Занятие 2, часть 2

[Говорящий 1] (0:02 - 3:32)
We handed out evaluations last week and people gave us their opinions. I think something that many people repeated was that they would like to have more time for questions and answers. Does anybody have any questions they would like to ask?

It doesn't have to be relevant or irrelevant. Yesterday you made a reference to Master Chang, and he described the Bodhisattvas' way of life. Clearly, that is one of the great books on Buddhism.

I was wondering if you could make a comparison or speak a little bit to how you feel about both of these books as they relate to one another in practice. I think, normally when we think of the Bodhisattvas' way of life, we think of a book that was written about compassion. And we think of it as being a sort of a teaching on exchanging self and others.

That's how we view that book. But it's in where the creators of the Tantric canon, where they decided to put that book was in the Madhyamika sect. It's in the Madhyamika sect.

It means they considered it a teaching on attention. So, you know, we tend to think of the Bodhisattvas' way of life, it must be a book about compassion or something. And it is.

It's the greatest source for that. And it's also, I think if you ask a monk, let's say, how do you feel about the Bodhisattvas' way of life? A book by Master Chang, he would say, it's alarming.

You know, he would view it as alarming. Because really, it goes from the six perfections. And it treats the Bodhisattvas' way of life.

It's also one of the best presentations of emptiness in ancient times. So I think Khyentse Pabongkha Rinpoche would have to say, it's a source blogger. Tsongkhapa, or somebody, yeah, it's going to be Tsongkhapa quoted here later.

He's going to say, don't talk to me about the Ramayana. I don't want to hear that anymore. It wasn't something that the Tibetans knew.

It's a lineage from Lord Buddha. And all those books were alarming. So I would think they would say, it was alarming.

And it was a guidebook on the steps to enlightenment. I think there's a... For each time in history, there is a presentation which more calls to people and which they can relate to.

I think because our teacher's teacher's teacher spoke this book, and because our teacher's teacher wrote it down, that we have some kind of close connection to this version. It's close enough to us in time, and in the blessing of human beings, lineage, to people, that we're very close to this one. So I think for that reason, this one calls to me.

I think this one calls to me more. But they're all the same. The same creator.

[Говорящий 2] (3:34 - 3:46)
Any other questions? May I ask a question about the last course? Trenber and Sheshin.

Power of recollection and watchfulness.

[Говорящий 1] (3:47 - 3:59)
Trenber involves a watchfulness in the sense of watching the mind that is standing on the object or catching it when it's pointed off. And then the latter part is to bring the mind back onto the object.

[Говорящий 2] (4:00 - 4:15)
Is that watchfulness, whether you're on the object or not, included as part of Trenber? Or is that also part of Sheshin? Or is Sheshin just restricted to watching whether you're falling into darkness or agitation?

[Говорящий 1] (4:16 - 9:19)
Okay, good. I'm going to go out there. He's talking about two very useful tools that we use in meditation.

Say Trenber. Sheshin. So these are two different states of mind.

And they are two tools that we use deeper than meditation. The trick is that they function in the space of several seconds in the mind. So it's very hard to watch your mind having Sheshin available.

You can, on a gross level, observe how you catch yourself spacing out and how you bring yourself back, right? But really, these two states of mind... Sheshin means a part of your mind which watches your meditating mind to detect if there's a problem.

Sheshin's function is to ring an alarm. If the mind has gone off the object, or if the mind has lost the strength of its clarity of the object, then Sheshin just rings a bell and says, you know, we have a problem. So it's a, what do you call it?

It's like a smoke detector. Okay? Then the sprinklers come on.

You see? So the smoke detector's job is not to put out the fire. The smoke detector's job is just to tell you there's a fire, right?

And then the sprinklers come out and put out the fire. That's general. Deta means the capacity of the mind to bring the mind back to the object.

And those happen so quickly in progression, one after the other, that they're almost indistinguishable. It's very difficult to catch yourself catching yourself and bringing your mind back. It's very, very difficult.

So first it's important to get the theoretical picture in your mind. Part of your mind is just going to complain that you're not on the object anymore. Hey, hello.

You're not on the object anymore. Then you finish this job. That's Sheshin.

He doesn't function to bring the mind back. Then Gemma says, oh yeah, we are off the object. Now let's bring it back.

And as I always say, in elliptical order is palpable. Now don't try to bring the strength back. The mind goes off to what are we going to have tonight for dinner.

And then if you struggle against that force directly, how do you make it biometrically? And just struggle to bring it back. It's not going to work.

Let it go for a second. OK. We're talking about dinner.

Yeah. What are you going to have? I don't know.

OK. What are you going to have? How about maybe an oven over there on Kilburn?

It's covered. OK. That'll be all right.

So until then, could we maybe meditate? I don't know. We won't work.

Bring it back. Don't bring it back. You have to.

And they don't. Their functions are not made. Sheshin doesn't bring the mind back, and Gemma doesn't do it.

But in practice, to watch your mind detect that you're not omniscient and to bring it back happens so fast that you take some practice. You might want to do an artificial distraction experiment, like meditate, start meditating, and then purposely think of something else, and then catch yourself, and then bring yourself back. Just to get used to what sheshin feels like.

And then later, you can detect how it's working. So it's an important meditator's practice to be able to detect when your detector is detecting. Because then you'll appreciate how it works, and you can bring it up when you need it.

But if it's just some kind of unaware or unconscious process where eventually your mind moves you back and the other way, that's very weak, and you can't use it. So get in touch with it. Set up a distraction.

We call it dress rehearsals, where you set up a distraction, you get distracted, and then you bring the mind back, and you watch how those two mental functions operate. And then you can use them more skillfully. Is that OK?

Is this OK? During the chat, it was a little confusing.

[Говорящий 2] (9:19 - 9:48)
There's a meditation level 4, you're no longer completely losing contact due to the power of your kapa. But your sheshin is not fully developed. And it seems that sheshin then allows you, it's a power that takes you to 5, 6, and 7.

And then you're really finessing and overcoming your ailments and agitation from level 4 to 8, I guess.

[Говорящий 1] (9:49 - 11:52)
I think you could use sheshin not just to detect distractions. We can say sheshin allows you to detect that the mind is off-balance, right? But I think you could say that it's detecting that you don't have clarity.

Which means what? Blind. What is clarity?

Isn't that the pictures and the colors and the shapes are clear? Yeah, the mind is bright-eyed and critical. The mind is like, ah.

Like when you're watching a good movie. That's the goal of meditation. They say clarity, but it doesn't mean that the picture is clear.

It means that the state of attention is powerful. And that's clarity. So, you can not do sheshin and still keep your sheshin to detect when you're looking for clarity.

And that would still be a function of sheshin. And which one would become more highly developed first? Sheshin or sheshin?

I don't know. I don't think so. I don't think so, no.

Yeah. Continuing in terms of teacher-sheshin practice. Like that?

I don't think so. But I would agree that sheshin can be used to detect more things than just a loss of clarity. It can be used to detect that the mind is either getting power or out of it.

And especially so... Is that right? Sure?

Do you agree with that? Sure? Yeah.

It's okay. So, level...

[Говорящий 2] (11:52 - 12:09)
Meditation level 4, you're no longer completely losing the object. So... But you have a level...

Level 4, you're still suffering gross mental dullness and gross mental agitation. So...

[Говорящий 1] (12:09 - 12:18)
If you're having dullness meditation, is it like a subtle micro-toggle of the object, but it's not enough to qualify as completely losing the object?

[Говорящий 2] (12:19 - 12:31)
Because if your mind is in a certain case of agitation, going to some pleasurable sense object, is there a slight micro-loss of the object?

[Говорящий 1] (12:32 - 16:05)
I think you do, yeah. I think you can have a micro-loss of an object which doesn't qualify as losing the object in a sensible sense. So, yeah.

When you have even subtle agitation, and let's say just before subtle agitation, like the last traces of gross agitation, you must still be losing the object. But it must be so instantaneous that it cannot be given the name to forget the object. Forgive me, but it's not like that.

It cannot any longer be given the name of losing the object. But it is technically losing the object. It has to be.

Because your mind is troubling by instantaneity. Then, on a practical level, what the feeling is, is that your mind is being tugged at Okay? So, multiple microseconds off the object, on a practical level, give you the emotion, or the feeling, that your mind is trying to think about life.

Or it keeps pulling you towards life. And you don't think you've thought about life yet, but you must have. And you wouldn't feel like you were being pulled towards life.

Because you wouldn't know what you were being pulled towards. Okay? If you hadn't thought of life a little bit.

So it must be what Nick said. There must be microseconds off the object where you do think of life. And experimentally, it feels as though you're being pulled off.

It feels as though someone keeps tapping you on the shoulder and saying, think about life, think about life. And then that becomes gross, I'm sorry, subtle agitation, right? Which they call, uh, chewed caffeine all night long.

Water flowing out of the eyes. And you feel as though you might get distracted in the night. You know, you feel something tugging at you.

Like you have a problem in life. For me it's usually a problem. Like I have a problem with my memory.

Or there's some problem in my life. And I try to, I don't check email before I meditate, you know? I don't open the ones that look like problems.

And, uh, because they will pull at you during meditation. They will, they will pull at your mind during meditation. And you feel like, you feel like you want to think about things.

Um, but I think I agree with what you're saying. If this, if I have it right, you must be thinking about the problem. For microseconds.

And that's what it is to feel like you're being pulled away from that problem. Even before you start actively thinking about that problem. Or else you couldn't say, I'm feeling like that problem is gnawing at my mind.

Okay? I think that's a nice way of speaking to it. You know?

You must be up here. For microseconds. And maybe that doesn't qualify us.

We don't have that idea of getting that instruction, which means that we're up here. That's a cool thing. Oh, I know.

Maybe that one. I don't know if you know the distinction, but one teacher said that there were three types of bodhisattva path.

[Говорящий 2] (16:06 - 16:18)
Shepherd-like, boatman-like, and king-like. And so, we understand the difference. Yeah, I used to know that.

[Говорящий 1] (16:23 - 17:15)
One is where... No, one is called a ferryman. And one is called a king.

One is called a shepherd. And, the idea is that... By the way, it's a theoretical difference that expresses the attitude.

And it's not a... In practice, it never happens. But the theory is that king-like bodhisattva says, I will become enlightened so that I can lead everyone else behind me.

So I will get enlightened first, and then everybody will see my example, and they will follow me. In the next life? No, even now.

And then the shepherd one is like, I'll make sure everybody else gets enlightened first, and then I'll follow.

[Говорящий 2] (17:16 - 17:17)
You know?

[Говорящий 1] (17:17 - 20:37)
I'll make sure everybody in this room gets enlightened when the thought occurs. And then I will go into my... And I will go into my mind.

And then the ferryman, they have to get in the boat with you, to take you across. In Tibet, it was a very important thing, because they have ferries everywhere, and they didn't have any ferries. So you had to get into a yakskin co-op, and you would...

Even horses could get into these little ferries, so you have to go in the boat, because he has to row. So that means, I will pass into Nirvana with you, at the same time. So that's a distinction.

Now in practice, that distinction is based on a misunderstanding of what it is to get enlightened. The king life is always the right one. And maybe the ferryman.

But... But you see, the distinction is based on believing that when you achieve Nirvana, you will disappear. It's not true.

So you don't have to wait for other people to catch up before reaching Nirvana, because it's not that you're likely going to go anywhere. And you will still be here, and you don't disappear when you reach Nirvana. So people heard, Lord Buddha said...

By the way, this is a beautiful thing. Lord Buddha said, when you reach Nirvana, you go out like a candle flame. Lord Buddha said, when you reach Nirvana, you go out like a candle flame.

So the whole school of thought rose up and said, when you reach Nirvana, you disappear. And actually, that's not what Lord Buddha meant. Lord Buddha meant, if you go into a personal Nirvana and stay there, you have extinguished the flame of your life.

You have extinguished the flame of your compassion. If you go into your own little personal Nirvana and you ignore other people, then you have extinguished the flame of your love. He meant the opposite.

You should reach Nirvana and then help others. He didn't mean that you disappear when you reach Nirvana. You see, it's a very beautiful mistake.

So anyway, we should become enlightened because then we're really capable of guiding others. But, we should keep in our heart the willingness to be enlightened. You know, like, the way you really help people is to get enlightened first and then show them how to do it.

But, if the question ever came up of, okay, there's three people in this room and they have to reach enlightenment. You want to be one of them. In the sense of sacrificing your desires for others, you should save the others.

But in practice, it never happens. Because the way you really help people is to get enlightened first. You see?

But you should be willing to be laughed at if it ever came up. But it will never come up. Okay?

Alright? It refers to an attitude and not to something that really helps.

[Говорящий 2] (20:38 - 20:55)
But you're talking about enlightenment as if it's the last flick of the switch. But actually, it's a long lifetime process. A multi-lifetime process.

It starts from very low and we can all help each other each step of the way.

[Говорящий 1] (20:55 - 21:31)
Yeah, that's a fair enough. Yeah. Cool.

Good question. I think it comes in this section. We're going to go back, okay?

We're starting. We have like half an hour. But it's a beautiful question and it's a beautiful thing that comes up.

It'd be interesting to ask that question with regard to Tantra. Laughter Laughter In which it's more like you are the the cowboy and the whole herd is chasing you.

[Говорящий 2] (21:33 - 21:44)
Laughter Laughter Like this. Laughter Laughter And I jump down.

[Говорящий 1] (21:44 - 24:59)
Laughter Laughter Laughter Uh... In which In which This body is more valuable than a million wish-giving gems. In which the company didn't make just a standard.

If you were to be blessed with a body and mind such as we have now and wasted Okay? And wasted. On what?

On what? You can say watching TV, but I object to that. You see, don't think Samsara is so easy.

Don't think Samsara is such an easy thing to define. You know? I don't know.

I had a very tempting experience once watching The Wizard of Oz with two small children. And I swore everybody was a Buddha. You know?

Even the wicked witch. You know? I was like having this tempting experience with two small children.

So, I don't think it's so easy to say that TVs are always on fire and saying prayers is always religious. It's not that...unfortunately it's not that easy. Okay.

Normally when I watch a show, I will go back to the seats in the front and I jump 10 times up. It would be more of a loss to waste hours of your precious money and money than it would be to give up thousands of gemstones that could give you anything. Dēlē tōngqēwā.

There would be no greater loss. You know? It's the opposite of profit.

Loss. Loss. Yeah.

Loss. In the sense of not profit. Dēlē mōpa.

And nothing more stupid. Dēlē rāndhī rāndhū sāk chewa mege. And there could be no greater deception of yourself by yourself than to waste your time.

So, waste... But what does it mean to waste time? Here's my device on the computer writing homework.

Somebody else is enjoying the Paradise Café with a friend and speaking about maybe something of great meaning. You can't tell from the outside who's wasting time. Okay?

You don't know. You only know if you're wasting time. Okay?

Which would be something like I think not being happy is a waste of time. All right. Let me...

Gomo shiwa he, he calls shiwa pa. Let's take a second. He calls shiwa pa.

Thank you. Okay, here we go. Dēlē rāndhī rāndhū sāk chewa mege.

Dēlē rāndhī rāndhū sāk chewa mege. It's got to be something like that. Dēlē rāndhī rāndhū sāk chewa mege.

Oh, okay.