So I just want to say again that in terms of texts, in the written texts during the world, usually we say that the emergence of the Mahayana in India, when people actually started to see it and talk about it, It happened quite a while after the Buddha's Parinirvana. And the texts that signaled it were the Prajnaparamita texts. And it followed many other Mahayana texts. For hundreds and hundreds of years, new Mahayana texts came. But the first ones that we really say are the Mahayana texts are the Prajnaparamita. And the Lotus Sutra came not too long after the Prajnaparamita appeared. But without the prajnaparamita, you might not know what the Lotus Sutra was talking about, because the Lotus Sutra doesn't talk about emptiness very much.

[01:06]

So the first way the Mahayana teachings share in written form They reject the theoretical of the Abhidharma. They reject the theoretical, conceptual templates that the Abhidharma offered as a way to study experience and realize the truth of selflessness. It's truth of no self. the first kinds of teachings that really are well developed and published, the teachings which are popular conceptual frameworks, be ready to realize the truth of selflessness.

[02:24]

Why the Prabhupadmita comes by and says, rejects the conceptual frameworks by which, as a way to realize selflessness, we see that we just immediately realize emptiness. Now, in the early phase in teaching, we say that emptiness is hidden a distance from us. It's selflessness, the selflessness of beings right here. So the Prajnaparamita literature is rejecting the conceptual approach and just trying to say, let's just meditate on the immediacy of emptiness. And we know, if you're familiar with Heart Sutra, I guess, where it says Avalokiteshvara was practicing Prajnaparamita, perfection of wisdom.

[03:29]

He's looking at these templates and he sees There are all these templates, all these conceptual frameworks of the five elements. And they're empty of, actually, any conception of them. It doesn't say there's no form aggregate. It doesn't say there's no feeling. He just says they're empty of any conception of what they are. So feeling is empty of any idea of feeling. Or colors are empty of any idea of color. Which is another way to say form. Color is that it's color. So form is empty of color, of the idea of color. And then in this emptiness of everything, in everything's emptiness of any idea of itself, then in that emptiness, when you're actually looking at that, realizing that emptiness, then they're actually, in that context, there are no feelings or impulses or consciousness or forms or anything.

[04:49]

So in that sutra and those types of sutras, they're just saying, can you look at things and just see their emptiness and about themselves. Can you just look at that? Because it's actually right there. It coexists with the ideas of them. But rather than giving you a way to look at that, we'll just tell you that and you just go right at it. And how that happens, and I'm not even going to tell you how it happens. So the path is also the theoretical path is rejected, the eightfold path. as a conceptual approach to the Eightfold Path. The Eightfold Path isn't rejected. The conceptual approach to the Eightfold Path is rejected. So practice the Eightfold Path, but we're not going to tell you how to do it. We're going to just tell you that in the way to practice the Eightfold Path is just to immediately realize emptiness. And this is a wonderful teaching and it worked really well for Avalokiteshvara.

[05:57]

But After several hundred years of this type of teaching really thriving in certain circles, while the earlier teaching is still going on, okay, so this new movement is growing, but the old movement is also thriving, with conceptual approaches. And it may be the case that in the same monastery, some people were doing this immediate non-conceptual approach to practice, and other people were doing the conceptual approach to practice, and they were getting along very nicely, if possible. Some of the people who actually received this teaching, this Mahayana teaching, and practiced it, they felt actually that it was time to bring out another possibility, another way to practice the Mahayana, which was not to reject the conceptual approach, but to use the conceptual approach in the context of emptiness.

[07:08]

To use the Abhidharma, the Abhidharma's conceptual approach, in the context of emptiness. So, this sutra that we're going to recite tonight, called the Sandhiramacchana, or the elucidating... Is there a room next to me? Are there more chairs anyplace? Or grays? So this sutra is the elucidation of the intention of the Buddha Sutra, the disclosing or the unraveling of the deep intention of the Buddha when he was teaching these various ways. In this sutra, we now have the construction, a reconstruction or a new construction, actually a slightly different construction, a slightly different conceptual approach,

[08:17]

the type of consciousness which underlies the understanding of emptiness and underlies the conceptual approach. So both the conceptual approach and the immediate non-conceptual non-approach, they're both connected in consciousness. There's a consciousness which knows emptiness, and there's a consciousness which knows conceptual categories and uses them to realize emptiness. So in both directions, both immediately going to emptiness to realize and going through conceptual constructions to realize emptiness to realize the way, in both cases there's a conscious being who's doing practice and of course somebody sought to do both. So they're not trying to give you a In the Yogacara, the picture of consciousness which underlies the conceptual and the non-conceptual access to emptiness.

[09:29]

And they give you a conceptual approach to and a conceptual understanding of the consciousness which realizes emptiness. Okay? So now, we can... Is there enough for everybody to hear? Are these the text? So here's... Here's the text. You know, it's kind of my Anabhidhamma text. Yeah. Yogacara. Yogacara is like It literally means Catholic Yoga. It's usually used to refer to the type of Mahayana practice that provides a teaching, a special teaching about the nature of consciousness, which under-internalizes all types of understanding.

[10:39]

Also uses the teaching of consciousness to realize emptiness. And so one way to look at it was just that the Indian culture evolved from the first introduction of Mahayana to such a point that another type of Mahayana was able to be produced. And this other type of Mahayana, in some ways, was more suited to lay people. Yogacara, in some ways, was better suited for lay people. And also, some of the people who led the Yogacara movement, particularly Asanga, felt that the Prajnaparamita literature, as it was being understood, or this way, Prajnaparamita that said, give up all theoretical, conceptual approaches to practice, it too easily could be understood nihilistically.

[11:51]

And if you live in a monastery, in some ways it's not so dangerous because you live in an environment where everybody's, the primary commitment that they share, even if they have different things they're studying, their primary commitment is to the precepts and to help each other practice the precepts. Whereas in lay life, easier for some people to have a nihilistic interpretation of the Prajnaparamita and think that precepts aren't important. And people don't necessarily think that all lay people are committed to the precepts. But they naturally expect monks to be committed to precepts. They even know usually what the precepts of the monk is by the monastery, because they can find out usually what the precepts of that monastery are. So they not only know that they're committed to ethical precepts, but they even know, can find out what the ethical precepts of the place the person lives is.

[12:59]

Like Zen Center, years ago, had to publish some statements just to make sure that people knew what to expect at Zen Center. So that, yeah, so they would, if something happened, that wasn't according to those principles, then people would say, oh, well, I thought you did this at Zen Center. But this seems to be happening. It says in this document that you don't do this here. So Zen Center is not exactly a monastery in all its aspects, but it is a place where we have a community that has to put out clear precepts. And when you're in a community that has clear precepts, you're less likely to slip into nihilism. People in society at large who are kind of on their own, maybe they're practicing precepts, but then they read the Prajnaparamita and they think, precepts are empty, so I guess I can do what I want. That's a nihilistic misunderstanding of the Prajnaparamita. So this teaching is trying to protect the practice of emptiness from becoming nihilistic.

[14:10]

All right, so would you please open your text to page, whatever the page is, first page, and we shall, if you don't mind, we will chant this chapter five, which are the questions of Vishalamati. One, two, three. Mind, thought, and consciousness. How do we launch this? How do we start this? Why is the respect to the secrets of mind, thought, and consciousness? Why do we base it on this? How do we start this? Why is the respect to the secrets of mind, thought, and consciousness?

[15:18]

How do we start this? Why is the respect to the secrets of mind, thought, and consciousness? This video was made possible in part by the support of who dissected the secrets of mind, thought, and consciousness to heal a body and whatever type of sentient being there may be in the center. The constricted minds and beings, those sentient beings, now testify and arise to the mistakes of birth, such as ache-born, or wound-born, or moisture-born, or spontaneously-born. Initially, independence allowed two types of appropriation, the appropriation of the physical sense powers,

[16:19]

The support and the appropriation of great dispositions which proliferate with national designations, with recites, times, dates, and concepts, a language that is all-seeing, is bright, and suited to all of us, the increase of any stance, and the collaborations of all the key acts of appropriation, the existence of the... Appropriation is not to rule in a formless realm. We shall not see consciousness, we also call the appropriating consciousness, because it rules and appropriates the body in that way. It is all that makes this consciousness, because there is the same establishment and abiding within those bodies. ...connected and thoroughly connected, because it's all mine, because it collects and accumulates warm sounds, smells, tastes, and fangs. Well, I've trusted you, and I've seen a sinful collection of consciousness. The eye consciousness, ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness. Consciousness arises depending on the variety and the appropriateness of consciousness.

[17:26]

My consciousness arises depending on an eye in a form in association with consciousness. Consciousness with conceptual mental consciousness arises at the same time. The object of recklessness shall allow the inner consciousness of those consciousnesses of unconsciousness and bodily consciousness to rise again on endearing and uncivilized association with consciousnesses of science, self-taste, implantable consciousness together with those bodily consciousnesses of conceptual medicine. consciousness and arise together within only one mental consciousness which has the same object of activity as the i-consciousness likewise the four bi-consciousnesses arise together within conceptual mental consciousness, which has the same object of activity as the five-fold collection of consciousness.

[18:34]

You shall not take, for example, the possible conditions for realizing of what you are grateful and grateful for are present in just one way, but will rise to become a obligation to redeem the hate-self in any case, a present in multiple ways. be broken will never be entirely stopped. The cross of the musicians are realizing a vision of perfect beauty. They are out there, our president. Just one image will arise. If the cross of the musicians are realizing two images or many images are present, impossible images will arise. However, that idea will not be transformed to the nature of the image and will never Institutionality, just as it is with water and the mirror, can be compounded and audited. Incorporating consciousness evolves with conditions, when simultaneous arising with one-eyed consciousness are present, then just one-eyed consciousness will arise one time and get to the loss of conditions.

[19:39]

Raising an object of life, all the sandwich of consciousness are present. Get down to that five-fold sandwich of consciousness. is the way that we rely on knowledge of the system of doctrine, and the way I acknowledge of the system of doctrine, and the way I reflect on the secrets of mind, thought, and consciousness. However, it is not only because of this that we designate those three sectors as being wise and always visual and multidimensional. wise in all ways, do not perceive their own internal appropriators. They also do not perceive an appropriating consciousness, for they are an important reality. They also do not perceive a basis, nor do they perceive a basis consciousness. They do not perceive accumulations, nor do they perceive You're not to see the night, or the day you sleep, or the way they perceive your consciousness.

[20:46]

You're not to see the air, or the way they perceive the sound. You're not to see the air consciousness. You're not to see the nose, or the way they perceive the smell. You're not to see the nose consciousness. No, they could see the taste. No, they could see the tongue consciousness. They could not perceive a body. No, they could see the tangible object. No, they could see the bodily consciousness. They could not perceive their own particular thoughts. No, they could see their own... The mental consciousness that they are in a corporate reality is fully self-assertive, being wise with respect to the ultimate. The target that designates fully self-assertive are wise with respect to the ultimate. It's also being wise with respect to the secrets of mind, heart, and consciousness. These are my... What we stop does not rise when we strike to the secrets of mind, thought, and consciousness. When the guitar is out as it may, so we stop does not seem wise when we strike to the secrets of mind, thought, and consciousness.

[21:53]

He does it based on his touch, but is very recent, and in a lot of us, what this works to, you never really know. Even so, all that seems to make my career work is seen as so badly not being right. Thus, I must offer this to children. This concludes the fifth chapter of Michelle and Monty. We have copies of this chapter, like... ...not too close to right here. I just wanted to point out something kind of simple, and that is that the Buddha says that Vishalamatsi is involved in asking this question in order to benefit many beings, bring happiness to many beings out of sympathy for the world and for the sake of the welfare, benefit and happiness of many beings. Chinese translation says, you ask this question because you want to aid and comfort innumerable beings, because you have compassion for the world, welfare, and happiness.

[23:02]

This phrase, of course, you wouldn't be surprised if Bodhisattva would ask a question with this motivation. Does that make sense? But I just want to point out that this phrase is found too. So the Buddha says to the monks in the first turning also that they ask this question. And also the Buddha teaches for this reason. So the Buddha has this motivation and his developed disciples ask questions to practice this motivation. So this motivation is not just appearing in the Mahayana. It was from the beginning of the scriptures this way of talking was pointed out as motivation. And so again, the first part of this chapter presents a conceptual, theoretical framework.

[24:09]

And at the end, it says that if you understand this, bodhisattvas who understand this are wise, with respect to the secrets of mind, thought, and consciousness. And he said, that's not the whole story. They also understand the emptiness of mind, thought, and consciousness. Then they're completely or thoroughly wise. So he puts the emptiness context at the end. After building this conceptual framework, he says they also understand that all these elements in the conceptual framework are empty. And understanding that they don't perceive any of this stuff. Because all these things, actually, all these things that we're talking about are actually conceptual frameworks.

[25:12]

So they don't actually perceive them. But they're there, not perceptible in emptiness. And mind, thought, and consciousness. Mind, in this text, mind is sikta, sikta. thoughts, immanence, and consciousness is vijnana. And citta in this is also understood to be alaya, vijnana, or adana, vijnana.

[26:15]

And they had this citta. And citta is like the support for all forms of mental life. And the laya now serves the same function. It really is the same. Mind. So mind is, of course, the basis. or the overall embracing of all mental phenomena. And then, manas means that thought is reflection or thinking. And there's two types of manas in a way. One type is just the simple function of mind being able to be aware of itself. of being aware of its own mentalness. And that function of mind having like an organ by which it can be aware of mental phenomena.

[27:29]

Mind is the basis of all mental phenomena, the source of all mental phenomena. They arise with it, it arises with that. It has the power or the faculty to be able to be aware of its own associated contents. And that reflective power is thought, in this case, manas. And that reflective power, what it actually is, is a moment of cognition. Which is a very kind of tricky idea, but that's... The idea is that the ability of mind to have like an organ power is that there was a previous moment of cognition. And that previous moment of cognition also serves a reflective activity. But there's also another aspect of this mental organ, which is that it's also this... It isn't specifically set

[28:40]

But when Asanga reads this text, he comes to say to us that this manas, this thought, also serves as the locus of defilement because when this organ arises with mind, it's associated with the belief in a self. the esteeming of a self, the confusion of a self, and the love of a self. So, there's a functional aspect of the organ of mind, and there's a defiling aspect of it. This chapter does not point out the defiling aspect, I'm just telling you that now. And then the third aspect of the third aspect of mind, which is called consciousness here, are the six senses. The six consciousnesses which operate in direct perception.

[29:46]

The five sense consciousnesses and mind consciousness. Mind consciousness which directly perceives things. And sense consciousness which... So these are the... Actually, eight consciousnesses. six, seven, eight. Manas is seven. Alaya is eight. And then you have this plus the mind consciousness. Those six. The eight consciousnesses. It doesn't say eight consciousnesses in here, but you can see them. Okay? So that's the basic structure of the basic conceptual structure here. The basic conceptual template for studying which is the basis for understanding the next part of the chapter, which is that these things, which are the conscious basis by which we're going to understand everything, including themselves, these consciousnesses are the basis for understanding that these consciousnesses are empty.

[30:59]

And in that understanding, we won't perceive these consciousnesses. Doesn't say they don't exist, just that we won't be able to find them once we can't find any conceptual apprehension of them. I was talking to a Jehovah Witness about two weeks ago. Yes. And she was discussing Adam and Eve, and the first sin was... when they took the bite of an apple, the apple tree that they were told not to take a bite into from God, and she said that sin started from becoming aware. It's this mental faculty that you're talking about where it becomes aware of the self.

[32:02]

So consciousness becomes aware of its self. How else would you know that? I think that consciousness was aware, but in some sense I would say maybe that consciousness was aware at the level of direct sense consciousness. in the Garden of Eden. They were perceiving colors and stuff like that, but they had no conceptual medium in their awareness. And in direct perception, in the realm of direct perception, we're barely aware. You know, we can, like, negotiate a garden very nicely. We can learn, you know, that... This fruit is poisonous and this one's not. But we're barely aware of the objects that we're aware of.

[33:10]

But we are aware, and we do relate to them. But when we have conceptual mediation, our awareness becomes much more conscious and clearer, I would say, and not ambiguous. In direct perception, the... the awareness is somewhat ambiguous because you're actually dealing with the actual richness of sensory life. When you look at something, you're looking at it, does something to it, and, of course, it does something to you. So in direct perception, actually, you can feel you're actually in touch with the richness of our life, and it's not so clear whether that it's So in order to be clearer about that, they had to separate themselves from the apple and separate themselves from each other and separate themselves from sex.

[34:14]

Actually, that's not correct. According to your witnesses. According to them, it was the awareness that was dismissed by taking a flat to the apple. I agree that it's awareness, but I think there was another awareness before that which is sort of, you know, what we say, it wasn't... Direct perception. It was direct perception, yeah. But otherwise they wouldn't have been able to find the apple. It would be no issue. They wouldn't have been able to bite it. And if they were told not to bite the apple, they wouldn't have known, but they sort of knew the apple was there. But if they bit it, they would be actually more separate from you. And then they have what's called usually objective knowledge, That usually means conceptual knowledge, where we actually know that that object's out there separate from us. But before that, the separation is not that clear. And really, there is no separation. But in direct perception, you don't really understand that there's no separation.

[35:17]

But you can't really... You don't really... There is separation. So your knowledge isn't really that firm. Or if you say, the image isn't... You don't have a sharp image of the apple. But when you bite the apple... And you have more... So it is, I agree with that thing, it's knowledge, but there is some awareness before that. It's just that it's not clear. And I want it to be clear. So there's also the story of Amoran psyche in Greek myth, right? Greek mythology of psyche getting together with love. And they get together, but they get together in the dark. So they're actually having contact and knowing that they're together. But she doesn't know, she's not clearly aware of who he is. But it's kind of ambiguous because it's in the dark. She doesn't know that he's a god. She doesn't know that he can fly. She doesn't know that he's Aphrodite's son. She doesn't know that he's really good looking. She doesn't know that stuff. She just knows that this is really important, this relationship.

[36:19]

It's a big thing. She can tell him from other people, but she doesn't really know. So if she puts a light on him, then she can be more sure. When you put some light on them, then that disturbs their relationship. So she gets thrown out of the garden. She gets thrown out of her own little nice garden of Eros's palace. You know, she gets thrown out of the palace and she loses him. So it's a similar story, but there is awareness before. Otherwise, there would be no life. So in some sense you could say that the Bible is actually telling something about human evolution at that point. It's a metaphor. It's poetry for the evolution of consciousness from direct sense perception to, I would say, conceptual cognition where we have clear images of things. But the problem is that when you have a clear image of something, it gets confused with the thing. And you think that the image is the thing.

[37:23]

That's wrong. It's not. But it's nice that you have a nice clear image now. But then you get kicked out of... The Garden of Eden is the garden of direct sense perception, in a way, which is very rich. Those are different tastes and different color and different smell. And now they're a different taste and different smell, but they're like talking to you, and you're talking to them. There's this kind of very intimate thing, which, of course, That's the way things are. And everybody you meet that way, too. The way they smell, the way they look. Of course, they can't talk yet because we need conceptual mediation in order to talk. So all the people you're not talking with but that you're just interacting with, it's very rich, very interactive, very ambiguous about who is who and what's what. But it's... the biological bliss, it's life.

[38:26]

It's actually the way life is. It's very interactive, and the world gives us life, and we give the world life. All the plants in the garden are born because of mental apprehension. And it's very ambiguous and kind of wonderful. And there's all kinds of possibilities. rather than just the one possibility of it being an apple that's bitten into. So basically it's the same thread. I see a common ground here. Between the stories that you were talking about and the Buddhist theory, which is this awareness is the cause of the suffering. Yeah, exactly. They're very close, and here we just have a conceptual theoretical picture, which gives you more information to look at, to make a little temple around around the biting into the apple and getting kicked out of Eden story.

[39:32]

It gives you some more psychological information about that process. But it's the same story, really. I mean, the same event is just when we get exiled from what it's like in the realm of direct perception. And then we try to get back to it. But you can get back to it. through a process of meditation. Yeah. Yes. I was thinking the instructions to have a meeting, but they had to have a meeting. It was kind of like before the apples, but it was... Say it again? The instructions to have a meeting, and I had a meeting. They had meaning. Yeah. Yeah, and actually, does anybody know, when you say, don't bite him, or you say, if you bite him, you get kicked out? He said, don't bite him. So, I guess God didn't want people to evolve into spiritual beings, according to that.

[40:43]

Pardon? Well, maybe he wanted to be the only one who knew anything. Yeah, this picture of God is maybe a picture of God who was the only one who knows anything. It's an omniscient one who's not going to have any successors. It's a test to see if you believe it or not. It's a test to see if you believe it or not. Well, I don't know, I'm not saying they didn't believe him, but just they... God told them not to, but the universe forced them to do it. If you look at the story of Amor and Psyche, there are various forces that pushed her to blow the Nicene. And I think the revolution is that it pushed beings to take this step.

[41:45]

And if God told them not to, that's kind of an interesting twist. I don't know if it's God who told him not to. God wrote the story. Well, they were going to eat up that tree of the knowledge of the good of evil next. It wasn't him. It's a matter of free will. It's a matter of free will. I read somewhere that he actually, he actually, in order for them to actually, he knew he was a man, he would need to actually, he can't really see us, but he'll still, he'll still, he'll still, I think another perspective on this is that before this happened, living beings were already serving the function of the universe being aware of itself.

[43:09]

But again, there wasn't a clear objective knowledge in the universe. So this special variety of knowledge called objective knowledge, but the object seems out there separate from the subject, doesn't arrive before this point. There's still the possibility of this type of knowledge, but it's not because in direct perception, you're actually in the realm of where things are really like still kind of mushy and soupy and alchemical. So the universe gains something when he has evolved to this level. It gains a new type of consciousness that you didn't have before in this neighborhood anymore. What's the object of the direct perception of mind consciousness, when mind consciousness has direct perception of thought?

[44:14]

Mind consciousness can have direct perception of the same things that our senses are aware of, and mind consciousness can also have direct perception of mental phenomena. In both cases without any conceptual mediation, because mind consciousness, the organ for mind consciousness is the same, is this manas, this thought. So the organ for chitta is manas, and among these six sense consciousnesses, one of the sense consciousnesses is the mind consciousness. The mind consciousnesses are not the same as the conditions for the sense consciousness. The conditions for sense consciousness are, the three main conditions are, the organ, the physical organ, the physical data, and the previous moment of consciousness.

[45:17]

The previous moment of consciousness is the immediate condition for the arising of the mind consciousness, or for the arising of sense consciousness. So if you have a consciousness, and also the consciousness, the sense consciousness, are named after the organ, not after the object. The sense consciousness, for example, the first sense consciousness that's usually listed is the eye consciousness rather than the color consciousness. So the conditions for the eye consciousness are the eye order, the subtle physical order, the gross physical data, which is electromagnetic radiation. And the previous moment of consciousness is associated with the three conditions for the arising of sense consciousness. With mind consciousness, conditions for the arising of that, the immediate condition is the same. It's the previous moment of consciousness. The object is not the object.

[46:22]

Even if the mind consciousness is aware of the object, the object's not the dominant condition. It's not the object consciousness. It doesn't have object consciousness. Because it determines, from inside, it determines what the object will be. And it has, excuse me, it does have object consciousness. I take it back. I thought it was the next type of consciousness. It does have it. But its organ is not a physical organ. Its organ is its mind organ. So its organ is the mind organ. It's the mind organ, the same as the other one, that the mind organ is the previous moment of consciousness. So its organ is the previous moment of consciousness, and its immediate condition is the previous moment of consciousness, and its object is the object which the previous consciousness had. The sense has received it,

[47:22]

that would bring that information, but also the concurrent sense consciousnesses which it arises with, it could also be aware of those. But it could also be aware of other mind consciousnesses, and it also can be aware of mental data that arises with it. Okay? That's a little bit about the basic structure in this chapter. The next big chunk is to talk about Alaya. Last winter, I spent quite a few sessions talking about the evolution of where Alaya came from, probably sort of the history of this concept. Again, this is a conceptual concept about where the concept of Alaya came from. So if you want to hear about that story, you can hear about it by listening to those tapes.

[48:34]

There's also a... Doesn't he have a reading list here? There's also a text on this reading list called The Potion of Eloquence. It's listed under hope. And the Ocean of Eloquence has a discussion, it's basically about, the main topic of the book is Alaya Vajrayana, as the history of how the concept arose, and Tsongkhapa, the Tibetan teacher Tsongkhapa's understanding of Alaya. So if you want to learn more about Alaya, if you want to learn a lot about Alaya, this is the book to start with. Now the guy, the author's name is, the author's name is Gareth Sharpe, no Sharpe, Sharpe, Gareth Sharpe.

[49:37]

It's listed on, it's on his radio. So I don't mind going over it again, but I spent several classes on it last week. We wouldn't, you know. I think it may be better for you just to consult that. Pardon? I think it's S-H-A-R-H-A-M. S-P-A-R-H-A-M. S-P-A-R-H-A-M. It's on the reading list under O, proportionally. Do you have a reading list? Yeah, okay. So anyway, it's a good book on Elia. There's a lot of other places, but that's one where I specialize in the topic. Okay, so we can say a little bit about Elia by reading the text.

[50:42]

Initially, in dependence upon two types of appropriation, the appropriation of the physical sense powers associated with the support, and the appropriation of predispositions which proliferate conventional designations with respect to signs, names, and concepts, the mind which has all the seeds develops, increases, and expands its operations. So this is talking about, this is a story about initially. Initially what? Well, initially, whatever type of sentient beings there may be in cyclic existence, with its six kinds of beings, in early Buddhism they had five, in Mahayana they have six. Whatever types of beings there may be of these six types, those manifest body and arise within a state of birth, such as egg-born, womb-born, moisture-born, and spontaneous-born.

[51:49]

So this is saying whatever kind of being are born, initially, at the beginning, they do so in dependence upon two types of apprehension, appropriation, and these appropriations happen through this ally of the young. In early Buddhism, they just had a type of citta, a type of consciousness, which they called birth consciousness. They just called it birth consciousness. But they didn't go into much detail about the nature of that birth consciousness. It's a lie. Yes, you said... Yeah, here it says, the appropriation of physical sense powers associated with the support. Do you know what is associated with the support? Do they mean like the body that would support the physical? Did you hear her question? She said, do you mean like a body?

[52:50]

Like support. It's a reasonable question, but my saying no points to the fact that that the body is a sixth sense organs. That's what the body is in Buddhism. So it's actually saying the body. All right. What's the support for that? Support for the body? No, for the sense organs. They are the body. What's the support? Mind. It's mind. So it's a lia. So here it says, initially, there's an appropriation of sense powers associated with support. At the beginning of birth, there's an appropriation of sense powers which are associated with the support. The support is a lia.

[53:53]

So initially, sense powers arise in dependence on mind. So they're saying the mind is a support for the arising of the actual functioning sense organs. That's the first type of appropriation, is actually... appropriation of sense organs is supported by the mind. So in some sense, it's the mind appropriating the sense organs, but then the body gets sense organs too. In other words, the body comes alive in dependence on the mind, and mind apprehends the sense organs. So the mind seems to almost be a condition for the sense organs. Yes, the mind is a condition for sense organs. Pre- or pre-existing? It doesn't pre-exist, but there have been minds before. But this mind, it isn't like the mind's floating around waiting for the sense organs. But because there has been mind, now mind and sense organs arise together.

[55:03]

And again, if you listen to those, if you read that book or listen to the tapes, originally they came up with this theory about a liar who explained... how consciousness could go on in states of very, very profound meditation or states of coma or states of, you know, I guess coma is a good example, states of deep unconsciousness. How did life go on? How did consciousness continue to exist? And they came up with the idea that consciousness can actually live in the sense organs. Even though it's not operating, it can live in the sense organs. which is not different, doesn't contradict early Buddhism, because consciousness arises out of the sense organs, which are always living in this field. Sense organs are always living in the field of... And they're always resonating with it. They're always interacting with it.

[56:06]

And if mind lives in the sense organs, rests in the sensitive part of the body, the life can go on. even though none of these other... So that's part of why they came up with this. But now they're saying at birth, it's not that the lie is sleeping in the sense organs because the person is coming alive now. You have this condition of some kind of materiality interacting with the environment. And based on having alaya as support, there's apprehension to get the sense consciousnesses activated. They activate the actual power. They're turned on. It's kind of like, you know, when you get a credit card, you call in, and they activate it. I'm not talking about that. We have another question.

[57:11]

Okay. I don't know if this has been covered earlier. You can tell me. Most of this has been covered earlier. Several sentences. I'm very tired. Well, it's mentioning alaya as the appropriated consciousness. Well, actually, it is. But actually, they have a different word in this text. They have a different word for the appropriated consciousness at birth. They call it Adana. Adana means appropriating. So at birth, in the sense of the lie, it's called Adana. After birth, it's called the lie of Vishnu. So one of the names for a lie is appropriating consciousness at the time of birth. Because it appropriates the sense consciousness. It activates and it turns them on. And then after that, After that, which I really like this part of the text, which says that after that it shares the destiny of the sensorics.

[58:16]

It shares the risk and the benefits of the sensorics. Sensors get trouble alive. It's a trouble alive. It's a trouble sensorics get. So this consciousness and the body then are closely allied from then on. One other little detail is that the body can deteriorate and disperse, and there's no causal continuity between this body and other bodies. This body disperses and doesn't make more bodies any more than the mountain makes more bodies. The mind, which was associated with the body, the body, it has a causal continuity to create further minds. So the minds you have in this life and the bodies you have in this life, as long as the body's collected and together with the alaya and so on, there's continuity for both.

[59:22]

But when the physical situation develops such that the physical elements disperse, that doesn't cause another body. But the mind does cause further minds. So there's a different continuity, process of continuity for mind and body. And that's why the mind is support for the birth of the body. This is what I was going to ask, but how does the mind cause further minds? That was just a side point. What did you say? How does what? How does the mind cause further minds? The conditions for the arising of a consciousness is a previous consciousness. The main conditions for the arising of consciousnesses are an organ power, which for sense consciousness is physical organs, and for mind consciousness is... And the mind organ is a previous state of cognition.

[60:23]

The just previous state of cognition is the mind organ. So the organ-like power of your mind is that consciousness is just deceased. And the other main condition for the arising of consciousness, the immediate condition, is also the immediately antecedent condition. So consciousness just before this consciousness is the cause of this consciousness. It's not the same consciousness, it's a different consciousness. But it is taught as a condition for this consciousness. And all the different schools agree on that point. In other words, consciousnesses don't come out of nowhere, they're conditioned by a previous consciousness. And they also need an organ. which is the previous consciousness, in the case of mind consciousness. In the case of consciousness, it's the sense consciousness, which has been activated by a previous mind consciousness.

[61:26]

So you have a previous mind consciousness, which is a condition for the sense consciousness, and you have a turned-on sense consciousness, which is dependent on a previous sense consciousness for mind consciousness. So you have these two living conditions, plus an object, And in some cases, the object is not, in the case of conceptual cognition, the object is not an external object. It's not really an important condition. The important condition is the predisposition to conceptual cognition, because it comes up with images from itself according to its own predispositions. Yes? Yes. physical elements disperse. Yes. And the conditions of the mind, when the next mind proceeds or... See? When the physical elements disperse, that... And they're not linked anymore, the mind, in the sense organs?

[62:30]

The mind and the sense organs are not linked anymore. That's, by the way, why we don't mind cremating people. Just burn the body. I want to know about how the mind that produces or is conditioned for further minds, how that works exactly. What's the physical illness of this person? The way I think, I'll start by saying, just to offer this for discussion, that it operates the same way that minds worked before. And some minds, and minds don't need physical... So if you lose a body, there can still be evolutions of minds. So... The body's been dispersed. The last consciousness at the point before it sort of got dissociated from the mind.

[63:35]

So the body-mind become dissociated. Nothing permanent here, right? So we have body-mind dissociated. The body's no longer got the sense organs. It's all falling apart. But you have now the last cognition associated with the body. Now, that cognition can be the antecedent condition for another state of consciousness. And that state of consciousness can't be a sense consciousness, because it actually could be a sense consciousness once. Maybe. Because it could be somewhat... It could be associated with sense because it could be associated... It's associated with the previous moment of cognition. The previous moment of cognition could have been a sense consciousness. So in that sense, it could still be connected to sense a little bit. But more likely, I would say, is that it's going to be a mind consciousness.

[64:40]

Its organ is going to be the previous moment of cognition. Its antecedent condition is going to be the previous moment of cognition. And its object is going to be something coming from itself, from its own predispositions. So conceptual cognition would be handy at that time because conceptual cognitions don't even need any objects. They can just refer to the causal continuity of imagination. So that could be the one right out there. Well, you got that? Well, then you can have another one and another one. And if the repertoire of this consciousness, this last consciousness that was associated with the body, concepts for practice, when this priest chooses to choose those concepts of practice to guide the mind, then there would be a causal continuity with that. So the mind could actually then, it doesn't last, but there could be this causal continuity of minds which aren't connected to it. And then, and a lie is there too, right?

[65:45]

So this is a causal, I just said the causal continuity and the resource of imagination is a lie. So you have a lie which has all this kind of, which has all these... Seeds for all the images, the seeds for all the images, plus predispositions for how the seeds are selected. And if he's a practitioner, there would be predispositions to select those kinds of seeds which would promote practice without a body. I would go on for some period of time until this alaya then apprehends another set of senses. apprehends the sense consciousness in which before a lie apprehends them, they're not turned on. But when it apprehends them, they become alive. And it becomes... gets settled into, joins this set of sense organs, and we have what we call birth of a sentient being.

[66:49]

Now, the sentient being could be quite developed, however, in some cases. So the sentient being could be bodhisattva. Not Buddha yet, but highly developed. And some of these consciousnesses, when at the moment of conception, they go, OK, here we go. I wondered if this tribe was a new understanding for you, because it seemed a few years ago. I remember you maybe incorrectly emphasizing that the consciousness will only exist with the body. Sort of in line with the question Roberta first asked, but this core was actually a body. Between body and body, there was no active mind. Does that seem different from before? That seems different from what you just said, maybe. It does, but I don't know if I exactly said that, but maybe I did, I don't know.

[67:51]

So this just feels new from things you've said before. With this body, you could have experiences where there's only four skandhas, right? However, you still have a body with sense organs that just as the sense organs are not operating. They're not always operating. and you could be happily meditating on the infinity of space or something, and your sensor would not be turned on. It wouldn't be functioning. However, you could come out of that trance and it would be turned back on. So there can be just four skandhas. That seems like not what I was asking. That seems separate from what I was asking. So I'm saying there can be just four skandhas. It's possible that the sense organs are dispersed and there's a causal continuity of four skandhas producing four skandhas producing four skandhas. A causal continuity that way. And that would be a story of process of rebirth.

[68:55]

Where there would be a causal continuity of consciousnesses. Buddha did not say the consciousness get carried over. from one birth to the other. He said that wasn't right. But he didn't say there wasn't a causal continuity because he said there was rebirth. And the karma of one life visits the next life. So this is a story about how there could be causal continuity from the death to the birth. Without saying the consciousness lasts. Because he doesn't want anything to last because then he'd get a self. And by the way, I just tell you that there's another big wave in this, in this, in a sense, this Yogacara tradition where they actually like stop talking about the life is not because they feel like it's, it's just too easily considered to be a self. But this is the first, this is the first phase of the yoga.

[69:59]

we're trying to become familiar with. And the next phase we'll get to later. I don't know when. So the first phase, the leaders of the first phase are Asanga and Vasubandhu. The leaders of the second phase are disciples of Asanga and Vasubandhu, Dignaga and Dharmakirti. So all these people are historical Indian sages and presented conceptual approaches to realizing emptiness and practicing the Bodhisattva way. They're all part of the Bodhisattva tradition. The latter two, which Asanga just says, he does debate a little bit, but he doesn't really like

[70:48]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_83.74