In Exile From the Land of Snows

by John Avedon

  JA: Could you describe the two truths: ultimate and conventional. What are they and how do they work?

  DL: This is important. Take the table as an example. If one searches for the object designated—the table itself—it can’t be found. If one divides up the parts of the table in terms of directions or divides up its qualities or substances, then one can’t find a whole that is the table. Indeed, to our minds there is a distinction between whole and parts such that when they appear to us, there seems to be a whole separate from parts—parts separate from whole. In reality, however, there isn’t. Now, when one searches in this way, one will not find the table. This nonfinding, though, does not mean that the table doesn’t exist. We’re using it, right? But if we search for it, we can’t find it. So there are two types of modes of being of the table. One is the positing of the table by a mind that doesn’t analyze and is just involved in the conventionality. That sort of table is found by that sort of mind. However, if you take the table as the object, if you are not satisfied with just this which you put your hand on but search to discover what it actually is among the parts—whether this is it or that is it—then there isn’t anything that can be found to be it. Why is there this nonfinding of the table? It’s because the table is something that is such that if analytically sought, it can’t be found. Now what does the mind searching to find the table among its parts discover? It finds just that nonfinding of the table. This nonfinding itself is a quality of the table, its substratum or base. This nonfinding is the final nature of the table. Something more subtle does not exist. Thus, this is the ultimate or final mode of establishment of the table. Now, this mode of being is sought with respect to the table as the base or substratum. Therefore, this nonfinding is the actual mode of being of the table. Thus, with respect to the one basis, the table, there are two natures: one that is found by a nonanalytical mind and one that is found by the analytical mind. With respect to one base, then, there is an object found by a consciousness distinguishing the ultimate and an object found by a consciousness distinguishing the conventional.36 Thus it is said: “Form is emptiness. Emptiness is form.” Now these two are mutually exclusive. The two truths are one entity but are mutually exclusive.

  JA: How?

  DL: With respect to a phenomenon, that which is its ultimate truth is not its conventional truth and vice versa.

  JA: So, it’s incorrect to say that they are mutually definitive?

  DL: The one doesn’t define the other. Still, if you take the ultimate reality or emptiness of the table as the substratum and search to see if it can be found, then it becomes a conventional truth in terms of itself as the substratum. In relation to the table, its emptiness is an ultimate truth, but in relation to its own reality, i.e., the reality of the reality, it’s a conventional truth. It’s contradictory for something to be its own mode of being. Therefore, the reality of something is not its own reality. This is because when reality is sought, when the nature of things is sought, it can’t be found either.

  JA: When emptiness first appears to the mind, what is it like?

  DL: Even though the word, dharmata,37 doesn’t have any negative particle in it, when that—the nature or reality of phenomena—appears to the mind, it must appear through the root of a negation. It is important to make this distinction. I’m talking within the context of the two truths as set forth in Nagarjuna’s Treatise on the Middle Way. Is it that when inherent existence is sought, it is not found because it doesn’t exist, or even though it exists, it isn’t found because it can’t be found under analysis? It is the former. When you look at how things appear to your mind, they appear as if they were such that they could be found upon analysis. Therefore, if things did exist in the way they appear to our minds, when you examine them they should become clearer and clearer. The fact that they do not is a sign that they don’t exist in the way they appear to. In sum, though they appear to inherently exist, they don’t exist in that way.

  Now, in your mind, you initially have a sense that the object doesn’t exist in the way it appears to. When you get used to this thought, accustomed to it, you eventually ascertain that the object does not exist at all in the way it appears. At that time, your own sense of appearances is an experience of vacuity, which is simply the absence of inherent existence. At the beginning of this process, the object—this thing that is empty—might still appear. In an easy way, if one goes to a cinema, you might differentiate two different times while watching the movie. In both cases pictures would appear to your eye consciousness, but in the first instance one would just observe them, while in the latter you would be thinking strongly that this doesn’t exist as a fact. If you strongly develop and maintain the thought that this doesn’t exist—if you concentrate on its nonexistence—then in time the appearance itself will begin to vanish. This is because the immediately preceding condition of the eye consciousness will begin to deteriorate. Therefore, when you initially ascertain emptiness, just a mere negative or absence of the object of negation—inherent existence—is ascertained. Even if at the beginning the object still appears, in time, with concentration on emptiness, it will disappear. Then due to observing the emptiness of the object, when the object reappears, the thought that it doesn’t exist in the way that it seems to is induced. This is called the illusory-like appearance. At this point you are able to control your afflictive emotions. These faulty consciousnesses can in no way be produced without the assistance of the conception of inherent existence. Even though for beginners there are cases when the conception of inherent existence acts as an assister to a virtuous consciousness, in general, it is not necessary that such a consciousness have assistance from the misconception of the nature of existence. Therefore, a consciousness realizing that objects do not exist in their own right serves to obstruct the generation of afflictions, whereas it doesn’t serve to obstruct a virtuous consciousness.

  JA: At the moment emptiness is understood—when the object vanishes—what does it feel like?

  DL: I’ll just give a conventional example. For instance, the reflection of a face is empty of being a face, but its emptiness of being a face is not its reality; its emptiness of inherent existence is. When from the very depths the mind realizes the absence of this kind of existence of the object, at that point no other consciousness is being generated. Not even the thought “this is emptiness.” If you did think “this is emptiness,” then emptiness would be distant. It would be like an object under observation. It would not have arrived at being the actual object of apprehension by the consciousness.

  JA: So there is a loss of duality?

  DL: No. Even here there is still duality. There is the duality of the appearance of the conventional object as well as the appearance of the image of emptiness.

  JA: If you were to describe the image itself in conventional terms, would you say that it’s clear, vacuous, buoyant, luminous?

  DL: That’s very difficult to describe. To explain this exactly is very difficult. There are many different types of dualistic appearance. One is the appearance of conventionalities—objects as we normally see them. Then there is the appearance of inherent existence; also the appearance of subject and object as if different; and the appearance of a general image—an image covering all objects in a particular group. When one gets used to the mind realizing emptiness—cultivating it even further in and out of meditative equipoise—and it turns into direct perception, then for that consciousness all types of dualistic appearance have vanished.

  JA: There is no natural luminosity or clarity to the appearance of emptiness?

  DL: No, but in terms of tantric practice it’s a different story. That’s not from the point of view of emptiness but from the consciousness. Due to the dissolving of the coarser consciousnesses, there are many different types of appearances. These appearances result from the subtler consciousnesses as well as being connected to one’s body; the white and red constituents and so forth.38

  JA: Can you describe the mind of a Buddha?


  DL: That which prevents the mind from knowing all there is to be known are called the obstructions to omniscience. With respect to the obstructions to omniscience, there are potencies,39 which are established by the conception of inherent existence and which cause objects to appear as if they inherently or concretely exist. Even though primarily the false appearance of an object is the fault of the subject—the consciousness cognizing it—there may be some fault with the object in that it itself is polluted by ignorance or the latencies of ignorance. From this appearance—that of objects as inherently existent—there is the defilement that conceives the two truths to be different entities. Due to this defilement, when phenomena appear, they seem to exist in their own right, thus preventing the appearance of their reality. Similarly, when the reality of an object appears, the object cannot. We’re talking about direct perception. When this obstruction to omniscience is removed, however, then while knowing the object one can know its nature and while knowing its nature, one can know the object. One mind can then simultaneously and directly ascertain both an object and its nature. Thus an omniscient consciousness—from the point of view of knowing conventional objects—is a consciousness that perceives the varieties of all phenomena. From the point of view of its knowing the nature of objects, it’s a consciousness that knows the mode of being of objects, i.e., emptiness. But it is just one consciousness that knows both. This is a distinctive feature of the omniscient consciousness of a Buddha.

  JA: Why is omniscience dependent on the elimination of the latent obstructions through compassion?

  DL: The reason for wanting to be omniscient is to help others. To do so, one must know how to help others. Thus, nothing can be obscured. Those defilements that obstruct knowledge of the different dispositions, interests, and so forth of trainees are the main enemy of a Bodhisattva. The obstructions to omniscience are never in any way helpful to a Bodhisattva, whereas the obstructions to liberation, that is to say the afflictions, can sometimes be helpful in achieving the welfare of others (as in the case of a leader’s fathering many children to help in administration). Whether or not a consciousness realizing emptiness acts as an antidote to the obstructions to omniscience depends greatly on motivation. Even though the view realizing emptiness in the continuum of a Listener or Solitary Realizer Superior is the same as the view in the continuum of a Bodhisattva Superior, the ability of the latter to serve as an antidote to the obstructions to omniscience is due to motivation and also due to great merit.40 There is no way for the collection of wisdom to be brought to completion without that of the collection of merit. It’s as if you are going to put up one of these rafters here. To do so, you need to put up two pillars. Even though you don’t need one pillar to put up the other, to hold up that rafter, both must be used. So in order for the view realizing emptiness to turn into the Truth Body of a Buddha, it is necessary for it to have all of the causes required for the production of a Form Body.

  JA: How are compassionate means and the wisdom of emptiness41 ultimately identical?

  DL: In the Perfection Vehicle42 there is a description of wisdom and method conjoined. For example, before entering into meditative equipoise on emptiness, one generates an altruistic mind directed toward becoming enlightened. Then the meditative equipoise is conjoined with the force of that altruistic motivation. Also, when one is practicing altruistic acts—giving, ethics, and so forth—43 these should be conjoined with the force of the mind realizing emptiness. Thus in this way, there is a union of wisdom and method, the one affecting the other. In mantra, there is a union of method and wisdom within one consciousness and even more profound features of that union within Highest Yoga Tantra.

  JA: How, in a Buddha’s mind, is bliss united with this?

  DL: Yes. There is a feeling of bliss. From a Buddha’s own point of view everything is a pure appearance and a blissful appearance. From his own point of view. Now, does suffering appear to a Buddha? Yes, but not from his own point of view, but due to its appearance in another person undergoing suffering. Does an appearance of inherent existence occur to a Buddha? Yes, but not from a Buddha’s own viewpoint; but by way of its appearing to a person who hasn’t abandoned the obstructions to omniscience. Now, the appearance of inherent existence does, in general, exist. Something’s existing, and its not appearing to a Buddha is contradictory. Therefore, whatever exists must appear to a Buddha, but not necessarily from his own point of view. Through the force of its appearing to someone else and only through that does it appear.

  Notes to An Interview with the Dalai Lama

  1. My Land and My People, Potala Publications.

  2. Mahakala (Tib. Nak-po-chen-po) is a wrathful emanation of Avalokiteshvara (Tib. Chenrezi), the Bodhisattva of Infinite Compassion, of whom the Dalai Lama is an incarnation. He is one of the primary protective deities of the Buddhist teaching.

  3. Located near present-day Rajgir in Bihar, India, Nalanda was the largest of Mahayana Buddhism’s monastic universities. It was founded in the fifth century by a Gupta king and destroyed during the Moslem invasions of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.

  4. Predicted by the Buddha to be a great upholder of the dharma, Nagarjuna was born in southern India around the first century A.D. He became one of the foremost exponents of the newly cohering Mahayana, as well as founding the Madhyamika School through six major works clarifying emptiness of inherent existence as the final status of phenomena.

  5. Dependent-arising (Sans. pratityasamūtpada; Tib. ten-jung) refers to the Buddhist doctrine of cause and effect in which phenomena and events are held to be produced and destroyed dependently, i.e., through causes and conditions.

  6. Geshé literally means “spiritual friend,” though it is most often translated doctor of Buddhist philosophy or master of metaphysics. The geshé degree, to which most monks of Tibet’s largest sect—the Ge-luk-pa (“Wholesome Way”) or Yellow Hats—aspire, requires extensive study of five major areas usually taking more than twenty years.

  7. Before its destruction in the early 1960s by the Chinese, Drepung Monastery was the world’s largest religious institution. Over ten thousand monks lived within its precincts, located five miles northwest of Lhasa.

  8. Charles Bell, Great Britain’s resident envoy to Tibet, recounts the Dalai Lama’s enthronement in his book Portrait of the Dalai Lama. (See the bibliography.)

  9. Kyabjé Ling Rinpoché: the Dalai Lama’s senior tutor and current head of the Ge-luk-pa Sect.

  10. Shunyata (Tib. tong-pa-nyi) can be translated as either emptiness or voidness. It denotes the Buddhist conception of the ultimate nature of reality and refers specifically to the lack of an inherently existent self in all phenomena and beings.

  11. Bodhichitta (Tib. chang-chub-gyi-sem) means mind of enlightenment. It is divided into two types: conventional and ultimate. Conventional bodhichitta is the altruistic motive to obtain enlightenment for the sake of freeing all sentient beings from suffering and also refers to the altruistic practices that this motive entails. Ultimate bodhichitta is the realization of ultimate truth or emptiness in the mental continuum of a Bodhisattva.

  12. One of Tibet’s three original provinces, Kham lies east of Utsang (central Tibet) and south of Amdo (northeast Tibet). Following the formation of the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) in December 1964, it was severed by Peking from Utsang and incorporated into the Chinese state of Sichuan. Amdo has also been cut off from central Tibet and is now treated as part of Chinghai.

  13. The Abhidharmakosha or “Treasury of Knowledge” was written by the Buddhist scholar Vasubandhu approximately nine hundred years after the Buddha’s death. It deals extensively with the various classes of mental and physical phenomena, placing special emphasis on which traits are to be developed and which abandoned in the quest for enlightenment.

  14. The Tibetan term, lung (Sans. prana), can be translated as air (inner or outer), energy, or wind.

  15. Samadhi (Tib. ting-nge-dzin) means meditative stabilization, specifically one-pointed co
ncentration on an object. There are nine levels leading to a fully qualified state of meditative stabilization called calm abiding (Sans. shamatha; Tib. zhi-gnas), which can be used as a basis for attaining supernormal or miraculous abilities.

  16. Refuge refers to the Buddhist practice of “taking refuge” from the sufferings of cyclic existence (Sans. samsara; Tib. khor-wa) in the Three Jewels: The Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. The Buddha or “Awakened One” (Tib. Sang-gye) has realized both the ultimate and conventional nature of existence and is therefore a fit source of refuge from it. His teaching, the Dharma (Tib. chö), comprises the cessation of suffering as well as the path of inner development sentient beings must follow to obtain liberation. The Sangha or community (Tib. Ge-dun) are all those practicing the Dharma. Technically the term denotes any group of four or more fully ordained monks or a Bodhisattva who has obtained the first Bodhisattva stage (Sans. bhumi; Tib. so) equivalent to the path of seeing.