宗喀巴_三主要道英文版及解释-第20部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！

s　a　modern　interpretation　might　be　'a　car'。　So　then　if　we　take　'car'　as　the　starting　point　then：　A　car　is　made　up　of　all　its　ponents；　if　we　separate　out　its　ponents；　we　don't　find　something　that　we　can　point　to　as　'car'。　For　example　if　we　were　to　point　to　the　wheel　and　say　'this　is　the　car'；　or　look　at　the　exhaust　and　say　'this　is　the　car'　…　this　is　something　absurd。　So　then　when　we　put　all　the　parts　of　the　car　together；　we　designate　the　name　'car'　upon　the　certain　formation　of　those　parts　and　then　that　serves　as　the　basis　of　designation　of　the　label　'car'。

…five　aggregates　are　not　in　and　of　themselves　the　self；　we　have　to　clarify　this。　If　we　look　at　the　five　aggregates　…　is　the　self　the　form　aggregate？　or　the　feeling　aggregate？　…　and　so　forth　and　right　down　to　the　point　of　having　the　aggregate　of　consciousness。　So　here　then　the　biggest　doubt　es　with　regard　this　aggregate　of　consciousness　because　the　Svatantrika　Madhyamika　then　say　that　this　is　the　self；　this　is　the　autonomously　existing　self。　But　the　simple　negation　of　that　is　that　we　don't　talk　about　possessing　something　which　is　the　'I'　in　the　way　which　we　talk　about　possessing　something　which　is　a　consciousness。　For　example　we　can　easily　say　'my　consciousness'　or　'my　mind'　but　we　don't　say　'my　I'；　do　we？　So　how　can　the　thing　which　is　the　'I'　in　and　of　itself；　that　is　to　say；　the　consciousness；　be　possessed　by　something　which　is　other　than　it？　So　that　is　what　Rinpoche　was　saying　…　can　you　say　'my　I'　or　'my　self'；　not　as　in　'me；　myself'　but　rather　as　in　my　…　other　than　my　…　like　a　glass　…　'my　glass'；　'my　self'　kind　of　thing。　So　is　it　possible　to　say　that？　…　and　obviously　that　is　not　the　case；　and　the　antithesis　then　is　that　we　can　say　with　regard　to　consciousness；　'my　mind'　or　'my　consciousness'；　so　that　kind　of　negates　the　fact　that　the　consciousness　in　and　of　itself　is　the　possessor；　or　that　is　to　say；　the　'I'。

With　regard　objects　then　we've　looked　at　a　car；　but　let's　look　at　something　which　is　more　accessible　to　us　at　the　present　moment　…　if　we　look　at　this　building　and　in　particular　this　hall　which　we　are　now　gathered　in：　This　hall　exists；　we　are　enjoying　the　Dharma　teaching　within　this　hall；　but　if　we　were　to　say　'Where　is　the　hall？'　…　can　we　say　that　it　is　in　the　northern　wall；　the　eastern　wall；　the　southern　wall；　the　western　wall？　If　it　was；　let's　say；　in　the　eastern　wall　…　if　we　then　look　towards　that　wall；　we　could　say　'this　is　the　hall'　and　there　would　be　something　there　which　everybody　would　perceive　as　'the　hall'。　But　if　we　investigate　then；　if　we　look　at　that　wall；　we　find　it　is　a　posite　of　bricks　and　cement　and　wood　and　glass　and　so　forth；　there　is　nothing　there　screaming　out　'hall'　from　its　own　side。

So　through　these　kind　of　reasonings　we　can　e　to　understand　that　the　way　phenomena　exist　is　just　as　a　mere　verbal　designation；　or　as　a　concept；　a　name　which　is　applied　by　a　conceptual　mind　or　a　thought。　So　it　is　in　dependence　upon　these　reasonings　that　we　can　start　to　pass　through　the　gateway　into　the　correct　understanding　of　emptiness　or　the　correct　understanding　of　the　ultimate　nature　of　phenomena。　But　you　have　to　understand　that　this　is　just　the　beginning　…　we　are　just　introducing　those　initial　reasonings；　those　initial　contemplations　as　a　means　to　inspire　you　to　e　to　terms　with；　or　try　to　understand；　what　is　meant　by　'the　object　of　negation'；　and　then　through　that　to　try　to　get　into　the　understanding　of　the　way　that　phenomena　actually　exist。　Because　if　we　were　just　to　say　…　'Well；　we　can't　find　a　hall　in　this　place；　there　is　a　hall　but　we　can't　find　it　…　I've　realised　emptiness！'　…　then　that　would　be　something　that　is　quite　absurd　because　the　realisation　of　emptiness　is　something　extremely　difficult。　A　reason　for　that　is　that　past　masters；　for　example　Dignaga；　have　set　forth　their　various　tenets；　so　we　have　the　four　tenets　school　system　and　so　forth；　so　these　are　not　idiots；　these　are　individuals　who　knew　what　they　were　talking　about。　So　this　is　just　an　introduction　to　the　lines　of　reasoning　which　will　eventually；　if　one　pursues　them；　lead　one　to　a　correct　understanding。　It's　not　as　if　I've　said　'this　is　emptiness　and　you've　got　to　see　this'；　and　now　you've　got　it　because　I've　just　told　you　this　and　you　have　accepted　this。

The　union　of　the　two　realisations　of　dependent　arising　and　emptiness

So　then　returning　to　the　root　text；　it　reads：

　　　　One　who　sees　the　infallible　cause　and　effect
　　　　of　all　phenomena　in　Samsara　and　nirvana
　　　　and　destroys　all　false　perceptions
　　　　has　entered　the　path　that　pleases　the　Buddha。　

So　here　then　when　we　talk　about　'seeing　the　infallible　nature　of　cause　and　effect　of　all　phenomena　within　Samsara　and　nirvana'　…　'samsara'　then　refers　to　the　cycle　of　existence　within　which　one　is　bound　by　the　fetters　of　the　destructive　emotions　and　the　actions；　or　karma；　which　is　generated　thereby；　'nirvana'　here　then　refers　to　an　individual　who　has　destroyed　the　enemy　of　the　gross　destructive　emotions　but　not　perhaps　the　subtle　imprints；　and　has　achieved　the　lesser　nirvana　…　we　could　also　include　within　that　category　the　various　pure　lands　and　so　forth　…　so　all　of　these　experiences；　all　these　places；　e　about　through　the　infallible　nature　of　cause　and　effect。　'Cause　and　effect'　here　then　…　when　all　the　causes　are　gathered　for　a　result　it　is　very　difficult　to　stop　that　result　ing。　So　it　is　also　possible　to　remove　negative　causes；　that　is　to　say；　negative　karmas；　through　the　various　practices　which　are　set　forth　and　then　through　that　avert　such　a　drastic　event；　but　when　all　the　causes　and　conditions　are　in　place；　then　it　is　very　difficult　to　avert　such　an　effect。

So　with　regard　the　cycle　of　existence；　if　one　engages　or　encourages　the　play　of　the　destructive　emotions；　and　the　cause　of　Samsara；　that　is　to　say　the　truth　of　origin；　the　truth　of　the　cause　of　Samsara；　it　is　very　difficult　to　bring　about　an　end　to　the　cycle　of　existence。　And　with　regard　then　to　achieving　the　truth　of　final　cessation　…　if　one　is　an　individual　who　is　fully　qualified　in　meditating　upon　the　ultimate　nature　of　phenomena；　that　is　to　say；　the　empty　nature　of　phenomena；　and　then　through　that　generates　the　truth　of　the　path；　then　it　will　be　very　difficult　to　stop　the　truth　of　that　…　which　is　the　truth　of　cessation。　So　then　understanding　the　mode　of　the　true　nature　of　phenomena　destroys　all　false　perceptions。　So　here　'false　perceptions'　refers　to　grasping　at　objects　as　existing　as　something　which　they　aren't；　and　then　through　removing　that；　generating　the　wisdom　which　cognises　that　as　something　other；　that　is　to　say；　as　naturally　empty　of　that　false　mode　of　existence。　Then　that　individual　is　one　who　is　said　to　have　entered　the　path　that　pleases　the　Enlightened　One；　or　the　Buddha。

The　next　stanza　reads：

　　　　Appearances　are　infallible　dependent　origination；
　　　　voidness　is　free　of　assertions。
　　　　As　long　as　these　two　understandings　are　seen　as　separate；
　　　　one　has　not　yet　realised　the　intent　of　the　Buddha。　

So　here　then　there　are　two　understandings　…　first　of　all　that　appearances　（whatever　appears　to　our　five　senses）　are　dependently　originated；　they　have　arisen　in　dependence　upon　something　other　than　them；　and　then　the　voidness；　or　the　empty　nature；　of　that　object。　If　they　are　seen　as　something　lacking　a　single　entity；　that　is　to　say；　lacking　a　single　unity；　then　one　is　perceiving　them　in　a　wrong　fashion；　because　these　two　（what　is　written　here　as）　two　ways　of　existing　of　phenomena　are　in　actuality　one　entity。　So　then　seeing　them　as　other　that　is　not　the　intent　of　the　Buddha；　so　whilst　one　is　seeing　them　in　such　a　way　one　has　not；　as　the　text　says；　realised　the　intent　of　the　Enlightened　One。

The　next　stanza　reads：

　　　　When　these　two　realisations　are　simultaneous　and　concurrent；
　　　　from　a　mere　sight　of　infallible　dependent　origination
　　　　es　certain　knowledge　that　pletely　destroys　all　modes　of　mental　grasping。
　　　　At　that　time；　the　analysis　of　the　profound　view　is　plete。

So　here　then　when　one　has　these　two　realisations　of　dependent　arising　and　emptiness　arising　simultaneously　within　one's　mind　…　from　just　seeing　the　sight；　as　it　is　said　here；　of　infallible　dependent　arising　…　through　cognising　the　emptiness　at　the　same　time　as　that　es　the　'certain　knowledge'　…　'certain'　with　regard　to　the　actual　mode　of　phenomena；　and　then　through　that　understanding　of　the　correct　or　the　true　way　or　natural　way　of　existence　es　the　negation；　or　the　removal；　of　the　grasping　onto　autonomous　existence；　and　then　through　this　negation；　one　arrives　at　the　state　where　the　basis　for　the　destructive　emotions　has　been　destroyed；　so　as　the　text　says　'　es　certain　knowledge　that　pletely　destroys　all　modes　of　mental　grasping'。　So　at　that　time　then；　one's　analysis　of　the　profound　view；　that　is　to　say；　the　view　of　emptiness；　is　plete。

So　the　next　stanza　reads：

　　　　Appearances　clear　away　the　extreme　of　existence；
　　　　voidness　clears　away　the　extreme　of　non…existence。
　　　　When　you　understand　the　arising　of　cause　and　effect　from　the　viewpoint　of　voidness；
　　　　you　are　not　captivated　by　either　extreme　view。

So　here　then　it's　a　rather　unique　presentation　because　if　we　look　below　the　Prasangika　Madhyamika　philosophical　school　we　find　that　the　majority　of　the　other　schools　us