I'm going to discuss with you the basic awareness of the Soto Rin tradition, and I've been listening to your expressions, many of you have expressed to me your intention for this practice period and your basic intention in life, your basic faith and practice, and in the morning service

[01:04]

a couple of days we've chanted Chapter 5 from the scripture called the Samyama Chandra Sutra. This scripture, this sutra, offers many things, one of the things it offers in Chapter 7,

[02:11]

it offers a little overview of the different types of teachings that appeared in India up to that time, so if you look in Chapter 7 of the Powers translation, the chapter which is called the questions of Maitreya, the questions of Parmartha Samyakata, there is a section in there where the three wheels of dharma are discussed, the three turnings of the dharma

[03:12]

wheel. The name of what is traditionally considered to be the first discourse that the Buddha the name of it is setting the dharma wheel in motion, the turning of the dharma wheel. So the type of teachings that happened at that time and for quite a while after that, are called the first turning, and then the second turning is based on Prajnaparamita

[04:17]

literature, scriptures like the Heart Sutra, and then the third turning of the dharma is scriptures like the Sangha Nirmachana Sutra, which are based on the second turning, but kind of recover the teachings of the first turning. Because during the process of the second turning, most of the conceptual approaches which the Buddha offered in the first turning are refuted in the second turning. So the Buddha offered to human beings, offered conceptual approaches to understanding dharma

[05:22]

and achieving freedom in the first turning, a wonderful system of analysis and practices to realize the nature of things, but these conceptual approaches are overthrown in the second turning. So if you read the Heart Sutra, you notice that almost all the major teachings of the first turning, following the truths and so on, are said to be non-existent in the context of the ultimate truth. But in the third turning, a conceptual approach is offered based on a non-conceptual ultimate

[06:24]

truth of emptiness. And I kind of would like to go through those different wheels with you during this retreat. But I think I'd like to start by looking at Chapter 5, which is this third type of teaching, the third level of Buddhist teaching. And the question asked at the beginning is by the Bodhisattva Vishalamartin, and he asks the Buddha, the Bhagavan, when you say that bodhisattvas are wise with respect to the secrets of mind, thought and consciousness, Bhagavan, just how high are bodhisattvas wise

[07:38]

with respect to the secrets of mind, thought and consciousness? But what reason does the Tathagata designate Bodhisattva as wise with respect to the secrets of mind, thought, and consciousness? Mind, thought, and consciousness.

[08:52]

And these probably can be put in correspondence with Sanskrit and Chinese. Sanskrit, for here, you can put under mind, citta, under thought you can put manas, and under consciousness you can put jñāna, and in Chinese it's kind of like this. So, mind, thought, consciousness, and jñāna, and jñāna, [...]

[09:59]

jñāna, jñāna, jñāna. So the Buddha commends Vishalimoto, Bodhisattva, saying in his asking this question, in order to benefit many beings, bring happiness to many beings, offer sympathy for the world, and for the sake of the welfare, benefit and happiness of many beings, including gods and humans." So he says, your intention in asking this question is good, so please listen and I will describe to you how Bodhisattvas are wise with respect to mind consciousness. He starts off by saying that whatever kind of beings there are, living beings, however

[11:15]

they are born, that initially in dependence on two types of appropriation, the appropriation of physical sense powers associated with support, and appropriation of predispositions which proliferate conventional designations with respect to signs, names, and concepts, the mind which has all seeds, writings, and develops, increases, and expands its operations. Although there's two types of appropriation exist in the form realm, appropriation is not two-fold in the formless realm. Abhishali Mata consciousness is also called appropriating consciousness because it holds

[12:22]

and appropriates the body in that way. It is also called the basis consciousness because there is the same establishment and abiding within those bodies, thus they are wholly connected and thoroughly connected. It is called mind because it collects and accumulates forms, sounds, smells, tastes, and tangible objects. So, the Buddha is saying that initially, when beings are born, this birth is in dependence on two types of appropriation, appropriation of sense powers, sense capacities, and appropriation

[13:34]

of predispositions, predispositions which proliferate conventional designations with respect to signs, names, and concepts. And this initial appropriation is called appropriating consciousness, or Adana Vijnana. And then it says, it is also called basis consciousness because it has the same establishment and abiding as the bodies, it has the same establishment and abiding as the sense powers.

[14:39]

And that basis consciousness here is a translation of what we call Alaya Vijnana. So, Alaya Vijnana, it says in this chapter, has the same establishment and abiding as the body. What was the other Sanskrit word? A-D-N-A A-D-A-N-A Adana Vijnana And is that different from Alaya? It's sort of, it's like Alaya in some sense, at the first moment of connection with the sense powers. And it says now that Alaya is a Vijnana, and it's a Vijnana partly because it's connected

[15:46]

to these sense powers. But then it also says that Alaya is mind because it accumulates all the sounds and so on and so forth. So it's a Vijnana, it's a particular type of discriminating consciousness, it's called a Vijnana but it's also called mind. So in this chapter, when it says mind, from now on, it's actually talking about Alaya Vijnana. Does it mean that these predispositions are in contact with the sense powers at the moment of birth? No. Right. Predispositions come in contact with sense powers at the moment of conception, the moment

[16:49]

of birth. That's what it's saying. Yes. And that is birth. So does that mean mind equals consciousness, in other words? No, not quite, because there's a variety, there's six other varieties of Vijnana that are discussed in this chapter. So in one sense, this mind, consciousness and intellect sometimes actually, it doesn't really clearly state in this chapter, but this chapter is the basis for a clear statement that this chapter is actually putting out eight Vijnanas. So Vijnanas can actually apply to five sense consciousnesses and mind consciousness, that's

[17:53]

six, and that's the traditional six consciousnesses of earlier Buddhism, that's six Vijnanas. And now we're adding an eighth, called Alaya, and we're also adding a seventh, which is Vijnanas. But this sutra doesn't articulate it that way. And you'll be receiving a, you can have a reading list, and on the reading list there is a text which is on reserve in the library, written by, or composed by, or attributed to the Bodhisattva Sangha, and it's called the Mahayana Sangraha, or the summary of the Mahayana. And in that text, he presents his understanding of this sutra.

[18:54]

And part of his understanding of the sutra is that the sutra is espousing an eighth consciousness doctrine of mind. Yes? Could you clarify a little about the difference between mind and consciousness? Well, mind is, in some sense, more just the totally embracing and holding, and Vijnana is more the discriminating, and Manas is more like thinking about, roughly speaking. And Alaya, the storehouse, the basis consciousness, is called Vijnana, and also called mind in this chapter.

[19:57]

Whereas we're not calling the sense consciousnesses mind. So I'll go into more detail about this, but part of the implication here is that these sense consciousnesses, it says in Sutra 2, these sense consciousnesses in a given moment may, one of them may be there, none of them may be there, or five of them may be there. If there's one, then there's one other, if there's one sense consciousness, the sutra says, then there's at least one other sense consciousness. And what's that other sense consciousness? Mind consciousness. But not the Alaya? Yes? Is that the thing with the Manas? So I was just trying to, again, the difference between mind and Vijnanas.

[21:07]

The Vijnanas are, they're evolving and transforming, and they are not necessarily, well the five sense consciousnesses are not always present, and the one, there's zero to five of them, but if there is one, then there's also, mind consciousness is also there. But part of what's being said here is that as long as there's a body, as long as there's sense consciousnesses, excuse me, as long as there's sense organs, and there's something which has the same thorough establishment as the sense organs, and that is Alaya. So Alaya is actually the consciousness which is present with every moment of animate body.

[22:08]

When there's a body with functioning sense organs, Alaya is there. That's what Sutra says, right? It's thoroughly connected to the sense powers, so it's thoroughly connected to the body. And Sutra doesn't say this, but if you take Alaya away, the body dies. The sense organs are not animate. That's why, that goes with, as you say, the birth being when there is appropriation of the sense organs and then an abiding in them. The appropriation and the abiding in the sense organs is birth. So as long as, throughout a living being, Alaya is always there. So in that sense, mind is always there.

[23:10]

In each moment of life there's mind. But the others, the other Vijnanas may or may not be present. That's what, I see that implication essentially. And so, I was thinking now, so that's also somewhat the difference between mind and consciousness. In some sense consciousness, also you might say, consciousness is intentional, but mind is not necessarily intentional. In other words, Alaya is not necessarily intentional, but the Vijnanas are. So, I have on the push here, I'll listen to the questions, but I might just give you this little history on Alaya

[24:16]

instead of answering the questions. Yes? Could you distinguish the difference between 6 and 7, between Manas and that last sense consciousness, which is mind? Could I distinguish between Manas? Yes, between Manas and, you said Manas was 7, but that's 6. The 6th is mind consciousness. Right. Do you want to distinguish between mind consciousness and Manas? Or is that the difference you were just speaking of? No, I don't think I did necessarily speak of that. So, it says, I think in the sutra it says, for example, if there's a an eye consciousness, the consciousnesses, the sense consciousnesses are named after the organ, if there's an eye consciousness, then accompanying that eye consciousness will be a mind consciousness.

[25:21]

So, accompanying the Chakshi Vijnana, there's a Mano Vijnana. Mano Vijnana is mind consciousness. If there's an ear consciousness, it will be accompanied by a mind consciousness. What does a mind consciousness do? It apprehends the sense, the object that's involved in the sense consciousness. It apprehends it as a mind object version of the sense consciousness. Could you repeat that? The Mano Vijnana, for example, if there's a sense consciousness of color, there is a consciousness of the color, like blue, and accompanying that sense consciousness of blue is a mind consciousness which knows it's blue. It's coarse blue.

[26:23]

And part of what this is saying is that the predisposition to call it coarse blue is the alaya. So, mind consciousness can use the alaya because the alaya offers the predisposition to its conventional designation of signs, names, and concepts. And then Manas, what's Manas doing here? Manas has two basic functions. One function, which is absolutely necessary for this whole thing to work, is what's called the immediate antecedent condition the immediate antecedent condition

[27:32]

for mind consciousness for mind consciousness to be able to apprehend and make the sense consciousness into a mind object it needs a mind organ and Manas partly serves as mind organ antecedents just prior Samanantaya Pratyaya the immediately antecedent of just also sometimes called the just-deceased sense consciousness serves as an organ for the present mind consciousness Another thing that Manas serves which is not specified clearly in this chapter but which a Sangha proposes is that another function of Manas

[28:34]

is what's called Krishna Manas which is the defiling way of thinking which is to imagine a self so the the arising of what you'll see in the next chapter called the imputational character the manifesting of that of that idea of an essence or a self is part of what that's one of the main functions of Manas that's the second consciousness that's the second function one is one is served as an organ just like for a sense consciousness for a sense consciousness to arise it depends on an organ and an object for example like sight consciousness or eye consciousness eye consciousness arises in dependence

[29:36]

on the organ of sight the eye and some kind of electromagnetic radiation when electromagnetic radiation interacts with the sense organ that interaction is a basis for the arising and awareness of the color so the consciousness depends on the organ mind consciousness depends on the organ too and an object it depends on mind objects which are concepts it depends on the organ and the organ is called Manas and that organ is just previous, just deceased and just antecedent mind consciousness is an organ for the present consciousness just deceased just deceased Manas was the object

[30:36]

that electromagnetic radiation electromagnetic radiation is like the type of radiation which we interpret as color that's the electromagnetic radiation which is the field or the support for the functioning of a sense power called sight sight needs sight depends on or is supported by electromagnetic radiation and then then a consciousness can arise which would know that electromagnetic radiation a sight consciousness and where is Manas? where is Manas? well Manas will be there when we have then the arising of another consciousness which is called mind consciousness which is one of those in a sense

[31:39]

maybe I should write six over here the sixth sense consciousness is really the sense consciousness of mind objects and mind objects will be concepts names and they'll depend on signs so and in a way Manas is working together with the arising of Mano which we now adopt to mind consciousness which accompanies all the sense consciousnesses its organ is Manas so the mind consciousness which functions with sense consciousnesses so that there can be mind consciousness of the sense data its organ is Manas which is in the system of the sutra the system which is derived from the sutra is the seventh consciousness

[32:40]

so the sixth consciousness is mind consciousness and the seventh consciousness is the organ for the sixth consciousness but it is also the locus of illusion it's a locus it takes the rap for projecting the idea of self upon phenomena and what is it separate from alaya being storehouse for other predispositions so this is a separate predisposition sense of self the idea of the sense of self will be coming from alaya so although Manas is the locus of the egocentric view which takes the rap it is also gets the idea from alaya

[33:41]

because alaya when the predispositions got associated with the body one of the predispositions was towards a conventional designation called self gets stuck in Manas that piece of it gets stuck in Manas no Manas is the thinking about Manas brings this this idea of self into thinking Manas activates it that's part of it but in one sense a condition for the arising of any state of cognition one condition for it is that the previous state of cognition

[34:42]

is ceased that's a condition for the arising of the present one and that is the case of anyone all arising everything that arises depends on the condition that what was there before ceased but in this particular case we're saying that the function of mind to have an organ like function is actually that the previous sense consciousness has ceased that is the function the organ function for the present state of mind consciousness but it isn't the same for the sense consciousness we don't say that organ for the sense consciousness is the previously ceased sense consciousness organs for the sense consciousness are physical organs but the organ for the mind consciousness is a deceased sense consciousness

[35:45]

in other words organ for mind consciousness is not a physical thing it's a mental thing a mental organ, and this same organ also has a dual, has this other function of being the locus of self-centeredness, but the idea of self-centeredness is derived from a lie, which at the moment of birth, there is the apprehension of the predispositions towards conventional designations in terms of signs, names, and concepts. So a lie and karma, sometimes I've talked about as the same thing. I've never been able to really understand that, but as you're speaking, I see that the predispositions, another way of saying that is karma. In the, one of the scriptures, one of the treatises that's derived from this scripture

[36:58]

is written by a sangha, which I just told you about, Mahayana Sangraha, summary of Mahayana. Another very important treatise which is derived from this sutra is called the Thirty Verses on Mind Only, and there's a little book on that, which is transcription of talks I gave on that scripture, on that treatise. And in that treatise, it refers to alaya as the resultant. So alaya is not karma, alaya is karmic result. Alaya is karmic result. So as a result of karma, when there's a certain physical situation, then there is, and there is an apprehension or appropriation of that physical situation by a karmic result,

[38:05]

by a state of consciousness, which is a karmic result, becomes associated with a body, that's when alaya gets hooked into a body, and then there's a birth, and the birth comes with karmic results. All the predispositions from past action come with that consciousness. And then those predispositions, which are karmic results, get associated with sense organs. So as a sense organ is operating, it's mixed in with these results of past time. Now, I think maybe it would be good, rather than just pick these questions, if you can remember your questions, can we just sort of go through and give you a brief history of alaya as you're on it? Can I ask a different question? Pardon? Can I ask a different question? I'm wondering, for me, I'd like a little more faith in the value of the Yogacara school.

[39:07]

Could you explain how it's benefited you to know more about the Thirteenth Enigma? Well, let me just say, number one is that the Bodhisattva asked this question about mind, consciousness, and intellect. And the Buddha tells us that this Bodhisattva asked this question about a concern for the welfare of all beings. And I think he said that because one might wonder, what is being wise about the secrets of mind, consciousness, and intellect? What's beneficial about that? One thing to say is that this describes how people, this teaching describes how people are not wise. It shows how alaya is actually, because we're involved with alaya, how we can't see reality.

[40:13]

So, this teaching kind of describes how it is that the Dharma is obscured to us. And it also talks about how by studying how the Dharma is obscured to us, the obscuration is removed and we can see the Dharma. That's basically what it's about. It's showing how the vision arises, and how by studying it is reversed, and how alaya then is actually eliminated eventually. So there is no alaya after alaya. There is no pre-disposition. But if we study it with a diluted faculty, if we study it with a faculty that's already spoiled, then how can you study the process of delusion as a deluded process? Well, with considerable difficulty.

[41:24]

Which then means in order to continue with a difficult project, you have to practice patience, and you have to have quite a bit of diligence. Diligence doesn't mean you just work hard, it means somehow studying has to be enjoyable. Because diligence has to do with, the root of it has to do with studying something, it has to do with attention to something that's delightful, that's something that's tasty. And then, also we have to practice the precepts. Deluded people have to practice the precepts. Now of course they practice the precepts with a deluded mind, but still practicing the precepts with a deluded mind, you're more successful at studying the deluded process if you don't

[42:28]

practice the precepts. It's still difficult, but you have a chance. And also practicing generosity. And then also practicing concentration, wherein we kind of take a break from our process of delusion, take a little vacation, and calm down. Because we're not actually working on our delusion process so much when we're practicing tranquility. So, for a deluded being to study the process of delusion, we need to practice generosity, precepts, patience, diligence, and concentration. So, by practicing lots of kindness and patience and gentleness with a deluded being, the deluded being has the chance, the opportunity, to keep studying the process of delusion until one becomes clearer and clearer about the process of delusion. So the delusion starts to, in some sense, clear up.

[43:33]

And more and more, as I said the other day, you more and more become suspicious that what you think is true is not, and more and more open to what you think is not true, or what seems really different from what you think might be true. And you get more and more used to that by doing these other practices. And then, also related to Walker's question, I was generally speaking, as I'm practicing the right faith, my basic stance as I'm walking around and sitting around and lying around and standing around, my basic thing is I'm standing around with all of you, and all of

[44:40]

you are supporting me, and I'm supporting all of you, and I'm standing around and walking around and sitting around with all the Buddhas, they're practicing with me, and they're practicing with you, and I'm practicing with them. That's my basic situation. And then I just happen to notice, while I'm standing around, that there's this little ocean that I'm in the middle of, and it's an ocean of teachings. And there's all these stories of these inspired beings who have lived in this ocean in the past, and they've authored various messages to us. And so I think maybe I should study this stuff, like all of it. Like every aspect of it.

[45:46]

And I might be studying part of it and say, you know, I think this part of the ocean is actually kind of an illusion. It's not real. The way it looks there is not actually the Dharma. But I have to look at every single thing to ascertain what it is. In the meantime, in order to continue to study, I need to constantly be refueling, you know, re-contacting where the support's coming from. And then I go look at the ocean again. So lately I've been looking at the Sangha Yama Chana Sutra, and there's many reasons why I've been looking at that. Many causes and conditions have led me to sort of looking at this and talking with you about it. And another thing I thought of saying the other day which comes to my mind is that,

[46:56]

since I was a girl I've been circling around in rings around the ancient tower. I don't know how many times I've gone around or how many times I'll have to go around or whether I'll ever complete this journey, but I intend to. And so now I'm circling around the Sangha Yama Chana Sutra, kept aside. I've heard about alaya. So now I'm circling around alaya. What is alaya? What is it? Yes? It's an alaya question. Okay. Later in the sutra, earlier you said alaya is the consciousness present with every moment of an animate body. That's what this is saying. Because it says right there.

[47:57]

It's thoroughly connected to the body. Later in the sutra it says the mind, something about the mind that is contemplated by any mind. Is that referring to alaya? You know, I was thinking about that and I'd like to postpone getting into that because if I start getting into it, it's going to be a billion questions. So it's not a simple yes or no? Not really. But I am getting into how to relate this to that. So the sutra is anyway saying... Huh? Pardon? I have a quick question. The sutra is saying that alaya is... I like the way clearly says it. It says...

[48:58]

It says... Oh yeah. Clearly says... And down below it says... Oh yeah.

[50:02]

And the other translation says... consciousness because this consciousness joins itself to and lies hidden in the body in common security and risk. Now I think that is... Do I have any brackets? Anyway, I like this. In common security and risk. Alaya is like hidden in your body. And alaya has this nice little home in your body. But also alaya has the same risks as your body. Your body has the same risks as alaya. Alaya goes, your body goes. Your body goes, alaya goes. Also, your body has the security of having alaya. Alaya keeps it alive. Alaya has the security of your body. So there is this symbiosis between this consciousness and alaya.

[51:06]

I mean, consciousness and alaya. One short question, yeah? I was wondering where the part of the, if one can call it, mind that perceives or the true nature of reality sits in this diagram. In all this configuration, where does the part that perceives the true nature of reality sit? Where does it sit? Yeah, where does it dance with this? If I had to pick one part, I guess I would pick the sixth consciousness. Simple mind consciousness. But this mind consciousness then would have to be kind of like, give a break from manas in order to see. So manas and alaya are overpowering our simple mental consciousness.

[52:14]

So it's always operating under their influence. So it can't see. Manas can be purified. Hm? Manas can be purified. I hadn't heard about that. So anyway, a little history, a very brief history is that in Indian religious thought, prior to Buddhism even, but also prior to this emergence of this third turning, had two big concerns that were very influential in the formation of this, the formation and the appearance of this teaching. One is the idea of karma, which is kind of the most Indian religions kind of accepted karma,

[53:32]

which means karma causation. Not just the idea of action, but it refers to the entire net of complex causes and conditions, wherein a particular action or set of actions is held to result in a particular sequence of results. So this is perhaps the most influential of all culturally received ideas that influences the appearance of the alaya-vijnana teaching in the Buddhist tradition. But there's another important pre-classical Indian idea, and that is the idea of a unifying ultimate. And this is also something in the culture

[54:42]

where these inspired Buddhist practitioners were living, that probably was a condition for their inspiration to come up with this teaching. So in one sense, they say, in a tradition sense, these people who developed this teaching, they were like, this was revelation to them. They experienced this as revelation, divine revelation, through the power of the Buddha. But divine revelation sometimes also happens in the cultural context. And in terms of cultural context, before this revelation of this teaching occurred, the teaching of these sense-consciousnesses and also the teaching in the sutra called mind-only teaching, which is also said to be a divine revelation, that's part of the cultural context for it.

[55:45]

Karma, the notion of karma, has actions and how they have results, and that you have a unifying ultimate. In the Yogacara Buddhi, which is also a Yogacara text, the first meaning that's offered about live vijnana is related to a phenomena called nirodha-samapati. Nirodha means cessation, and samapati means attainment and absorption.

[56:51]

It is the highest yogic trance. We consider it the lowest yogic trance. It's a state wherein, when the yogi enters, like if they entered right now, into that state, they might come out of that absorption perhaps even a week later, and they would feel when they came out that it was the next moment. They wouldn't have thought that they'd been away even for a moment. Sometimes if you were in a class and you doze off and then you wake up again, you might feel like, oh, I dozed off, I missed something. But that's partly because part of the time you were dozing you were still somewhat conscious.

[58:02]

You weren't clear about what was going on, but you felt like something was going on. So when you wake up you wouldn't have felt like, it's just the next moment. If you were clear while you were sleeping and you went into deeper and deeper parts of your dozing, in the very deepest part of your dozing you would approach this state of this nirodha-samapati. And as you went into that and came out of that, you would feel, even though it might last for a few minutes, you would feel like it was the next moment. Most people are not that clear since then. But the yogis actually, in order to get into state, they're very clear about it. The lights are on, the world's happening, now it's gone, and it comes back on, and they really feel like nothing happened between them. And physiologically, psychophysically almost nothing did happen on its own. It's just barely alive, and somewhat dangerous. So the first meaning of laya is the sense that what thought about happened

[59:10]

is that the consciousness, during that phase, consciousness was just lying upon the sense organs. Consciousness was just laid down upon and stuck to the sense consciousness. It was hidden in and had the security of the sense consciousness. So the sense consciousness kept consciousness going and consciousness kept the sense consciousness going. If you went into this trance in a sense, and the laya went away, the organs would die. So that's the first, in terms of the evolution of it, in some sense, that's the first meaning of laya. It's kind of a special, narrow event to propose that there's some consciousness which survives this very deep trance,

[60:17]

and survives by basically being very close to, and not hardly activated at all, above just kind of sleeping or hibernating in the sense consciousness. So there's no object. There's never any object in a laya, actually. A laya doesn't have... the objects are not known in a laya. Are you saying it's a laya that's lying down? A laya is lying down in the sense consciousnesses. Whose sense consciousness? Hm? Their own sense consciousness, or someone else's? Actually, I think with sense consciousness lying down in the sense organs. Sense organs. The sense consciousnesses are not operating. Right. Note, this state of trance is something that comes after you've gone through states of trance where there's no sense consciousnesses.

[61:20]

So we have these, what we call, formless trances, where, that's why it says here earlier, it says that the two types of appropriation exist in the form realm. The appropriation is not twofold in the formless realm. So in the formless trances, there's not a twofold appropriation, because there's not appropriation of the sense organs to be used for sense consciousnesses. In the formless realms, the mind isn't using... the mind is connected to the body, but it's not apprehending the sense consciousnesses. There's no sense consciousness in the formless realms, there's no sensory consciousness in the formless realms. The highest level of trance in the formless realms is this trance.

[62:24]

It's very... it's also called... this same state of trance is also called asamyika samadhi, which means absorption in unconsciousness, or no perception. It's got the same name. The difference between those two names is that nirodha samadhi is the trance of someone who understands that this state of mental eternal is... they don't think that this is nirvana. People who think it's nirvana, the name of the trance has a different name, it's called asamyika nirodha. Are you... No, asamyika samadhi. So I'm just saying that the first idea here in the development of alaya-vijnana is to accomplish continuing life through this trance state.

[63:35]

Yes. Ready for the next one? Next one. I was just thinking of somebody who is basically dead, they're in some kind of coma or something like that, but their body is there reliably hidden in the organs and just keeping them going. I mean, it's a different... It reminded me of something like that. Is that what's happening there? Yes, but that's not the same as this state. In a person who's in a coma, there's more activity than in this trance. There's more than in this trance. They can hear, actually, yeah. They don't usually come out of those comas and feel like they're in the next moment. The next time they went in. They sometimes are surprised that it's been months, but they usually have some sense of something... There was something between there and there, a little bit,

[64:42]

especially if it was months. If it was just a couple of days, sometimes they might be so suppressed, they feel like it's actually just... Like it was right after the car accident or something, or right after... You know. Did they score the touchdown? But it would be... In those states, the lio is still operating very nicely. That's why we... There's some accord with the suture when we take care of people that are in comas. Because... The same thing that gives rise to our current active life, that same basic consciousness is operating in them. They have also the predispositions are there for them to be delivered to, if they were to come out. Yes? Hearing this talk about this type of a state,

[65:43]

I just wonder why one would strive for that. It seems like when you're in that state, you can't really be of much help as a bodhisattva to people because you're in some trance. I don't understand the value of striving for this. Oh. Well, it's kind of getting over a little bit to Catherine's question, but I'll just briefly say that having the ability to attain that level of concentration is extremely useful in developing wisdom. If you can get that concentrated, and then you come out of that trance and start studying wisdom teachings, you would go very deeply, very forever. Then, with the aid of that concentration and the wisdom which arises out of bringing that concentration to the teachings, then you take the wisdom which arises from that study in that state of concentration, and then you go back into the concentration with that wisdom.

[66:46]

And in that state of concentration, that wisdom just goes right down into your sense organs. And your sense organs are wisdom transformed. You have removed the predispositions by the wisdom practice, and then the wisdom settles down into the concentration in which there's no disturbance around the sense organs anymore, so that the body is totally immersed in this wisdom. So the concentration promotes wisdom, and then once you attain it, if you go back into the concentration, it just drops right down into your body. But we don't attain that state just for that state. We don't attain that state just for that state. It's the asamya gandharva, the smoke. To think that that state would be the case. And the reason why some people would like to do that is they don't particularly care about helping other people.

[67:48]

They just want to be very, very blissful. Doesn't that sound... Huh? It is the highest possible mundane bliss. There's no higher mundane bliss than that state. Is that the Eighth Jhana? It is like the most pure heroin. It is worldly composure and joy and bliss. It is the highest. There's no higher. However, it's impermanent. And when you come out of it, if you didn't go in wise and you come out, you'll be grumpier than when you went in. It's like heroin. If you go into heroin unwise and you come out, you find things very irritating, and you want to get some relaxation again. Even if things aren't that bad, you still know these could be a lot better than this.

[68:49]

So you're drawn back into that. It is a bliss beyond the other world of bliss. However, it is impermanent. If you know it's impermanent, then it's called neurodysmopathy. Then it's like there's some wisdom in it. Ready for the next level of lie-up before the 19 questions? Except for the people who have their hand raised. Should I call them or not? Oh, too bad. This is now the next step. It's a slight expansion of the meaning of the word lie-up. And there's lots of different... This is just one that I'm kind of like zeroing in. The one that takes you towards the development of the lie of the jnana in the Vilgachara school. And that is, now a lie-up,

[69:52]

instead of just being a lie-up, the consciousness which is there at the moment of birth, it's also considered to be the vivifying principle. The vivifying principle. So this occurred, just like in the previous one, at the moment of... This occurred around the time of conception, but it gets extended then to the moment of death. And the moment of birth. And the presence or absence of this alive jnana is this appropriation. And the word for appropriation is apadana, which is related to the adana. The appropriation

[70:56]

without which death ensues. So it causes a lie of the jnana to become a feeling which imparts warmth and sensation all the way out to the tips of your fingertips. So in this sense, a lie is very much like the Chinese vivifying principle. Qi. The qi that extends itself into all kinds of mental and physical functioning. One way to write it would be a-u-p-a-long-a-d-a-t-r But if you break it up into upa, which means arising, and then a-long-a, and then the root da, ada. Upa, sort of like to get.

[71:58]

And upa... I see that on the board. Etymologically, it would be like upa, like upas like, you know, upadana skandhas, like upa, like arising, and then a, and then the root, the root da, ada, to appropriate. So the arising of appropriation. Upadana or upa-adana. Upadaya, upadana. All these kinds of words come from this. Ada. So... So it's the next step. So first of all, it's the consciousness which... uh... which appropriates and then becomes a link to the body.

[73:00]

Then it becomes the actual vivifying, life-giving principle of the whole system. At first, it's just the consciousness that goes with it and protects it. And it's protected by the mind. So at first, it's the consciousness which is laid down upon the sense organs and stuck to the sense organs. Now it becomes the vivifying principle of the body where the sense organs live. And let me just jump ahead and say the next step is basically this, that we have now, alaya being the ability of consciousness to live in the body and lay down upon the organs. Because of becoming this vivifying principle, this table gets turned in a way

[74:01]

and now it turns that alaya becomes that which is laid down upon and that which is stuck to. So first alaya lays down with and gets stuck to the sense organs. But then as it becomes the vivifying principle then alaya becomes that which life lays down upon and gets stuck to. But also what happens is that it goes from laying down and being stuck in the sense organs to laying down and being stuck in the sense of self. So then alaya becomes now the basis for the sense of self,

[75:08]

the sense of self-love, self-esteem, self-pride, and so on. And again you see in the 30 verses those four different misconceptions that are based on alaya. Is this still pre-Buddhist? No. The pre-Buddhist part was just the idea that there's karmic causation and that there's a process by which actions have consequences. That's pre-Buddhist. And also pre-Buddhist. But is there a lot of trans-state in pre-Buddhist? I don't know if... I don't think that outside of Buddhism that they have the order of Sanapati. I think outside of Buddhism they have... The yogis who can attain this state who aren't Buddhists, they think that's it. They think the bliss of that state is...

[76:12]

That's their nirvana. They think that's nirvana. So the idea of alaya is not there? Alaya... The word alaya is just a word, but the idea of alaya is nirvana. I don't know if you can find that literally in any other school, but there's something similar to it in other Indian schools, particularly Samkhya. There's something similar to it. So Samkhya arose around the same time as Yogacara. So if you look at the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, there's some interaction between the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, which are Samkhya, and Yogacara. There's some similarity. The terms are a little different, but there's some similarity, and there's a difference, too. But there's a mutual interaction between the Yoga Sutras and Yogacara, and they arose around the same time. But you said that for the Hindu, that state is bliss.

[77:13]

I'm not saying for the Hindu, I'm just saying some yogis consider that state of bliss to be freedom, to be nirvana. And Buddhists? And Buddhists do not. We consider that to be just a dependently co-arisen state, which is impermanent. You don't necessarily have understanding of Dharma to enter that state of trance. If you have understanding of Dharma, and you enter that state of trance, you would consider that just to be a state of trance. You wouldn't think of it as freedom. States are not freedom. So it's basically a consciously induced coma, basically. Yeah, it's like a consciously induced coma, right. But deeper than most comas. And the causation of it is such that each one comes out, however one can die in that state, and then one is reborn in a divine form.

[78:17]

Which is, again, the main point of Buddhism. Is that the eighth jhāna? That trance state? Related? No. It's like one step beyond the eighth jhāna. It's actually called, I believe... What's it called? It's called bhavagra, I think. It's called the... It's the highest... It's called laukika agra dharma, the highest worldly attainment. It's based on this. It's one step after the eighth jhāna. Laukika agra dharma. Okay, then the next step, which hasn't been said yet,

[79:21]

and that is now how to use this alaya to handle something which Buddhists are always concerned about, which is related to what I said before. They live in a cultural setting where they wanted to relate their teachings to the laws of karma, which most human religious people were concerned about. Does your action have to do with consequences? What's the point of religious practice? How does it work? And I would just say that now we enter into some discussion of mechanics, karmic mechanics. And I would just say that, generally speaking, this chapter, up until you get to the place where it says... I guess it's on page...

[80:23]

where it says, you know, it is like this. Bodhisattvas who rely on knowledge of the system of doctrines and abide in knowledge of the system of doctrines are wise with respect to the secrets of mind, thought, and consciousness. However, when the Bodhisattva designates... when the Tathagata designates Bodhisattvas as being wise with respect to the secrets of mind, thought, and consciousness, it is not only because of this that he designates those Bodhisattvas as being wise in all ways. At that juncture in the chapter, everything before that is the mechanics of consciousness, which Bodhisattvas are wise if they understand these mechanics. So I'm still talking in the mechanical realm now. After that point, we move into not the mechanics of consciousness, but more the mysticism of consciousness. So Bodhisattvas both understand the mechanics,

[81:26]

which are up to that point in the chapter, and they also understand the mystical dimension, which is when you take these mechanics into the realm of the heart sutra, when you take these mechanics into the ultimate. But that ultimate level of understanding in this chapter is based on the mechanical understanding of the first part of the chapter. So now, the mechanics of karma. So I think many of you have heard this before, that Buddhists have a problem. It's easier to explain karma if you have a permanent self. Now, it goes on. I do this, and then I'm here later, and then the results of what I do come back to me. But if you don't say that I go on from moment to moment,

[82:32]

then how are the actions that I do, who do they mature to? Where do the results come back to? And in one of the scriptures about the Eightfold Path, when the Buddha is talking about the Eightfold Path, he goes through, in some sense, the Eightfold Path twice, or he speaks of two kinds of the Eightfold Path. For example, there's mundane right view, and supramundane right view, or right view with taints, and right view without taints. And there's right livelihood with taints, and right livelihood without taints. And right mindfulness with taints, and right mindfulness without taints, without outflows. So, if you have right view, he says, right view is, you know,

[83:36]

meritorious, beneficial, and the merit of it matures on the side of attachment. He doesn't exactly say that the merit of right action, or right view, matures to the person who did, who had the right view, or matures to the person who had the right action. He says it matures on the side of attachment, which is close to this line. So we're not actually saying that when an action arises here, through my body and mind, that I'm going to collect the results. The results will be collected at the point of attachment. So, in me right now, there is a point of attachment, if I'm acting in a deluded way.

[84:41]

In me right now, there's a predisposition. There's a habit energy. And the actions which occur under the auspices of this habit energy will mature on the side of further habit energy, of later habit energies, or later attachments around later attachments. Habit means, I'm using a synonymous word, attachment. In other words, a stuck pattern, a repetitive pattern. So a laya is kind of like a pattern of attachment which can collect karmic results. And it itself is, in fact, a karmic result. Originally, it was a karmic result. And here, you see, it is a predisposition. So, I hope the idea here was that

[85:47]

maybe a laya could perform this function of being this self, or this soul, which collects karmic results without actually being a permanent independent self, but be more a pattern of attachment, and clean, and appropriation. And that being a resultant can serve as the collector of results. It is the collector of all results. Yes? It doesn't somehow go together very well in the hearing that a laya is still active, because the predisposition for the consciousnesses are coming out of a laya. So... So you're seeing a laya as active...

[86:50]

I see it more as passive. It is an active part, but it's more passive. Yes, that's right. It is more passive. So it's not attaching, but there's something attached to it. Well, if something gets laid down upon something else, it's not necessarily active. And if it's laid down upon, it's not necessarily active either way. So originally a laya was associated with the sense organs, and then in certain states it kind of like collapses into the sense organs. A laya doesn't have any place, though. Pardon? A laya doesn't have any place. Doesn't have a place? No, this sutra says it does have a place. A laya does have a place. What's a laya's place? The sense organs. You say it's in the sense organs. Or the sense organs are in a laya.

[87:53]

First it's the laya that apprehends a sense organ and lays down upon the sense organs. But then it turns around that the sense organs are laid down upon the laya. But in either case, a laya is a resultant. A laya is not active karma. It is the basis of karmic activity and the resultant of karmic activity. But it's not karmically active itself. But karmic activity arises from a laya. And not only that, but we want not just a basis for karmic activity, because you can have a basis for karmic activity in the moment, have a body, have consciousness, have delusion, and you get karma. But we're also concerned with what happens to the results of karma. Where do they go? Buddha says they mature on the side. In the early scriptures he says Buddha's results of good action and unwholesome action.

[89:00]

He wasn't talking about the wrong path, he was talking about the right path. He wasn't talking about wrong view, he was talking about right view. So right view is that there is karmic causation. The result of having right view is that it's beneficial to have right view. It's meritorious to have right view. And where does the merit congeal? It congeals on the side of the attachment. Wherever there's attachment, that's where it'll land. However, when he describes the untainted right view, he doesn't say that it's meritorious. The super mundane, untainted right view, he doesn't say then that it's meritorious. He doesn't say then it's good. He doesn't say it matures on the side. It doesn't mature on the side of attachment because there isn't attachment. So the merit, there is merit, but it's not a concern anymore. It goes everywhere. It doesn't go on the side of attachment because the consciousness is now untainted by attachment.

[90:04]

The merit doesn't come back to the pattern of attachment because the pattern of attachment has been dispersed. And that's the end of a liar? That's the end of a liar. A liar is no longer. Now we just have dependent co-arising. So a liar, for most of us, a liar is dependent co-arising. But in wisdom, there's no a liar, there's just dependent co-arising. For most of us, dependent co-arising and a liar are pretty much the same thing. Therefore, a liar obscures dependent co-arising. And dependent co-arising is the Dharma. But when a liar is dispersed, then there's just dependent co-arising, so then dependent co-arising, the Dharma is revealed. Wouldn't dependent co-arising be everybody's a liar? Well, except that everybody's a liar doesn't get laid down on the post-sense organs.

[91:11]

But it seems if you say that for most people a liar and dependent co-arising are the same, if I'm thinking of a liar as particular to a person... And dependent co-arising is particular to a person too. There's a dependent co-arising of you. And the dependent co-arising of you, because it's confused with a liar, because there's also dependent co-arising of a liar. So when you have the dependent co-arising of a person and the dependent co-arising of a liar, the person doesn't get to see the dependent co-arising. Or it's very hard to see the dependent co-arising. Not impossible. You see the little squeaks, and you get in there. So what if you were something like a lens, you see everything through these perspectives? It's not so much that you see through a liar, but that what you see is based on a liar. You kind of see through monists and monoliths, and I'm about to...

[92:14]

You see through those consciousnesses, but what you see is in a liar. And I don't know if I should... There's more material for the kitchen to come back. So maybe I'll just take a few more questions, and Nick Kress will take the next step. Yes? So in the mundane, you said that the merit comes back to the point of attachment. But what if that person or point of attachment is thinking beyond the self? Then it automatically becomes super mundane? It's kind of confusing. Okay, so here's mundane. Yeah, I mean, yeah. Yeah? So it automatically becomes super mundane. So what you're saying basically is a bodhisattva who says, I'm not disabled beings, automatically that is super mundane? Well... Because now they're not doing it for the self. Well, it depends on how they understand what you just said. Okay. But it would be the case that if one were awakened,

[93:18]

there would still be a process after the awakening wherein the karmic results that were coming back to the point of attachment would keep coming back to the point of attachment until all the returns were in, as they say. At that point, and during those returns coming in, the person is generating no new points. Things are not being generated from points of attachment. So the merit of the person's practice is not coming back to the point of attachment where they were generated. It would only be the return of actions based on attachment to a place of attachment. And in that way, those things are fulfilled. And then they're actually washed away. They're over. The consequence has happened. So even though the vow says... Not just a vow, but even a realization. Yeah, exactly.

[94:21]

Even if you vowed to realize selflessness and did realize it, there would still be some karmic fallout. Even if you vowed to realize selflessness and did realize it,

[94:29]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ