The Questions of the  Contemplative Nyimo Gomchen and  
                  the Responses of Sakya Pandita 
                  I reverently  bow at the feet of the Holy Guru! The glorious Sakya Pandita wrote the  following lines to Nyimo Gomchen, a contemplative filled with faith and  spiritual aspiration, applying himself earnestly to his practice: In response  to your questions:  
                     
                  What is the cause of renouncing this life? 
                  It is the awareness that the cycle of existence is devoid of essence.  
                      What is the  contributing condition for such renunciation?  
                      Seeing the faults of the cycle of existence.  
                      What is the  criterion of renunciation?  
                      Mentally turning away from the Eight Mundane Concerns.  
                      What is the sign of  renunciation?  
                      Not being affected by the Eight Mundane Concerns even though one  encounters them.  
                      What is the  criterion for attaining Enlightenment in one life?  
                      Liberating one's body from aging and death and  accomplishing the nature of the Four Bodies of a Buddha.  
                      What is unspecified  action?  
                      Action that  is unable to produce either good or bad results.  
                      What is dedication  of merit?  
                      Something  that transforms the causal roots of virtue into whatever result one desires.  
                      What is prayer?  
                      The yearning for bountiful  results [of spiritual practice].  
                      What is the meaning  of auspicious verses?  
                      Special words that produce good results by the blessing of  truth.  
                      In realizing the  nature of the mind, is there a complete grasp of the meaning of the Three  Collections of Teachings and the Four Classes of Tantras? 
                      There are two realizations:  Realizing the emptiness of the mind, and realizing the union of apparent  reality and the emptiness of mind. In realizing the emptiness of the mind, one  does not fully grasp the meaning of the Three Collections of Teachings and the  Four Classes of Tantras. With such realization one may fully comprehend the  Cessation of a Listener (Shravaka), but since that cessation falls to the  extreme of emptiness alone, one would not grasp the meaning of the Mahayana  teachings. This is stated in all the Mahayana Sutras and Tantras. In  realization of the union [of apparent reality and emptiness], there is no  blemish of even the most subtle faults. It therefore holds the basis of  morality, and the Collection of Vinaya is complete. Since the Heroic Samadhi  and all other states of concentration arise [from such realization], the  collection of Sutras is complete. Since it cognizes all knowable things, from  form to the Omniscient Mind, the collection of Abhidharma is complete. And due  to its comprehension of the special outer and inner dependently-related events,  the Four Classes of Tantra are complete.  
                      Are the Three  Jewels complete in one's own mind?  
                      In the mere emptiness of the mind and the understanding of that  emptiness, the Three Jewels are not complete. In the union of the cognition and  emptiness of the mind, the seeds of the Three Jewels are complete. If one  properly realizes the meaning of that union, the Three Jewels are manifestly  complete.  
                      Is the Supreme  Accomplishment (Siddhi) attained due to the Guru or the Meditation Deity? 
                      It does not occur from either one  separately. Rather, it occurs due to the Guru, the meditational Deity, the  Buddhas of the three times, one's own mind, and from the realization of the  indivisibility of all of Samsara and Nirvana.  
                      What makes a person  one's true Guru? 
                      The  person from whom one correctly receives the four empowerments in accordance  with the Tantras in one's true Guru. A Guru from whom one has not received such  empowerment - how ever good a person he might be - is one's Guru in name only,  For example, the person from whom one receives monastic ordination is one's  true abbot, but if one has not been ordained by someone, he is not one's true  abbot. And even if he is called "Abbot", he is such in name only.  Thus: "without bestowing empowerment, there is no Guru. Without monastic  ordination, there is no abbot. Without precepts, there is no continuum of  virtue. Without going for refuge, one is not a spiritual person." That is the meaning of the above verse.  
                      Is it possible for there to be hearing, reflection and meditation  concerning one utterance of the Buddha? 
                      In reliance upon one utterance of the Buddha, one may practice hearing,  reflection and meditation. The nature of such an utterance is that it is an  enlightened activity of a Tathagata.  
                      Among all the  teachings of the Buddha, which are profound? 
                      With respect to the mentalities of individual  disciples, all of the teachings are profound. On the other hand, only the  Tantric teachings are profound for all disciples in common.  
                      Is a person who  realizes the emptiness of the mind a Buddha? 
                      One who has realized emptiness alone is not a Buddha.  If one comprehends all knowable things, one is fully enlightened. Furthermore,  there are two modes of comprehension, the comprehension that there is no  realization of an ultimately (i.e. inherently) existent phenomenon; and the  comprehension of all distinct, conventionally existent phenomena.  
                      Do you claim to be  a realized person? Since I have not ultimately realized any phenomenon, I do not  claim to be a realized person. But since I know the Five Fields of Knowledge  concerning conventional truth, I claim to be a Pandit.  
                      Among your pupils  are there some who ascertain the nature of the mind? 
                      I understand that among my pupils  there is no one with ultimate realization of the mind, but there are many who are  learned in conventionally existent phenomena. The mind being without [an  inherent] nature, what is there in the ascertainment of the mind?  
                      If one does not  ascertain the mind, even though one accumulates merit, doesn't that [just] lead  to temporary happiness? 
                      If one does not realize the mode of existence of the mind - the meaning  of emptiness - one cannot attain the joy of Liberation by means of one's  collection of merit. Although that may act as a cause for the joys up to the Peak of Cyclic Existence, the collection of  merit is not perfected, And, on the other hand, if one does not have knowledge  of know able objects but only realization of the emptiness of the mind, how can  one be a Buddha? If that were possible, there would be Buddhas in the Nirvana of  Listeners, for which there is realization of emptiness alone, and there would  also be Buddhas in empty space. But how could there be Buddhas there? Thus the  assertion of all the Sutras and Tantras is that Buddhahood occurs through  knowledge of all knowable objects and through realization that there is no  inherent nature to be realized, i.e. knowing that of which there is nothing to  be known,  
                      At what point does one have the certainty of attaining Enlightenment? 
                      Some people realize the emptiness of the mind alone,  but have not perfected the qualities of the Method aspect of the training. Some  have such qualities, but do not realize the emptiness of the mind. Some have  both, but they are not able to guide their practice of the Method with their  knowledge. Some have the other qualities, but since they lack the lineage of  blessing, they are unable to generate the Clear Appearance. Thus, I fear that  Buddhahood is far from them. Since I have a number of these attributes, I hope  to attain Enlightenment, but not by the swift means.  
                      Who is your Root  Guru? 
                      My Root Guru is  the Great Sakyapa Drakpa Gyaltsen, the Vajradhara, who is the nature of the  body, speech and mind of all the Tathagatas of the three times.  
                      For what reason is  he your Root Guru? 
                      He has granted me the four empowerments of the vase, and so on;  he has shown me the four paths of the Stage of Generation, and so on; he has  set forth the dependent relationships of the Four Bodies, including the  Emanation Body, etc.; in short, since he practices in accordance with the  Buddha's teachings in the Sutras and Tantras, he performs the deeds of a  perfectly enlightened being; and thus I regard him as my Root Guru. On the  other hand, one who does not grant empowerment according to the Buddha's  teachings, does not reveal the Path and does not set forth dependent  relationships, but does ascertain the mind, is limited in his teachings to  those leading to the Cessation of a Listener - regardless of whatever merit he  accumulates. Such a kind of person is not fit to be regarded as the Root Guru  of a Mahayana practitioner, for that path is not a Mahayana path. Thus from the  treatise called Synthesis (sDud pa): "With Wisdom alone, without the  Method, one falls to the state of a Listener." Thus, those who give little  emphasis to the Method and great emphasis to Wisdom slip down to the Nirvana of  the Listener.  
                      Which path to  Enlightenment is shorter: that of a learned pandit, or that of a  "kusulu"? 
                      In general, the acts of a "kusulu" are impure.  "Kusali" means "a virtuous person". There are kusalis who  do not rely on the Buddha's path, and there are also pandits who do not rely on  that path. Neither of them become Buddhas. There are both pandits and kusalis  who are Buddhists. Among them there are both pandits and kusalis following the Vehicle  of the Perfections who attain Buddhahood, and it takes them three countless  eons to do so - a long time. There are also tantric pandits and kusalis who  establish internally certain dependent relationships and thereby swiftly attain  Enlightenment.  
                      Now it is  said that the task of a pandit is to become learned in the outer and inner  field of knowledge. And it is said that a kusali supremely devotes himself to  inner practice, after discarding all external affairs. To attain perfect  Enlightenment, one first becomes knowledgeable regarding all knowable objects  and cuts through false assumption by means of hearing and reflection. Then by  taking Samadhi as one's essential practice, one cuts through false assumptions  by means of meditation and thus achieves the Dharma of Insight. In this way one  gradually attains Enlightenment. Therefore, it is necessary to be both a pandit  and a kusali. In terms of those approaches taken separately the pandit is  closer to Buddhahood. Now one might object to that, citing the Sutra, Mound of  Jewels (dKon mchog brtsegs pal): "If one meditates for one moment, the  merit from this is greater than that of listening and explaining to others for  ten eons." I think there is no contradiction here. The meaning of that  citation is that meditation [has such benefits] if one already knows the object  of meditation; but without such knowledge, how could there ever be such  benefits? The Vinaya scriptures also state that one should not meditate in a  hermitage without having understood the Collections of Teachings. The Treasury  of Phenomenology (mNgon pa mdsod) also states: "Endowed with proper  hearing and reflection, Devote yourself to meditation." Arya-Deva also  states: "Without relying upon conventional reality, One will not realize  ultimate reality. Without realizing ultimate reality one will not attain  Liberation." Thus, in all the Sutras it is frequently said that by hearing  certain points of Dharma, one is liberated from certain obstacles. There fore,  if hearing and reflection liberate one, one is advised to meditate afterwards.  It is wonderful that you dwell as a contemplative, and I think it would be good  if you continue in your efforts on the path of the Tantric method.  
                    I realize  that there is no realization of the answers to the question of this realized  person (i.e. yourself), I understand that there is no understanding, and I know  that there is nothing to be known.  
                     
                    This concludes my responses to the questions of the contemplative Nyimo  Gomchen.  
                  (This unedited translation was  prepared under the guidance of Lama Tashi Namgyal by B. Alan Wallace (Gelong  Jhampa Kelsang) at ©Sakya Thubten Kunga Choling in Victoria, B.C., August  1984).                    |