When we are seeking liberation, or inner freedom, there are two vehicles, which we call the Hinayana vehicle and the Mahayana vehicle.

When somebody is seeking liberation, there are two things.

Hinayana and Mahayana are Sanskrit terms, but if we translate their meaning into English, they mean the small attitude and the great attitude.

The small attitude is, well, we already have a small attitude! Especially when we’re in trouble: “I want happiness, liberation, freedom.” The “I want” attitude leads to small action, small vehicle, small boat.

Mahayana means the great attitude; that’s what we are trying to do.

When I mention these two vehicles of Hinayana and Mahayana, perhaps you think I’m putting the Hinayana doctrine down. That’s not the case. I’m not interested in giving you philosophical comprehension. You already have more philosophical comprehension than a supermarket has stuff. Also, when I talk about Hinayana and Mahayana—small mind and great mind—I’m not talking about doctrine. I’m talking about us.

We mean well; we want to practice Mahayana. We’d like to be as open as possible. We want to go that way, even with hardship. But the narrow mind is overwhelming. It keeps on coming all the time.

Maybe intellectually we try to be as open as possible but the narrow mind overwhelms us yet again.

Therefore, it is not easy to be a Mahayanist. Both Atisha and Lama Tsongkhapa said that it is not enough for a person’s religion to be Mahayana; the person himself or herself must become Mahayana.

This is similar to what a Kadampa geshe once said: “It is not enough that your doctrine is dzog-chen; you yourself must be dzog-chen.”

Dzog-chen means great completion, so he was saying that it is not enough for your doctrine to be complete; you yourself must be complete. That’s clear, isn’t it? Of course, we talk about Mahayana philosophy, so perhaps we can say we are all Mahayana philosophers, because we talk, talk, talk about it. But we are not Mahayanists. It is a sort of realization; a level, or state, of mind. Intellectually you can’t say, “Oh, today I learned some Mahayana philosophy so I’m a Mahayanist.” You can’t say that; it’s not possible. Until I have solved certain problems, until I have transformed something, until some change has happened in my mind—I’m happier, more open, more satisfied in myself—only then can I say, “I’m a Mahayanist.”

Anyway, I don’t want to talk too much that way. I’d better attend to the business at hand. In America we don’t have time to do so many things, do we? Better make sure we finish.

So, the business at hand is that both Hinayana and Mahayana practitioners are seeking liberation by understanding the nature of samsara, but one of them is making tremendous effort on the basis of, “I am the suffering one; I cannot stay there in this way. I want to liberate myself.” The emphasis is on liberating me. Great vehicle practitioners, Mahayanists, don’t cry so much. Even though they have problems, they are more concerned about other people’s problems than their own. That’s the difference.

That’s why we say that bodhicitta is the door to enter the Mahayana vehicle. That’s why bodhicitta is the principal, most essential need for stopping the problem of the self-pitying, self-cherishing thought.

Therefore, if you are a Mahayanist, you have bodhicitta. What makes you a bodhisattva is having the realization of bodhicitta.

Then perhaps you will think, “I’m seeking enlightenment; that’s why I’m meditating. I desire to reach enlightenment; that’s why I’ve come to this meditation course. So how can that be?”

Let me give you an example. Say you are hungry and you go to a restaurant. In some restaurants they have a system where before you can get your food, you have to buy a ticket. Once you have a ticket, then you can get the food.

Some places are like that. Your principal aim is to get food to stop your hunger, isn’t it? To do that, you have to start by going through the business of getting a ticket. It’s the same thing: we are Mahayanists; our job, our duty, is to serve other people.

That is our principal aim, not getting enlightenment. We should not cry and grasp, “Enlightenment, enlightenment, enlightenment; I’m unhappy. I want to be happy.”

That is not principal. Now you can see the difference.

There are two things. A bodhisattva has two goals, two destinations: to help other people and to become self-sufficient by receiving enlightenment, by becoming totality. If we grab that—”It is more important that I become enlightened”—it’s partial. But still we have to do it. It’s not the principal thing, it’s partial, but we still have to get the ticket in order to solve problems and help other sentient beings. I think this example is clear, isn’t it?

Still, some people debate philosophically. The Western mind is sneaky, always intellectualizing this and that. They say that since desire and grasping at sense pleasure is the irritant that leads to the cycle of confusion, one should not wish to get enlightened or to help other people—that that is also desire. Some people argue that way. They say that you’re in bondage whether you’re bound by wire or by silver or gold; whatever it is that binds you, you’re still bound. Therefore, we should be completely free of any kind of wish. Many people say this. Have you heard that kind of thing? That kind of wrong philosophical debate is a waste of time.

They are different. Can you see the difference? Don’t be confused about important things. Wishing to open other people, especially to the highest destination, enlightenment, is very important. I think you know this already and I don’t need to talk too much about it. So, bodhicitta is the open, enlightened attitude—or, saying it another way, the healthy mind. Instead of using the Sanskrit—the healthy mind.

No irritation; plenty of room. That’s all. That is bodhicitta. Citta is Sanskrit; it means mind, in the sense of heart. Heart feeling is what we need. We need that attitude, not just an intellectual explanation.

Normally, Western people say, “I need so much love; nobody loves me.” They say that kind of thing, don’t they? Use that expression in the reverse way: We need the totally opened attitude. It takes care of all the problems that the narrow attitude brings. If you have this attitude you make yourself a complete human being—that’s a better way of putting it—because you have complete comprehension. Otherwise, you’re in the dark shadow of ignorance. You can see one thing but the rest is in the dark. You know that. Even in everyday life, you need some kind of complete comprehension to keep your house and family together. If the husband sees only one thing, he cannot see the totality of his family’s needs—especially in America! It’s the same thing with the wife. Of course, a woman comprehends things differently than a man does, but again, she sees only one thing and cannot see totality, what is needed for a totally satisfied life or total mental integration.

These examples are very good. Our lifestyle deteriorates because we don’t put our life together. We don’t see the totality of our needs. When we don’t see totality we can’t see how everything is interrelated—when we move one thing, everything else moves too. We have to know that.

Anyway, the enlightened attitude of bodhicitta allows your energy to expand universally. You develop a broad view. Now, one who has bodhicitta can follow one of two vehicles, the Paramitayana and the Tantrayana. The Paramitayana is like the lam-rim, where you understand karmic causation and recognize your own profound ability, or potential, to solve completely all levels of ego problem, not just those on the human level. The Paramitayana takes you through the three principal paths to enlightenment and your job is to actualize the six paramitas. You know this already; I’m just repeating it.

That is the Paramitayana. Practicing in that way leads you to enlightenment. But don’t think that the enlightenment the Paramitayana path leads you to is a small enlightenment, whereas Tantrayana leads you to a great enlightenment. The enlightened experience that results from following both these yanas is the same; the way they function is where they differ.

Paramitayana and Tantrayana differ in that Tantrayana has the skillful wisdom by which you put totality together. Tantrayana has that kind of key. The Paramitayana also has a key, but its path is slow. The Paramitayana practitioner cannot put two things together simultaneously and keep going. To do that is difficult. Like my cook, Babaji—he can’t be in the kitchen and here listening to teachings at the same time! That’s his problem. The practitioner of Tantrayana has the skill and intelligence to both see reality clean clear in a penetrative way and simultaneously keep going in a unified way. There’s a great difference between the two.

For example, Lord Shakyamuni, the present Buddha, discovered enlightenment after struggling for three countless great eons; three countless great kalpas. Shakyamuni himself made a long journey and led a very ascetic life. Some people say he did not eat for six years; others say he ate the fruit of the palm tree. Palm trees bear fruit [dates]. If we Americans tried to survive on that, we couldn’t; we’d die. Back then, maybe the taste was different from what it is today; maybe better than chocolate. Who knows how it was at the time?

There are different explanations about the way he became enlightened. We can’t go into detail here; it takes too much time. However, one explanation is that when he came to earth he was a tenth stage bodhisattva, ready to become enlightened in just a second. And while he was in samadhi during the ascetic phase of his life, other buddhas awoke him from his samadhi, saying, “Hey, what are you doing? You’re having a good meditation, but that’s not enough for you to expand into totality.” So they gave him the four great initiations, including the third and the fourth initiations, and he became enlightened.

So, why did he show that aspect? Normally we say “show” because he was already enlightened before he came to earth and everything he did in his life was just a show.

The reason is that, from the tantric point of view, without practicing tantra, it is not possible to discover enlightenment. Following the Paramitayana alone can take you to only the tenth bodhisattva bhumi, or level, and without receiving initiation and practicing tantra, there’s no way to achieve enlightenment. This is tantric propaganda! I’m joking! There are many reasons for this, but without practicing tantra, you can’t fully open; the extremely subtle mind cannot function. It’s something like that.

The difference between Paramitayana and Tantrayana is that the Tantrayana has the skillful methods whereby you can use desire objects that usually bring reactions of confusion and dissatisfaction in the path to enlightenment; by practicing tantric yoga, you can transform the energy of desire into the path to enlightenment. We call it taking desire as the path to enlightenment, but it is dangerous if you do not understand what these words mean; it takes some research to understand them correctly.

Once, during Lord Buddha’s time, a king asked him, “As a king, I have so much business to attend to, so many responsibilities in taking care of my nation and so many pleasures. Given my situation, please give me a method to quickly discover enlightenment.” Then Shakyamuni gave him the method of Tantrayana.

You can see why Lord Buddha gave the king such teachings from the way he asked, but the person practicing Tantrayana has to have the skill to transform daily pleasures into the path to enlightenment. Let’s take our body as an example. As a matter of fact, our body comes from the functioning of desire, doesn’t it? Desire made this body; ego made this body. Our grabbing ego made this body manifest, come out. However, instead of looking at it negatively, we should regard it as precious.

We know that our body is complicated, but from the Dharma point of view, instead of putting ourselves down with self-pity—”My body is a heavy burden; I wish it would disappear”—we should appreciate and take advantage of it. We should use it in a good way.

So, my example is—I’m not going to miss my example—the point is that despite where the body comes from, the way it manifests, despite the fact that it’s not so easygoing, that it’s complicated, this body has great ability; it can do so much. With this body, not only can we take care of our food and clothing, but we can also reach beyond that; we have the opportunity to gain the eternal goals of liberation or enlightenment. That’s why our human body is precious; that’s the point. We can use it in a good way, even though it is potentially poisonous in that it can create more complications, confusion, suffering, loneliness, dissatisfaction and samsaric rebirths for us. If we can change in a positive way, we can feel grateful for having this body and make it worthwhile.

It’s similar with our daily pleasures, our sense pleasures. Normally, grasping at sense pleasures brings the reaction of confusion and so forth. We know that. Now, Paramitayana and Tantrayana both lead to enlightenment, but even though at the beginning it might look like contact with sense pleasures is negative, Tantrayana gives us the powerful skill to transmute desire into the blissful path to enlightenment. That’s why the wisdom of tantra is perfect.

And especially, when you practice tantra, instead of thinking, “I’m a problem; my ego’s a problem; I’m a weak person; I need…” instead of thinking of yourself with self-pity, think, “I am the Buddha; I am Chenrezig; I am universal compassion.” The difference is unbelievable. There’s a huge difference.

Paramitayana does not have the skillful means whereby you think, “I’m Buddha; I’m an emanation of the Buddha.” You already know that there’s no such thing. But with Tantrayana, “My body is a buddha body—as clean clear as crystal, and radiating light; my speech is mantra—whenever I open my mouth, good things manifest; my thought is wisdom.” Somehow, you become transcendental; you bring the enlightenment experience into the now. That is the beauty of Tantrayana.

From the cultural point of view, when you people look at me, I’m mumbling mantras with this mala, I’m wearing these strange clothes; I’m surrounded by strange art and so forth. You get culture shock. And sometimes you’re in conflict: “Why do I need these things? Why do we have these things? I don’t want this Tibetan trip.” And when it comes to mantra: “Why do mantras? I’d be better off saying ‘coffee, coffee, coffee, coffee!'”

One way, Tibetan Buddhism says that liberation is an inner thing, but the other way, it has too many external things. But we’re not yet buddha; that’s why we need help. We need help. Actually, mantra is an inner thing. We do mantra in order to develop comprehension. That’s a small example. What I’m saying is that to recite mantras, we don’t need a rosary. People practicing Tibetan Tantrayana don’t need rosaries! It’s true. That’s what we should understand. But of course, sometimes they can be useful too!

Now I’m a little lost somewhere!

So, by using a skillful method, it’s possible for your life to become a transcendental experience. Your life can perhaps become an enlightened experience. Maybe I shouldn’t use those words, but I think it can become an enlightened experience.

But you should not be in conflict or get mixed up when in one way you have the Tantrayana recognition that, “I am Chenrezig; I am the Buddha; I am totality,” and in another way you again have to do all the relative things [like saying mantras].

Tantrayana is the way to achieve the perfect body, speech and mind we need in order to help other people. The purpose of meditation is not to reach nirvana and then disappear. If that were the case, it would be better that you manifested as a flower. The purpose is to emanate in the beautiful, radiant, white light body of Chenrezig, as clean and as clear as crystal. That emanation can really help people.

Sometimes Westerners worry, “I’m practicing meditation so much; perhaps eventually I’ll disappear into nothingness. Then what can I do?” Better learn Tantrayana and instead of disappearing, emanate as Avalokiteshvara—transform the purity of your consciousness into the complete, pure body of Avalokiteshvara.

Perhaps I can put it together this way. Each of us does have a psychic, or conscious, body as well as a physical body. It is not this blood and bone body that we are radically transforming into Chenrezig. It’s not that radically, my body becomes Chenrezig. But my consciousness, or psyche, can transform. Perhaps you can say that one aspect of my psyche is already Chenrezig.

For example, each day of our life we manifest differently. When we get angry, a wrathful manifestation comes out. Some-times we manifest as Chenrezig, loving kindness, and try to give all of our body, speech and mind to others. You can see; you become an entirely different person. We know this according to our own and each other’s lives. Sometimes our dear friend becomes so good, like Chenrezig. And sometimes so wrathful that we get hurt and our heart breaks.

You can see this objectively, if you look at one person; we’ve all experienced it. We don’t know what’s happened to this person: “What happened to him?” What makes this change happen? For thirty years the person is one way and then all of a sudden, he’s the opposite. We want to understand why it has happened but we don’t understand. Of course, I don’t understand either.

So, that is the beauty of the human being. Human beings have so many aspects, qualities—good and bad—and different manifestations.

If you are sensitive, you can see them through the aura, or vibration—especially Californian people. They always say, “Oh, those are not such good vibrations; oh, very good vibrations.” Sometimes it seems that they are very sensitive, but I’m not sure about that. I’m doubtful! I don’t know what that is! Maybe that’s a new expression.

We know people who use that kind of language. But those examples are similar. Tantrayana has reasonable scientific explanations; it’s not something imaginary. It relates to the circumstances of our life.

Love elephant and want to go steady?

Sign up for our (curated) daily and weekly newsletters!

Editor: Bryonie Wise