Question and Answer Session at the Department of Philosophy of Peking University
(June 24, 2010 AM)
(1) Question: I am a master’s student from the Mathematics Department at Peking University. I have a question: There are voluminous scriptures about the doctrines of the second turning of the wheel of Dharma and the third turning of the wheel of Dharma, including what you have translated and your commentaries. However, for an ordinary layman like me, I don’t have the opportunity to study and learn about them. Can you recommend one or two scriptures or treatises which elucidate these topics so that we can gain some insight into the philosophy of Madhyamaka and Buddha nature?
Answer: As I have mentioned just now, for the second turning of the wheel of Dharma, you should study the Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way systematically. If you have spare time, then it is also best to study the Commentary on the Ornament of the Middle Way by Nyingma master Mipham Rinpoche. This work elucidates the synthesis of the Mind Only school doctrines and the Middle Way school doctrines. It clarifies that all things and events are ultimately emptiness, but conventionally appear like a dream, and how to transform these appearances for Dharma practice. Therefore, if you want to comprehend the teachings of the second turning of the wheel, you should at least study these two treatises.
For the third turning of the wheel of Dharma, it is best to study the Treatise on the Sublime Continuum and In Praise of Dharmadhatu. Regarding the Treatise on the Sublime Continuum, Mipham wrote a commentary on the Sublime Continuum. Jonang school also wrote a commentary on it. His Holiness Jigme Phuntsok expounded the Sublime Continuum twice during his lifetime. On the first occasion he completed it, but in the middle of the second occasion, His Holiness manifested the parinirvana. Due to its comprehensive elucidation of the doctrines of the third turning of the Dharma wheel, recently our Dharma teachers in our monastery are also expounding these treatises. As for the Vajrayana, if you have received an esoteric empowerment and have time to practice, then you can systematically study Finding Comfort and Ease in the Nature of Mind (Semnyi Ngalso) and The Meaning of Fundamental Mind, Clear Light, Expressed in Accordance with the Transmission of Conqueror Knowledge-Bearers: Vajra Matrix. These pith instructions are truly very profound.
Personally, although I have full confidence in the philosophical system of Madhyamaka, my confidence in the pith instruction of Dzogchen is even stronger. Why? Because Buddhist doctrines and logical reasoning are voluminous and vast, so, in this very short human life, we might not able to understand them all. However, with the profound pith instruction of Dzogchen, our confidence, and the blessing from our guru, when all these causes and conditions are bound together, it is easy for us to realize the nature of the mind. To us, who are confused in the net of samsara, this is extremely precious. In fact, a few decades pass in an instant or a flash. Planting the seed of enlightenment during this lifetime, or even better, gaining full confidence in liberation, is the most important thing in our life.
(2) Question: I just graduated from the China Foreign Affairs University. When I was studying the Adornment of the Middle Way, I noticed Mipham Rinpoche says: “Does Madhyamaka have a position or not?” It is said that this is one of the most difficult topics in Madhyamaka. During your lectures, you have also repeatedly stressed the importance of this issue. However, many people do not understand why it is so important. Can you shed light on this?
Answer: “Does Madhyamaka have a position or not?” is not only stated in the Adornment of the Middle Way, but is also a very crucial point in the Beacon of Certainty. Why is it emphasized again and again? Because during the time these treatises were composed, the Madhyamaka philosophy was flourishing dramatically. At that time, many learned masters from the Gelug, Nyingma, and Sakya held different views on this and it sparked some debate. For this reason, Mipham Rinpoche repeatedly analyzed and discussed this issue in various discourses.
In fact, “Does Madhyamaka have a position or not?” refers to whether Madhyamaka takes any position at the ultimate level of truth. Nagarjuna previously said: “Since I take no position, I have no flaw at all.” Why did he say this? Because when he ascertained phenomena in the Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way, there is no position, neither on “existence” nor “non-existence.” Since the fundamental nature of reality is always beyond any conceptual extremes from the beginning, there is no fault in not holding any position.
Now, physicists believe that the smallest unit of matter is a quark or field. The Hinayana posit that the smallest utterly indivisible particle is objectively real. The Yogacara school asserts that alaya consciousness is instinctively real. Madhyamaka Svatantrika believes that, at the conventional level, things exist inherently. In fact, all these are only descriptions and assertions made by language. When subject to critical analysis, they all turn out to be untenable and have no essence. Hence, the ultimate reality of things and events is beyond the grasp of our minds and speech, just like it says in the scriptures, when we have: “reached the other shore of the most excellent transcendental wisdom.”
For those who have some understanding of Vajrayana practice, with the help of the pith instructions, it is possible that you might understand the nature of the mind when you carry out some observations. During the observations, if you say that your mind exists inherently, this cannot be established, but if you say that it doesn’t exist, that is also not true, because something clear and luminous is there. This state cannot be expressed in language and thought. This is the ultimate reality of things and events that we call tathagatagarbha, the true nature of Buddha.
Therefore, in many of Mipham Rinpoche’s commentaries and works, this issue is very crucial. In what situation does the Madhyamaka accept the notion of existence? In what situation do they reject the notion of existence? These issues have been the subject of acute debate between the Prasangika and Svatantrika. By understanding these arguments, it can gradually help us to realize the nature of the mind, which cannot be found. But this “cannot be found” is not mere emptiness; this is a very subtle and profound state. It is beyond dualistic thoughts. If, however, the ultimate nature of reality were within the ordinary dualistic mind, then it would mean that ordinary beings have also realized this state, and there would be no difference between them and the great masters or enlightened beings. This is obviously absurd.
(3) Question: I am a student of the Institute of Education, Peking University. What are the distinctions in education above the Vindhyavana or Buddhist institute, when comparing it to contemporary education? Are there any things between the two that they can learn from each other?
Answer: Excellent. For those of us who are engaged in education, this is indeed an issue we should care about.
As I said before, although my current identity is a monk, I was a teacher for more than twenty years. Of course, there are some differences. For you, there may be wages, conditions, or fame; for us, we are just living in a mountain valley with a very simple lifestyle, carrying out our teaching. We do not long for wealth or fame from teaching, and try our best to transmit the profound Dharma to the next generation. In my opinion, only by doing this, can it be meaningful. Why? Because the development of humanity should not be merely reflected in, for example, the economy or military. What is more important is the improvement of the mentality of human beings.
The Sangha education inside the monastery is exactly for the purpose of developing kindness and an altruistic and selfless mind. This kind of education is very different from an ordinary education in an ordinary school. I have seen the materials used in elementary, middle, high schools, and college. I found that materials related to morals and ethics are extremely limited; this is quite a shame. Therefore, higher education should include the ancient Standards for Being a Good Student and Child (Di Zi Gui), Trimetric Classics (San Zi Jing), and Thousand Character Classics (Qian Zi Wen), all focusing on ethics.
At the same time, our Sangha and Buddhist institutes also need to learn science and technology from higher learning institutions. Although it is not necessary for us to study them as main subjects, some basic understanding is needed. Imagine if many monastics and even eminent masters only recited the name of Amitabha Buddha wholeheartedly every day but were utterly ignorant of present critical issues, for example, how present high tech discoveries can prove Buddhist logic to be true, and issues about environmental friendliness and charity. How could they promote the Dharma in this multicultural, highly cooperative, and highly competitive society? This can be quite difficult.
Some time ago, we gathered some intellectuals and eminent monastics for a seminar. Through this seminar, many gained enormous benefits: Some monastics were lacking an understanding of modern knowledge. By listening to some important news and events from home and abroad, this widened their horizon. Although some intellectuals in institutions of higher learning understand part of secular knowledge, they have never been involved in morals or Buddhist education. They have not even studied the Standards for Being a Good Student and Child (Di Zi Gui). This time, they were able to learn about them. Eventually, they learned from each other. Each of them gained varying degrees of benefit.
Therefore, it is vital for people in the schools to study and research religion. I heard that, due to faith or interest, the lecturers and students in your school of religious studies, while studying technology, also devote themselves to a long-term study in Buddhism. This is particularly valuable in our lives. For me, during my lifetime, as long as there are causes and conditions to promote the Dharma, even if there is only one person, I will still want to expound the Dharma a little bit each day to that one person. Why? Because promoting philosophy and exchanging experiences are indeed the most meaningful thing to do.
(4) Question: I am a PhD student in the Department of Philosophy, Peking University. Just now you mentioned that benefiting others is considered a very important aspect of Buddhism. However, Buddhism also talks about both the benefit for yourself and benefit for others. Can you please explain the relationship between benefits for yourself and benefits for others?
Answer: Generally speaking, there are two types of “benefits for yourself”: one is temporary and the other is ultimate. The temporary benefit for yourself is just like what it says in the Medicine Buddha Sutra and other sutras of the same type. By relying on the Buddhadharma, whatever you long for, such as wealth or fame, will be fulfilled. On the other hand, for the ultimate benefit for yourself, it is just like what the Hinayana practitioners do. On the basis of not harming others, they wholeheartedly desire for self liberation. We can see from this that it is wrong to say that Buddhism never advocates benefit for yourself. Buddha actually allows this “benefit for yourself.”
In Mahayana Buddhism, unlike Hinayana Buddhism, the focus is on benefiting sentient beings. However, while benefiting others, the “benefits for yourself” are obtained automatically. For example, we can see that if a secular teacher has a strong altruistic mind, he or she might not consider his or her own interests very much, yet, he or she still will not lack daily necessities, such as food, clothes, and shelter. This is the relationship between benefits for yourself and benefits for others from the viewpoint of Mahayana Buddhism.
We can also see that there are obvious differences between the views of Mahayana and Hinayana Buddhism in this regard.
Question: There is a verse in the Diamond Sutra like this: “You should generate the mind without abiding, You should generate the mind not abiding in anything.” However, at the moment, many people only emphasize “not abiding in anything.” They easily neglect “generate the mind.” May I ask you to explain the relationship between not abiding in anything and generating the mind from the point of view of Tibetan Buddhism. Also, what is this mind generated “not abiding in anything”?
Answer: When I previously taught the Diamond Sutra, I mentioned that “not abiding in anything” is about emptiness. In this state, all phenomena dwell in emptiness. Apart from emptiness, there is nothing. This is the meaning of the second turning of the wheel of Dharma. “Should generate the mind” is about being in the state of emptiness—unceasing appearance is present too. The clear light Buddha nature is born from emptiness. That is the meaning of the third turning of the Dharma wheel. Why was the Sixth Patriarch Hui Neng able to achieve enlightenment in the moment he listened to this verse? The reason is exactly because of the profundity of this verse, as I mentioned earlier.
Therefore, this verse is extremely important. When you have time, you can read about the teachings I mentioned earlier. The first part of that verse ascertains emptiness. The latter part ascertains the clear light, which is what we call the non-duality of emptiness and appearances or the non-duality of clear light and emptiness. The “clear light” aspect is about the nature of the mind. The “emptiness” aspect is about the unfindability of the mind. These two aspects have never been separated; they are always in the state of indivisible and inseparable oneness. However, due to ignorance, sentient beings are not able to realize this. Were they able to see this indivisible state that the Diamond Sutra is talking about, enlightenment would be within reach. For this reason, when many great masters recite this sutra, often, they become enlightened instantly when they read about this verse.
Even if you are not able to memorize the whole Diamond Sutra, you should at least always recite this verse. Although it is just a very few simple words, it completely and perfectly explains the nature of mind is emptiness and its essence is clear light; this is also the same in Dzogchen. Whether dualistic thoughts arise in your mind or not, this nature of non-dual indivisible oneness of clear light and emptiness will always be there. The actual state transcends words, it is: “Just like when you drink water, whether it is cold or warm, you can feel it yourself.”
(5) Question: I am a student in the Department of Philosophy at Peking University. I would like to ask about the Heart Sutra. It says: “Form does not differ from emptiness, emptiness does not differ from form.” Literally, it looks like these two sentences have the same meaning, but are expressed in different ways. May I know if there are any significant differences between these two from the philosophical and experiential level of understanding?
Answer: “Form does not differ from emptiness” refers to the essential nature of form being emptiness. This point can be comprehended at the literal level using the Madhyamaka logical reasoning. For the pith instruction, someone that has already realized ultimate truth can directly point it out to you. For example, in Zen Buddhism, some gurus may either hit or knock their disciples to help them instantly become enlightened. For the Vajrayana, during an empowerment, by relying on a crystal as an object of guidance, it is also possible for you to realize the nature of mind. At that time, you can easily realize that, in reality, form never separates from emptiness.
Regarding “emptiness does not differ from form,” emptiness here doesn’t mean a place that has empty space due to no obstructions. Instead, it means that great emptiness is free from any conceptual constructions, which is the ultimate nature of things and events. This kind of emptiness is not independent of form. It is oneness with emptiness. They are not two independent realities. This state of mind can only be elucidated by the Great Madhyamaka, the secular person or Hinayana practitioner has never been able to get close to it. At present, when ascertaining emptiness, often, many people fall into mere emptiness, such as when there is nothing inside a bowl, we assert that this bowl is “empty.” However, if the ultimate nature of reality is mere emptiness, then it appears that even our dualistic mind can perceive it. Then, why did Buddha say that it is beyond the mind?
Hence, “Form does not differ from emptiness, emptiness does not differ from form” refers to the nature of form and emptiness that is indivisible oneness. The subjective experience of the mind and external objects are the distorted views of our delusions. It is just like our dreams. Although there are various kinds of objects, such as mountains, rivers, lands, and various kinds of emotions and feelings, these are all only the display of illusions. Once you wake up, you will find that these various forms inside the dream are not different from emptiness. Similarly, whatever we experience now is no different than dreams. Through the dream analogy, if we understand the relationship between form and emptiness, we will then have the experiential understanding of the subtle and profound Madhyamaka view.
Question: Nowadays, science and technology are very well developed. Through cloning, life can be replicated. Through rat neurons, scientists created Gordon, a robot controlled by a “biological brain.” When this kind of life is created, how do we account for causes and effects and rebirth in the cycle of existence?
Answer: Well, I’ll make sure that you settle the account. (Laughter)
In recent years, following the cloning of Dolly the sheep, biotechnology has made remarkable breakthroughs and advancements. Many people think that humans not only can make machines, but also can create life. Buddhism does not agree with this view. Why? Because for a life to come into being, it is indispensable to have a bardo from which to enter it. Lord Buddha said in the sutra that, in our surrounding environment, there are infinite numbers of bardos, filling empty space, water, and so on. At one time, when Venerable Aniruddha used his supernatural power to observe water, he found that there were many bardos inside the water. Hence, he did not dare to drink water any more. Later, Lord Buddha told him: “Bardos are everywhere. When deciding on what to adopt and what to discard regarding certain behavior, you should not use the supernatural power of an arahat to make the decision. Rather, it should be evaluated using ordinary human eyes.”
When I went to the Shanghai Institute of Science and Technology I was able to observe countless lives by using a microscope. Through this kind of observation, I deeply felt that just because our ordinary eyes cannot see something, it doesn’t necessarily mean nothing is there. With this, irreversible confidence in my heart for Buddha’s words arose.
The case of the bardo is the same. It is usually extremely difficult for most people to see them, but they do exist. Since there are so many bardos filling the empty space around us, when causes and conditions come together, beings can enter cells and cause a life to come into being. Therefore, for those sentient beings created by using cloning technology, to be born, a bardo must join with them, otherwise, even with cloning technology, it is impossible to breed a life. Previously, scientist Yu Zhi Biao had said: “No matter how advanced science is, it cannot even create a tiny ant!” Hence, life cannot be created by science. It is only because, when causes and conditions such as a sperm, egg, and the right temperature come together in the right conditions, occasionally, because of the bardo joining them, then a new life comes into being.
(6) Question: You just talked about cloning. I would like to ask: In accordance with the twelve links of dependent origination, have those cloned sentient beings gone through conception?
Answer: Cloned living beings may not necessarily go through birth from a womb in the process of the twelve links of dependent origination. If they are born from a womb, then they may cover the twelve links of dependent origination. However, if they are born from moisture, then they will not have conception inside a womb. For example, during the summer, with the correct causes and conditions, small insects may appear in the manure in the soil. But you cannot say that the manure and soil are the cause that creates life. Buddha said in the sutra that living beings are born in different ways. They can be born from an egg, born from a womb, born from moisture, and born miraculously. For example, Murdhagata was born from the head of a human being. Therefore, there are various mysteries in this world. Buddha elaborated on these in various scriptures.
Regarding the whole process of being born from a womb, it is meticulously explained in the Maharatnakuta Sutra. If you read it, you will find that, without exception, Buddha mastered all the discoveries of modern medicine two thousand five hundred years ago, through his insights. Of course, it is not because I am Buddhist that I am praising Buddhism. If you subject Buddhism to critical analysis, you will realize that today’s medicine, physiology, and the macro and micro worlds that scientists are researching, up to emptiness and dependent origination, are all mentioned in Buddhism. We should be aware of the greatness of Buddhism.
Question: One of the Yogacara schools asserts that, ultimately, there is an alaya consciousness, and the Samkhya school also believes that there is a self called atman. Mipham Rinpoche and other eminent masters considered that liberation cannot be achieved with this kind of grasping on an intrinsically real nature. Since it is so, then what is the difference between this Yogacara school and the Samkhya school?
Answer: There are many differences between the Yogacara and Samkhya. What Mipham Rinpoche meant when he said: “If you posit that the alaya consciousness is intrinsically real, then there is no liberation” is that this kind of grasping at things to be inherently real is the cause of cyclic existence. However, he did not deny that “with the basis of Yogacara doctrines, then enter the Middle way, and liberation can be attained.”
Generally speaking, if you long for liberation, then knowing that the basis of all things and events is “empty” is indispensable. Due to grasping on the alaya consciousness as inherently real, the Yogacara is contrary to this point. That is not to say that they don’t have differences with the Samkhya.
(7) Question: I am a graduate student from the China University of Mining and Technology. I have a question and hope you can shed light on it. Since the enlightened beings have already realized emptiness and are free from death and rebirth, why do they still aspire to rebirth in the Western Pure Land of Amitabha Buddha?
Answer: Taking rebirth in the Pure Land of Amitabha Buddha is the best way to perfect the skills for benefiting sentient beings, just like if you want to get a job, then going to Peking University is a very good bridge to help you achieve that goal. His Holiness Jigme Phuntsok also said that: If you have a chance to take rebirth in the Pure Land of Amitabha Buddha, all the noble qualities in your mental continuum will be perfected quickly. After that, it will be very easy and effortless for you to benefit infinite and boundless numbers of sentient beings. Therefore, even for many great masters, although they are already free from rebirth and death, they still aspire to rebirth in the Pure Land of Amitabha Buddha to perfect all the noble qualities first. Only then do they move forward to tame and help sentient beings.
(8) Question: I am a student at the University of International Business and Economics. We all know that the fundamental basis of the Mahayana is to benefit all sentient beings. For so many years, you have continuously taught the Dharma and benefited sentient beings. As long as you are in the monastery, no matter how tired you are, you will continue to teach Dharma to your disciples. Teaching Dharma has occupied a large part of your life. I would like to ask: How do you strike a balance between teaching Dharma and benefiting sentient beings with your personal practice?
Answer: I do not dare to claim that I have made significant efforts in teaching Dharma and benefiting sentient beings. However, I truly feel that the most valuable thing in my life was my encounter with Mahayana Buddhism and all my gurus, who transmitted the precious Buddhadharma to me. I have visited some countries, enjoyed some worldly fame, and received good treatment from others, yet, at my age, when I look back at my life, I feel that all these things are meaningless and insignificant when compared to what the Buddhadharma can bring about.
For that reason, whether I am at our monastery or going out doing other activities, I always remind myself about this: Even if it is only for one being, as long as I can benefit him or her by transmitting the wisdom of the Buddhadharma, I will feel that I have done a meaningful thing. We should know that we can help others in many ways. If we give someone ten or twenty thousand Yuan, that person might be very happy, but this cannot help him or her to solve the sufferings of revolving in cyclic existence. Only by transmitting the pure Dharma can beings receive immense benefits in this life and all future lives.
I cannot tell what will happen to me in the future, whether my wishes will be fulfilled. I cannot tell because causes and conditions for everyone are ever-changing. However, I am not very demanding. In the past, when I formed the Buddhist Study society, I said that even if there were only twenty people carrying out long term study, that was fine. As long as I am still alive, if I am teaching Dharma to ten people, five people, or even one person, I will still feel that my life is meaningful. I am not just saying this; it comes from deep down in my heart.
By understanding the importance of the Buddhadharma, knowing that teaching the Dharma is the most important thing, as well as being satisfied even if I have only one student, I try to get up early every day, and go to bed a little bit late, so that I can find some time for my practice, which includes reciting sutras and so on. This is how I strike a balance between the two. I have very little time for practice because I usually have many things to deal with, since I am reluctant to give up translation and charity causes. Decades of a human life are really very short, so when the causes and conditions are there, we should treasure them and perform virtue. Of course, things are not always as easy as we think they should be, and sometimes, we have to face many difficulties. However, whether I am successful or not, I still feel happy and joyful.
