a gun in a
monk’s house or someone is turned off by seeing a gun in a monk’s house or something like
that. You’re not … you don’t break your vow if you refuse objects which would freak
people out for you to own. So the next person who gives you like, certain kind of cars
[laughs] and things like that. {[unclear]}[repeat] {…me je}[repeat] {cher di …} means to a
person who wants the dharma, to a person who wants the dharma. {… me je} means you
don’t give it to them. Any objections? [student: sounds like one of the root vow] Yeah,
good. {Tibetan}- it is the second root vow. And you’re gonna see lots of these. So Je
Tsongkapa being Je Tsongkapa spends a lot of time to tell you what’s the difference between
this one and the other … and the other one. And this is the difference he points out. What’s
the main klesha in the other one? When you don’t give money, when you don’t give
material assistance or dharma in the second root vow, what’s the main motivation? [student:
selfishness] It’s attachment to the thing. You don’t want to part with it, it’s called {Tibetan}
{chak pa} attachment. That’s a very, very nasty … you can sense how nasty that is, not to
grant dharma to someone because you’re attached to it. In this case it’s any other motivation,
other kinds of motivation; lesser motivation, okay. You’re lazy; you don’t feel like it, things
like that; you’re jealous of someone. The other mental afflictions than just having this heavy
attachment to it not wanting to share it. [student: [unclear] to dharma not wanting to share]
Happens all the times, it’s called {Tibetan} there’s a special word for it in Tibetan. Like you
know, you withhold some knowledge so that you always look like you know more. And if
you’re really teaching nice, you pour it out, you give everything you can, you get them to a
very high state as much as you can and then you sent them to somebody better, you know
what I mean? That’s … I mean, really if you really want them to grow you … you just give,
give, give and then … and then try to refer them to the next step. Exceptions are – sickness,
okay, if you’re sick and you can’t teach you don’t, you don’t break your vows. If in very
extraordinary circumstances it would teach them a lesson, all right. If it would help them
turn to virtue from non virtue and here’s in interesting list. These are problems with the
student. He says if it’s the kind of student who is sitting there waiting for you to make a
mistake, you know, they just came to the class, you know, to be critical, you don’t have to
teach them. You do not break your vow if you don’t teach a person who has come there
mainly for the purpose of being critical. Same if they have just come to be disrespectful.
They’re not asking for it in the right way. If they’re not sitting properly. I see everyone
sitting properly. If you happen to know that they could never catch it. And if they come
and ask you for, you know, the Prasangika’s view on, on basis consciousness or something
and you know that if you spent all night they would never catch it. You not required to
teach it. [student: [unclear]] Traditionally yeah, you have to ask three times. She’s … it’s
another point but it’s not to do with this vow but traditionally you have to ask the teacher
three times. The teacher, first two times he’s supposed to say, I don’t know anything ... so
anyway. If you, if you know that they would freak out if you taught them the real thing,
you know that it would be too much for them. Like if I … Rinpoche has never taught any of
us the fifty verses on Guru Yoga, you know, how to really act towards your Lama. He has
never taught it and he refuses to let us teach it. It’s so heavy. You wouldn’t believe it. You
wouldn’t be able to absorb it. Things like that – you just know the person would freak out.
If they, if they don’t believe in what you’re saying. They’re not really interested in what
you’re saying and they don’t have any real belief in it. If they’re in the depths of some very,
very bad wrong views and you meet students like that. Then you should have a custom of
interviewing people. I mean, it’s bad if you have a group of people and one of them you
know has this problem and it’s difficult to teach the group. And then even if you teach them
what’s the right thing to do, you know they won’t listen. You know they don’t have any
intention of following it. Then you do not break your vow if you don’t teach it. If you think
they might get a bad attitude that would make them even worse than before. Like you know
people that … like at work when they start squashing the bugs and the guy is the kind of
joker type and you know if you tell him it’s wrong to squash bugs, he’s going to squash bugs
all day in front of you just to … just to see how you react, then you’re not allowed to teach
them about squashing bugs. You don’t break your vow. And you know people like that.
And then if you know that they will take that teaching out and spread it to other people, to
whom it would be improper to teach that, let’s say especially on emptiness or secret
teachings, you know they fully intend to go advertise it and distribute it to people who, who
are not ready and who are not allowed to have those teachings. This is like when they come
to you and ask you to work on a Kalachakra book, which happened to me and they say, will
you help us translate this secret teachings so that we can publish this and get famous, you
know what I mean. And you’re like … no, that’s not right, you know, can’t do that. You
don’t break your Bodhisattva vows. We’ll stop there, why? Because the next … we’re
going to do seven more, we’ll do them before … we’ll finish on time, probably finish on
time. The next group are going to be against the second perfection which is what? [student:
morality] Morality. So take a nice break, come back. {….dor} [repeat] okay. {tsultrim}
means what? [student: ] We have a new monk named {Tsultrim}. That’s certain, okay. {kyal
nang} means … {… nang} means people with sullied morality, people who have broken their
morality. And {Tibetan} means got dirty or broken, okay. {tsultrim ….} means someone who
has messed up in their morality. {… dor} means to reject them, to ostracize them. [student:
[unclear]] Excuse me? {tsultrim } means morality. And the examples that Je Tsongkapa
gives … he gives very heavy examples; someone who has committed the five misdeeds –
killing your mother, killing your father - very heavy ones. Someone who has broken their
root vows of the Bodhisattva vows. And what he’s saying is you can’t just ignore them, you
can’t reject them, you have to reach out to them to try to help them. He says, people who
have messed up in their morality or monks for example who have broken their vows and lost
their vows, you have to be kind to them; you have to try to help them because they are … he
says they are in the worst position of anyone. If you’re gonna … if you’re supposed to be
helping suffering sentient beings they are … he says they are … the words he uses is, they are
residing in the cause of suffering. They have moved in to the house of the cause of suffering.
They are going to suffer because of what they did. So if anyone needs your pity and your
help, and your assistance and your attention, it would be people who have broken their
vows. Doesn’t mean that obviously that you should let it rub off on you or anything like
that, you know, it’s very, very bad. And, and in a dharma center or in a monastery there are
times when you are required to cut that person off for the good of the whole, you know.
There are times when you’re required to do that. But this is not talking about those times.
[student: doesn’t matter if that person has remorse or not or] Not particularly. They’re going
to suffer. The reason you’re supposed to be nice to them is nothing more than they have
done something very bad. They’re going to suffer from it. If they’re very evil, you’re
required to resist them but that’s another story. We’re talking about … and you know the
kind of people … they have, they were monks, they thought it would be … they got
interested in the family life, they gave up their vows, they made a big mistake and now
they’re kind of almost pitiful, you know, and you meet … you know people like that and
they, they went after something that turned out to be nothing. And now nobody wants to
talk to them; nobody wants to see them; nobody respects them anymore and, and you’re
supposed to try to reach out to them. Be a bodhisattva. [student: the reason [unclear]] Yeah,
but it’s also talking about normal … like killing and stealing; doesn’t have to be someone
who has broken … no, you’re right. No, it doesn’t have to be someone who has broken
vows necessarily. Just anyone who has done any very bad deed, even if they never heard of
vows, you have to reach out and help them. Be … don’t, don’t cut yourself off from them,
and say, you’re dirty, I don’t want to be around you; I’m not going to relate with you
anymore. Things like that. yeah? [student: [unclear]] {yang …dor} is a very heavy word, it
means to throw out like rubbish. It means to ignore; to ostracize; to castaway, you know, all
those things. [student: but you’re also supposed to avoid people who have a malevolent
influence on you] There’s a kind of … if a person is very evil you’re required to avoid them
and not, and not, not get close to them and be affected by them. So this assumes that you’re
not going to be mis… lead astray by them, okay. This assumes you’re strong enough to be
around that person and they’re not going to bring you into the same trap they got into.
[student: perhaps a kind of a hello, how are you, a polite thing but you know, kind of go
away as opposed to spending [unclear]] No, even that … depending on how strong you are
personally in your morality, you know. I can stay around drunkards all day ‘cos I’m just not
interested in alcohol anymore. It depends, you know, it depends on your own personal …
and you have to judge your strength correctly or else you’re really get it screwed up.
[laughs] All right. Let me say what else he says. You want some {nye me}s? [laugher]
everybody likes {ney me}s. Okay. If it is in order … in exceptional cases if you are a great
bodhisattva, [unclear] with them in order to teach them a lesson. {shen …sem sum} which
means, if in getting close to this person you would alienate many other people you’re not …
you don’t break you vow if you don’t do it, you know, if somebody … you know, like
there’s lamas who have appeared to be drunkards and things like that, and, and if you got too
close to them people, a lot of people might mistake that for you … approving of such
behavior, or something like that. Then you shouldn’t … you don’t break your vow if you
don’t reach out and touch someone, you know, [laughs] you don’t break your vow.
[student: [unclear] teach all the people a lesson] [laughter] [laughs]. In order to respect the,
the code of monks, okay, there are times when the code of monks and nuns requires us not to
reach out to a monk who has lost his vows. And there are times when our code which I
can’t tell you about requires us to punish them in a certain way, yeah, as far as internal
among monks, how we relate to them. And, and, so you don’t break your vow if you’re
trying to hold, uphold the monk’s code or the nun’s code by not, by not relating to this
person. [student: Michael] yeah [student: I thought these Bodhisattva vows [unclear] I
thought the Bodhisattva vows [unclear]] We’ll talk about it; we’ll get there. No, not in every
case. Not in this case for example. [cut] {me mechir} [repeat] {gom …}[repeat] {pa ru}
[repeat] {nye che} [repeat] {lok me che} [repeat] {pa ro nye che} means in order to inspire faith
in others, okay. In order to inspire faith in others. {lok me che}means not to follow the rules
and, and, that needs a little explanation, okay. What it means is, there are, there are certain
rules, for … especially for monks, let’s say eating after, after noon. Okay. If you’re in Sri …
if I’m Sri Lanka and I eat hard food after noon it would cause a lot of people to lose faith in,
in the institution of monk. It’s not allow … it’s very strictly kept in that country. So if they
saw a monk stuffing his face after twelve o’clock they would … they might lose their faith in
the whole institution of, of monks. So, so as a bodhisattva monk you’re required to keep
your monk’s vows even more strictly than, than the Hinayana who made them up, you
know, as a bodhisattva you’re required to follow them very, very strictly in order that other
people don’t lose their faith in that institution of the monastic life. That’s … well, it sounds
like that but I’m telling you what it really means. It means, it means failing to follow the
rules which if followed generate … inspire faith in other people, you see what I mean? And
if you translate it wrong, you’re in big trouble. He says, mainly talking about monks but as
we all know when you’re talking about Bodhisattva vows, the Pratimoksha vows, the vows
… the normal vows of morality apply to laymen also, it means your ten vows. So if you as a
layperson, not a monk, if you as a layperson, people know you’re a Buddhist and if you lie, if
you obviously stand in front of people and lie they’ll lose faith in the whole idea of
Buddhism. They’ll say, yeah, Buddhists are just like everybody else, they lie. They stand up
and lie like everybody else. So then they start to say, well, Buddhism is the same as all other
crap where, you know, and they’d say, okay, you gotta to do this and that but you just break
it. When it comes down to it you just act the same as everyone else, if it’s in your interest. So
that would apply to a layman also. If you break the shared morality that we all have, which
is the ten non virtues and, and someone loses … that, that if you kept it, you know, if you’ve
got a reputation at work that all the Buddhists at our company never lie, that would be really
… that’s what Buddhism is supposed to be, you know, that’s the way it’s supposed to work
but you would hurt other people’s faith if you … by the way, these are the morality, the
Pratimoksha morality, the morality of not doing bad deeds which are …especially the ones
which are, they protect the reputation of Buddhism, you see what I mean? By keeping them,
you, you protect the reputation of Buddhism. In other words, in Tibetan it’s called,
protecting other people’s faith. What do you want to call it? I don’t know what you want to
call it. [student: that’s good] Is that okay, but you know what I mean. They, they would
lose their faith in Buddhism if you started lying. These are for … number nine is specifically
referring to those kinds of morality, either monastic or non monastic, which tend to protect
other people’s faith in mora… in Buddhism when you keep them, you know, all right, you’ll
see why I brought it up. [student: [unclear]] Uh, we’re going to get to it. Say {sem chen}
[repeat] {dun la} [repeat] {…. chun} [repeat] {sem chen} means living beings, all living beings.
{dun la} means for their benefit. {….chun} means not doing enough and what it means is this.
You take all the rules that the Buddha made, we call them proscribed rules as oppose to
natural. What do you guess the difference is, between proscribed and natural? Natural rules
are like: don’t kill, don’t steal, don’t commit sexual misconduct. They’re all the same
throughout the world. I mean, all societies, almost every society has recognized that these
are naturally harmful to people. Those are what we call natural bad deeds. Then there’s
called proscribed bad deeds or bad deeds that are bad because there was a rule made against
them, by whom? [student: the Buddha] The Buddha. Why? [student: [unclear] realization]
Somebody during his time screwed up and the Buddha found it necessary to make a rule.
And it was always … and when you study Vinaya, the Vinaya is thousands of pages long,
when you get to the incident, it’s called the incident; there was an incident – some monk got
drunk and went out and hurt somebody so monks can’t drink and Buddhists can’t drink,
that’s a proscribed rule. Buddha made it after he became enlightened and He said, at some
point in his career He said, you know what, alcohol just causes trouble for everybody, I now
make a rule that no one can drink alcohol. So that’s, that’s the main kind of bad deed we’re
talking about when you’re talking about protecting others people’s faith. There are a lot of
rules that the Buddha made that are mostly meant to protect other peoples’ faith so that they
won’t lose faith in Buddha. But then there are these other rules that he made in order to
achieve {jawa chung}. { Jawa chung} means not doing much. And he made a lot of rules for
monks especially to keep them quiet. To keep them in the monastery, [laughs], keep them he
says … just meditate; don’t do a lot of different things; restrict your activities. {jawa chung}
means restrict your activities. Stay in the monastery, stay in your cell, meditate, read books,
do your prayer and that’s it. And he made rule for monks. For example a monk is not
allowed to keep a certain length of cloth for more than ten days unless he makes into his
robes. Not allowed to own a piece of cloth that he doesn’t intend to make into a robe within
ten days, okay [laughs] it’s very interesting. And that’s … that was not made because it hurt
other people. That rule was made to keep monks from getting busy, you see what I mean?
That rule was made so that monks wouldn’t start going out and trying to get all this cloth and
having to have a house to keep it in and then having to protect it from other people and buy
a lock for the house and all these things that lead to possessions and all that stuff. It was
meant to keep the monk’s life simple so he made a rule against keeping more than a yard of
cloth for more than ten days unless you make it into a robe. As a bodhisattva you’re not
allowed to restrict your activities. You break this Bodhisattva vow if you strictly follow in
the way the Hinayana people follow those rules that the Buddha made to restrict your
activities. In other words, if you’re a bodhisattva you’re gonna go out and get warehouses of
cloth and obtain them and give them to poor people. You’re required to keep cloth more
than ten days; you’re required to go try to find a lot of cloth [cut]

Side B
[cut]

and you’re required to give it to poor people. You break your Bodhisattva vow if you’re a
stickler for your monk’s vows and say, no, no, no I’m purist, I can’t keep this cloth for more
than ten days. On the eleventh day you, you just leave all those warehouses of cloth when,
when you could send it to, to Biafra, or something. You see what I mean? [student: but isn’t
that breaking a vow, though, Michael?] It’s understanding what’s meant by … [student:
[unclear]] … karmic path you do not break a vow. We’ll talk about it. [student: [unclear]
about the alcohol, in certain ceremonies you [unclear]] That is not alcohol [laughter]
[student: [unclear]] [John: it’s just whisky] Yeah, that’s right. In other words, as a
bodhisattva you break your vows if in trying to keep some more basic vows that restrict your
activity, you, you’re very dogmatic and say, no, no I’m a monk, I can’t keep cloth more than
ten days even though you have an opportunity to get a bunch of boxes of cloth, keep them
for two months and send them over to India to help people. You’re not allowed to follow in
the way that Hinayana people would follow, those vows which restrict your activity.
[student: like proscribed vows?] Proscribed. [student: you can’t [unclear]] In the way that
Hinayana people would, if you have an opportunity and he says, bodhisattvas who aren’t
very busy in the, in the welfare of others are not pretty, he says. It’s not attractive. They
have a bodhisattva who is just hanging around, trying to restrict his activities or her activities.
Okay, we got to move on or we’re going to get stuck, you’re going to get stuck. So these
vows … these rules that keep other people having faith in Buddhism, you must keep them
much … he says ten thousand times more … ten million times more strictly than a, than a
Hinayana practitioner. You must keep - a monk, a Mahayana monk - must keep these vows -
and a Mahayana layperson - must keep their ten vows infinitely more strictly than a
Hinayana person. But these vows, these rules, that were meant to restrict your activities, you
break your vows if you stick to them the way the Hinayana person would. A bodhisattva
monk or layman is, is, is always holding a big party, a big feast, he’s always trying to feed
other people; take care of other people; out, out doing things for other people and that’s …
the whole difference in the outlook. [student: [unclear] morality [unclear]] Because it could
refer to any of the vows like that. For example, playing music or something like that. You
know, if it would turn a lot of people on and bring them to the dharma center, go ahead, you
know. But we will get to that. You can feel that we’re getting into dangerous territory.
Don’t kid yourself. Be careful of these vows. Classic mistakes made with these vows. People
go over the line from … have to make other people comfortable to I would like this, to do
this myself [laughs] . All right, say {neng je} [repeat] {chena} [unclear] {me ge me} [repeat] –
the most dangerous Bodhisattva vow of them all. Je Tsongkapa says the most subtle and the
most dangerous. And it’s too bad that’s it’s at the end of the class. Should be a separate class.
{neng je} means out of compassion. {chena} means if you break it. {me ge me} means there’s
no bad deed. It’s not a bad deed. And this refers primarily to the seven natural bad deeds,
the seven natural bad deeds. That’s the first seven of the ten. What are they? I mean,
quickly. You, you should be … let’s do a tundruk. [student: killing] Killing, stealing,
sexual misconduct in your body. And then in your speech – lying, divisive talk, harsh words
and wasted talk, idle chatter. Those seven if you don’t break them when an extraordinary
circumstance presents itself, you break your vows. Now we gotta to talk about that very
carefully. [student: you [unclear] have to break them under this [unclear]] Yep. Now, I’ll
tell you the kind of bodhisattva that you have to be for this vow to apply to you, okay. In
other words for everybody else it’s a {nye me}. If you’re not this kind of person, you don’t
have to worry about this vow, okay. You can think about it but you don’t have to worry
about breaking it. The following and, and you should put down each of these parts – it’s on
your homework. It’s also on your karmic conscious. {kelpa duma} means for many trillions
of years. {kelpa duna}. {lam la gomba} this person has perfected their practice of the path.
That’s A. B {topla kepa} – they have an extraordinary insight into when it’s necessary to do
something strange or unusual to help other people. {ningje ….} they must have mahakaruna.
They must possess that ultimate great compassion. Look on every person as if they were their
own child who just fell into a huge barbecue pit. That’s the definition, pretty much, okay.
And they think that way about every other person. And he says, bodhisattva but I, I don’t
believe it will be … required to have full bodhicitta. Because he calls … all throughout it he
calls anybody with Bodhisattva vows a bodhisattva which is not technically true. Yeah, in
another words you have to be very, very, very advanced for this vow to apply to you. Then
he gives me more but I’ll just read it to you, you don’t have to write it down but he says, this
person after taking their Bodhisattva vows must have kept them perfectly. This person must
cherish other people infinitely more than himself or herself. This person must have
bodhicitta. You can write that down, okay. Must have bodhicitta. That’s very hard to get
to. They must see that there’s no other way than to commit the deed. There’s no other
possible route to go than to commit that deed and then they, and then they’re allowed to do it
for the sake of others. The classic example you, you probably know, by the way, and then
he says after that he says, but it’s not allowed for all people who are Mahayana. So it’s not
enough to be a person who has Bodhisattva vows, you have to have all those other
qualifications. The classic example is when the Buddha … before he became the Buddha he
was on a ship, he was the captain of the ship, there were five hundred merchants on the ship
and there was a murderer in the ship. And he, he was able to read the person’s mind. He
knew the person was planning to murder all five hundred people. So out of compassion he,
he murdered that person. He killed that person first because they was no other way and he
had already reached this high level. When Rinpoche teaches this subject, listen, okay. When
Rinpoche teaches this subject he says you’re not allowed to do this unless you actually have
the power to transfer the person’s consciousness to a higher realm, okay. And if you don’t
have the power don’t worry about this vow, okay, all right. What I’m saying is you’re not
allowed to do it unless you’re an extraordinary person. People hears this vow and they get in
… terrible, he mentions all the kinds of hells we can go to, [laughs] for misusing this vow,
okay. [student: [unclear]] The person that … in other words this vow is saying that under
certain conditions which I’ve just listed if you don’t kill that person, you break a vow.
[student: strictly murder? That’s all that we’re talking [unclear]] No, all seven. All the first
seven of the ten. [student: sexual misconduct, lying, stealing?] Yeah. [student: okay sexual
misconduct …] We’ll get there, we’ll get there, we’ll get there. [student: do [unclear]]
raping or something] Very extraordinary cases, we’ll get there. We’ll discuss it in detail
[student: today?] Yeah. Tonight … we have to otherwise you go home like that, you might
… [laughter] [laughs] all right? Okay. So, so those are the conditions that Rinpoche has
often mentioned. You actually have to have this extraordinary supernatural powers, grab that
person’s consciousness and send it to a heaven, something like that. [student: is that just for
killing or all of the seven] For killing. [student: Michael, I thought it was not possible
[unclear]] They have to have the karma for you to do it. True, true. They have to have
relationship with you that you are the stick by which they go because they collected the
karma for you to do it. How’s that? [student: but then they could experience the result of]
Of someone else [student: some other …] Yeah, okay. He gives as the example of [unclear]
okay. [laughs] [laughter] Someone who has been killing many bodhisattvas and, and
Hinayana arhats for a long time and who is collecting incredible bad deed and you have this
great compassion where you say, okay, maybe I’ll go to hell for killing them but at least they
won’t have to go to hell, for killing many, many holy beings. That has to be ... your
motivation has to be totally compassionate. [student: [unclear]] Yeah, that’s the way he puts
it. It’s a … he calls it … Je Tsongkapa calls it a perfection of exchanging yourself with others.
You’d rather go to hell than have them go to hell, something like that. It must be a totally
virtuous state of mind. You cannot have any kind of hatred for the person. You have to love
the person with all your heart when you do it. And then he says, and I, and I like this what
Je Tsongkapa says, and if by so doing they lose their life it is not only not a bad deed but
your, your good deed, your virtue increases to the sun. You know what I mean? He’s like
… you’ve just done an … a very excellent deed. It’s not only not a bad deed but you’ve just
done some incredibly virtuous. [student: if you want to exchange yourself for the other, ie
you’re willing to go to hell instead of that person, now, if you were such a great bodhisattva,
you would [unclear] should have been able to help that many more people, right, so if you’re
going to hell you will be unable to help people] Uh, they call it the basketball trip to hell. It
means … boing … and you come right back up [laughs] [laughter] Seriously. No joke. They
call it a rubber ball trip to hell. [student: okay] But according to this you wouldn’t even go
to hell because it’s a big virtue. Yeah? [student: [unclear]] I don’t like to get specific, you
know. I think Rinpoche’s approach has always been, you come to dharma class, I’ll give
you the rules but then individual cases … there has to be absolutely no other option; totally
no other option. You must be doing it out of pure love. Pure totally unadulterated love for
that person; concern for their welfare. Stealing – I’ll give them to you very quick. Stealing,
it would be like someone who was … they give the example of an evil government which is
hurting all of the people, stealing … they’re hurting all the people of the country and if you
… if you steal their authority from them, if you strip them of their authority, those people,
you have not stolen. You have done a very good deed, okay. Has to be out of compassion.
He gives another example – someone who has made it their career to steal things out of
temples and [laughs] monasteries. And you go and you steal it back, then you don’t commit
… you not only don’t commit a bad deed, you do a huge, great, big deed, good deed. Then
he gives the example of someone who was a caretaker or treasurer of a dharma group or
monastery and … what you do call it …embezzled the money [laughs]. If you figure out
some way to steal it back, it’s not problem. And then he says the same words, he says, not
only not a bad deed but an incredible good deed. For sexual misconduct Je Tsongkapa goes
into a very long proof that a monk cannot do this one, okay. A monk is not allowed to
break the vow against sexual misconduct, for any reason. Doesn’t matter if they’re a
bodhisattva or whatever – cannot do it, okay. An ordained person cannot engage in sexual
intercourse out of some compassion [unclear]. He says if the time comes and you’re totally
sure of what you’re doing, you must give back your vows first because a monk cannot do
that. So can’t do that. Then he … he gives examples of why … when it would ever be
necessary. I, I … frankly I couldn’t understand the whole thing but I, the words I
understood were that it has to somehow be life threatening to the other person if you did not
engage in intercourse with her. It has to somehow threaten their very life if you didn’t do it.
[student: an example of this perhaps would be like when monks and nuns were made to
fornicate with the Chinese authorities or something like?] Maybe something like that, and
they say, we’re going to kill her … then the monk would have to give his … mentally he has
to give his vows back or, or do a ceremony to give his vows back. Otherwise better to let
them kill [unclear] [laughs] Lying; he gives examples of people doing some horrible, horrible
actions, hurting many people and you’re lying to get them out … to get, to get them to stop.
Divisive speech, he gives the example of a … a charlatan, a religious teacher who is a fake
and hurting people and you purposely create a schism in that group. You try to split the
followers away from that evil teacher. Like this guy teaching people that it’s a holy practice
to fornicate, you know, and that this will bring you … or there are other ... that if you steal
for me this is a good deed, you know, and steal from other people and come and offer it to
me, this is a holy practice. If you do your best to lie or do whatever you have to do to split
people from that person, you don’t break it. You, you actually collect a good deed. If, by
the way, if it’s the last resort; if it’s totally the only thing you could do. Harsh words –
obviously if you have to correct someone with very, very evil language, okay. If it’s the last
way you could ever get … to get them to be good, you have to do that. And then about idle
talk, useless talk, singing songs, dancing, playing music, things like that – if it’s the only way
you could ever find, to get, to attract these people into being Buddhist. He says you cannot
commit the last three of the ten under any circumstances, why not? Those are mental. You
know, what are you going to do? Hate someone for the good of all sentient beings,
[laughter] [laughs] You’re gonna have a wrong view for the good of all sentient beings, you
know. You’re gonna, you’re gonna want someone else’s possessions for the good of all
sentient beings? I mean, the mental ones you cannot do for anything. Yeah? [John Stillwell:
the last thing you mentioned, idle talk, singing, dancing and … are we supposed to
incorporate into idle …] He, he gives those examples. I mean, as a layman you do not break
your vows if you listen to music, like that. You have to be wise about how you use that, you
know, if you waste your time and … if you waste time, that … it hurts you. So, anyway…
Okay, number twelve … [student: before you go…] By the way, at the end he says … at the
end, the very last thing he says about that is, if it’s okay to do the natural bad deeds under
extraordinary circumstances no need to say the …? [student: proscribed] Proscribed bad
deed, [unclear]] [student: why, why is there [unclear] bodhisattva? I mean, just in normal
morality you can say most people would think that if you can save someone by lying, there’s
a murderer coming after … where’s Jenny Jones and you …] Yeah, it’s also true, it’s also
true. It’s also true. [student: so, but why is it …] [student: can you say that again?] We’re
talking … he says, suppose a person never took their Bodhisattva vows and would it be okay
to lie if you’re protecting them from a search party which is going to murder this person and
you say, I never saw the person. You hid them in the closet, you come to the door when the
police knock and you say, … yeah, I mean, when the militia comes and you say, no, I didn’t
see anybody. Yeah, you are supposed to do that even in normal [unclear] but we’re talking
pretty heavy ones here. We’re talking like, like killing, you know, things like that. I mean,
it’d be very extraordinary if … we’re also talking about not breaking your Bodhisattva vows.
[student: ah, right] All right, number twelve – it’s the only way we can cover all the vows. I
would be a bad teacher if I let you leave here at the end of the course without all the vows
[laughter] and I can’t make it shorter than that. So you just got to stick it out, okay, we’re
almost done tonight. We got, we got a few more to go tonight and we’ll finish within five or
so minutes. Wrong livelihood, wrong way to make a living. The first five come from
Nagarjuna. I think they, they can … they sort of sound like they’re emphasizing monks,
okay. Flattery. If you’ve ever been [unclear] right, Mr Kiley? Oh man, you look so good
today and that suit is a knockout. I’ve got some stones to show you, you know and … I
remember some guy saying that and I said, listen if I lost this job tonight and I saw you in the
street tomorrow you wouldn’t talk to me, right? [laughs] You know. Someone one wants
to sell you something and they’re telling you how handsome you are and you’re, yeah right.
Flattery, okay, that’s a wrong way to make a living. Second one – hinting. Oh Laura, those
chips you brought tonight, mmm yummy. [laughter] You know, I don’t know if anybody is
bringing anything next week, you know, okay. That’s wrong livelihood. You’re not
allowed to do that. On, on a path in India you know, probably [unclear] [laughter] could
you give five thousand dollars for our dharma center, you know [laughs] [laughter] You
know, like that. You know the thing. Umm, I don’t know to spell this … harassment or …
[student:] One R? [laughter] This means the person really doesn’t want to give it to you and
you just keep needling them, bothering them, hassling them, you know, and it … mostly you
can see that these mostly refer … Nagarjuna was a monk, he was mostly talking about the
monk’s relationship with their sponsors, you know. You can’t go and twist their arm and …
you can’t be more than a little bit of a pest, okay, and can’t really force them to do it. And
the word in Tibetan is almost force. You can’t like blackmail them into giving a donation to
your center or hassle them or threaten them or anything like that. [student: what’s wrong
livelihood for a layperson?] We’re getting there. These are … obviously you can apply them
to your life. [student: so these are regarding monks?] Well, what I’m saying is all the
examples that Jsongkapa gives and all the … you know, the whole taste of Nagarjuna’s lines
are … sounds like he’s mostly talking about … you know, the relationship between a monk
and a monk’s sponsor has to be very subtle, has to be very careful, you know, you can’t
abuse that relationship. You need sponsors. And you’ve … and you have to have mercy.
And, and he says many times, if you honestly need something and you must go to a sponsor
that’s not breaking the vow. You know, if you go to a sponsor and you say, look, I just, we
need this place in Connecticut. [laughs, laughter] And we’ll do good things with it and we
just frankly we need it and we want it. You know, that’s not … you’re not breaking your
vow. If you keep going [student: [unclear]] … you know, or tell them how beautiful they
are. That’s, that’s breaking the vow. Okay. [unclear] Did I spell that right? [student: yeah]
Anyway, pretense means to fake being a very holy person in order to attract donations and
things like that. You, you’re like in front of your sponsor you’re very upright and honorable
and then as soon as you get of their sight you go back to normal [laughter] [laughs] okay.
Those are the five that Nagarjuna’s [unclear] [student; [unclear]] I’ll give you number six, this
is by Bodhivajra(?) one of Atisha’s teachers. This is … I count it as a number six. First five to
me seem to relate mostly to monks. Sixth one is the following and Je Tsongkapa lists it and it
is – any kind of harmful occupation which means, he gives the example of trading in alcohol,
running a liquor store; trading in weapons; trading in animals, you know, like where you’re
going to hurt the animal or eat the animal, [laugh] okay, like a butcher. He gives the
example of silk, silk, silk merchants, why? [student: silkworms? ] You have to kill them.
He gives the … these are ancient examples, okay. He gives the example of being … owing a
mill, a grinding mill where they throw in sesame seeds along with a lot of bugs and, and it’s
your job to crush them, things like that. [student: mills in general] Excuse me? Well, he’s
just giving examples where … I mean, obviously you have to apply it to modern times. Any
occupation which would be harmful to sentient beings. [student: he had in mind any kind of
mills, yeah?] He had in mind anything where a bug could get crushed, okay. [laughs]
Okay, that’s that.
You, you know what they’re talking about. By the way, he says if you’re engaged in such an
occupation and you’re struggling to get out of it. I can think of … like prostitution in New
York, you know, you … you’re … you’re wrapped into it, financially you need it; you’re
doing it because you don’t have any choice, you have kids to support or something. He says
as long as you’re struggling against it, as long as you’re fighting to get out of it you don’t
break the vow. You can be engaged in it but as long as you’re fighting to try to get out of it,
you don’t break the vow. It’s like the one about desire, right, you don’t break the vow as
long as you’re putting up a good fight. [student: just how wild is wild?] In America … I
don’t know. But what it means is to act totally silly and you know, Wayne’s wild day or
[student: Wayne’s world] Yeah, yeah. [laughter] What’s that something [unclear] and
[unclear]. [student: [unclear]] Yeah, yeah, I mean just go out [unclear] you know, you know
what it is. It’s when you’re just totally of the wall all the time and you can’t be serious and,
and you’re just being frivolous. I guess you could call it being frivolous, you know, you just
… no-one takes you seriously, you’re … you’re just wasting time by being goofy. He says,
{nye me}. I love this {nye me} right. {nye me} If you’re struggling to stop but you can’t
control yourself. [laughter] [laughs] As long as you’re putting up a good fight. It has to be a
good sincere fight, okay. Can’t be like … oh, I really wish I wasn’t doing this. He says to
stop another person’s grief. You know, if another person is really down or depressed you
can … you, you don’t break your vow if you, if you act goofy to bring them up. Okay that’s
[unclear]. [laughter] If it would lead someone away from doing a bad deed, you know, like
you just kind of distract them and get them to do something good [laughter] If it would
make the people around you, you know … if it would just create a better environment and
then, you know, for leading people to something good. And if it would attract people to
Buddhism that you have a pretty good guess would not otherwise come. People say that’s
why Chogyam Trungpa had all these parties. I mean, seriously people say that. And, and
many … I’ve heard his students, I’ve heard it reported that many of his students would never
have become Buddhist if he hadn’t hooked them in with some wild parties and stuff, you
know. So that would be an extraordinary case, okay. I don’t know what the motivation was
of that … but I mean, that … those are possible [cut]
950911-1.aaa
74A.txt.
transcribed by:Kryshna Brooks