Using the Five Types of Deep Awareness in Daily Life
Session Two: The Anuttarayoga Tantra Systems
We’ve seen that when we speak about five Buddha-families: that if we look at it on the dimension of what will develop into all the aspects of a Buddha, then we have this one set of five: mental activity, good qualities, verbal expression, physical expression and influence—or body, speech, mind, qualities, and activity—depending on how you want to phrase it. Obviously, we have all of these as a Buddha as well. Each of these five can be divided into the five Buddha-families: there are five different styles of mental activity; five different styles of verbal expression; five different styles of physical expression—that’s referring to the five elements; the five different types of activity—the way that we influence others; five different types of qualities—good qualities. And these can be classified into these Buddha-families; this is where the variation comes. How do we define these five variants—let’s say of mental activity—and which family do we put them in? There’s going to be several different systems.
Just for your reference let me mention what the five systems are that I’m familiar with. As I say, there may be more.
- There’s the general anuttarayoga tantra system (anuttarayoga is the highest class of tantra). Within that, there’s the variant that we find in the Gelug system (the Gelugpa system) and the variant that we find in the non-Gelugpa systems: that’s Kagyu, Nyingma, and Sakya. The usual difference is in terms of what’s called the mirror-like awareness and the awareness of reality or dharmadhatu awareness—these are reversed: in these two systems, where one has the mirror the other has the reality awareness and vice versa, as they’re defined slightly differently in accordance with their whole approach to voidness meditation.
- Then there is the system that we find specifically in the Karma Kagyu tradition which most people in the West know it by the Tibetan name “namshey yeshey” (rnam-shes ye-shes) [or “yeshey namshey.”] This is a system in connection with mahamudra meditation, which is speaking about deep awareness, general awareness and specific awareness. It’s another system, from the Karma Kagyu mahamudra approach. And there seems to be two variations here within that system, just as we had two variations in the general anuttarayoga, and the variation is exactly concerning the same point: one system has the mirror-like awareness, the other has reality awareness, and vice versa—these two are exchanged. What are these two systems? Within Karma Kagyu one is a system that we find in, for instance, the Great Jamgon Kongtrul’s commentaries, and the other one is the one that we find in Trungpa’s interpretation: I have no idea what his source is, where he gets his interpretation, where he switches reality and mirror-like awareness, but he has that variation. That’s what you find in the Maitri space awareness.
- Then there’s the fifth system, which is the Kalachakra system, which is yet again something different. It wouldn’t surprise me if within the Kalachakra system, as well, we find the two different types of commentaries that will again switch the mirror-like and the reality awarenesses; that wouldn’t surprise me.
The two variations are quite interesting. If you’d like to know where it comes from, why the mirror-like and reality awarenesses are interchanged, it has to do with a mandala and who is the central figure in the mandala: is it Vairochana or is it Akshobhya? The earlier tantras that were translated into Tibetan tended to emphasize Vairochana in the center, and the ones that came later tended to emphasize Akshobhya in the center, and it’s from that that you get this variation.
Anyway, this is the situation. I’m not saying that one system is better than the other, just as you can’t say that Chinese medicine is better or worse than Ayurvedic medicine. They are just other systems and they have a whole system built around it. It’s important to at least be aware of that, then we’re not confused. At least I find this for myself—and I would hope that other people would find it as well—that when we know the source of the system, then we can be a little bit more calm about the whole thing – that it’s not just that somebody made up this, and somebody made up that, and it’s arbitrary and so on, but that each of these five or six systems, or however many more systems there might be, actually come from a certain tradition, a certain viewpoint, and has a whole development and so on. Then there’s a tradition and we can accept that there are different traditions.
Let’s start to work with some of these fivefold divisions of these five basic aspects: body, speech, mind, qualities, and activity. Obviously, we won’t have time to go through all of this, but just some representative ones. We start with the five in terms of the mind or mental activity. These are five different ways in which we are aware of things. Let’s start with the way that these five are defined in the general anuttarayoga tantra system. Let’s work with the Gelug variation of that, then we know what we’re working with. This is what I explain in my book Developing Balanced Sensitivity. The exercise that is in there is based on this particular system of these five types of what is called “deep awareness.”
One of the points in this presentation is that if we talk about Buddha-nature aspects, in order to really understand it we have to be able to not only identify it in ourselves, but a worm has to have this as well. If we can understand it on the level that the worm has it also, then it really is Buddha-nature, right? It’s something that everybody has, not just human beings. And obviously if the worm has it, there’s no reason to feel low self-esteem about ourselves, because obviously we have it too, and compared to the worm we probably have it a little bit more well-developed than the worm. That’s why I say it’s important to be able to identify these in the worm also. So this particular presentation is quite easy to recognize in a worm. That’s why I like it very much.
We can always speak about these Buddha-nature aspects in terms of the basis situation. They’re what everybody has, including the worm: the path aspect in which they are developed as a spiritual pathway to enlightenment. And then, the resultant level of what a Buddha has. Some systems emphasize much more the basis presentation of this, so you can identify with a worm. Other systems of presenting these Buddha-nature factors are speaking much more on the pathway level of when it’s actually developed—it would be very difficult to identify these in a worm; we identify it much more in what a practitioner is experiencing. That’s the way it’s being described. Although you could find the basis level of it, but that’s not really how it’s being described. It’s being presented from the point of view of the path. And then other presentations are presenting Buddha-families from the point of view of the result. These are the ones that are talking about Buddha-families in terms of the iconography of mandalas: the colors, the Buddha figures and what they look like. That’s hard to relate to the worm, isn’t it? So there are many different presentations depending on what point of view we’re describing the Buddha-families: the basis, path, and result.
What I’d like to do in this weekend course is not only to present a taste in terms of experience of what we’re talking about with these Buddha-families, but also give the structure for being able to then work with other presentations of it that we might find in books—what other teachers teach, and so on. Otherwise, this is such a bewildering topic that it is very easy to get quite lost and confused.
In terms of the mental activity we have, although they are sometimes called “Buddha-wisdom,” that’s not a particularly appropriate word for describing what the worm has: it’s hard to say the worm has five types of wisdom. This is why I call it just more simply awareness, and it’s deep awareness because it is very fundamental. To call it a Buddha-wisdom is describing it from the point of view of the result. The Buddha, and it’s wisdom; the worm, it’s not wisdom. See how this basis, path, and result very much influences the way it’s described and the vocabulary that’s used. In terms of our awareness, our mental activity, first let me describe these five. Then we can work with them.
First, we have what’s called the “mirror-like awareness.” The mirror is an image which is used—you have to think in terms of when Buddha taught. In our modern times, “camera” would be a little bit more appropriate because with this awareness, what we do is just take in information. The word “mirror” is a little bit misleading because it reflects, although it takes the information and reflects it; we’re not talking about the reflecting aspect here. We’re talking like a camera: it just takes in information. We’re not limiting our discussion here just to sight, such as taking in visual information like a camera does; but also the microphone, taking in sound information; and we can extend it to all the senses, and to the mind as well, in terms of taking in all the information about all the different aspects of feeling that we have, for example. So smell, taste, physical sensation, and with the mental faculty as well, because we can take in all the information, which could be very complex information about how we feel at the moment. There’s unhappiness, and there’s also a little bit of annoyance, and there’s also a little bit of impatience. There are many, many different aspects of the information that is there in terms of: How do I feel? Mirror-like, camera-like takes in just the information.
Question: To take in from the five senses and not the mind?
Alex: No, the mind is another dimension of this. But just the information, the camera. Just taking a picture of what emotional thing am I feeling now. And there’s many, many different pieces of information that are all occurring at one moment.
Question: But the feeling is occurring in the mind?
Alex: Yes. We’re not talking just about physical sensations or feelings: cold, hot, and pain—these type of things. That, of course, the worm has as well. The worm sees or hears or feels and whatever. [We’re also talking about taking in the information about our feelings of happiness and unhappiness, and our emotional feelings.] It’s just taking in information. We may not pay attention to everything, but the information is coming in.
For example, we have been looking at each other around this circle. We have seen what clothing each person in this circle is wearing—we may not be able to remember that, but that information has come in. That’s a factor of attention: how much attention we pay to that information that the camera took in. The camera took in the information; all these mental factors are there. Anyway, the information: that’s the mirror-like awareness or “camera.”
Then there’s the equalizing awareness. The equalizing means to simply consider several things at the same time; to put them together. To look at—let’s say these three persons opposite me, together: put them equally together, to consider them together. A worm does that as well. Then there’s the individualizing awareness. With the equalizing we can, obviously, only put a few things together, or a lot of things together. The individualizing is just focusing on one thing and the individuality of that thing: as an individual. And then there’s the accomplishing awareness, which is the awareness to relate to an object in some way: to do something with it, or toward it–to relate.
Then there’s what is called in Sanskrit “dharmadhatu awareness”—dharmadhatu means the sphere of reality—for short, I call it “reality awareness.” And that has two aspects to it: the awareness of the conventional reality of things—that we all have; and then the awareness of the deepest reality of things, which is a little bit more difficult. Usually, the awareness of the conventional reality of things accompanies the other four.
So this reality awareness would be what something is. You take in information like the camera and that goes together with what it is. This is a table. This is a floor. This is food. This is a rock. If we think in terms of a worm, the worm might not have the word “rock” or “food,” but the worm has the concept of rock or food. Concepts don’t have to be verbal: the worm knows what it is. So you take in the information and you know what it is.
Then equalizing is considering several things at the same time, which may or may not be present at the moment, and putting them together: well, how do they fit together? This is food. A worm sees a colored shape and puts it together with other colored shapes that it saw before: and knows that it is food, and puts it all into the same category, puts it together into categories; it sees the patterns. Equalizing just puts things together into a category, and the conventional reality (the reality awareness) is what category is it. It is all food.
These three forms that I see, these colored shapes on the other side of the room, are three women. I’m putting them together, and what category do they fit in? The reality awareness is: what is the category? They are all equally women. It’s how we process information. You don’t just take in information: you have to process that information. We do that in terms of putting things together into categories: into universals, in a sense. And we see the patterns. I mean everybody has that; it’s a matter of how much we extend it to see everybody equally as wanting to be happy, and not wanting to suffer, and so we can equally have compassion toward everybody. Obviously this can be developed, but that basic ability to put things together—consider several things together; and then to see what do they have in common—that’s the reality awareness. That we all have. The worm has that as well. Otherwise, how in the world would a worm be able to eat if it couldn’t recognize food?
Then individualizing awareness just specifies one individual thing, and then the conventional reality awareness is what are the special features of this one thing. I can put these three people together, with equalizing, into the category of men; but also I can know their individuality of: this is Hans-Harald, this is Matthias, this is Kes. We know the individuality, not only that they come together, but we also know the individual identity of things. So the individualizing sees it as an individual and then the reality awareness: what is it? Which one in this category is it?
[Question: Doesn’t dharmadhatu awareness refer to all-encompassing awareness?]
Alex: It depends how we translate it: all-encompassing awareness or reality awareness. It depends how we define this awareness and what system we’re using. I’m using this in this system. We would define it and translate it as reality awareness. It makes more sense. All-encompassing is in another system. As I said, these different types of awareness can be defined differently in each of these five systems. And in each system, we can identify the five within us as defined in that system. But it’s important to just work with one system at a time, otherwise you go completely into confusion.
Then the accomplishing awareness is to relate. There is the basic awareness to relate to something and then conventional reality awareness is how to relate. How do we relate to this particular individual? I would speak in a certain way to an adult; I would speak in another way to a child; I would speak in another way to a dog. It’s based on the individuality and, although there is the awareness to relate, the reality one would say how to relate and in what manner to relate.
Obviously, a Buddha has this fully developed, so a Buddha is able to know the individuality of every single sentient being and how best to teach and lead that being. This is the relating awareness: how to lead that being to enlightenment. The worm takes in the information of this colored shape, knows that it’s food, puts it in that category, focuses on this individual piece of food, it’s over there and knows what to do with it: it knows to eat it, how to relate to this thing. The way to relate to it is to eat it, as opposed to fighting it, to make love to it, or whatever. A worm has all of those.
The deepest reality awareness is that things don’t exist permanently, solidly in this category and in that category. It’s more open. This allows for our flexibility to be able to deal with situations in different ways as they develop. “This person I relate to in this way, and that’s the only way, permanently.” Well, if you’re like that with your child, and you continue to act in that way when the child is grown up, you’re in big trouble. Obviously, this deepest reality awareness allows us to be flexible and to relate in different ways as the child develops—or in a personal relationship with somebody—to relate in different ways in accordance with the circumstance, because we see that it is open: they don’t exist in just one way. That’s the deepest reality awareness. It accounts for flexibility. Or in a relationship, as the mood changes—or even in a conversation, as the mood changes, as the conversation develops, we need to be flexible: to change our tone of voice, change the way that we’re doing things. It’s this awareness (deepest reality awareness) that allows us to be flexible. If there’s a problem with that, we have a lot of difficulty in relating to others. Don’t we? These are five types of basic awareness. We all have it: it’s how our mental activity works. And if we can recognize them, then we can work with them. We can see they can be adjusted and evolved. It’s very important here.
The question was raised during the break of [dualism] when we’re working with these evolving factors, and trying to make them grow, and so on. What’s important is that we try not to do this from the point of view of there being a separate “me,” separate from these five types of awareness or whatever. It’s not like there is an observer who has observed what’s going on, and then the controller is adjusting the knobs and the buttons on the apparatus. It’s not like that. If you experience it like that, there is a great deal of self-alienation and there are big problems with that.
In some Buddhist systems we call that: dualism, duality, a feeling of duality. This requires working with this whole understanding that mental activity is occurring all the time without there being any separate “me” that is making it occur. It just occurs. Although we can say “me,” “it’s my mental activity,” and so on, that’s just a way of referring to it. Although it may feel as though there’s a solid separate “me,” that’s not really the way that the situation exists. To really work with these five Buddha-families, we need to do this within the context of this Buddhist understanding of how the self exists, otherwise it can be a very artificial alienated type of practice of this super-controller “me.” “Now I have to do this to myself.” As though there is a “me” who is the controller and “myself,” who is like the victim or the patient that I am controlling. That’s very neurotic. Because one side of us is the judge, the other side is the criminal. There is guilt, paranoia and all this stuff that makes it very neurotic. This is very essential to working with all these systems.
Obviously, it requires quite a bit training and understanding to be able to work with this—it’s just mental activity—and to be able to have adjustments without there being the view point of there being a separate “me” making the adjustments. That’s quite delicate and difficult to do. We shouldn’t fool ourselves into thinking that’s easy. But if we are sensitive to this danger that’s there, then we can watch out for it. When we start to go on the trip of: the judge, paranoia, guilt, and all of that, we can say, “Hey, this is really not actually what is going on. This is based on confusion.” At least to be aware of that danger is helpful, even if we are not able to reach the state yet in which the danger doesn’t arise.
It’s not that we’re stupid, although it may feel like that. It naturally feels as though there is a separate “me.” That’s what makes what we call in Buddhism “samsara” so terrible. It naturally feels like there is a solid separate “me.” It’s because there is this voice in our head saying, “Oh my god, what should I do now? Oh, I’ll do this. I’ll change the facial expression.” The voice is going on in our head, so it gives the feeling as though there is some separate “me” somewhere: who knows where—maybe sitting in the back of our head—who is separate from the whole thing and is observing and controlling. That’s just a vision out of a Walt Disney cartoon. It’s not reality.
We were speaking about one of the systems of the five Buddha-families in terms of mental activity or mind. In this system of the five types of deep awareness, we saw that the mirror-like awareness is taking in information like the camera. Then equalizing is putting several things together so that we can process that information: seeing the patterns or the categories. Then seeing the individuality of the situation or person—relating. Then being aware of the conventional reality of what things are, and then the openness of flexibility that things may be conventionally like this now, but can be open to change.
In sensitivity training, we have some exercises for recognizing and cultivating these five. Before we get into the exercise, let me give you some idea how it would apply in our daily life: the application of these five. For instance, if we are in a relationship with somebody and we come home and we see this person, we meet the person. First, we need to take in the information of how they look: their expression. Are they sad? Or looking very tired? Or these sort of things, because often we just ignore that. We need to take in the information when they speak: the tone of voice, the emotion behind it. We take in all the information. It’s the mirror or camera-like awareness. Then we have to process it so we see how it fits in to the patterns of this person’s previous behavior. We may think that perhaps they are upset with us, or whatever. We have to see how this fits into the pattern of this person’s behavior. This is equalizing, putting it together with other things we know about the person. We see what pattern does it fit into. But it’s not just, “Ohh, another time in which they’re upset. They’re upset again.” We have to respect the individuality of this particular situation and see what makes this particular situation individual. It’s not just yet another time.
Remember all of these awarenesses will come together here with the reality awareness of what is it, what is the information, what is the pattern, and what is the individuality of the situation. Then we put together the awareness to relate to the person with how to relate: which is what to actually do in response to this situation when we understand the information, the pattern, and the individuality. It’s not just the awareness to relate, but with the reality thing of how to relate: what to do. Then there is the deepest reality awareness, which is: although they may be like this now, they’re not stuck in this particular situation as if it were stuck in concrete. This allows us the openness to be flexible, take in new information, as our interaction proceeds, as our conversation proceeds; fit it into other categories and so on, and respond, and be flexible in our interaction during the period of time while we’re with the person. This is very important.
For example, a friend of mine tries to explain certain things to me or convince me of a certain point of view: advice in terms of my work and stuff like that. He explains and I understand and I agree, but then he goes on for the next ten or fifteen minutes continuing to try to convince me of a decision that I said already, “Yes, I agree.” Still he goes on and on, repeating. That’s a lack of this flexibility. It’s like really getting stuck at one point in the interaction. That’s very boring: lack of flexibility.
These five are very crucial elements, or factors, that we work with to develop proper balanced sensitivity to others. As a Buddha, it would be fully developed to its highest degree. A Buddha has it fully. This is an area of application of working with the five Buddha-families. If we notice in our interaction that we are lacking in one or more of these areas, then we really haven’t taken in the information. If we came in and start talking to the other person, then we haven’t really taken the time to take in the information that they may be busy. Very often, we walk in and start laying our whole trip on somebody and we don’t even pay attention to the fact that they are busy or upset. We need to know what area do we have to try to increase in these five. The point is that these five are always there. It’s just that they may not be functioning very fully, but they are always there. The worm has it as well.
Let’s do an exercise. In sensitivity training, we do lots of exercises with many steps with such things as this, but we will do just one here concerning these five types of deep awareness. What we will do is sit in a circle looking at each other. We will try to recognize these five types of deep awareness, one at a time, while we look at each other around the circle. We may know some people in the circle, and we may not know other people in the circle: that doesn’t need to be a problem. First, just take in the information: being the camera. In sensitivity training, we always are doing exercises on the basis of the two “legs” that go on in all the exercises. One is the quiet mind: not making comments about what we observe, thinking about something else, telling little stories, worry, or all these mental stories or movies that might go on. We need to quiet the mind of that. The other is the caring attitude, which is taking the other person seriously: you’re a human being and you have feelings just as I do. The way that I interact with you—the way that I speak, the way that I act—is going to affect your feelings and mood, just as the way you interact with me is going to affect my feelings; so in this way we take the other person seriously, our behavior and our actions seriously. That’s the caring attitude, because as we look at each other around the circle it’s not that we’re just looking at people on the television, but that these are real people here. They all have feelings just as I do. That’s important, otherwise it becomes very cold. Although we don’t have time to do a whole big training in this, at least be aware of that. Let’s try to do this not as the distant observer looking at animals in the zoo or something like that.
First, we quiet down with focusing on the breath. If we can quiet down then we can turn our energy to whatever exercise we are doing: whether it’s meditation or whatever it might be. We will look around the circle at each person. If there is the eye contact then sometimes people seem to get stuck in that, and get a little bit mesmerized by that contact, and maybe start to feel a little self-conscious, or some sort of trip. If it happens that there is eye contact, don’t engage in it, but just go on. Eye contact isn’t the point here. That’s something else, so just go on. What we want to do here is to just be the camera: just take in the information about each person.
Now we may know the reality awareness, it usually comes in here. I know that a person is tired, or looks stressed, or this or that, but we don’t need to actually verbalize that. When we meet with somebody, a live situation, you need to be able to take in all the information and know what that information is, but you don’t actually categorize it all in terms of: how the person is dressed, how they keep themselves, how they hold themselves, the expression on their face, and all these sorts of things. We need to be able to just take in the information and what it is, without being like a radio announcer and announcing it all. That’s what we mean by the quiet mind.
Let’s do that in terms of being the camera. Go at your own speed around the circle. Don’t feel compelled that you actually have to look at everybody. Don’t go too slowly so that you only look at one person in five minutes, or too fast. When we’re really very highly developed then we can do this very quickly. My teacher Serkong Rinpoche, for example, at a big teaching with His Holiness the Dalai Lama sat next to His Holiness and was always looking down, but occasionally he would look up at the audience for just a few seconds and look down. Later he would say to me, “This one was asleep, that one wasn’t paying attention, this one was doing this and that one was doing that.” To be able to see everything in just a few seconds like that [snap]. The way we normally look is like a child at the zoo: “uhhhhhhhh…” You have to stare at something with your mouth open and look at it for a long time before you actually are able to understand what you see. That can be speeded up and developed. Again, quiet down for a moment. And: camera!
This time what we’ll do as we look around the circle is to look at two or three people together. From our distance here we can see two or three people together quite easily. Try to see them together, equally. Let’s try to do that in terms of: all these three are human beings and have feelings just as I do. They want to be liked, and not disliked, just as I do. They’re all equal in that respect. Put them together without having to verbalize it. Quiet for a moment. Then see the groups as people as equal, as respect.
Then we look down. Let the experience settle. Focus on the breath.
Then, the people that we’re seeing are not just a flock of sheep, in which we can’t tell the difference between any of them; they’re all sheep, but each one is an individual. It’s not necessary to know the name of anybody here, but the next part of the exercise is that we look at each person as an individual: with their own history, personality, circumstances and so on. It entails respect for the person as an individual, because if we are going to relate to somebody, it’s unhelpful to have a standard way to deal with every sheep. We would relate in terms of the individuality of the person, custom-made to what is the situation of the person. Let’s quiet down first. Look around the circle at each person, as an individual, using individualizing awareness.
The next one is the accomplishing awareness: the awareness to relate. Here we look at each person with the awareness to relate to the person. In other words: in terms of the information, the pattern, the quality; and that it wants to be liked, not disliked. This is an individual: so based on all of this, then this is the awareness to relate in a way which would be appropriate to all this, that we know from the other type of awarenesses. This is a rather subtle type of awareness here. Because we may not know what would be an appropriate way to relate to the person if we don’t know the other person very well. Just on the basis of whatever information that we might be able to gather, we would relate.
Let’s say if you work in a store and a customer comes to you, you can see is this person tired, in a hurry, friendly and so on. And one would relate to the person in an appropriate way based on that. This is obvious that we are able to do this. In terms of if the customer is an adult, small child or a very elderly person, obviously we adjust the way that we relate. We don’t speak to the eight-year-old child the way we speak to an adult. Here, when we look around the circle, what we try to have is the awareness, the intention, or the wish of relating to this person in an appropriate way. What we experience here is a little bit like our energy going out to the person in a way to actually meet this person, not just meet another sheep and so on, but to this person as an individual. This is the awareness we are having here. We may not know exactly what that interaction is going to be, but it’s very important to go that step: to put energy out and be open to meet you and interact with you. That’s this relating awareness. Based on however much we know of the other awarenesses, we have some idea how to relate. Again we quiet down, focusing on the breath. Then we look around the circle with the awareness: relate!
Then finally we have the reality awareness, which is open to see that the situation with the other person is open to change, and our own way of dealing with it is open to change. In other words: flexibility and openness. We’re open to whatever will develop in the interaction. We will respond accordingly with this openness and flexibility.
Please notice that in all five of these, what is fundamental here is an attitude of acceptance. We accept the other person, the way they are, in a non-judgmental way. We accept their individuality. It’s not that we’re judgmental and lay a whole trip on them. We accept how the interaction will unfold. This doesn’t mean to be passive, so that we don’t do anything, but it is non-judgmental. Open means that we don’t have fixed ideas about the other person; we don’t have fixed ideas about ourself. Look around the circle with this type of awareness, this kind of mental activity, to be open.
So we quiet down and look around the circle with this openness awareness, reality awareness. Open: they’re open; we’re open. They’re open to change; we’re open to be flexible in our interaction.
Let’s take a ten minute pause and during the pause, what I would recommend is that you discuss with each other your experience during this exercise [in groups of two, three, four or whatever comes naturally.]
Is there anything you would like to report back to the group in terms of what you learned, what you observed or any questions you might have.
Participant: I found that when we start this kind of exercise, in the beginning I had a bit of a hesitation: does this really work? At the second or third, I find that it suddenly builds up and becomes real. It’s like you are putting bricks on top of each other, then suddenly it feels real. There’s a difference between hearing it and feeling it.
Alex: With any exercise, of course, it takes time to get into it the first time we do it. Of course we have some hesitations and doubts. It takes a while. That’s natural.
Participant: The business of relating to people sometimes worked very well and sometimes there was no idea at all—it didn’t work at all. And she felt she was putting herself under stress if didn’t work well. She felt bad for it was not working well.
Alex: That actually is a good sign because it indicates to us an area that we need to work on. With a certain type of people we find that our energy goes out more easily to relate to them, and with others we might have some blocks: other types of people, or individuals. It shows us that these are the areas that we need to work on. But because we’re able to relate to some people—our energy goes out—that reaffirms that we have the possibility to relate to everybody because the basic mechanism is there. That’s the point of it being a Buddha-nature factor.
Then we apply the five types of awareness to this particular block. By taking in the information, we try to see the pattern. What is the pattern here? Here I can more easily relate to women, but not to men; or to older people and not younger people; or to people that I find pretty and attractive, than to people that I don’t find attractive. We try to see what the pattern is and put it together. Then in each specific situation that we’re in, it’s an individual case. We shouldn’t lock ourselves into this pattern. Then we want to relate to this problem. I want to relate with it. I want to deal with it. How can I overcome this? That’s very important. I want to relate to this problem. I want to do something about it. To realize that during the process of dealing with it, we need to be open and change, and that we ourselves are open to being able to change to overcome this block. It’s the openness awareness.
When we’re aware that we have these five types of awareness, these Buddha-nature factors, then we have great confidence that we have a mechanism to be able to deal with any problem or blocks that we have. Obviously, we need other factors as well, such as compassion for ourselves, and these sorts of things. It all fits together. This is the important point of Buddha-family work, Buddha-nature work. We have all the tools already within. It’s just a matter of recognizing them and knowing how to develop and apply them. We didn’t even know that we had these or that we could apply them. But as we saw, even the worm has these five.
Participant: There’s the phenomenon that there are certain people you don’t want to relate to because you simple despise them, you don’t like them. For example, there’s a lady cleaning in her office and she just doesn’t like to meet with her because she is so talkative. So she avoids meeting her. Whenever she comes to the office, this woman is there, even if she should not be there. This lady wonders if there is a purpose in there that she should learn something from the situation.
Alex: As we were discussing in terms of rebirth from the Buddhist point of view: it’s not as though there’s some outside higher authority that’s dealing us lessons to learn, setting this woman there to challenge us. That’s a very paranoid way of viewing our life. However, it’s important to recognize that you are relating to this woman. The way that you are relating to this woman is by avoiding her. That mechanism is there.
Is this a satisfactory way of relating to this woman? What is the effect of the exercise earlier today? What is the influence this has on the other person? Not only what influence does it have on the other person, but what influence does it have on me? It makes me very uptight. Is this how I want to continue to experience this woman because, obviously, if we don’t have the power to fire her then we have to deal with her. We may not be so highly developed that we’re going to become best friends with this cleaning lady, but we can certainly be creative and flexible enough to relate in a different way, at least in a manner in which we are not upset by her. We have to non-judgmentally accept that this woman is very talkative. This is the way that she is.
One way of relating to people is to set boundaries, to set limits, without feeling uptight, angry or guilty. It’s important not only with the cleaning lady, but with so many people in our lives. That’s one way of relating that can be very beneficial to that other person. It’s certainly beneficial to us. Set the limits and boundaries, but remain flexible. We need to be flexible according to the situation, but we need to be able to say in a relaxed manner, “Excuse me, I need to get back to my work,” without feeling uptight about it, without rejecting the women. Instead of saying something like “Shut up and leave me alone!” very simply say, “Excuse me, I have to get back to my work,” like that.
This is one system of these five types of deep awareness, as I have said the system that we find in the anuttarayoga tantra (the highest class of tantra) as understood or explained in the Gelug system. Now if we look at the way that it’s explained in the highest class of tantra from the point of view of the non-Gelugpa systems, just to point out the variations… We won’t do a whole big exercise on it. We just want to get a little feeling of what the variation is….
- Here [in the non-Gelug system] in place of this first type of awareness—remember we have the camera or mirror-like awareness—here we have the reality awareness. Here the reality awareness actually involves very much of what we had before, but there [in the Gelug system] it was called the mirror-awareness. Here [in the non-Gelug system] we’re taking in the information as well as the conventional reality awareness that we had before. Take in the information and it’s this and not that: this is a man, not a woman; and this is an old person, not a young person, etc.
- Similarly, like before, we have the equalizing: the pattern, putting it together, the individualizing and the relating—that’s the same.
- Then finally, we have the mirror-like awareness, which is to open up and be like the mirror to take in all of that in the larger, larger context of everything. The context of an entire relation with this person, the context of my whole life, the context of everything about their life and the things they’re doing. You may not know all the details, but that doesn’t matter. The point is to be open to this person in this larger context. When we talk about openness here, it’s this huge expansiveness of seeing something in the context of everything. That would be not so easy to identify on the basis of the worm as this is much more something that we would work with on the path.
So this is another way of presenting these five, and this kind of presentation of the five can also be very helpful. In our relations with somebody, what is a little bit different here is this last one: this different type of openness, this whole context. This is very important in terms of seeing our relationship with somebody in the context of our whole life and all the other relationships I have, otherwise I over-emphasize it or under-emphasize it so that it doesn’t fit into a balance with what is going on. That can apply in terms of a relationship with this person within the context of our relationships with everybody else in our life.
It’s very interesting that when I want to be loved by this person, it doesn’t matter that the other people love me, but it’s this person that I want to love me. It’s a very interesting phenomenon. The other ones don’t really count. Also in terms of a fight with somebody, a disagreement with somebody we’re in a relationship with, it’s very important to be able to be open to see that incident in the context of the whole relationship, instead of blowing it up and then identifying the entire relationship with this one little incident. See the whole picture, then this is just one particular incident, nothing more, nothing less.
If we try to think how does the worm have this, then we have to go back to the image of the mirror (this is called the mirror-like awareness in this system). Think of it. The mirror takes in the entire visual sense field, the whole thing. We may only pay attention to a little part of what we see, but actually we see the entire visual field, don’t we? That’s this openness, seeing the whole context.
Question: Does the worm understand the concept of what a mirror is?
Alex: No, not at all. But the worm sees an entire visual field: even though the worm may only be focused on this colored shape which is food in front of it, the worm actually does perceive the entire visual sense field. I assume that worms have eyes, but I don’t really know. It’s an analogy. You know a fly has eyes and it sees the entire sense field, the whole context. We do have that ability to open up and see the entire context. It’s just a matter of broadening what is that larger context. Like this, you can’t say that one system is better than another system. It just gives us slightly more to work with.
We’ll continue tomorrow with another system of deep awareness: the one that we find more in the system of namshey yeshey. These are different types of awareness that Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche works with in this Maitri space awareness. This is yet another way of looking at the five types of mental activity.
Join us in trying to benefit others.
Support our work!
This website relies completely on donations. Its maintenance, preparation of the remaining 70% of our planned material, and further translating is costly. Although we currently have 80 volunteers, 23 essential team members require payment. Help us raise the 100,000 euros (US $150,000) required each year
to continue providing our website free of charge.
Reaching Our Goal (35%)