In reality, if you analyze, there is no real I there that has gone to prison. Nobody can put that I in prison, because that I, which appears to us as real, as existing from its own side, and is believed in, doesn’t exist at all.

The “I” cannot be found

Not only is the object of attachment a concept; the “I” is also a concept. First of all, there is the I that is merely imputed by the mind, because there is the base, the aggregates, the association of body and mind (if elaborated, there are five aggregates). When the body is kept in prison along with the mind—the mind is dwelling within the body—the mind simply labels, merely imputes, “I am in prison.” The mind merely imputes that, then believes it; the mind believes, “I am in prison, I have been put in prison.”

In reality, if you analyze, there is no real I there that has gone to prison. Nobody can put that I in prison, because that I, which appears to us as real, as existing from its own side, and is believed in, doesn’t exist at all.

That I doesn’t exist at all; nowhere can you find it. Neither the body is I, nor the mind is I. If you analyze, you will find that each of the aggregates is not that I. Even the collection of the five aggregates is not the I. That real I also cannot be found on the aggregates, which is the base. It cannot be found from the tip of the hair down to the toes. It cannot be found either outside the body or inside the body. It cannot be found. It exists nowhere, not in the sky, nor in the ground; nowhere. It cannot be found.

By scientifically checking, you can see that it cannot be found—­“scientifically checking” means using reasoning. With wisdom, scientifically, what you realize after analyzing is that the I is totally non-­existent, it is totally empty. By logical reasoning, it cannot be found. That emptiness is the ultimate nature of the I, the very nature of the I, the reality.

How the mind projects

How does labeling happen? For example, if you ask yourself, “What am I doing?” you think, “I am sitting,” or “I am talking,” or “I am meditating”—sleeping, eating, whatever.

First, the mind sees the aggregates and sees what action the aggregates are doing—the body is doing the action of sitting, the mind is doing the action of meditating—then, according to that activity, the mind makes up that label.

Then, second, right after that, because of the subtle negative imprint in our mind of grasping at true existence in the past, the mind projects, decorates. Even though “I am sitting” is merely imputed by the mind, the next second, when what the mind has merely imputed appears back to us, it does not appear as merely labeled by the mind; it appears as not merely labeled by the mind. It appears as something real, as existing from its own side. Then we believe it. It is not only that our mind labels it, we believe it.

First there appears a real I that is really sitting, talking, sleeping, meditating. Then the mind imputes “I am sitting,” “I am talking,” etc. And then the mind immediately decorates, projects true existence onto the action—not only the I appears as real, the action appears as real as well. The mind makes it real, as existing from its own side.

It is like this for all phenomena. We think everything is real because of the subtle negative imprint of grasping at true existence in our minds. But in reality, everything is empty. The I is empty, the aggregates are empty, the senses, the objects of the senses, the actions—everything is totally empty. There is no such thing as these phenomena. They don’t have true existence at all. They don’t have the slightest atom of true existence. All this is projected, false, a total hallucination. All this is totally non-existent.

This emptiness of true existence is the ultimate nature of all phenomena.

We create our own world

Basically, we create our own world. As we discussed before in relation to attachment to a person’s body, you believe that the beautiful body exists from its own side. But that is totally wrong. If the beauty existed from the side of the object, not projected by your own mind, that person’s body should be seen as beautiful by everybody, by every living being.

When you compare different bodies, you will say that one is more beautiful than another; or this one is ugly compared to that one. This makes it very clear that “beautiful” and “ugly” come from your mind, they don’t come from the object’s side at all. If ugly and beautiful existed from their own side, every human being should have the same view, everybody should have the same appearance. But they do not.

We label things, then believe in them

Let’s make this point a little bit clearer. When you were a child, before you were taught the alphabet by your school teacher, you saw what was written on the blackboard as a drawing or a design; you didn’t see that this is A, this is B, this is C, etc. You didn’t see those designs as those letters. At that time, all you saw was just a design. Once your teacher introduced you to A, B, C, D, your mind imputed A, B, C, D on those designs, then you believed in those labels. Only after that was there the appearance of A to you; only then did you see A. Your mind labeled A, then you believed in it.

Now you can see that the A that you are seeing came from your mind. Your mind imputed A and believed in it. It started with that. The whole process started with that; it came from your mind.

But when this A appears to you, right after the mere imputation by the mind calling it A, it appears as if it is there on those lines. Why is that? That is the big question. Why does it appear there on those lines—in other words, why does it appear as existing from its own side, as existing truly? Because of the imprint of past ignorance grasping at true existence.

The lines are not the “A”; they are the base of the label “A”

Each line of the design is not A. Even all the lines together are not A, because all the lines together are the base upon which your mind imputes A. If that base, those lines, were already A, then the very first time you saw that design, before you were introduced to A, you would know that it is A. But the first time you saw it, you didn’t see A, you just saw the lines. Only after you were introduced to it, and your mind made up the label A, called it that, only then was there the appearance of A—then you saw A. That very clearly proves that the whole design is not A. It is the base to be labeled A.

The question is whether it is labeled by mind or not. Yes, it is labeled by mind. Without the mind labeling A, A doesn’t exist. A is labeled by mind—what is called A is a name, and the name has to come from the mind, the name has to be imputed by the mind. Right from the beginning, what caused your mind to label A? You have to have seen some design first, then your mind labeled A.

The aggregates are not “father”; they are the base of the label “father”

Before you label “father” you have to see those particular aggregates, that particular shape of body, that face and so forth. You recognize those aggregates, then your mind labels “father.” You don’t label “father” before seeing those particular aggregates—the shape of the body that performs the function of father for you; you don’t say, “Oh, father is coming into the house” unless you see those aggregates. First you see that particular body, that connection to you, then you label “father,” and only after that do you see “father.”

It is very clear, then, that you don’t see father before seeing the base, the aggregates. You don’t label “father” before seeing those particular aggregates, which are the base.

Nor do you label “father” at the same time that you see the base. Believing that it happens at the same time is totally wrong. This is already proven by experience. In order for your mind to label “father is coming into the room,” you have to first see the aggregates coming into the room. You see “father” only after seeing the base, the aggregates.

You label the body “beautiful” and then you believe it

It is exactly the same with the body of the person you’re attached to—you are seeing a body as beautiful. The evolution is exactly the same. Your mind labeled “beautiful” and then believed in it. If your mind did not label it as beautiful and then believe that it is beautiful in the first place, there would be no appearance of beauty, you wouldn’t see beauty. It is clear with this explanation. It all starts from your mind.

The base and the label are not separate, but they are different

So, same with the A. First you see the design, then your mind labels A, then you see A. Therefore, that design is not A. Rather, it is the base upon which we label A.

This point is very important. The base is not the label; they are different phenomena. The base and the label do not exist separately, but they exist differently. It is extremely important to differentiate the label and the base. Seeing the base and the label as indifferentiable—that is the object to be refuted. That is the wrong view. That is the false A. That is not the reality. Meditate on that.

You can see very clearly that you can’t find the A on this base, on those lines. Not one part of the lines is A, nor is one of the lines A, even the whole group of lines is not A. You can’t find A on those lines. If you look for it, you can’t find it. This should be very clear. This is the reality.

Nevertheless, there is “A”—a merely labeled “A”

Now, here is the point; you have to really pay attention here. Through this analysis, even though you cannot find A on the lines, it doesn’t mean there is no A. There is A existing. Yes, there is A—because there is this design there on the blackboard, because there are these lines. There is A—but it is a merely labeled A. It’s merely imputed by your mind.

You cannot find the merely imputed A on the lines, but A can be found—it can be found on the blackboard, because there is the base: the lines on the blackboard.

But an A that is appearing to you on those lines as findable—which has the same meaning as a real A, existing from its own side—that is completely false. That is the object to be refuted as described in the philosophical texts. When we realize that that A is totally non-­existent, empty as it is empty, then we are realizing the ultimate nature of the A, that which is emptiness.

The not merely labeled beautiful body does not exist

It is exactly the same with the beautiful body. The beautiful body appears there, as if it is there on the base, the aggregates, after the mind has imputed it. It appears as a findable, real one, as existing from its own side, not merely labeled by mind. It even appears as if it never came from your mind, had nothing to do with your mind.

The object appearing as not merely labeled by the mind is the subtle object to be refuted, according to the Prasangika Madhyamika view. One of the four schools, the Madhyamika, has two sub-­schools, the Svatantrika and the Prasangika, and it is the Prasangika view of the object to be refuted that we’re discussing here.

Seeing the beautiful body as not merely labeled by mind is totally wrong, totally false. If you look, you cannot find it there on the base, the aggregates—that beautiful body not merely labeled by the mind. If you look for it, you cannot find it there on the base, nor anywhere. It is exactly the same as the analysis of “A.”

So, seeing the body as there, appearing above the base, is totally false. In reality, if we analyze, we will realize that it is totally non-­existent, empty right there. And that is the realization of the ultimate nature of the body. It’s the same for the person, for everything.

Now you can see there is no beautiful body existing that is not merely labeled by the mind. There is no real person not merely labeled by the mind. There is no such thing there. It is totally empty.

Mind exaggerates “beautiful this and that” and then attachment grasps onto it. But there is no such thing. Lama Tsongkhapa explained in the Lamrim Chenmo by quoting Four Hundred Stanzas by the great Indian pandit, Aryadeva:

On the basis of what ignorance holding true existence exaggerates,
The mind exaggerates, “This is beautiful.”
Then attachment arises on that.

This also applies to anger. On the basis of the person’s body and so forth appearing as not merely imputed by mind, the mind exaggerates “bad, ugly,” then anger arises toward it. In reality, there is no such thing. There is no such object of anger, in reality. It is a total hallucination, false. There is no such thing. “On the basis of what ignorance holding true existence exaggerates”—in other words, on the basis of ignorance exaggerating the existence of, in this case, the body as truly existent—“The mind exaggerates, ‘This is ugly, undesirable.’ Then anger arises on that.”

You can clearly see the conclusion from this quotation. (I may not have given it completely. I have given the essence, but maybe not all the words.) What ignorance grasping as truly existent exaggerates is totally non-­existent. The object of anger or attachment that you totally believe is there is totally non-existent.

Meditate on these points every day

Meditate every day on all these points, the many different examples I have described, including the examples about attachment in chapter 9 and the analysis of what is reality and what is false that we’ve just discussed, especially the quotation from Aryadeva.

Now you can see very clearly that the real I, that which appears and is believed as existing from its own side—that I is not in prison. You can’t find it in the prison. And nor can you find it on the aggregates, the base.

You must do this meditation every day. This is very important, no matter how many hours it takes.

Delusions can be removed because they’re impermanent

There is no question that ignorance and attachment can be removed from the mind—because they are not permanent. They are causative phenomena and thus can be removed by the remedy path.

Delusions can be removed because they’re dependent arisings

In fact, all the defilements can be removed because they’re dependent arisings. If they were independent, that would not be possible. But because they are dependent, they can be removed by other causes and conditions.

Delusions can be removed because we possess buddha nature

Finally, we can be liberated totally from all the delusions because we have buddha nature. Every insect, every worm, every spider, every being in all the realms of existence, all have mind, and all their minds have buddha nature. The emptiness of their mind is their buddha nature. There is no mind existing from its own side, even though it appears that way to us and, due to ignorance, we believe it.

That’s why everyone can be free from the suffering of samsara, everyone can achieve buddhahood, the total cessation of obscurations and the completion of realizations—remember, this is the very meaning of the word “buddha.” Even the subtle negative imprint that projects the subtle dual view can be removed completely—by the wisdom directly perceiving emptiness, with the support of bodhicitta; by completing all the merits of wisdom and the merits of virtue. Then your mind becomes a fully enlightened mind.

True cessation can be achieved because there is the true path. Lord Buddha has revealed and explained the true path in scriptures, and there are many great masters in whose minds the path exists as experience from whom we can learn. We can learn from them and practice.

This is how we can cease the defilements and be liberated forever from all suffering and its causes.

remember

• The self-­existent I that has been put in prison cannot be found.
• But there is a merely labeled I.
• We create our own world.
• We label the body beautiful, then believe it.
• The I and everything else is merely labeled.
• The aggregates and the I are not separate but they are different.
• The not merely labeled I does not exist.
• We all possess buddha nature, therefore we can change.