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！
o a correct understanding。 It's not as if I've said 'this is emptiness and you've got to see this'； and now you've got it because I've just told you this and you have accepted this。
The union of the two realisations of dependent arising and emptiness
So then returning to the root text； it reads：
One who sees the infallible cause and effect
of all phenomena in Samsara and nirvana
and destroys all false perceptions
has entered the path that pleases the Buddha。
So here then when we talk about 'seeing the infallible nature of cause and effect of all phenomena within Samsara and nirvana' … 'samsara' then refers to the cycle of existence within which one is bound by the fetters of the destructive emotions and the actions； or karma； which is generated thereby； 'nirvana' here then refers to an individual who has destroyed the enemy of the gross destructive emotions but not perhaps the subtle imprints； and has achieved the lesser nirvana … we could also include within that category the various pure lands and so forth … so all of these experiences； all these places； e about through the infallible nature of cause and effect。 'Cause and effect' here then … when all the causes are gathered for a result it is very difficult to stop that result ing。 So it is also possible to remove negative causes； that is to say； negative karmas； through the various practices which are set forth and then through that avert such a drastic event； but when all the causes and conditions are in place； then it is very difficult to avert such an effect。
So with regard the cycle of existence； if one engages or encourages the play of the destructive emotions； and the cause of Samsara； that is to say the truth of origin； the truth of the cause of Samsara； it is very difficult to bring about an end to the cycle of existence。 And with regard then to achieving the truth of final cessation … if one is an individual who is fully qualified in meditating upon the ultimate nature of phenomena； that is to say； the empty nature of phenomena； and then through that generates the truth of the path； then it will be very difficult to stop the truth of that … which is the truth of cessation。 So then understanding the mode of the true nature of phenomena destroys all false perceptions。 So here 'false perceptions' refers to grasping at objects as existing as something which they aren't； and then through removing that； generating the wisdom which cognises that as something other； that is to say； as naturally empty of that false mode of existence。 Then that individual is one who is said to have entered the path that pleases the Enlightened One； or the Buddha。
The next stanza reads：
Appearances are infallible dependent origination；
voidness is free of assertions。
As long as these two understandings are seen as separate；
one has not yet realised the intent of the Buddha。
So here then there are two understandings … first of all that appearances （whatever appears to our five senses） are dependently originated； they have arisen in dependence upon something other than them； and then the voidness； or the empty nature； of that object。 If they are seen as something lacking a single entity； that is to say； lacking a single unity； then one is perceiving them in a wrong fashion； because these two （what is written here as） two ways of existing of phenomena are in actuality one entity。 So then seeing them as other that is not the intent of the Buddha； so whilst one is seeing them in such a way one has not； as the text says； realised the intent of the Enlightened One。
The next stanza reads：
When these two realisations are simultaneous and concurrent；
from a mere sight of infallible dependent origination
es certain knowledge that pletely destroys all modes of mental grasping。
At that time； the analysis of the profound view is plete。
So here then when one has these two realisations of dependent arising and emptiness arising simultaneously within one's mind … from just seeing the sight； as it is said here； of infallible dependent arising … through cognising the emptiness at the same time as that es the 'certain knowledge' … 'certain' with regard to the actual mode of phenomena； and then through that understanding of the correct or the true way or natural way of existence es the negation； or the removal； of the grasping onto autonomous existence； and then through this negation； one arrives at the state where the basis for the destructive emotions has been destroyed； so as the text says ' es certain knowledge that pletely destroys all modes of mental grasping'。 So at that time then； one's analysis of the profound view； that is to say； the view of emptiness； is plete。
So the next stanza reads：
Appearances clear away the extreme of existence；
voidness clears away the extreme of non…existence。
When you understand the arising of cause and effect from the viewpoint of voidness；
you are not captivated by either extreme view。
So here then it's a rather unique presentation because if we look below the Prasangika Madhyamika philosophical school we find that the majority of the other schools use appearances to prove existence； but here we are clearing away that very notion of existence by appearance。 The reasoning set forth here is that if something appears to our senses； or to our consciousness； at the moment that appears； we understand that object in a causal way； that is to say； it appears as an object because there is an object possessor； it appears in a certain way because of certain causes and conditions。 So we are seeing that object as an object which is lacking any kind of autonomous existence。 Thus just through the object appearing to our mind； any notion of the object existing in and of itself bees； as the text reads； cleared away； or removed。
Then 'voidness clears away the extreme of non…existence' … so here then 'voidness clearing away the extreme of non…existence' … what is meant by that is in order for us to talk about the emptiness of something； that 'something' has to exist as the basis of our discussion； or analysis。 So for example； if we use the example of a sprout … and a sprout being empty of inherent existence … the basis upon which we are going to prove； or set forth； emptiness is the sprout； and it is negating a false perception of that sprout； and through that； we negate that false perception。 We cannot talk about the emptiness of a non…existent phenomena； for example saying the emptiness of the horn of a rabbit； or the emptiness of the child of a barren woman； because for that we don't have any basis on which to prove emptiness。 If there is no basis upon which to prove the lack of or the emptiness of a false perception then we cannot possibly prove that。 So then the text reads 'when you understand the arising of cause and effect from the viewpoint of voidness' （that is to say when you understand these two simultaneously） 'you are not captivated by either view。' 'Either view' here then referring to the extremes of permanence； or annihilation … 'permanence' referring to the ignorance or confusion which grasps at true or autonomous existence； or in simpler terms grasps on to th