Showing posts with label Buddhist Studies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Buddhist Studies. Show all posts

Meditation - Tibetan Buddhism - What Is The Buddhist View Of The Self?

    The Self is the Antithesis of Selflessness. 

    All four Buddhist schools consider emptiness to be a 'self-emptiness,' but this does not imply that things are devoid of themselves. 

    • No thing, not even an emptiness, would exist if objects were empty of themselves. 
    • Rather, in the Prasangika paradigm, the term'self-emptiness' refers to an object's absence of intrinsic existence. 
    • The term'self-emptiness' differentiates Buddhist emptiness from theories like Samkhya, which claim that a person is empty of being all of the world's things. 

    This emptiness is known as a 'other-emptiness,' and it may be realized by differentiating one thing from another, such as distinguishing the person (purusha) from the nature (prakrti) that gives birth to all appearances in the Samkhya philosophy. 

    • On the other hand, realizing a'self-emptiness' entails identifying the lack of a false predicate of an object, such as the absence of its own intrinsic existence, rather than separating one entity from another. 

    The things that constitute the foundations of the characteristic of emptiness do not present to the mind when emptiness is directly cognized. 

    As a result, some Tibetans, such as the Jo-nang-bas, misunderstood Buddhist emptiness as a 'other-emptiness.' Self, defined as intrinsic existence, is denied in the Prasangikas' sophisticated doctrine of selflessness. 

    In the Prasangika System, The Hypothetical Synonyms For 'Self' Are: 

    • True establishment (satya-siddhi/bhava, bden par grub pa/ dngos po). 
    • Existence as it is (satya-sat, bden par yodpa). 
    • Existence in its final form (paramartha-siddhij don dam par grub pa). 
    • Existence as [its own] particularity (tattva-siddhide kho na nyid du grub pa). 
    • Existence as a [self-contained] reality (samyak-siddhi, yang dag par grub pa). 
    • Svalakshana-siddhi, ring gi mtshan nyid kyis grub pa). 
    • A significant existence (dravya-sat, rdzas yod). 
    • Existence that is capable of establishing itself (tshugs thub tu grub pa). 
    • Existence from the object's perspective [rather than from the subject's perspective] (svarupa-siddhi, rang ngos nas grub pa). 
    • The presence of a goal (vishaya-siddhij yul gyi steng nas grub pa) # It is able to exist because of its own strength (svairi-siddhi\ rang dbang du grub pa). 
    • In the item to which the designation is applied (prajnaptivishaya-siddhi, btags yul gyi steng nas grub pa). 
    • Gdags gzhi'i steng nas grub pa (gdags gzhi'i steng nas grub pa) svabhava-siddhi, 
    • (rang bzhin gyis grub pa) svabhava-siddhi, (svabhavata-siddhi, ngo bo nyid gyis grub pa). 
    • In a way that covers its foundation of designation (gdags gzhi'i go sa gnon pa I tshul du yod pa). 
    • Gdags gzhi'i ngos nas grub pa) exists from the standpoint of designation. 

    The members of this list are merely 'hypothetical' synonyms because 'synonym' (ekartha) in Buddhist logic implies 'one thing,' therefore all synonyms must exist. 

    • These words for'self' can only be 'hypothetical' synonyms since they relate to non-existents.
    • All of these words are opposites of dependent-arising since the subtle self, which is denied in the Prasangika conception of selflessness, indicates an independent being. 
    • Each elucidates the concept of non-dependence a bit further. 

    'Existing from the side of the basis of designation,' for example, implies that if you looked for the item named, you'd find it among the bases of designation, as their composite, or as the composite of their previous and later moments. 

    • 'Substantially existent' implies that an item exists by its own power rather than via the force of statements. 
    • Existing able to establish itself implies existing in the object's foundation of designation by way of the object's own entity, rather than via the power of words and phrases. 
    • 'Existing via its own power' refers to the object's own unique way of existence. 

    'Establishment via the force of a designating awareness' is the Prasangikas' unique definition of 'dependency.' 

    Phenomena are thought-dependent in the sense that only if the thought that identifies an object exists can that thing be posited as existing (conventionally), and if that idea does not exist, the object's (conventional) existence cannot be postulated. 

    • Nothing exists inherently since this applies to all things. 
    • It's like to a snake being imputationed to a rope. 
    • If a speckled and coiled rope is not clearly visible, the idea 'This is a snake' may emerge. 
    • At the moment, the composite of the rope's components and the pieces themselves could not possibly be construed as a snake; the snake is only conjured up in the mind. 

    Similarly, when the concept " emerges in reliance on the mental and physical aggregates, the composite of the previous and later moments of the aggregates' continuum, or the composite of the aggregates at one time, or the individual aggregates themselves cannot be posited in the least as the I. 

    Furthermore, there is nothing distinct from the aggregates or their composite that can be interpreted as I. 

    As a result, the I is only formed by thinking in reliance on the aggregates, rather than being essentially as it seems. 

    • A person's connection to the six components that make up his or her grounds of imputation or designation—earth, water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness—can be analyzed in the same way. 
    • A person is neither a collection of them, nor is he or she any of them separately, nor is he or she something other than them. 
    • As a result, a person is proven not to exist fundamentally. 

    Only the Prasangika school recognizes all of the aforementioned words as synonyms; non-Prasangika schools do not place the same value on these terms and therefore arrange them differently. 

    • The Chittamatrins, for example, would not claim that dependent phenomena (paratantra) are independent just because they exist intrinsically; "inherent existence" for them simply implies that things have their own way of being. 
    • The Prasangikas, on the other hand, argue that the terms "innate existence" and "own way of being" indicate independence. 
    • Non-Prasangikas further argue that if things were solely named in the sense of being unfindable among their bases of designation, they would cease to exist since the unfindable could not possible be functional. 

    The other schools, according to the Prasangikas, have misunderstood the meaning of 'only designated' or 'only imputed' (prajnapti-matra, btagspa tsam); the Prasangikas claim that although this word implies that the designated object is not its foundation of designation, it does not indicate non-functionality. 

    • What is simply labeled may be functional, much as a lady produced by a magician can captivate an unsuspecting audience, which is a fundamental yet challenging aspect of the Prasangika-Madhyamika system. 
    • It is claimed that when a yogi believes he is advancing in his knowledge of emptiness, he loses ground in his understanding of conventional objects, and that when he thinks he is progressing in his understanding of conventional things, he loses ground in his understanding of emptiness. 
    • It is important to remember that progress in the presentation of emptiness helps in the presentation of conventional things, and progress in the presentation of conventional objects aids in the presentation of emptiness for someone who has discovered the Prasarigika perspective. 

    The Prasangikas escape the extreme of destruction by opposing only intrinsic existence rather than mere existence. 

    • They escape the extreme of permanence by asserting merely nominal existence rather than intrinsic existence. 
    • To put it another way, they explain exactly how things exist and do not exist. 
    • Because things exist imputedly, the absence of even nominal or defined existence would constitute an extreme of annihilation—an extreme of non-being. 
    • Because things do not essentially exist, intrinsic existence would be an extreme of permanence—an extreme of existence. 
    • The extremes are no nominal existence, which means no being at all, and intrinsic existence, which is 'finer' and 'coarser' than the proper presentation. 

    As a result, the two most extreme ideas are that things do not exist fundamentally and that things do not exist by design. 

    Extremes do not exist, but their ideologies do, and they can be dismantled. 

    Many people believe that the Prasangikas have reached a point of nihilism, that they are no different from nihilists who reject the reality of rebirth and so on." 

    • The Prasangikas themselves deny any resemblance, claiming that nonperception of previous and subsequent births is insufficient to determine the emptiness of previous and subsequent births. 
    • To begin, one must first determine what previous and subsequent births are and whether or not they occur. 
    • Then, using logic like the present birth becoming a past birth when the future birth becomes the current birth, one may deduce that past, present, and future births are all interdependent and hence do not exist fundamentally. 
    • The emptiness of births may be determined by recognizing that previous and subsequent births do not exist fundamentally. 
    • It is necessary to identify both the positive subject (births) and the negative predicate (non-inherent existence) since one cannot determine emptiness just by looking at nothing. 

    The Nihilists in question are Dialectician Nihilists, not Meditating Nihilists, since some of the latter achieve meditative clairvoyance and therefore experience a limited number of previous and future lives.

    • Future lives, according to the Dialectician Nihilists, do not exist since no one is observed coming here from a previous life or going from this life to a future existence. 
    • Future lives, according to the Madhyamikas, do not exist intrinsically because they are dependentarisings, or, to put it another way, because they are defined by concepts and ideas. 
    • They do not, however, reject the reality of past and future lives. 
    • Both the Nihilists and the Madhyamikas have quite distinct theses and motives.

    List Of Research Sources

    • Oral teachings of Kensur Lekden. 
    • Annotations by Nga-wang-bel-den 

    Meditation - Tibetan Buddhism - How Does Meditation Help With Self Awareness?


      Meditation: Self-Awareness. 


      These are the steps taken by someone who is just learning to meditate: 

      - How does a novice gain experience with the concept of emptiness? 

      - How to develop a similitude of exceptional insight based on a calm abiding similitude? 

      - How to develop genuine unique insight based on genuine quiet abiding?

      - How to develop direct emptiness cognition? 

      - During the second stage of, how to dwell on nothingness?

      - Yoga Tantra at its highest level. 


      How can a novice get experience with the concept of emptiness? 

      • Through one of many reasonings, a yogi gets an early acquaintance with the concept of emptiness at the first stage. 
      • He goes through three fundamental meditation steps: recognizing the object negated in the perspective of selflessness, establishing that selflessness follows from the reason, and establishing the presence of the reason in the subject. 

      The person's selflessness is the first object of meditation, and the logic employed is Chandrakfrti's sevenfold reasoning. 

      • In the idea of selflessness, identifying the object is prohibited. 
      • One must first focus and cleanse one's thoughts. 
      • One waits for the I to emerge while sitting calmly. 
      • If it does not, an appearance of it is produced by thinking ", and the appearance is seen with a subtle kind of awareness. 
      • If the awareness that observes the appearance is too powerful, the I will either not exist or will emerge and vanish soon. 

      As a result, one should let the awareness conceiving I to be produced constantly, and one may acquire a solid feeling of it by observing it as if from a corner. 

      • You might also pretend that you're being accused, even if it's untrue, and keep an eye on your sense of self. 
      • One could recall a false allegation in which one believed to themselves, "I did not do this; I am being falsely accused." It is possible to get a good idea of how the non-analytical brain perceives me by observing the accused I. 

      If a yogi's recollection of such an accusation is weak, he or she cultivates it until the feeling of I as misconceived by the inherent nonanalytical mind becomes clear. 

      • This inherent mind makes no distinction between whether the I is identical to or distinct from mind and body. 
      • It imagines an I that is self-sufficient, capable of establishing itself, naturally or intrinsically existing from the beginning, and merged with the appearance of mind and body, without any thinking and by the power of habit. 
      • Even if such an I does not exist in actuality, an image or idea of it exists and will emerge. 
      • The look of a concrete I is first difficult to recognize, but it becomes apparent with time. 
      • The I seems to be the breath at times, and the stomach at other times, like when someone has an upset stomach and says, "I am ill." The I may appear as the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, or mental awareness at times. 

      The I Seems To Be Physical At Times And Mental At Other Times.

      According to the Fifth Dalai Lama, the appearance of the I and the appearance of the mind and body are, in the end, as if mingled together like water and milk, undifferentiated yet clear enough to grasp with the hand. 

      • In his Manual of Instructions on the View, Dzong-ka-pupil ba's Kay-drup states, "If the mind thinking 'I' is not created, you should manufacture the idea 'I' and promptly examine its manner of manifestation." You'll learn about its look without having to mix it up with anything else... 
      • There is a distinct mode of appearance of I to the consciousness which thinks " if you gaze softly from a corner without losing the awareness thinking ", and this appearance is not any of the mental and bodily aggregates. 

      The I does not seem to be a fictitious identification, but rather looks to be self-created. 

      You are trapped in circular existence by believing that the I exists as it appears. 

      Is it possible for the I to seem self-established if its appearance is mingled with that of mind and body? 

      • It might seem theoretically impossible for it to be self-established and mixed at the same time, but the inherent intellect apprehending I does not logically evaluate its object before, during, or after its apprehension. 
      • The appearance of a self-established I is intermingled with the appearance of mental and physical elements, but it is not identical. 

      Ling Rinbochay, the current Dalai Lama's Senior Tutor, stated that if someone puts a pin in your finger, you feel that the pin is lodged in you, not simply your finger. 

      • You have a strong feeling of the I who is in pain. 
      • To determine this look, it is critical to conduct a prolonged, delicate study of it without allowing it to vanish. 
      • Before moving on to the second stage, some instructors recommend observing the I for a week or even months. 

      In Vedanta, the jiva, or 'limited individual existence,' is frequently described as being the size of a thumb and situated in the 'heart.' 

      • In Vedanta, the jwa is merged with the infinite self, Brahman, whereas in Buddhism, the appearance of a concrete I is analyzed, found to be non-existent, and overcome, eventually leading to a direct realization of emptiness in which the subject, wisdom consciousness, is merged with its object, emptiness, like fresh water poured into fresh water.

      List Of Research Sources.

      • The Great Exposition of Tenets by Jam-yang-shay-ba. 
      • Oral teachings of Kensur Lekden. 
      • Tenets as presented by Jang-gya. 
      • Manjushr, the Sacred Word of the Fifth Dalai Lama 
      • The Manual of Instructions on the View by T. Kay-drup. 

      • Oral teachings of Ling Rinbochay. 

      • Jam-yang-shay-ba describes five phases of emptiness meditation. 

      Meditation - Tibetan Buddhism - How Do Buddhists Do Tibetan Meditation?

        Investigation Via Meditation.


        Determining that selflessness is a result of the rationale. 

        • The ascertainment that if the I exists in the manner it is understood, then it must be either the same entity as the mental and bodily aggregates or a separate entity from those aggregates is the second of the three fundamental stages in meditation on personal selflessness.' 
        • If the I exists intrinsically, it must be either the same entity as the aggregates or a distinct entity. 
        • Entity similarity and dissimilarity are mutually incompatible; if two things exist, they must be identical or dissimilar. 

        If the I is discovered to be neither essentially the same as nor fundamentally distinct from the mind and body, then the I does not inherently exist. 

        • One may conclude that the I does not inherently exist as it seems by using the seven-fold argument. 
        • If non-inherent existence permeates, or happens with, every instance of not being intrinsically the same as or different from the aggregates, such an inference cannot be formed. 
        • To put it another way, a yogi must understand that whatever is fundamentally neither the same as nor distinct from its basis of categorization does not exist inherently. 
        • One must come to the clear conviction that a third option of tangible existence does not exist. 
        • When this happens, one begins to question one's own existence in the same manner that one begins to doubt an old friend. 

        Identifying the reasons' existence in the subject 

        In summary, 

        (i)'I' do not inherently exist because I I am not the aggregates, 

        (ii) I am not an entity other than the aggregates, 

        (iii) I am not the base of the aggregates, 

        (iv) I am not inherently based on the aggregates, 

        (v) I am not inherently possessing the aggregates, 

        (vi) I am not the aggregates' shape, and 

        (vii) I am not the aggregates' shape. 

        After recognizing the inherently existing I and determining that it must be either the same as or distinct from mind and body, the third stage in emptiness meditation is to establish the first reason as a characteristic of the I, demonstrating that the I is not mind and body. 

        Many arguments are offered here, and each should be carefully examined until one emerges that challenges the idea that the I is made up of mind and body."

        • I Demonstrating that the I is not comprised of the intellect and body 
        • The statement of an I would be meaningless if the I were made up of mental and bodily aggregates. 
        • The aggregates would simply be referred to as". 
        • The I is not the aggregates since the selves would be many if the aggregates were many, and the aggregates would be one if the I was one. 
        • The I is not the aggregates since the I would be created and disintegrated in the same way that the aggregates are. 
        • The I is not created essentially, and it does not dissolve naturally, since if it did, recollection of previous incarnations would be impossible. 

        Because the two I's from separate lives would be fundamentally distinct, they would be unrelated. 

        • Because there would be no transfer of the potencies acquired through activities because the Fs of various lives would be unconnected to each other, the I is not naturally created and does not essentially dissolve. 
        • Because the I would meet with the consequences of acts not done by itself, the I is not essentially created and does not naturally dissolve. 

        If, on the other hand, the potencies acquired through acts were transferred, the consequences of those deeds would be experienced by an I who was completely distinct from the I who did the deeds. 

        Demonstrating That The I Is Identical To The Intellect And Body

        • The I is not a separate entity from mind and body since it would lack the collective characteristics of creation, dissolution, enduring, shape, experiencing, and realizing things if it were. 
        • The I is not a distinct entity from the mental and bodily aggregates; if it were, the name I would be meaningless. 
        • The I would be a non-product, because non-products aren't subject to change, while the I does. 
        • Because there would be no object to be perceived as I if the I were a distinct entity from the aggregates, there would be no object to be apprehended as I. 
        • The I would be a non-product, similar to nirvana, or a non-existent, similar to a sky flower. 

        If the I were a distinct entity from the aggregates, it would be apprehendable apart from them, just as the character of form is apprehendable separately from the character of awareness. 

        However, this is not the case. 

        Demonstrating that the I is not the foundation of the mind and body.

        The I isn't fundamentally the foundation of the mental and physical aggregates, like a bowl of yogurt or snow that blankets and surrounds a forest of trees, since if it were, the I and the aggregates would be two separate things. 

        In the first rationale, this has already been rejected. 

        • Demonstrating that the intellect and body are not the foundation of I
        • The I is not fundamentally founded on the aggregates, as a human living in a tent or a lion living in a jungle is, since if it were, the I and the aggregates would be two separate things. 

        In the second rationale, this has already been rejected. 

        • Determining that the I does not have mind and body by default 
        • The I does not naturally own the aggregates in the same way that a person does not inherently possess a cow, since if it did, the I and the aggregates would be two separate beings. 
        • The I does not intrinsically own the aggregates in the same way that a person owns his body or a tree owns its core, since it would make the I and the aggregates the same thing. 

        In the second and first reasonings, these views have already been rejected. 

        Demonstrating that the self is not a combination of intellect and body.

        Because the aggregates constitute the foundation of the designation I, and an item named is not its basis of designation, the I is not simply a composite of the aggregates. 

        • The I is not the aggregates' composite because the aggregates' composite does not exist essentially; if the aggregates' composite existed inherently, the composites would be many like the aggregates, or the aggregates would be one like the composite. 
        • Also, if the aggregate composite were a separate entity from the aggregates, it would be distinguishable from the aggregates and lack the aggregates' character, but this is not the case. 

        Establishing that the I is not a physical form 

        Because form is physical, the I is not the shape of the body. 

        • If the I were just physical, it would not be aware. 
        • Furthermore, the form of the body does not exist fundamentally since it is made up of the shapes of the body's limbs. 
        • Without more thought, one understands that the I does not exist fundamentally. 

        Non-inherent existence results if a phenomenon is in none of these seven connections with its bases of designation, and now it's clear that the I, body, and mind can't be in any of these seven relationships. 

        • As a result, the I does not exist as a physical entity as it is often thought. 
        • Before gaining a grasp of emptiness, novices must first get familiar with the logic over a lengthy period of time. 
        • Reasons, on the other hand, do not need infinite establishment since if every reason had to be established by another reason, the primary thesis would never be realized. 
        • The reasons have been established to the point that they have been proven by experience. 

        If a person lacks this experience, other options, such as examples, must be considered in order to acquire the required experience that defines the reasoning.

        List Of Research Sources

        • The Great Exposition of Tenets by Jam-yang-shay-ba. 
        • Annotations by Nga-wang-bel-den.

        Meditation - Tibetan Buddhism - What Is The Concept Of Dependent Arising?


          If a yogi is told by his guru to meditate on the I's non-inherent existence using dependent-arising logic, he should think to himself, "I don't intrinsically exist since I'm a dependent arising." 

          There are three stages to the meditation:

          In the context of selflessness, identifying the object is prohibited. 

          • This phase is the same as the sevenfold reasoning process. 
          • The yogi recognizes the appearance of an I as if it covers all of its grounds of identification, and he or she also recognizes how the mind responds to this appearance. 

          Determining that selflessness is a result of the rationale 

          • Because intrinsic or independent existence is the polar opposite of dependent-arising, it is determined that whatever is a dependent-arising does not inherently exist. 

          Establishing the existence of the subject's rationale 

          • Because the life of a being in cyclic existence is formed by predispositions set by an action motivated by ignorance, the I is a dependent-arising because it is produced by contaminated acts and afflictions. 

          Ignorance of the nature of the individual motivates even the virtuous acts that lead to joyful migrations and the non-moving deeds that lead to life in the form and formless worlds.

          • Because it achieves its existence in reliance on its parts—its earlier and later moments, mind and body, and so on—the I is a dependent-arising. 
          • Because I am imputed in reliance on a consciousness that specifies, ", I am a dependent-arising. 
          • Without more thought, one realizes that the I does not exist inherently since one has already established that whatever is a dependent-arising does not exist essentially and has now established the existence of the reason—being a dependent arising—in the subject I. 

          The shortness of dependent-arising reasoning demonstrates why yogis first use the sevenfold reasoning, which elucidates in detail how the I cannot be discovered under examination. 

          • The sign of dependent-arising is sufficient to demonstrate that the subject cannot be discovered under analysis.
          • Nevertheless, it takes more than one examination of dependent-arising to understand that analytical unfindability or non-inherent existence are both associated with being a dependent-arising. 
          • Dependent-arising reasoning is also used to things other than people, such as the body: Because it is a dependent-arising, the body does not exist fundamentally. 

          In the context of selflessness, identifying the object is prohibited.

          One recognizes a body that seems intrinsically existing and self-established in the context of being indistinguishably intermingled with the appearance of the five limbs and trunk. 

          • It's the look of the body covering all five limbs and the trunk. 
          • Determining that selflessness is a result of the rationale 
          • Whatever is dependent-arising does not exist essentially, since inherent existence refers to something that existing independently of others. 

          Establishing the existence of the subject's rationale 

          • Because it is created by the mother's blood and the father's sperm, the body is a dependent-arising organism. 
          • Because it achieves its own existence in reliance on its parts—arms, legs, head, trunk, and so on—the body is a dependent-arising entity. 
          • Because it is imputed in reliance on arms, legs, head, trunk, and so on, the body is a dependent-arising entity. 

          Without more thought, one understands that the body does not exist by default. 

          The body does not inherently exist because,


              • it is not the arms, legs, etc., 
              • it is not a separate entity from the arms, legs, etc., 
              • it is not the base of the arms, legs, etc., 
              • it is not inherently dependent on the arms, legs, etc., and 
              • it is not inherently possessing the arms, legs, etc.

          List Of Research Sources

          • The Great Exposition of Tenets by Jam-yang-shay-ba. 
          • Annotations by Nga-wang-bel-den 

          Meditation - Tibetan Buddhism - Why Do Buddhists Meditate?

            Emptiness As The Ultimate Mode Of Existence

            Emptiness is the ultimate mode of existence of all things, according to the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras. 

            • Buddhapalita and Chandrakirti lucidly remarked on Nagarjuna's explanations in perfect line with his thinking, and Nagarjuna described the ways to that emptiness. 
            • Not only to achieve omniscience, but also to achieve freedom from cyclic life, it is essential to depend on the perfection of knowledge as these masters describe it. 
            • This perfection of knowledge is required for anybody who wants to become a Hearer Superior, Solitary Realizer Superior, or Bodhisattva Superior. 

            Subhuti, one who wants to achieve the enlightenment of a Hearer must study precisely this perfection of knowledge, according to the Eight Thousand Stanza Perfection of Wisdom Sutra (Ashtasahasrikaprajnaparam it a). 

            • Subhuti, anybody desiring to attain the enlightenment of a Solitary Realizer must master this perfection of knowledge. 
            • This perfection of knowledge is also to be learned by the Bodhisattva, the Great Being who wants to achieve the supreme perfect full enlightenment. 
            • The awareness of the subtle emptiness of all things, according to Nagarjuna's writings, is a precondition for the path of liberation from cyclic existence. 


            Misconception Of An I

            According to his Precious Garland (ab), "as long as the aggregates are misconceived, so long is there misconception of an I. 

            The simple recognition of the person's crude selflessness is insufficient to liberate oneself from cyclic existence. 

            • The ultimate delicate suchness of the individual, as well as the mental and bodily aggregates, must be realized. 
            •  The inherent non-analytical mind that misunderstands the nature of people and other phenomena must be eradicated. 
            •  It is insufficient to just stop the mind from forming a self of people and phenomena, or to simply stop the attention from wandering to things, since they are not adequate to realize emptiness. 
            •  If they did, profound slumber and fainting would be accompanied with the ludicrous awareness of nothingness. 

            The Seeds Of Cyclical Life Are Eliminated

            The seeds of cyclic life are eliminated, according to Aryadeva, when selflessness is recognized in things. 

            [Extreme] ideas emerge with [the notion of fundamentally existing] things, according to Chandrakirti in his Supplement to (Nagarjuna'sj 'Treatise on the Middle Way'VIA ). 


            • When [the idea of an essentially existing] thing does not exist, these [extreme concepts] do not emerge, just as there is no fire when there is no fuel. 
            •  Wisdom examines in this manner, says Bhavaviveka, with the mind in meditative equilibrium. 
            •  The entities that cause these events Apprehended in a traditional manner. 
            •  Who wants and what is wanted, says Shantideva, when one has sought [for them] as realities. 
            •  It is difficult to renounce [misconception] without doubting the target of this [misconception], according to Dharmakirti. 

             All Mahayana teachers declare that the way to nirvana is via object examination, not just withdrawing the mind from them. 

            •  It is necessary to investigate whether or not the intrinsic existence of things, as perceived by the natural non-analytical mind, exists. 
            •  One must establish that things do not exist as thought and penetratingly comprehend the falsity of intrinsic existence via argument and biblical reference. 

             It is critical to evaluate with discerning knowledge on a regular basis. 

            According to the King of Meditative Stabilizations Sutra (Samadhiraja), analyzing and cultivating the selflessness of phenomena has the consequence of achieving nirvana. 

            •  Peace can be attained via no other means. 
            •  'Analyzing via unique insight and recognizing the absence of intrinsic existence comprise knowledge of the signless,' states the Cloud of Jewels Sutra (Ratnamegha). 
            •  'The clever are those who properly evaluate things separately,' states the Brahma Sutra (Brahmapariprchchha). 

            The great Mahayana teachers taught a variety of reasoning techniques aimed at determining suchness in order to reveal the road to liberation for the fortunate, rather than for the sake of debate. 


            'All of the analytical reasonings put out in Nagarjuna's Treatise on the Middle Way (Madhyamakashastra) are only for the purpose of sentient beings achieving freedom,' Dzong-ka-ba states. 

            •  The desire to be free of cyclic existence is the driving force behind studying phenomena and realizing emptiness. 
            •  Those of lower ability among Buddhist practitioners engage in religious practice in the hopes of achieving a joyful migration in a future existence. 
            •  They have seen the agony of bad migrations and want to escape it by pursuing virtue. 

            Being A Buddhist Practitioner

            To be called a Buddhist practitioner, one must put out effort in religious practice for the purpose of enhancing one's current lifetime; at the very least, a Buddhist's objective is to achieve a happy existence as a human or a deity in a future life. 

            • Others, with more ability, want to escape the cycle life entirely. 
            • They recognize that achieving a joyful migration in the next life is insufficient since they must still age, get sick, die, and be reincarnated in line with their previous actions. 
            • Their drive for practice stems from a desire to free themselves from circular life. 

            Others, with even more ability, see the depth of their own suffering, infer the pain of others, and practice in order to liberate themselves from cyclic existence and achieve Buddhahood in order to assist all sentient beings in doing so. 

            Thus, prior to meditation, it is critical to declare a motivation vocally and explicitly: 

            • I am meditating on emptiness and studying things in order to achieve freedom from cyclic existence and omniscience so that I may assist other sentient beings in doing the same. 
            • Another possibility is that I am contemplating emptiness and studying things in order to achieve freedom from cyclic existence. 
            • The former is much more powerful since it connects all sentient creatures via meditation. 
            • The power of meditation grows in proportion to the number of creatures with whom it is associated. 
            • Emptiness is a highly strong meditation object in and of itself. 

            According to Aryadeva, those with less merit would have no reservations about this concept [of emptiness]. 

            •  Even a hunch [that some things are empty] Wrecks cyclic existence's [seeds]. 
            •  Even the notion that emptiness—the absence of intrinsic existence—is the mode of being of things upsets the same reasons that generate the endless cycles of helpless pain. 
            •  Because when one has such suspicions, the real mode of being of things behaves as if it were a mental object. 

             According to Dzong-ka-ba, aspirational prayers should be offered for the ability to listen to treatises on the profound [emptiness], memorize them, think about their meaning, meditate on them, and have faith in them over the course of a lifetime, all without jeopardizing the determination of cause and effect's dependent-arising. 


            • Though the transfer of Buddhist instruction to Tibet was foretold in sutra, Jam-yang-shay-ba cautions that few would follow the perfection of knowledge all the way to meditation
            •  He claims that although many people remember the phrases and propound the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras, only a few people really attain wisdom perfection. 
            •  He goes on to say that untold numbers of people refuse to concentrate on emptiness because of the five ruinations, but instead claim to focus on the 'natural mind,' or something other than emptiness that lacks the elaborations of dualism. 

            It is a mistake to believe that there is another ultimate goal of meditation since 'natural mind,' 'freedom from the elaborations of dualism,' and so on are none other than emptiness itself, and it is meditation on emptiness that puts an end to the elaborations of misunderstanding. 

            The numerous teachings that Buddha does not even abide in the middle way, or that Buddha eventually does not even teach emptiness, must be interpreted to mean that he does not abide in, or teach, an inherently existing middle way, or essentially existent emptiness. 

            Those who profess to concentrate on emptiness but do not really do so are wrong in believing that they may comprehend the suchness of things simply by removing the attention from objects and stopping thinking. 

            Instead, analysis is the fundamental basis of emptiness meditation. 

            List Of Research Sources 

            • Tenets as presented by Jang-gya. 
            • Oral teachings of Kensur Lekden. 
            • The Great Exposition of Tenets by Jam-yang-shay-ba.