View is of utmost importance
We’ll continue with the view a little bit, and then we will talk about meditation. View [is of] utmost importance. When Buddha said, “Never rely on a person, but rely on the teaching”, that’s what he’s talking about. You have to be inspired by the view, especially those who are new to Buddhadharma, Buddhism. It would be better if you were inspired by the view rather than inspired by Buddhist practices such as sitting straight and breathing in and out. And even more, it would be better if you were inspired by the view rather than a person.
Being inspired by the person and then getting into the view – that is possible. That is very much possible, but it’s really risky. It really has to have a proper cause and condition. Everything has to be together [i.e. all the right conditions]. It’s like [the story of] Saraha. The great Saraha was the Dean of Nalanda University. And Nalanda University, as I said yesterday, was really an academic institution. Nalanda was like the center of Indian critical thinking and analytical thinking. I mean, these days people pride themselves for being critical and skeptical. But if you read some of the skepticism and critical thinking of the Nalanda guys, even 2000 years later we will be ashamed at how we are actually so backward. There were so critical. Like Nagarjuna’s Mulamadhyamakakarika, [which is] one of the most important texts. [It has] one chapter wholly dedicated to whether or not the Buddha exists. It’s really amazing.
先因為某人而受到啟發，再接近正確的見地，這也是非常有可能的。但這真的很危險，它必須有適當的因緣，一切都必須具備。就像薩拉哈的故事。偉大的薩拉哈是那爛陀大學的校長，正如我昨天所說，那爛陀大學是一個學術機構，是印度批判性思維和分析性思維的中心。我的意思是，那時候人們因為自己的批判性和懷疑性而自豪。如果你讀了那爛陀學者的一些懷疑和批判性專著，即使 2000 年後的今天，我們仍然會發現自己竟然如此落後，且感到羞愧。他們是那麼的批判，就像龍樹的《中論》，它是最重要的文本之一。它有一章專門討論佛是否存在，真的很神奇。
It’s not [at all] wishy washy. [It is revolutionary] not only [in its own] time, [although] of course at that time. I mean, we consider Buddha as one of the most important modernists or revolutionaries. He was really going totally against the ideas of a creator God and super-magical powers, things like that. The Buddha was someone who really questioned the very existence of the self. Even after 2500 years, we still haven’t come to a conclusion. Self. Myself. Yourself. He was really avant garde. He was really very much ahead [of his time] and Nalanda was just like that.
這並不只是說說而已。不僅在那個時代，現代也是，我的意思是，我們認為佛陀是最重要的現代主義者和革命者之一。真的，他完全反對創世神和超級英雄之類的想法。佛陀是一個真正質疑自我存在的人。即使過了 2500 年，我們仍然沒有得出關於自我的結論。他是真正的前衛，他是非常超越時代的。那爛陀大學也是。
Unlike Saraha and the Arrow-Making Dakini, we need to rely on hearing and contemplation
Anyway, Saraha was the Dean of Nalanda University, and he was a very accomplished, feared, and respected, [held so much] in awe by other intellectuals and academics, the scientists [of his day] if you like. But one day he thought, “All this logic and all this reasoning and all this critical thinking is useless. They’re just another trap. They’re just another belief”. So he took off and he [came across] a woman who was a part-time prostitute and part-time arrow maker. And just at the sight of her, he was just so … I don’t know if “moved” is the right word. Something shifted [in him], just at the sight of her. And this woman was making arrows, and she was sort of testing the arrows and shooting them just aimlessly [in all directions]. And Saraha asked her, “Why are you not aiming properly?” [After all], she’s an arrow-maker. And she said, “That’s your problem, you have an aim”. And that did it [for him].
All those years of analysis and critical thinking and reading books and debating and all of that. Nothing. All of that didn’t do anything. But that experience [of meeting the arrow maker] did something. So in very rare cases [like this], if the cause and conditions are together, yes, that can happen. And that can really shift you. Forever. [It can] cent your organized, sensible life. [Your] orderly life. And that’s it. And then it’s possible that you [will] never go back to your old self.
This is very possible. But for the rest of us, we need to rely on hearing and contemplation. We need to rely on logic. We need to rely on language. We need to rely on analogy and inferential logic. We need to really rely on analysis basically. And this is why Buddha also encouraged [us] to never take things for granted. To never take what he said at face value. We must analyze. And when he’s talking about that, he’s mainly talking about the view. View is really of utmost importance. Even the most seasoned practitioners here, those who consider themselves as being Buddhist for a long time, please visit the world of view again and again. Even though many of [these teachings] are dry, boring, intellectual, academic. It will not harm [you]. If it cannot help you right away, it’s definitely not going to harm you. And I think it’s so important for the study of Buddhism. I cannot emphasize this enough.
We should view all phenomena as being like a dream
But it’s difficult. It’s really difficult, and we had a glimpse of [the] difficulty yesterday. Because articulating any kind of view of religion or philosophy is of course difficult. And especially Buddhism, because we are trying to articulate and trying to talk [about] something that cannot really be talked [about]. We cannot [talk about it]. There’s no proper language. But having said that, there are texts such as Vajracchedika Sutra [that do talk about the view]. The Vajracchedika Sutra is translated by most people as the Diamond Sutra, but maybe that’s not a good translation. Anyway, in one section Buddha talks about this view [DJKR recites a verse of the Vajracchedika Sutra in Tibetan].
但這是困難的，真的很困難，我們昨天已經一瞥了這其中的困難。闡明任何一種宗教或哲學的觀點當然是困難的。尤其是佛教，因為我們試圖闡明並試圖談論一些不能被談論的東西。我們不能談論它，因為沒有適當的語言。但說到這裡，有一些經文，如《金剛經》，確實談到了見地。《金剛經》在英文中被翻譯為 Diamond Sutra （意為金剛石之經），也許這不是一個好的翻譯。總之，有一節佛陀談到了見地 （仁波切念了一段藏文金剛經）。
The last word here [in the Tibetan] means “that is how you are supposed to view”, where [the Tibetan word] “tawa” means “view”. How you supposed to view what? All conditioned phenomena. And when I say “all”, I mean literally all. Everything. Not only our body, not only this [building], not only our system [but] just everything. [From] the most mundane things all the way to the most interesting and complicated things. For example, “This is a strawberry”, “This is a cherry”, ”This is a blueberry”. Very mundane. And then Buddhism, reincarnation, you, me, man, woman, all these complicated things. They are all conditioned phenomena. And all these conditioned phenomena should be viewed as [being like] a dream.
There are different translations [of the Vajracchedika Sutra]. I’m using [one that is] based on an English translation of the Chinese [manuscript]. I just wanted to use that because I think, I don’t know – maybe someone can correct me – I think printing, the whole concept and engine of printing started in China. And I was told that the first thing that they actually printed was the Vajracchedika Sutra. How interesting is that? It’s amazing.
This is a big deal, because during those days, printing must [have been] as exciting as going to Mars. And what did they decide to print? Not some edict of an emperor, which could very [easily have been] pushed by the emperor or empress. Or it could have been money. But instead of all of that, they decided to carve [onto wood blocks] and to print the Vajracchedika Sutra, where words like this are found. We are supposed to view all conditioned phenomena [as follows]:
All conditioned phenomena ~
Are like a dream, an illusion, a bubble, a shadow, ~
Like dew or a flash of lightning; ~
Thus we shall perceive them.
Phenomena are like a dream, but this doesn’t mean they are random or disordered
That’s the view of Buddhism. Now, as you read this you are not supposed to think, “Oh, life is [just] a dream” [in a dismissive or nihilistic way]. You see, there’s this habit [of thinking], “Oh, life is a dream. So It does not exist. Absolutely not”. It’s really important not to interpret it that way, “Oh, life is just a dream”. What do you mean by “just”? That word “just” is very scary. It has a sort of demeaning and downgrading [connotation]. Yes, so choose the word “just” very carefully.So, responding to Raymond’s question yesterday about appearance and disappearance, Raymond was [asking] about whether [the dream-like sequence of the phenomena of everyday life] come [without any] order [or structure]. No. [It’s a] dream. When Buddha said, “All conditioned phenomena have to be viewed as a dream” [that doesn’t mean they come in a random or disordered way]. Dreams have an order. If there are five elephants in the dream, it does not mean that there [could be] four elephants “just” because it’s a dream. It’s five and it’s truly five. That’s important. If in the dream you have a kilo of cherries or strawberries, if that’s what you dreamt, then it’s one kilo. Not two kilos. If in your dream, [there is] a long distance or actually I should say a very, very short distance between here to Uluru. Yes, well, it’s kind of puzzling, but that’s how it is. And it is acceptable.
這就是佛教的見地。現在，當你讀到這裡的時候，你不應該認為：「哦，生活只是一場夢」。看！你有這樣的思維慣性：「哦，生活是一場夢，所以它不存在，絕對不存在」。不要解讀為生活「只是」一場夢，這非常重要，你說的「只是」是什麼意思？這個「只是」是非常可怕的。它有一種貶低和降級的意味。所以要非常謹慎地選擇「只是」這個詞。雷蒙德昨天問了關於表象和表象消失的問題，雷蒙德是在問，表象是否是有序的。當佛陀說「所有和合現象都要被看作夢」，我們要知道夢是有秩序的。如果夢中有五頭大象，並不意味着這「只是」夢，所以成了四頭大象。它是五頭，而且是真正的五頭，這一點很重要。如果在夢中你有一公斤的櫻桃或草莓，如果這是你夢到的，那就是一公斤，不是兩公斤。如果在你的夢裡，是很遠的，就不會是很近的，例如說這裡到烏魯魯 （譯：澳洲著名景點） 之間的距離。是的，這有點令人費解，但這就是事實。這也是可接受的。
Yes, in the dream you fall from the cliff and you get panicked. And you have a very good reason to be panicked. Really, a good reason to be panicked, because we know what happens when you fall from a cliff. Also, in the dream, you can get angry. You can get horny. You can get excited. You can get disappointed. All of that. And it’s happening, truly happening. That’s why it’s called relative truth. It’s truly happening at that time. [You might ask] Is it happening? Is it really there? As I was saying again and again yesterday, yes, but it’s also not there.
If you happen to dream that there are five elephants in your tiny room, obviously it’s not there also. Because it won’t fit. Five elephants are big. But in the dream, yes, five elephants are five elephants [and they are all in your room]. That’s how it works. So when when the Buddhists talk about all conditioned [phenomena] as a dream, it’s not only a negation. [When we say all phenomena are like an] illusion, [the meaning is the] same.
When causes and conditions temporarily come together, phenomena arise
It’s like a mirage [of] an oasis. [Let’s say] you’re in the desert and you are so tired of these endless sand dunes. That’s a cause and condition [for the mirage]. When you are so tired of sand dunes, only then will you have an [oasis-like mirage]. The chance of you sitting on Bondi Beach and then having an appearance of an oasis is [small], because the whole thing [doesn’t include the necessary causes and conditions]. But [if you have a] longing for an oasis, a longing for water, that also projects [i.e. is among the causes and conditions that give rise to the projection of a oasis-like mirage]. That’s how it works. We don’t want to deal with salespeople [in stores]. We don’t want to deal with all that effort of physically shopping. So that’s why online shopping happened. But then it has a lot of consequences. Yes, but we’ll talk about that later.
[We should view all conditioned phenomena as being like a] bubble. A shadow. When there are cause and conditions put together temporarily, such as switching on the light, [then] there’s a shadow. [It seemingly comes] out of nowhere. No light, no shadow. As long as there is light, there is a shadow. Like that.
While I think about this, I [would like to] say that having this view is [what is meant by] mahakaruna. I hate to use the word “compassion”. As you know, [I have been] sort of working with one of my projects called “84,000: Translating the Words of the Buddha” and I have [been] looking at words, English words, Tibetan words, Sanskrit words. I realize wow, words are just so important.
Anyway if I were like the Kim Jong-un of Buddhism, I would really forbid [the use of] the word “compassion”. There are a few words that I would forbid: “meditation”, “compassion”, “enlightenment”. It’s so bad. I would really forbid them, but alas, I’m not [like Kim Jong-un]. But I’m praying. I’m sure you know. I have told you this. And already the preconditions are developing in my system, that sort of very dictatorial [approach to life]. It won’t fit in certain [parts of] society. But I have heard that algorithms are taking over the world, and in about 50 years, democracy will mean nothing. So I think I will have a chance. I can see it already. It’s happening.
And by the way, yes. What a bubble democracy is. Free speech. What is it? A flash of lightning. Journalism is like a shadow. If you look at the list of what the Buddha laid out in the Vajracchedika Sutra, all our life [is like this]. Shopping, parenting, pension plans, health insurance, whatever. [Just] look at all [of it]. Anyway that’s how the Buddha, the Teacher, [talks about the view in] the Vajracchedika Sutra.
Nagarjuna takes a more analytical approach when talking about the view
Then [we come to the way that] his disciple Nagarjuna [talks about the view]. I want to say these things, because I think it’s really important that you get used to these words. Several hundred years later [i.e. after the Buddha] Nagarjuna came and he wrote commentaries on sutras like the Vajracchedika Sutra, and he talks about the view so much. [However] Nagarjuna uses a more analytical [approach when talking about the view]. The Buddha’s approach [relies more on] analogies and examples. Life is like a dream, like an illusion, like a bubble. But Nagarjuna is more analytical. This is something that you can think about.
For example, he said, “There is no such thing as ceasing”. This is important. Do you know how we justify [that] certain things exist? Because they have an expiry date. Cessation. We believe in cessation, like Armageddon, the end of the world. Nagarjuna doesn’t believe in this kind of thing. There’s no such thing as cessation. You should fight the fire [Ed.: Australia was battling devastating bushfires when DJKR was giving this teaching in January 2020]. It’s not like the end of the world. You have every reason to save every single tree. [Whereas] with cessation, there’s a certain strong belief [that it’s truly the end]. But there’s no such thing as cessation in Buddhism. There’s only apparent or seeming cessation, but it’s not real cessation. And just like there’s no cessation, there’s no arising. [No] birth, being born, arising. No genesis.
And Nagarjuna also [said there is no permanence]. I’m trying to give you an example of how there’s no such thing as permanent. Just as there’s no such thing as permanent, there’s no such thing as annihilation or the end. For example, Shakyamuni Buddha or Jesus Christ are gone. No more. That’s annihilation. [Whereas] your head is here on your shoulders. That’s permanent. Basically we don’t see past annihilation [and permanence]. Yesterday is gone. [If we really] believe that yesterday is gone, exhausted, [we are] basically falling into the realm of annihilation. Nagarjuna doesn’t believe in that. And yes, my head is on my neck. It is here. I can feel it. [If we] truly believe that it’s here, today, present, now, right this very moment, [we are] falling into the extreme that’s the opposite of annihilation. What is the opposite of annihilation? Permanence. [Believing that it’s really] there. Can you think about this?
Nagarjuna doesn’t accept absolute arising or cessation: while it’s arising, it’s also ceasing
[Likewise] there’s no such thing as departing. There’s no such thing as coming. There’s no such thing as different, like black and white. Nagarjuna doesn’t believe [in it]. There’s no such thing as one [or the same], [as in the] opposite of different. He analyzed phenomena in eight different ways and he came to the conclusion that this is how things are. I talked yesterday [about how] while it’s there, it’s not there. Nagarjuna [is saying] the same thing. While it’s arising, it’s also ceasing. While it’s ceasing, that’s also the arising [of some other phenomena]. While it is solid, it is also not solid. While it is gone and finished, it’s also not finished. What is different is also the same.
All these distinctions are like a bubble. And Buddhists are not supposed to fall into [any] one of them. Buddha, Jesus, they are gone. Finished. Two thousand years ago. [That’s the extreme of] annihilation. Me. I’m here. This is here. [That’s the extreme of] permanence. [DJKR holds the table in front of him, indicating its presence and solidity] Wow.
The story of Buddha ‘Delight in Stars’
[The view is] taught in so many different ways, and some of them, as I said yesterday, are in the form of stories. And this is where people go wrong, thinking that Buddhism [is religious because it includes elements of] myth and story. But actually the aim [of Buddhist teachings, including the myths and stories] is to teach this [view] for which I’ve just given you the list [i.e. that we should view phenomena as being like a dream, an illusion, etc.].
For example, Nagarjuna doesn’t believe in big. While it is big, it’s small. While it is small, it’s big. Everything is like this. While it is there, it’s not there. [Let me illustrate] how this is taught in some some other sutras. For example, there’s a sutra with a description of all the Buddha realms. It’s so beautiful. There is a Buddha called Sangyé Karmala Gawa. What a beautiful name he has. I don’t know it in Sanskrit, but translated into English it’s ‘The Buddha Who Likes The Stars’. That’s his name.
And this particular Buddha, Sangyé Karmala Gawa, the one who likes the stars, his realm is as big – I should emphasize the word “big” – as the size of our thumb. The sutra goes on. The duration of the Buddha realm, the lifespan of this Buddha, how long is it? [Imagine] a healthy young person snapping their fingers. [DJKR snaps his finger]. Like that, divide that into sixty and one of those is the duration of that Buddha realm.
You see? Story. But it depends on how you hear it. In one way it sounds like Star Wars [but you can also hear it as a teaching on “while is it big, it’s small. While it is small, it’s big].
The story of Buddha ‘All-Gazing’
There’s another Buddha called Küntuzik, ‘The Buddha That Gazes At Everything’. Supposedly Mañjushri is a bodhisattva at the moment, and when he finally achieves enlightenment he will be the Buddha called Gönpo Kuntuzik, the ‘All-Gazing’. There are even descriptions of how he will look. His face will be white, and his body will be black from the neck down. Stories …
The size of his Buddha field is as small – [once again], underline the word “small” – as infinite. That’s what the sutra says. It’s as small as infinite. Supposedly you cannot measure [it]. And his body is also as small as infinite. In one of the descriptions it says that there are tens of thousands of buddhas walking from one side of his nostril to the other side of the nostril, and they still haven’t reached the other side.
You see how these people are making mockery of time and space? They’re laughing at it. They’re laughing at things like “small”. They’re laughing at things like “big”. These guys are laughing at it. But they also know out of their compassion [that] you want to hear [descriptions of] size, you want to hear shape, you want to hear the descriptions. So they give you all this mind-boggling stuff. [And they’re] not only mind-boggling, but so many of them are so beautiful too. They’re very inspiring.
These Buddha field descriptions are quite something. Certain Buddha fields have no other realms, only ghosts. And [they are presided over by] a ghost Buddha. But in that sutra, they also talk about realms that have no buddhas. And Buddhist practitioners pray “I can be born in the ghost realm, I can be born in any realm as long as there is a Buddha. May I be born into [a realm like] that, but not in that place where there is no Buddha”. Again, it’s a story.
Dark aeons, light aeons and the Fortunate Aeon
And then there’s also münpé kalpa, the dark age or dark aeon, meaning [an aeon in which] there is no Buddha. Again, the description is so profound. You may think “Oh, okay maybe there will be a time after many centuries when there is no Buddha”. But it’s not really like that. On the highest level, the moment you are distracted – it doesn’t matter what you are distracted with – that moment is the dark aeon or the dark age. The moment you are not distracted, that’s the light aeon. There’s also something called the Fortunate Aeon, which is the aeon in which we are supposedly dwelling at the moment. Yes. And because of that, we hear teachings from Buddha, the Buddhist teachings.
Oh, you know [we are told in the Mahayana teachings that] it’s going to take three countless aeons to become Buddha. It’s a story, because they want you to work hard. They don’t want you to be lazy. But then other times, [the teachings say] you’ll get enlightenment instantly. [DJKR snaps his fingers]. Just like that. They also say this.
你也許聽說過，大乘佛教中，要花三個無數劫 （譯：古稱阿僧祇劫） 才能成佛。這也是一個故事，因為他們希望你努力一點，他們不希望你懶惰。但其它時候，其它教法說你會立刻得到證悟，（仁波切打了個響指） 就像這樣。
So, this is difficulty of presenting the Buddhadharma to the modern world which is stuck with mathematics, logic, and empiricism. [With things that are] experienceable. It’s difficult, as I told you yesterday, to teach something so nondual, to teach a doctrine that laughs at size, color, shape, time – [while] using the language of [size], color, shape, time. It’s difficult. But this is how it is.
Using “negative” and “positive” language to talk about the view
Okay, just a little bit more [on] Buddhist view. I’ve been using [language that is] seemingly a little negative. No arising. No cessation. No annihilation. No permanence. No departing. You know the words [in the Heart Sutra], “No eyes, no nose, no ears” [and so forth]. We call it gakdra in Tibetan. It’s using negative words [i.e. words of negation]. Also, if you read the Vajracchedika Sutra, you can say that it uses a lot of negative words. There’s even a section where after hours and hours of teaching, the Buddha asks Subhuti, “So Subhuti, did the Buddha teach?” And you know that he’s the one who’s been listening for hours. And then Subhuti says, “No, Lord. You haven’t”. Buddha said, “There we go. That’s it. Buddha never taught.” It’s crazy. What do you mean he hasn’t taught? I have spent hours reading this. Again, using the negative. Negation. There are a lot of teachings like that.
But it’s not always like this. There are plenty of teachings where Buddhists use “positive” words. For example, kudang yeshe, jñanas, kayas, 32 major marks, 80 minor marks, dimensions, wisdom, all sorts of uplifting words. Nimbin people will like these kind of words. Don’t worry those who are not Australians, you don’t know what I’m talking about. Nimbin is a particular uplifting pure realm.
但並不全是這樣的。在很多教法中，佛教徒都會使用肯定的詞語。比如，界、身、三十二相、八十種好、向度、智慧，各種振奮人心的詞語。寧賓人會喜歡這類詞語 （譯：寧賓是澳洲著名的大麻村，在拜倫灣附近）。不要擔心那些不是澳洲人的人，他們不知道我在說什麼。告訴你們 （不是澳洲人的人），寧賓是一個特別振奮人心的淨土。（眾笑）
Instead of using the word “emptiness” they use the words like “Buddhanature”, “tathagatagarbha”, like that.
Even Saraha, the disciple of that part-time arrow-maker, part-time prostitute, he said [DJKR recites a verse in Tibetan]. In this day and age, I have to be careful. You know, animal rights people may not like this. But anyway, Saraha said, “Those who cling to things as truly existing. They are like cattle”. Cattle. Idiots. “But those who cling to shunyata, emptiness, that things do not exist, they’re even worse than that”.
As long as the view is present, astrology and Tarot-reading are also the path
You see? [Buddhist also talk] about kayas, jñanas, pure realms. And if you go to vajrayana, they have plenty of mandalas and deities. For example, there’s a blue Tara, a green one, one with four hands, one with three eyes, one with a million eyes, and so forth. Yes. Everything fits. And because of that, everything is [acceptable]. [Even] astrology or Tarot card reading. In this context, I will not and I cannot say that sitting on a meditation cushion is a better path than reading Tarot. I cannot. As long as the view is there, and as long as it is taking you closer to the truth, then it is the path.
The difference between compassion and mahakaruna
Oh, I got distracted. I was going to talk about compassion. I was saying that we should not use the word “compassion” [as a translation of] mahakaruna. However, knowing this – knowing that there is no coming and no going, or knowing that while it is small, it is simultaneously big. [Knowing that] while it is appearing, it is simultaneously disappearing. [Knowing that] while it is apparent, it is also nonexistent – this is mahakaruna. This is what we term “compassion”. [We are not referring to] sympathy, charity, or [empathetic] feelings [of care and concern]. They are okay. But they’re not mahakaruna. They are maybe karuna, but they’re not mahakaruna. What’s wrong with that [kind of sympathy or karuna]? If you don’t have the view, [then] that kind of karuna, that kind of mere compassion may end up taking you to hospital. And you may end up needing a shrink. Lying on the couch.” What’s wrong mate?” You say “I’ve been having too much compassion. Too much. Until I broke down, like this”.
How would you feel if you were to see somebody going really bananas dreaming or [having a] hallucinogenic experience? If [their experience of things like] long and short [did not correspond to conventional reality], “Oh, Uluru is so close. It’s so far. I have 500 elephants in my room”. [Knowing that] all this is actually not really happening [and it’s there but not there], and you are like “Aw” [DJKR adopts a posture and tone to indicate sympathetic concern for another person’s suffering]. That’s real compassion isn’t it? Of course [your ability to help the other person and intervene skillfully] depends on how expert you are, how matured you are, and how skillful you are also. Because until you have this [nondual view that makes your compassion into mahakaruna], your compassion is what we call nyéring chakdang. Your compassion is not yet free from distinctions and references, such as closeness or distance. For example, you might easily have compassion towards someone who is sick in Ethiopia or Rwanda or Syria, or someone in a war-torn zone. But Trump? “No, he doesn’t deserve my compassion. Trump. Billionaires. They don’t need my compassion”. Because you are bound by size, shape, color, length, distinctions, rich, poor.
如果你看到有人真的為了夢境的體驗或幻覺的體驗而抓狂，你有什麼感覺？如果他們正在體驗長短、遠近、大小，「烏魯魯是如此之近」「是如此之遠」「我的房間裡有500頭大象」等等。知道這一切其實並沒有真正發生過，你就會說「啊～～～」 （編：仁波切用了一種姿勢和語氣，表示對他人痛苦的同情和關注）。這才是真正的大悲心，不是嗎？當然，你能不能幫助對方，取決於你有多專業，你有多成熟，你有多熟練。因為在你有上面說的見地之前，你的大悲心是我們所說的 （藏文）。你的大悲心還沒有脫離親疏遠近等區別和參照物。例如，你可能很容易對埃塞俄比亞、盧旺達、敘利亞或戰亂地區生病的人產生悲心。但特朗普呢？不，他不值得我同情。特朗普們，億萬富翁們，他們不需要我的悲心。因為你被大小、形狀、顏色、長短、貧富的區別所束縛。
The paradox of the view
While you are rich, you are simultaneously poor. Keep on remembering this. This paradox is really so important. So important. I was looking at the [meaning of] the word “paradox” in English, and I found a good example: “I lie all the time. Don’t believe me”. I like that. The whole phenomenal [world] is like this. “I lie all the time, so don’t believe me”. So what choice do you have? “Oh, maybe he’s lying this time. Or maybe he’s now at last telling the truth?” The whole phenomenal [world] is like this. It’s not, “This time, it really exists” or “Now, this time, it’s finally gone”. [The phenomenal world is] not like that. [It’s there and yet it’s not there]. That’s the paradox. This really needs to be established in order to understand the Buddhist path.
Okay, enough with the view. We will take a break, and after the break we will talk about meditation. But I’m going to use the word “practice”. It’s better, I think. Yes, I will use the word “practice”, tawa gompa. Practice. Meditation. You are welcome to keep on using the word “meditation”. I think you will. But I think we need to poke and do a little bit of a reality check on this overly used word “meditation”. It has really been overly used. So, we will do a little bit of fact-checking on this one. Okay.
好了，見地就談這麼多。我們先休息一下，休息之後我們再來談談禪修。但我要用 「修行」這個詞 （譯：英文為練習，實踐的意思）。我想這個詞更好一點。歡迎你繼續用禪修這個詞。我想你會的。但我認為我們需要好好檢驗一下，這個過度使用的詞「禪修」。它真的已經被用爛了，所以，我們要做一點點實驗。
宗薩欽哲仁波切，於 2020年1月25-27日（農曆新年）在澳大利亞悉尼的新南威爾士大學，給予了為期三天的教授，題目為《見修行》。英文部分由 Alex Li Trisoglio（仁波切指定的佛法老師）聽寫，並分段和添加標題，發布在 Madhyamaka.com。中文部分由 孫方 翻譯。並在翻譯過程中，根據視頻做了文字上的修訂，所以中英文部分可能會有可忽略不計的微小差別。照片為課程現場。