And I just want to say again this wonderful 19th section of chapter 1 of the Summary of Mahayana says that here in the Mahayana there is a dependent core arising which is subtle and very deep. This dependent core arising is twofold. the dependent core arising that distributes self-natures, and the dependent core arising that apportions pleasantness and unpleasantness. That's a different translation. So that translation just says that in the Mahayana, the Mahayana has a dependent core arising It doesn't say anything about the alaya-vijnana.

[01:01]

And the translation we have says that the dependent co-arising as it appears in the alaya-vijnana is the most subtle and profound interpretation. Okay, and we were now looking at these two kinds of dependent co-arising. One is distributing delusion, is distributing Imputations of self-nature or substance. And the other one is distributing states of existence. Okay, remember that? So those are the two types. And then we talked about the problems you get into if you don't understand the first type.

[02:09]

and the problems you get into if you don't understand the second type. Remember that? So if you don't understand how we attribute self, you get into problems in the first case. If you don't understand how the the assignment or the distribution or appropriation of the various states occurs, you get into the second problem. And then the summary, we read the summary of that and we read the verse also, did we? And then we come into the next paragraph Did we read 23? Stable, morally neutral, permeable, and yoked with the permeator.

[03:11]

Did we read that? Okay. Would you read that, please, Deirdre? stable, morally neutral, permeable, and yoked to the permeator, if unable to be otherwise permeated. This is the basic character of permeation. These characteristics apply only to the container consciousness because they are not associated with the sixth sense consciousnesses, because three aspects of the sixth sense consciousnesses, i.e., support, object, and attention, are different and opposed. to those of the container consciousness because two moments are not simultaneous and because one would then overextend the analogy of permeation. That's a nice, difficult paragraph. stable.

[04:23]

So, in a sense, a lie is changing all the time, but it's also kind of stable because, you know, the majority of it is the consequence of past. So the changes that occur, which are very important, because that's where we grow and learn through these changes. But in a lot of ways, it's stable. It can evolve, but it's also kind of similar to the alaya vijnana of the previous moment and quite similar to the alaya vijnana of the next moment. It's morally neutral. And again, that term neutral also could be, is more accurately just translated as indeterminate. In other words, it's hard to determine what the moral quality of a liar is. Partly because it has the seeds for wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate states.

[05:32]

It's permeable and it's also permeated, and yoked to the permeator. Now, does that mean the permeator, is the permeator the act of consciousness, do you think? Usually that's the way we talk, is that the active consciousness is the permeator. Does that make sense? Any problem with that? What's yoke mean? Yoke means connected, or sometimes bound. But it could be lighter. You could just say associated. So somewhere between locked together and associated. Is that like from the yoke of a shirt or a blouse?

[06:35]

It's like the yoke of oxen. You know, two ox are yoked together. It's also the root of the word yoga, right? The word yoga comes from the root for yoke. So it's kind of, the alive jnana is tied together, but not always tied together with the active consciousnesses. Right? There are some situations where it's not associated with them. Right? What are those situations called? Organic brain disorder, like coma. Dreamless sleep. and these special trances, these two kinds of special trances. In those situations, it's not yoked. What are the trances called?

[07:38]

One's called Narodasamapati, which means the accomplishment of cessation. And the other one's called Asamnika, asamnika samapati, which means attainment of the same thing, attainment of no perception. The difference being, what's the difference between the two, these two states where alaya is there but is not yoked to the active consciousnesses? What's the difference between those two, according to what we talked about before anyway? What are the two that you're asking the difference between? The nirodha samapati and the asamnika samapati, or you could say accomplishment of cessation and accomplishment of unconsciousness. In here they call it, he calls it destruction, doesn't he? One believes himself to be eradicated and the other hasn't.

[08:45]

Right. In one, so you could say in one, the defiling manas, the kliṣṭha manas, has been abandoned. And in the other one, he's still present. So at the time of the Buddha, there were people who were as good at yoga as him and could attain a state where the active consciousnesses were suppressed. Their alaya was still there. And they also believed that there actually was essence to this state, and the essence of this state was that this state was nirvana. They actually thought this was it. But it's actually a worldly state. The lie is still there. But the Aryans understand that this is just a worldly state. They don't think that this state has a self. So that's the difference. So once again, Alaya is yoked with the active consciousnesses, which are the permeator in this paragraph, or the permeators, but not yoked all the time, just like almost all the time.

[09:59]

So Vasubandhu in 30 verses says that these six sense consciousnesses are always there except in these cases. This little thing between the brackets, I just want to look at. If unable to be otherwise permeated, So it's yoked with permeator if unable to be otherwise permeated. This is the basic character. What do you think he's getting there by this translation? If unable to be otherwise permeated. What could that be? If you just take that out, I think the sentence makes perfect sense.

[11:04]

But there must be something in the Tibetan or the Chinese that led him to add that. And I didn't actually see why that was so. Are there other ways that a lie can be transformed? Yeah. And what are those other ways that a lie can be transformed? Well, I would say be transformed by Dharma messages, by Dharma teachings. And Dharma teachings are not in themselves active consciousnesses.

[12:08]

Could it be also like a very powerful incident, like being hit by a flash of lightning or something like that? Sometimes people say that they woke up suddenly from something. Yeah, that could be an example of a Dharma message. Yeah. I'm just really relaxing and eating. Yeah. that could be like a Dharma message, it's not really an active consciousness, but more like an event that transforms alaya in the direction of not being the seeds for unwholesome, for defiled states. But, yeah, so that's the best I can do with this sentence at this time. Now it says, these characteristics apply only to the container consciousness because they are not associated with the sense consciousnesses.

[13:15]

Because the three aspects of the sense consciousnesses are different and opposed to those of the container consciousnesses. because the two moments are not simultaneous and because one would then overextend the analogy. Okay, so what's the difference between, first of all, what's the difference between the three aspects for alaya and the three aspects for the sense consciousness? They just said what the three aspects for the sense consciousness are. Support, object, and attention. Those are the three characteristics that apply to the arising of sense consciousnesses. Support means what? No? Organ.

[14:19]

Object means object or field of the organ. And what's attention? Cathy? Previous moment. Yeah. Attention is manas, previous moment of consciousness. That's what the active consciousnesses depend on. What about alaya? Well, a lie kind of depends on the organs too, right, because it lives with them. But what's a lie's object? A lie doesn't have objects like the object of the organs, as you know so well. The relationship between the seeds? Hmm? The relationship between the seeds? The relationship between seeds? What does it depend on? You're thinking that the relationship between the seeds would be the object? subtle form of dependent co-arising?

[15:32]

That is a very subtle kind of dependent co-arising. The relationship among seeds is, yes, that's true. And then there's other aspects of a lie also which contribute to the subtlety and profundity of this kind of dependent co-arising. But that's part of it. But I'm just specifically now thinking... the active consciousness have these three factors, epistemological supports, right? And alaya has a different set. What is alaya? Alaya, in a sense, does have sense organs, but the sense organs in alaya are not the sense organs that are operating on sense objects. Because a lie isn't sense organ specific. A lie is not aware of like a color or a sound or a color and a sound. A lie is not aware of a mental concept like the mind sense consciousness is. It's not aware of like Tuesday and Thursday. It's the seed for a consciousness which is aware of Tuesday or Thursday. But it itself is not aware of these objects of the senses.

[16:35]

but is connected to the senses. But what is alaya aware of? Well, the Samdhinirmacana Sutra says, and this says not yet, but this says too, alaya is aware of the predisposition towards conventional designations. And alaya is aware of a physical world. The sense organs are actually not aware of a physical world, except as a concept for the mind consciousness. So alaya is, those are the objects for alaya. And they're ongoing, they're not changing every moment. Could you explain first one and what that means by physical world?

[17:40]

First one, you said alaya is aware of other stuff, not physical world, but... Alaya is aware of a sense that there is a world, and also it is stable in that way. The sense organs are not, like, when you're aware of a color, you're not, at that time, the awareness of the color is not sort of aware that there's a world in which colors exist. Like, let's say you're aware of a color or a sound or both, okay? That's an example of active consciousness. Eye consciousness and... Could I say sound? Ear consciousness. So those sense consciences are named after the sense organ, right? But when you're aware of a color, you're not aware of that there's a world there. I would say. Does that make sense to you?

[18:41]

by that awareness of the color, in some sense, if you look at, and you can even test this out, when you look at a color and you really like looking at a color, there's no world. But something feels like there's a world. There's some sense that there's a world in which there's a color. That is what Elaya is aware of, that there's a world. The world of color? No, more than the world of color. But that's what I'm saying, is that when you look at a color and you're really just aware of the color, if you could imagine that, at that time, in that fullness of that awareness, there's no sense that there's a world in addition to, there's just a color. That wouldn't necessarily be a world, though, that would just be a color. Is that awareness of the world, is it a construction of some of the seeds or all of the seeds?

[19:47]

All of the seeds, yeah. All the seeds. Well, Alaya is all the seeds. And it's a consciousness. So it is all the seeds that is a consciousness. Somehow this collection of seeds knows something, but it doesn't know, for example, the kind of things that the active consciousnesses know. It doesn't know a color, a sound, a smell, a taste, or an idea. It is the seed for all the consciousnesses that do know these things. And those consciousnesses, they know those objects. Again, Vastu Bandha says that these six sense consciousnesses are the concept of the external object. Alaya does not think of these colors and stuff that's external. The active consciousnesses think of them as external. And they're defiled in thinking that.

[20:48]

So these are defiled active consciousnesses. Alaya doesn't think of blue or green. And what is Alaya? Alaya is all the seeds. And all the seeds are a kind of knowing. But it's not like a knower that has the seeds in addition to the seeds. So it's just all the seeds, but the collection of all the seeds is a consciousness. And what is its objects? Its objects are a sense of a world and a sense of an ongoing world, a world that arises and ceases and arises again and ceases again. There's a sense of that which when you're looking at a — or you know, imagine if you're like doing some physical activity like playing tennis or something, and you're just like totally like You know, right there with that sense, with that physical sense. Totally there.

[21:49]

In that sense, at that moment, there's no sense of the people in the stands, of winning the game. You know, there's just physical sensation. And that's an active consciousness. Simultaneous with that, however, alaya is right there. And alaya is the part of the mind that has a sense of the world that's arising and ceasing and arising and ceasing. Again, take it back to the earlier discussions of these special states of consciousness where the active consciousnesses are turned off, where there's no blue, green, yellow, there's no sounds, that's all that's turned off, and there's a consciousness. That's alaya, according to this teaching. And alaya can carry this moment up and down and then continue to be present for the next moment. So the life can go on, there can be continuity, without any active consciousness.

[22:52]

So something keeps track of there's life here. There's a world, there's a life. And every moment, it does that work. And that actually kind of holds the living being into a lifespan. It makes a continuity for a living being. That's what this provides. And the sense consciousness are not looking at that. The sense consciousness, what are they doing? They're like, okay, it's Monday around 11 o'clock, and then boom, I'm into like a trance. And two hours later, I come out of it, and I think it's Monday at 11 o'clock. I still think nothing happened in the active consciousness. There was no sense of color or sound or smell. But there was a laya. So I continued to be alive and I continued to be conscious because you can't be alive without conscious and you can't be conscious without alive or dead.

[23:57]

Now we're talking about alive. So a lie is going on. Every moment of a lie is like there's a world, [...] and there's a body with the sense organs, but there's no sense of the sense organs' objects and the sense organs' fields. There's no awareness of that. Is that becoming clear how that could be, how I'm talking about? So I'm saying the laya carries this sense of there's a life, there's a world, or there's a world and so there's a life. A sense of a world. But not coloring it in or anything, just a sense there's a world. And you can color it in with a sense consciousness system. And of course they arise and cease very rapidly, so we can put a lot of stuff together. Plus we have mental concepts to say like we're a Green Gulch or whatever. So all those active consciousnesses create the current coloring of that there's a world, but not too many of those are actually saying, I mean, none of those are really saying, except the concept, are saying there's a world, there's a world, there's a world, there's a world.

[25:07]

Mental consciousness isn't saying there's a world, there's a world, there's a world, there's a world. That's not one of its main jobs. It can do that conceptually, but that's not its main job. But it's a lie. Part of one of the main jobs of a lie is there's a world, there's a world. I see a world, I see a world, I see a world. Not I see a world. There's a world, there's [...] a world. A lie is doing that all the time. So it maintains the world for the living being. Is that getting any clearer? World and life are the same things? No, no, I take it back. I don't want to say they're the same thing. But if you don't maintain the sense of the world, which is connected to the body, then it's hard for people to understand how consciousness could continue during these states when our ordinary active consciousness is turned off And the ordinary active consciousness thinks there was nothing happening. When it comes out of the trance or out of the coma or out of the deep dream, it thinks out of the dreamless part of the sleep, I should say.

[26:16]

When it comes out, nothing was there. Nothing happened. There was no life for the active consciousness. Active consciousness was turned off, basically. But a liar wasn't. And so what was it doing? What was it aware of? It is an awareness. What does it know? It's the seeds for all the active consciousness, but those active consciousnesses are not turned on in alaya, right? What do the active consciousnesses know? Green, blue, pain, pleasure. Alaya does not know green, blue, pain, pleasure. It does not know those things. And what does it know? It knows two things. It knows that there's a world. There isn't really a world and there isn't really colors, but it knows there's a world as much. That's the thing that has the sense there's a world, there's a world, there's a world. And the other thing it knows is it knows the predisposition towards conventional designation. That's what the Sambhya Nirmacana Sutra says. And that's what this is referring to when it says, a laya depends on different things for its support.

[27:21]

It has different objects and different organs. it always has the whole body. But none of the other sense consciousnesses have the whole body. What was the third one? The third one for alaya. What's the third one for alaya? What's the third one for alaya? What does alaya depend on? Well, could it be the act of sense consciousness? Does alaya depend on the act of sense consciousnesses? Yes it does, because in fact they are the permeators. And a lie is just the sum total of the permeations. So a lie depends on the active sense consciousnesses. And the past ones? No. The past ones aren't the permeator. The present one is a permeator. It is the sum total of all the permeations from the past ones.

[28:22]

But a lie depends on the sense consciousnesses. But the sense consciousnesses do not depend on each other except the immediately antecedent one. It depends on that one. But the immediate antecedent one does not. The immediate antecedent one, no matter what it is, it's only serving the function of being immediately antecedent. So if the immediate antecedent one is negative or unwholesome, and this is a wholesome state, That serves the purpose as well for the arising of this as if the immediate antecedent one was neutral. But the neutralness or wholesomeness of it does not connect to this state. The neutralness of it or wholesomeness of it or unwholesomeness, that permeates aliyah. The thing that gives rise to the, that supports this particular state is the aliyah. But not as the antecedent condition,

[29:24]

but as a simultaneous condition. So that's the difference between the service or the power and the function of a laya vis-à-vis the ongoing experience and the function of the sense consciousnesses. Yes? I hear you saying that our sense that there's a world, our sense of being alive, is somehow alaya. Yeah. Well, our sense of being alive, I should say, actually our vitality, our life, is in a sense alaya. Because that's there even when this active consciousness is turned off. We're still alive. So again, that was sort of one of the reasons relating to this discovery or this theory. So in a sense, a lie is our basic sentientness. That's the way to put it, maybe.

[30:26]

Our basic sentientness, which is there no matter what state we're in, except totally transformed, a lie. Then a lie is not there anymore. then we're alive in this new spiritual way called the Dharmakaya. But prior to that, the sentientness of sentient beings is held primarily or fundamentally by these seeds. Yes? So when we're conscious of the sense of being alive, is that somehow awareness of That's an active consciousness. Right. So it's not a lie. I guess that's the gap that I can't quite see, because I feel a sense of being alive, but I also, my understanding of a lie is that I don't have any kind of direct perception of a lie. That's, you don't have a sense, you don't have, you don't have direct, well, maybe you have direct perception, but a not active consciousness of a lie. Right, so then, so then it can't be that my present sense of being alive is That's not a lie. a kind of consciousness of a lie. That's a mental... I don't know anything in here about consciousness of alaya.

[31:29]

There's only consciousness of alaya in terms of mental consciousness, active mental consciousness, of all these teachings about alaya that we're working with in our active mental consciousness. So we do have that. And we also have the sense of I'm alive. And that, I would say, is particularly characteristic of an active consciousness that's thinking. But what I was suggesting to you is that when you have a color and you're really concentrated on the color, at that time you're not thinking in that color consciousness, you're not thinking I'm alive. There could be a mental consciousness right there at the same time that's thinking I'm alive. Even though we're not thinking it, you're saying Alaya knows it. I seem more like Alaya is our basic sentientness, but Alaya doesn't necessarily know I'm alive either. That's more like an active consciousness. Alaya is an awareness such as a world. Even if you turn off all thinking, the living world is still there.

[32:37]

And alaya is like looking at that living world. And from all these active consciousnesses, that is unconscious. Just like the example again, you're thinking, I'm alive, you go into a trance, and you're not thinking you're alive anymore. And you come out of the trance and say, I'm alive. You don't even say, I'm still alive. You just happen to think I'm alive. You could have been looking at your life just as you went into the trance, and you come out of your trance and you say, I'm looking at the same thing I was a moment ago. So for you, there was nothing going on, even though everybody else thinks you were alive during that period of time, and actually a lie is what was going on for you, for this living being. Your sentientness was uninterrupted, and your consciousness was uninterrupted, The seeds were uninterrupted.

[33:38]

They were changing all the time, but they were uninterrupted. And there was an awareness. And one of the things there was awareness of, the seeds were the awareness, and one of the things they were aware of is that there's a world. And there also was an awareness, an awareness of the proclivity towards conventional designation. It's hard to understand where that awareness, how we could even talk of it as an awareness or a consciousness. I guess a light is a consciousness, but what kind of, like an unconscious consciousness doesn't even apply some kind of access or something that I can't quite get my head around how we could say that a liar knows or a liar is aware or a liar is conscious. But our consciousness, everything we understand as consciousness, isn't it, but somehow we're still using the word consciousness or awareness.

[34:45]

Yeah. Again, going back to the earlier part where we saw that the Buddha said, basically he said, all sentient beings delight in their possessions. delight in the storehouse, delight in the, you know, that which can be attached to. He used the word alaya. And the early Buddhists thought, he's talking about something that, he's not talking about a consciousness. Now, at this point, the sutra's been written, and now we're saying that that thing that everybody's attached to is alaya. But people are, all living beings are attached to a consciousness, But that consciousness is subliminal versus the way we usually call consciousness. So we have a consciousness, and we're talking about another one, and that one

[35:47]

is it's different, but it's a consciousness rather than just a thing. It's not just a thing. It's not just sentientness. It's conscious. It's a sentientness that's conscious. Even if what people usually think consciousness is, is turned off. And once again, when consciousness was turned off, people couldn't figure out how beings could continue to be sentient because they had a feeling that sentientness has consciousness with it. But this is the kind of consciousness that can endure, that can exist that can arise and cease without active consciousness, and that can be followed again often. As long as the body's alive, it can be followed again by another one, and another one, and another one. And if the body isn't alive, or the body falls apart, this doesn't happen. And if this doesn't happen, the body falls apart. Either way, as it says, they share the same destiny, the same risk, and the same benefits.

[36:55]

If the body has trouble, Alaya has the same trouble. If the body is doing well, Alaya is doing well. Yeah? When you talk about the world, the awareness of the world, when I think of world, I do mean objects. But you say that a lion is not aware of objects. Well, in a sense, what I'm talking about is a lie does have objects. It has two objects. One object, you could say, is a world, or you could say one object is a sense that there's a world. A lie feels like there's a world. Maybe that's a better way to put it. A sense of a world. And a sense of an ongoing world. A world of continuity. That's physical. That's physical. And just another parenthetical major comment is that in the Abhidharma Kosha, it says, from where does the world, you know, there's a chapter called The World,

[38:05]

And at the end of that chapter on the world, the following chapter is the chapter on karma. At the beginning of the chapter on karma, they refer back to the chapter on the world. Chapter 4 is karma, chapter 3 is the world. So at the beginning of chapter 4, it says, well, where does the world come from? And then it says, well, it comes from the karma. Now we're in the karma chapter and the world chapter, that all that stuff comes from karma. And not just the karma of one person, but the karma of everybody. of all living beings for all time makes the world. Alaya has a sense of that world. Now this is not referring to the world of sentientness. It's referring to the physical world. So every moment Alaya has a sense there's a world in which all sentientness is shared. I mean, in which all sentientness shares. Alaya has that sense.

[39:07]

So when you're in this deep trance, there's some sense of there being a world in people who are brain dead. Like a time and a space? You could say you have time and space. If you want to, that'd be fine. But physically containing time and space. And don't forget, there's an unconscious sense and where there's an awareness of this ability or predisposition, as you say, to make conventional designations. But that's also one layer of saying, one layer above saying that there's a sense that there's something to be designated. There's a sense in terms of the sutra, there's a sense that there's something, some essence, some essence and characteristics that you could use as a basis to make designations.

[40:11]

Alaya is aware of that every moment, in a sense. It carries that sense of the ability to have something to make designations about. And then the continuation of Alaya proliferates this tendency and maintains and proliferates it. So that's a different kind of thing that a lie is doing, but the sense consciousnesses are not doing that work. And if they did, if they did do that work, there would be a problem because they arise and cease and they don't transmit that to the next sense consciousness. They only act in relationship to the next sense consciousness as a support of being the deceased. They're deceased, but they have no current support for this from other sense consciousnesses. But they do have a support from alaya. Alaya is right there with them. They are arising with it. And alaya supports the sense of a world together with a sense that there's something to make designations about, and then tie that together with that there's a self which the manas carries, and you've got a defiled state of consciousness.

[41:26]

But the Manas doesn't carry over from moment to moment and doesn't incorporate the past the way Alaya does. So this is a... I had this wonderful feeling, you know, when just a moment ago I was talking to Mark, he was talking, I mean, Jury, he was talking about, well, where did they get this? How would they know this? And I... I just had this sense of the hundreds of years they spent and they had nothing else to do basically. These people did not have the internet. They didn't have to run the guest program. They didn't have to cook and clean. They're supposed to clean themselves and wipe their face and stuff until they're done and wash their hands. So they had some maintenance activity but basically This was their hobby and their religion and their job.

[42:28]

For hundreds of years, they were struggling with stuff like, well, how could sentientists go on in these trances that we've been doing here and stuff like that? And they're talking about it and And finally they understood it. And we have guys like this and the people who wrote the sutra. And I just got this picture that, you know, we're going to keep doing this and we're going to get it. We're going to understand this. And it's kind of like going to be like, yeah, I understand it's a lie thing. I understand that there is this thing, this consciousness. I understand my unconscious. And I understand that it's evolving. But it's probably going to take quite a while because it's such a weird idea, the idea of a consciousness that we don't know. Just like the transformed consciousness at the end of this text and at the end of the sutra, which is called the Dharmakaya, it's got no elaboration whatsoever.

[43:31]

And therefore it's inconceivable to sentient beings, because sentient beings are into elaboration. It's got no attachments, so it's hard for us to understand. So the dharmakaya is rather difficult to understand, and the thing that's transformed into the dharmakaya is hard to understand. But if we work at it, we will eventually be in the last chapter, you know. We will understand this profound teaching. But it is really slippery. For years and years, I just really thought the idea of manas was so strange that we're saying that our consciousness arises depending on something that's ceased. That the organ for a sense consciousness is the immediately antecedent sense consciousness. It just seems, you know, it's just a very unusual way of thinking. We're training our minds in a very strange direction, into new frontiers of thought. Yes.

[44:34]

Just on that, in terms of like how we're practicing with this, I appreciate in that statement some kind of faith in the truth of these teachings. And I feel like there's, I appreciate them and I'm interested, but it seems like kind of like philosophical or psychological kind of contortions to cover a kind of gap in in this evolution of peace with god and that seems important kind of to get the illusion of like a coherent tradition but um i guess that kind of that angle on it um is different from faith, that this is true teaching in a way. I see that it solves an important problem in Buddhist doctrine, but its ability to solve that doesn't mean... I mean, it's something to work with and kind of turn around. Well, you could say it's different from faith in the sense that it's... Well, you know there's a chapter in the Lotus Sutra called Faith and Understanding, right?

[45:34]

Chapter 4? It's different from faith that this teaching is valuable and beneficial to beings. It's different in that sense, but it's not so different from faith in this is a tradition that uses analysis to benefit beings. So there's two faiths. One is there's a faith that Buddhist understanding involves exercises and analysis, and there's a teaching that it does, like the Buddha says, five skandhas. So exercising your reasoning is, I would say, a performance of faith. Believing that these are valuable teachings is also But there's two faiths. One is these are valuable teachings. The other is the exercise program of working with them also creates a mind which understands them. So these are valuable teachings, but if you don't do the exercise program, the teachings may not be available. They may not be able to penetrate you.

[46:37]

And his teaching is saying that. It's saying if you work with your active consciousness in a certain way, that will transform your alaya so that your alaya will create more minds which will welcome more dharmas, and as you welcome more dharma, alaya will make you more and more receptive of the dharma. But part of that involves analyzing what's going on in your active consciousness. And then in his case, what's going on in your active consciousness, in some cases, are these teachings. You know, the Tibetans maybe are the, you know, they're just world-class analysts, right, in their psychology programs over the centuries. And they're still, you know, they're still in India and Tibet, and they're still debating and arguing with each other about what this stuff's about. They never did find out what Buddhism was, really, in a sense. Because otherwise, if some guy's wrong and some guy's not, But the state of mind they get in in their debates, that state of mind is, I mean, you'd have to change a lot to get into that state of mind.

[47:49]

And if you're in that state of mind, you're you're going to be able to receive things that you can't in other states of mind. It takes a lot of work. In the same, the state of mind we get into when we're performing ceremonies in our tradition and so on and so forth. When you get in that state of mind, understandings are accessed in those states. Yes? So I would like to answer your question of an hour and a half ago of how this teaching is going. Yeah. Prolonged analysis for me tends to make me think that the thing is real. And the danger for me in this particular study is a prolonged analysis without an alternative point of view tends to make me think that this stuff is real. And I'm worried about that. Well, I don't want to have you feel that this is your assignment to tell us that, but maybe you could for a year or so do that.

[48:54]

Just every time you start feeling that happening, you could say, uh-oh, I feel like it's becoming substantial here. We need to sort of stand up and stretch or something. That's part of why what I was trying to say on Sunday is that the Zen approach is more like, let's dramatize this teaching now. When we dramatize it, maybe we don't feel it's so substantial. It's like a play. This is just a play we're putting on here. It's the Mahayana Sangraha play. And if you, for yourself, or you sense in the group that's happening, I don't want you to be the only one who notices that, but if you're the only one who notices it, then maybe you have to be the one who brings it up, blows the whistle. You guys are substantiating the struggle. And the Buddha said, I only teach this to superior people, people who don't slip into that. I would prefer not to be one. Yeah, I'd like to... Yeah, I appreciate that.

[49:55]

The other thing to say, though, is that also a prolonged discussion of it can also contribute to a breakthrough and see some differences. So let me make the second comment that I was going to make, and that it seems to me that Alaya, I'm not quite sure what the verb is that I want next, so I'll just say is. It seems to me that Alaya is emptiness. And this parenthetical comment here that we took up earlier, if unable to be otherwise permeated, would be itself emptiness. So it helps me, whether it's true or real, quote-unquote, or not, to imagine that alaya is emptiness. Okay, we hear you, and do you feel heard?

[50:59]

I do, and I also find that conception right at the moment rather free and helpful. Yeah, and when you say that, then I think of Nagarjuna saying, dependent core rising is emptiness. I proclaim Dependent Goal Rising to be emptiness." So this teaching is more directly saying, Alaya is Dependent Goal Rising. And you're saying Dependent Goal Rising is emptiness, which is right. But first of all, this teaching is blowing up into great detail what Nagarjuna just said, Dependent Goal Rising. But it is emptiness. And then, that being a conventional designation, in other words, we've still got a lie here, folks. So we just said dependent core arising, which is the teaching of dependent core arising that we've got here is this one, what Sangha is saying, and it's very profound. And Nagarjuna is saying, which Sangha completely agrees with, that's emptiness.

[52:04]

But Nagarjuna is saying, too, you're still in, your alaya has not been completely transformed. So what you just said is a conventional designation. Where did you get the conventional designation from? You got it from alaya, which brings, even when you're talking about emptiness, you're basically still conveying alaya to the situation, which sees this, which makes a conventional designation out of this thing, which is not a conventional designation. It's not. What do you mean it's not? Emptiness, when a lie has been completely transformed, emptiness isn't anymore a conventional designation, just emptiness realized. It's no more a conventional designation. Just like the middle way is a conventional designation. But there's also a middle way that's not a conventional designation. What is a conventional designation? I just said middle way.

[53:07]

The word. I just said the word. That's a conventional designation. That's like somebody says, Buddha is a word. Buddha is a wonderful thing, but it's also right now a conventional designation. Which is, you know, if you see Buddha on the road, kill it. Don't let that Buddha. So we're playing with all these things and we keep, it's a very slippery slope to substantiate and This teaching of alaya-vijnana is a profound teaching, and the profound part of alaya, of the pinnacle of rising, is that it's emptiness. But don't stop there. Remember that the person who's talking is speaking based on alaya, so we have the proclivity to put this understanding, which we have, wonderful understanding, we put it into conventional designation. And alaya maintains that predisposition and proliferates it.

[54:13]

And we keep talking about emptiness and dependent core rising until all beings are liberated. And various times slipping into substantiating something and feeling sick about that. So I have trouble with each of these words, Alaya is aware of a world. Each one of those words is a problem for me. But right now I'd like to bring up the problem of the world. Or you could say, yeah, I also would change it to Alaya is not so much Alaya is aware, but Alaya is an awareness and its objects are. a sense of a world, and the predisposition to make conventional designations out of everything, including dependent core arising and emptiness. So is the world, possibly, that Elia is aware of, the unconstructed world, or the pre-constructed world?

[55:15]

No, it's the physical world. But not constructed? Isn't the world that we see a constructed world? No, I think this world that Elia is aware of is a constructed world. I think it's the world that's the result of karma. So the dharmadhatu, sometimes people say dharmadhatu, sometimes they say dharmaloka. Loka is like the word for world. And, you know, laukika is built on the word loka, means worldly. And what is it? Uttara loka. Super mundane. So some things are beyond the world, but the world that's described in Chapter 3 of the Abhidharma Kosha, these destinies, all these destinies are based on alaya,

[56:20]

These destinies are worlds. So chapter 3 of the Abhidhamma Kostya describes these worlds. But worlds are just constructions, they're constrictions that are a result of the karmic consciousness which is a constriction. So in reality, they aren't really these enclosed spaces. There can be structures, but things aren't really enclosed. But karma creates a sense of enclosure. So the world that's spoken of there is called, actually it's called the container world, but they don't use the word alaya. Oh, they use the word receptacle. They call it the receptacle world. So the receptacle world which has all these destinies. So the destinies where sentient beings live are human world, divine world, and so on. Those are receptacles in which living beings live.

[57:23]

Those receptacles, those enclosures, those worlds, are created by karma. Without karma, they don't exist. So they are constructed. And alaya is aware of a constructed world, of a sense of a constructed world. A karmically constructed world. A karmically constructed world, right. Alaya is aware of that, has a sense of that, ongoingly, and also it says at the beginning, pretty much at the beginning of this book, it says that, furthermore, It is called the container consciousness inasmuch as all sentient beings clinging to an image of themselves are themselves contained within it, contained within the confines of this consciousness. So we live in this consciousness, or another way to say it is, another translation would be, we live in it as though it were our self. Our sense of our self and where we live, that is alaya. But alaya, that's an active consciousness which is based on this deep sense that we live in a world, in an enclosure, in a receptacle.

[58:32]

And that sense of a receptacle, the conscious awareness of the receptacle and the ongoing sense that there is a receptacle, those are all the results of karma. And alaya is the storehouse of all the moments that all beings have had a sense of. So alaya goes on even though the active consciousness are turned off and there's no kind of conscious sense of there being a world, but then it comes right back. Because alaya carries, transmits that sense of a karmically, it doesn't say karmically constructed, it feels like there actually is an enclosure. So the universe isn't actually, in the Dharma realm, the universe isn't an enclosure. So when they say worlds, it means mundane worlds, it means constructed worlds, and those are constructed by karma. And karma is constructed based on ignorance. And Elia is supporting these karmic constructions.

[59:37]

And everybody's contributing to it. So if you take a break, the world, you know, the sense of it continues. But you taking a break is kind of like you turning off your karmic consciousness. So the other people maybe aren't taking a break and they're watching you when you're in a trance or a coma. So you're taking a break, but actually your ally is maintaining the world and all the people watching you, their ally is maintaining the world, so the world goes on by karmic force. But it's not the real world, it's a constructed world. These are destinies. Destinies are like places where sentient beings wind up feeling like they're living. They're not really destinies, but that's what destinies are. They're the results of karma. And they all, as it says here, only if this lie exists do all the destinies exist.

[60:41]

That means all the worlds. Only if a lie exists do all the constructed worlds exist. But also, that's the access to liberation too, is the same consciousness. So we're working with what maintains our sense of a world and it actually, unlike the sense consciousnesses, it's doing the actual maintenance of the sense of a world. the sense consciousnesses will drop the ball. And you may say, great, I wish they would. And in fact, early Buddhism, by focusing on the sense consciousnesses, dropped the ball of the world and they attained liberation by focusing on the sense consciousness. But if you really focus on the sense consciousness, just like I said before, if you just keep hitting that tennis ball and don't do anything else, you will attain liberation. If you can imagine living in a state, all of you have had moments probably where you're totally concentrated and there's no world in that concentration.

[61:51]

The lie is like not operating. You are free. And so early Buddhism, they really focused on the present moment and they were quite successful in terms of their own freedom. This book is saying, okay, great. And that's the transformation of consciousness that also is referred to in the sutra. That's the transformation of consciousness which is called a liberation body. So I believe it's in chapter, yeah, it's in chapter, the last chapter, the chapter on Manjushri. So Manjushri asked the Buddha, is the transformation body, is the transformation of the basis of the Shravakas the same as the transformation of the basis of the Buddhas? And the Buddha says, no, it's not the same. Their body is not the dharmakaya, it's the moksha kaya. I think it's moksha. Anyway, it's not the dharma body, it's not the true body, it's the liberation body. So by focusing on the present moment,

[62:55]

you attain your alaya. It gets transformed by that concentration, by that practice, into a liberation body. But it doesn't get transformed the way it would if you did bodhisattva practices in addition to that. That's the thing that alaya is doing, it's maintaining this world thing, the sense of a world, the sense that there's destinies. So all the destinies need this alaya to it, because if I just think of, for example, human destiny, right now in my active consciousness, that will not get transmitted to the next active consciousness, this teaching is saying. So then in the next consciousness I wouldn't have a sense of a world. If I'm really concentrated, that's the case. But as soon as I come out of the concentration, a lie has been carrying all the time and it pops it back up. Well, now I'm wondering if then the active consciousnesses construct a world kind of on top of this karmically constructed world.

[64:10]

Yeah, they do. So it's like an overlay or something. They, together with the alaya, do construct a sense of the world. Yes. There's kind of like two senses of the world going on. One that changes each moment and the other that has continuity. Yeah, the one sense of the world is the destinies. Alaya is not really the destinies. The destinies are like, I'm really miserable or I'm really blissful, or I'm really terrified, or I'm just like, you know, consumed by greed, you know. These are active conscious situations you find yourself in, where you actually feel like, I'm in a really bad situation, I'm really in a good situation, I'm in a happy place, I'm in an unhappy place. These are active consciousnesses. And a liar, without a liar, you wouldn't come up with that, is what this is saying. All those destinies depend on a liar. But those destinies aren't karmically constructed. They are.

[65:11]

Yes. Destinies are, again, it says, where do these destinies come from? Where do these worlds come from? They come from karma. What maintains, what transmits the karma? Laya is what transmits this karma. Without alaya, the active consciousness cannot send the sense of a world to the next active consciousness. Because active consciousness, they aren't dealing with the sense of the world, they're dealing with the sense data and ideas and feelings and emotions. That's what they're dealing with. They're not dealing with the sense of the world. But they do experience the sense of the world supported by alaya, which is transmitting. Otherwise, they can't transmit karma. Because they do the karma now, it arises and ceases, how does it get to the next moment? Well, it gets to the next moment because in the present moment, this karma that arises simultaneously impresses a liar. Right now. It doesn't have to send the transmission over to the next moment.

[66:12]

It transmits right now to alaya. So this alaya that's now been transformed in the present ceases and becomes the transformed alaya, which is the basis of the next alaya. But the sense consciousness doesn't transform other sense consciousnesses at that time. They don't communicate with each other. They don't exist at the same time as each other. We can say, well, an eye, if you're aware of a color and a sound at the same time, they could influence each other. So there could be that. But for our mind consciousness, that also, they're communicating. But this mind consciousness does not communicate with the next mind consciousness. It's only its deceasedness, it's only its death that's a support. The thing that's supporting the thing. is the alaya. And that carries the karma. And again, the early Buddhist masters were successful, but they did notice that they had problems.

[67:16]

They couldn't explain how karma got transmitted and when they're focusing on the present. And if you can't explain that, then why would you even focus on the present? We say, well, so that I could attain liberation. But how are you going to attain it if nothing transmits your practice? So when the Buddha was giving these teachings, people would practice them and they did fine. But over the years, they realized, we don't know exactly how this is working, and this is a problem that we don't know how it's working. And another aspect of this analysis and this discussion here is that this person, a sangha, uses the language where the problem appeared to discuss the situation, which the problem occurred to the analysts. Those who practiced the teachings of the Buddha and never got into analysis, they were successful, but they had no responsibility for explaining how this all worked.

[68:19]

But the analysts the professional scholars, they noticed that they had problems, like, for example, the Narottasamapati and so on, and they were troubled by it. They couldn't figure out how the Buddhist teaching worked in actual practice, given their understanding. But their understanding was not sophisticated enough to make the Buddhist teaching work, because they thought there was only one kind of consciousness. namely active consciousness. That's what the early Abhidharma says. It doesn't work. It's got lots of contradictions. So the Sangha is speaking in their language to help them understand the Buddha's teaching. The Buddha did not mean that mind, consciousness, and intellect, citta, mano, and vijnana, were synonyms for the one thing. But as I told you before, I thought that they were for many years. I thought there were just three names for the same thing, three different aspects of one mind.

[69:21]

But now it's saying, no, there's actually three discrete and simultaneous things. The vijnanas are not simultaneous with each other. They're arising and ceasing. But the alaya and the manas and the mano-vijnana and the samskasas, those are actually simultaneous. And also the early teachings said there's only one at a time. The sutra is saying there can be all, there has to be actually at least three of them and sometimes there can be eight. So this is a new thing, but somehow we have to use the language of the problem in order to understand why we have this new teaching. But I don't think we have to, like on Sunday, I don't think I have to prove to people that this term, alias, justified.

[70:27]

I hope I don't have to because that would be too much. We went through that previously, which is actually, this is an apology to Abhidharma about why we can have this term, which they never saw before. People looked carefully at the teaching and they never saw the word alaya-vijnana. It's nowhere. They couldn't find it. It may be found someday. Someone said to me that she copied the Lotus Sutra, and she said, what should I do with it? I said, well, give it away. She said, but it's my handwriting. I said, oh, kind of a mess. Things are scratched out and stuff like that. I said, oh. I thought, well, maybe burn it. But then I thought, no, don't burn it. Put it in a nice container and bury it. And someday people will find the Lotus Sutra, you know, when they're going through it. You know, bury it. And they might say, oh, people wrote funny in those days or whatever, but anyway. Maybe the Buddha did say alaya-vijjana, but nobody could— the people looked carefully and they didn't find it, but he did say alaya, and that's enough for a sangha and the composers of the Samdhi Nirmacana to say the Buddha meant a consciousness when he said this thing that people are attached to.

[71:47]

we attach to a consciousness. Living beings attach to a consciousness and a consciousness attaches to living beings. And this thing is very sophisticated. And worlds, the creation of worlds, the karmic creation of worlds depends on this. These worlds are not ultimately substantial or even ascertainable. Really, if you look at them, if you analyze them, you'll never, you can't find them. But if you want to know about how we get in messes, this is how. And you want to know how we get free, this is how. If you just want to be free, forget this book and just focus on the present moment and you'll be free. But if you have to think, somebody said, well, how does that work? You have to read this book, this book is saying, to be able to explain to people why practice works, how it can work, and why not practicing works in this terrible way. How unwholesomeness is transmitted, how unskillful karma is transmitted and accumulated and interferes with our practice, and how practicing another way is transmitted and purifies our practice.

[72:56]

And why it's so slow, too, is also discussed here. How come these things are maintained even when you're practicing? Even when you're focusing on the present, how do these defilements continue? This explains that. And how can purification happen? This explains that. But you don't have to explain it if you're purified. If you can focus, you have the blessing of past practice which allows you to practice. So in that case, the Buddha had students whose alaya had evolved to a point where they could walk up to him and he could just give it to them and they could practice it. And in two or three minutes, Gandita understood. But this teaching is saying, well, he practiced for a long time to be able to receive the Dharma at that moment, and then to receive further instruction. So in a very short period of time, he was an arhat. In a few moments, his manas dropped away.

[73:57]

And this explains how that could happen to him. And then the other people he worked with, these are amazing yogis. In a short period of time, they could receive this teaching. So he didn't tell them about this. They didn't need it. He was just like turning a little switch so that their mind could open to the Dharma. They could hear the true Dharma with his assistance. Even though he couldn't show it to them, he could help them, their consciousness shift to be able to receive it. Nowadays we have to do more work. But I thought that was a difficult paragraph. But I feel that, yeah, this is a really important paragraph to talk about the difference between the supports for active consciousness and the support for laya and how that difference in support is the reason why they can do what they can do, namely,

[75:10]

they being the active consciousness, give us active life to work with, which is great, because here we have language, which is the result of the predisposition for conventional designation. We're experiencing the result of that. We can do this because we're supported by alaya, and this is our problem, but also we can hear the teaching and discuss it, and that can transform alaya to support hearing more teaching and more discussion. But this cannot, this fortunately, unfortunately, this doesn't transmit continuity in our practice. Alaya is carrying that ball. And it can. But it also carries the predisposition to keep us conventionally designating and feeling uncomfortable if we're not conventionally designating. But we can work with that. So this is a very important and difficult paragraph. And again, it's bringing up Buddhist epistemology and Buddhist psychology in a very concentrated form in that one paragraph.

[76:15]

So it would be good if you're... And then there's one more difficult phrase, and that is, because the two moments are not simultaneous. What two moments are not simultaneous? the two moments of active consciousness are not simultaneous. But a lie is simultaneous with these six sense consciousnesses. The way I read this is the sixth sense consciousnesses are different and opposed to the alaya-vijnana in terms of their support object and attention.

[77:17]

Attention means immediate antecedent condition. They're different and opposed to alaya and also because they, the sixth sense consciousnesses, are not simultaneous. That part we've discussed and I think you got that part now. The next part and because one would then overextend the analogy of permeation. And how would you overextend the analogy of permeation? I would say you overextend it by having it go over to the next moment. That's an overextension. Permeation happens simultaneously. permeated and permeated live together. If you say the sense consciousnesses are doing that, you're overextending the analogy. This is an analogy. This is just a metaphor, right? If you try to make the sense consciousnesses doing it, you're overextending the idea. Of course they condition each other, but permeation is overextended if you try to say that the sense consciousness permeates the next sense consciousness, that an eye consciousness permeates the next eye consciousness.

[78:29]

That's overextension of the analogy. That's the way I would understand that. Yeah, so we have the blessing here of being able to go even more slowly than on Sunday. But that's pretty good. I think we can be ready for the next paragraph. What do you think? Are you okay with this one? Ready for the next one? Yes? I was wondering if you talked to Grace after she came out of the coma and talked about any of this type of memory, if she had any, or when she was coming to... And if that's kind of also, you've paid attention to that regarding these teachings you've been teaching for the past few years. I'm dying to do that, but have not yet had the living experience of it.

[79:32]

No, no, no. What did she say? I'm saying I'm dying to have that conversation with her. Well, it's kind of late then. Well, I hope not. I bet she doesn't think it's too late. She's dying to come in here and talk to us about it. So we sent you a thing, and I kind of would like to invite her, but if I invite her, then what about Sonia and Stephen? Now, Sonia and Stephen and Grace are meeting together and studying this text. So I guess another possibility would be, if we continue to do this, that when they're ordained, Sonia and Stephen come and we let Grace come, even if she's not ordained then. But to have her go ahead of them seems a bit much, and to have them to come before, I don't know, that might create problems.

[80:36]

Does that make sense? Because Grace doesn't have any, what do you call it, she doesn't have work responsibilities at Green Gulch that conflict with that either. That makes it simpler for her to come. But I guess I'm just saying maybe I should tell them that I kind of would like them to participate here and I think they would like to. Would they? Yeah. I think those three people would like to. There are some people who I don't think would want to participate, but I think those three would. So I'm trying to find a way to include them. And Grace's situation is, now that you mentioned it, I think it's like a prime example of what we're talking about here. Could we just read one more paragraph, just read it? I just have one question.

[81:38]

Yes. The thing about needing the Elaya Vishnana to explain why... one can go into a state where there's no affliction, I guess, and then later it comes forward and there's affliction again. I mean, doesn't that just depend on a belief in time? I mean, if one doesn't have time, isn't there kind of an underlying assumption of the validity of time? You know, I could easily say yes, and then I would say after that, I would say, but what about the people who do believe in time? What do we do for those people? And the people who do believe in time, maybe they're the ones who need this teaching of alaya-bhijjana. Maybe the Buddha doesn't need the teaching of alaya-bhijjana, but maybe sentient beings who believe in time do. So this is a skillful device for the people who

[82:38]

who do believe in it to help them on the path of liberation. Is it that easy? I mean, really, that that is it? That time is that crucial in it? I mean, that that really is? That if one just... Yeah, I think to this teaching, it's saying time is... This teaching is for people who still live in time because this is a teaching for people who live in, you know, gradual evolution. This is a teaching of gradual purification and gradual enlightenment. So it's kind of paying homage to time. Because sentient beings are dealing with that, so we have to give them a teaching that will help them with the world they live in. But if you didn't believe in time anymore, and a few other things along the way that you didn't believe in, then the practice, the instruction would be different. So maybe those yogis that Buddha first taught didn't believe in time anymore.

[83:49]

Maybe they spent so much time in trance that they kind of like, you know, time was just something that occurred between their exercise programs. But mostly they spent their time just trying to let go of time, forget about past and future. you sort of have to forget about it to be that concentrated, right? Yeah. You have to sort of give up. How long is this period going to be? How many days are we going to be sitting here? And we have some experience of just forgetting about that. So in some sense, concentration, you turn off the concept of time. And then when it gets turned back on, you have all kinds of strange experiences like, was that period unusually short? Was that period unusually long? you know, etc. These strange things happen when we temporarily turn our conceptual equipment off and become not concerned about past and future. And I think these guys, with first students, the Buddha did not need to teach them any explanation about the path.

[84:57]

The whole thing happened in a way, his whole teaching happened sort of at the end of a long path for them. at least in one life, maybe many lives. So they could actually put aside it. So they didn't worry about, well, how does this process work? But after hundreds of years of discussion of the Buddhist teaching, people said, there's problems. How does this whole thing work? And people are having problems and questions, and we don't know how to answer them. And we ourselves have lots of questions and problems. We don't know how to answer them with our current understanding of the Buddhist teaching in mind. So they make this new teaching. So without time, a lot of the problems that this teaching was, that provoked this teaching into manifestation, without that, probably this teaching wouldn't have manifested. So that when you actually have a living Buddha around, in some sense things are simpler.

[85:59]

The Buddha could say, just sit there, you know, and that's the end of the story, and then you understand. But that isn't what he did. But he became a Buddha. These people are becoming arhats. So this is a teaching for people who are going to become Buddhas, and those people have to find a way to bring the teaching to people who live in time, even if they don't, even if they've given it up. They have to go and deal with the problems of time. So, good point. We didn't really want to read the next paragraph anyway, did we? So I really appreciate your questions. I just have been working on the, what do you call it, the acknowledgments for this little book coming out on the sutra.

[87:02]

And I acknowledged your immense interest and perseverance and enthusiasm in studying the Sandhya Nirmacana. And I really feel blessed. And I feel blessed that we're studying this now. So thank you very much. And may we continue. I won't be here for a few weeks. I'll be... When do you return? I'll return on July 9th. And then I'm going to give a talk on July 10th. Here? Yeah. Yeah. So I'll get up from my... Will you even get to bed? Yeah, I'll get... Yeah? Yeah, I turn 68. I'll go to sleep, I'll get up and give a talk, and I think it might be interesting what happens when I... It'll be like Galen when she did it after her Dharma transmission.

[88:04]

It was short. Well, it was... It was very... May our intention equally extend to every being and place. We hate the truth. We hate the truth. We hate the truth.

[88:26]

@Transcribed_v005
@Text_v005
@Score_86.46