宗喀巴_三主要道英文版及解释-第21部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


he　mere　speculation　of　emptiness　is　something　which　is　very　far　away　from　their　being；　from　their　mind；　in　other　words　they　are　not　really　interested　in　this　mode　of　phenomena。　However　for　somebody　who　has　a　little　more　merit；　let’s　say　that　they　have　a　doubt　towards　the　mode　of　phenomena　…　‘perhaps　there　is　natural　or　autonomous　existence；　perhaps　not’　–　let’s　say　they　have　the　doubt　which　is　known　as　the　doubt　leaning　towards　the　truth　（or　leaning　towards　the　true　meaning）　that　phenomena　don’t　have　any　inherent　existence　…　for　that　person　they　acquire　a　tremendous　amount　of　positive　potential；　just　through　that　doubt。　As　Aryadeva　mentions　in　his　book；　just　having　that　doubt　is　enough　to　tear　the　three　worlds　asunder；　that　is　to　say；　this　reasoning；　this　doubt；　which　is　tending　towards　the　fact；　is　one　which　has　the　ability　to　not　only　remove；　but　to　tear　to　shreds；　any　notion　that　the　three　worlds　exist　inherently。　Thus　one　is　able　to　remove　through　this　the　seed　of　the　cycle　of　existence；　and　through　that　then　the　whole　of　Samsara　for　that　individual　bees　something　which　is　withered　and　then　finally　non…existent。

So　then　we　need　to　continually　familiarise　ourselves　using　reasons。　Once　we　have　established　those　reasons　we　can　meditate　upon　the　ultimate　nature；　or　the　lack　of　autonomous　existence；　of　phenomena　…　this　then　is　something　which　we　need　to　prove　to　ourselves　using　the　various　reasonings。　For　example；　when　we　start　to　contemplate；　we　need　to　have　an　understanding　and　then　slowly　get　into　the　understanding　of　the　nature；　or　the　actual　mode　of　existence；　of　phenomena。　Then　when　we　start　to　have　queries　about　that；　we　can　remove　those　using　the　various　reasonings。　For　example；　if　something　has　autonomous　existence　then　it　cannot　be　something　which　arises　in　dependence　upon　something　else　because　it’s　autonomously　existing。　Another　example　we　could　use　is　that　if　it　is　a　functioning　thing；　if　it　has　natural　or　self…existence　then　it　is　not　something　which　is　brought　about　by　a　cause　and　an　effect　…　but　yet　it　is　something　that　is　brought　about　by　a　cause　and　an　effect。　So　through　using　these　jarring　reasonings　we　can　bring　ourselves　…　we　can　continually　familiarise　ourselves　with　the　actual　mode　of　phenomena。　For　somebody　then　who　has　a　doubt　about　the　ultimate　mode　or　the　ultimate　nature　of　phenomena；　for　that　person　we　can　set　the　syllogism　and　then　through　that　we　can　lead　them　into　that　correct　understanding。　So　if　we　have　some　doubt　ourselves；　then　we　can　perhaps　contemplate　that　the　subject　–　whatever　you　like　–　is　empty　of　any　autonomous　existence　because　it　is　a　dependent　arising　or　because　it　is　lacking　autonomous　existence　as　singular　or　plural；　and　through　these　kinds　of　reasonings　we　can　bring　ourselves　onto　the　path　and　using　the　former　reasonings；　continually　familiarise　ourselves　with　that。

Grasping　onto　inherent　existence

So　we　have　to　understand　how　the　mind　grasps　onto　true　existence。　We　have　already　spoken　about　how　phenomena　lack　any　kind　of　natural　or　autonomous　existence；　so　we　have　to　have　a　look　then　at　the　mind　which　grasps　onto　autonomous　existence；　that　is　to　say；　a　mind　which　grasps　onto　inherent　existence；　and　the　trouble　which　is　brought　about　through　entertaining　such　a　mind。　So　then　this　is　clearly　explained　in　Chandrakirti's　book　where　he　says　that　initially　what　happens　is　we　have　a　view　of　self　or　'I'；　and　in　dependence　upon　this　we　generate　a　feeling　of　possessiveness　…　for　example　'my　head'；　'my　arms'；　'my　possessions'；　'my　enjoyment'　and　so　forth。　Then　in　dependence　upon　that　view　of　possessiveness；　when　we　engage　with　various　objects；　what　we　find　is　then　mind　grasping　onto　the　true　pleasure　which　we　perceive　to　be　existing　from　the　side　of　the　object　give　rise　to　attachment　towards　such　seemingly　true　or　autonomous　existence；　and　quite　the　reverse　on　the　other　side　…　for　example　when　a　seemingly　antithesis　for　our　pleasure　es　before　us；　our　reaction　towards　that　is　of　repulsion；　we　want　to　get　rid　of　that；　we　are　pletely　averse　to　that　object。　When　we　have　those　minds　then　of　attachment　and　aversion　we　have　generated　the　destructive；　or　the　disturbed；　emotions　in　our　being；　or　in　our　mind；　and　once　they　have　arisen　and　we　engage　in　actions　in　dependence　upon　those；　we　are　developing　negative　karmic　seeds　within　our　mental　continuum；　or　mind。　Having　brought　about　those　negative　karmic　seeds；　having　planted　those　negative　karmic　seeds；　the　result　of　those　are　something　which　is　definitely　going　to　be　experienced　by　us　in　the　future。

As　they　are　going　to　be　experienced　in　the　future；　how　are　they　going　to　be　experienced　then？　They　are　going　to　be　experienced　as　none　other　than　existence　within　the　cycle　of　existence。　So　Chandrakirti's　book　then　tells　us　how　initially　sentient　beings　have　a　notion　of　an　autonomously　existing　'I'。　That　is　to　say；　we've　spoken　a　lot　about　how　phenomena　lack　such　autonomous　existence　or　true；　from　its　own　side；　existence　and　how　phenomena　（when　we　use　the　self　as　the　object　of　our　discussion）　exists　merely　as　a　nominal　designation　on　the　five　aggregates　…　so　grasping　onto　it　as　something　other　than　that　is　the　first　step；　the　second　one　is　a　sense　of　possessiveness　on　top　of　this　'I'；　then　with　this　idea　of　true　possessiveness　with　regard　the　object　we　encounter；　a　sense　of　true　pleasure　or　true　disfort　arising　from　the　side　of　those　objects；　and　then　our　mind　of　attachment　and　then　aversion　directed　towards　those　objects；　and　then　in　dependence　upon　that；　the　arising　of　the　destructive　emotions　of　attachment　and　aversion；　and　then　in　dependence　upon　that；　the　generation　of　karma；　and　then　in　dependence　upon　that；　the　whole　of　the　cycle　of　existence。

So　Chandrakirti　goes　on　to　mention　that　seeing　helpless　sentient　beings　in　such　a　way　one　should　strive　to　generate　passion　and　so　forth。　If　we　were　to　give　a　great　or　a　long　explanation　of　this　process　of　the　arising　of　the　cycle　of　existence；　we　would　give　an　explanation　of　the　twelve　links　of　dependent　origination；　but　as　we　don't　have　time　for　that；　this　is　a　very　abbreviated　way　of　how　sentient　beings　first　grasp　onto　an　'I'　and　then　through　that　the　whole　cycle　of　existence　es　into　being。

So　then　there　is　no　phenomena　for　which　dependent　arising　is　not　its　actual　mode　of　existence；　there　is　no　phenomena　which　does　not　arise　in　dependence　upon　other　factors；　be　it　causes　and　conditions　or　nominal　designations。　For　example；　Rinpoche　was　showing　his　glasses　case　and　was　saying　'is　this　long　or　is　it　short？'　If　you　hold　it　up　to　the　microphone　you　can　say　it's　short　in　dependence　upon　the　length　of　the　microphone；　whereas　if　you　pare　it　with　Rinpoche's　finger　then；　it's　long　in　parison　with　Rinpoche's　finger。　So　'short'　and　'long'　…　'short'　depends　upon　'long'　and　vice　versa；　there　is　no　object　about　which　we　can　say　'this　is　long　and　there　is　nothing　which　is　longer　than　this；　this　is　the　perfect　long'；　or　'this　is　the　perfect　short；　there　is　nothing　shorter　than　that　particular　object'。　For　example　with　a　table；　can　we　say　that　the　table　in　front　of　Rinpoche　is　high　or　is　it　short？　In　dependence　upon　the　floor　it's　something　quite　high；　but　pared　with　the　shelves　and　the　tables　behind；　it　is　shorter。　So　we　cannot　say　of　an　object　that　this　is　the　perfect　high　or　the　perfect　short。

Imputation　from　the　side　of　another

This　reasoning　can　also　be　applied　to　all　other　individuals；　for　example；　we　speak　a　lot　about　those　whose　are　our　friends；　and　those　who　are　our　enemies；　but　there　is　no　naturally　existing　or　autonomously　existing　'enemy'。　If　we　look　in　world　history；　we　find　two　individuals；　for　example　Adolf　Hitler　and　Mao　Tse…tung；　so　these　two　individuals　…　the　majority　of　the　people　in　the　world　would　class　them　as　their　enemy；　as　somebody　evil　and　somebody　to　be　hated。　For　example　if　we　concentrate　on　Mao　Tse…tung　then　…　the　Tibetan　and　Chinese　religious　practitioners　would　then　view　him　as　the　most　evil　man　alive；　he　was　their　plete　sworn　enemy　because　it　was　he　who　was　responsible　for　the　destruction　of　all　their　religious　practices　and　so　forth。　However　if　we　look　at　it　from　a　different　angle；　if　we　look　at　it　from　the　angle　of　those　in　China　who　support　the　munist　party；　o