A City of Dreams

Recognizing the fleeting nature of the world.

Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche

Wisdom Collection

To access the content within the Wisdom Collection,
join Tricycle as a Supporting or Sustaining Member

Untitled (A City of Dreams)

This precious human body, supreme instrument though it is for the attainment of enlightenment, is itself a transient phenomenon. No one knows when, or how, death will come. Bubbles form on the surface of the water, but the next instant they are gone, they do not stay. It is just the same with this precious human body we have managed to find. We take all the time in the world before engaging in the practice, but who knows when this life of ours will simply cease to be? And once our precious human body is lost, our mindstream, continuing its existence, will take birth perhaps among the animals, or in one of the hells or god realms where spiritual development is impossible. Even life in a heavenly state, where all is ease and comfort, is a situation unsuitable for practice, on account of the constant dissipation and distraction that are features of the gods’ existence.

At present, the outer universe—earth, stones, mountains, rocks, and cliffs—seems to the perception of our senses to be permanent and stable, like the house built of reinforced concrete that we think will last for generations. In fact, there is nothing solid to it at all; it is nothing but a city of dreams.

Dilgo Khyenste RinpocheIn the past, when the Buddha was alive surrounded by multitudes of arhats and when the teachings prospered, what buildings must their benefactors have built for them! It was all impermanent; there is nothing left to see now but an empty plain. In the same way, at the universities of Vikramashila and Nalanda, thousands of panditas spent their time instructing enormous monastic assemblies. All impermanent! Now, not even a single monk or volume of Buddha’s teachings are to be found there.

Take another example from the more recent past. Before the arrival of the Chinese Communists, how many monasteries were there in what used to be called Tibet, the Land of Snow? How many temples and monasteries were there, like those in Lhasa, at Samye and Trandruk? How many precious objects were there, representations of the Buddha’s Body, Speech, and Mind? Now not even a statue remains. All that is left of Samye is something the size of this tent, hardly bigger than a stupa. Everything was either looted, broken, or scattered, and all the great images were destroyed. These things have happened and this demonstrates impermanence.

Think of all the lamas who came and lived in India, such as Gyalwa Karmapa, Lama Kalu Rinpoche, and Kyabje Dudjom Rinpoche; think of all the teachings they gave, and how they contributed to the preservation of the Buddha’s doctrine. All of them have passed away. We can no longer see them and they remain only as objects of prayer and devotion. All this is because of impermanence. In the same way we should try to think of our fathers; mothers, children and friends. . . . When the Tibetans escaped to India, the physical conditions were too much for many of them and they died. Among my acquaintances alone, there were three or four deaths every day. That is impermanence. There is not one thing in existence that is stable and lasts.

If we have an understanding of impermanence, we will be able to practice the sacred teachings. But if we continue to think that everything will remain as it is, then we will be just like rich people still discussing their business projects on their deathbeds! Such people never talk about the next life, do they? It goes to show that an appreciation of the certainty of death has never touched their hearts. That is their mistake, their delusion.

From Enlightened Courage by Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche, ©1993, 2006 Editions Padmakara. Reprinted by arrangement with Snow Lion Publications, snowlionpub.com.

Image: Untitled, Jelena Vukotic, 2004. © Jelena Vukotic, fluxfield.com

Share with a Friend

Email to a Friend

Already a member? Log in to share this content.

You must be a Tricycle Community member to use this feature.

1. Join as a Basic Member

Signing up to Tricycle newsletters will enroll you as a free Tricycle Basic Member.You can opt out of our emails at any time from your account screen.

2. Enter Your Message Details

Enter multiple email addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
celticpassage's picture

[laughing]...I think a better graphic could have been chosen. This depiction doesn't look like a city of dreams...more like Bejing in one of their pollution episodes.

ultrapeg's picture

This is what confuses me: the teacher says, "And once our precious human body is lost, our mindstream, continuing its existence, will take birth perhaps among the animals, or in one of the hells or god realms where spiritual development is impossible." How do we know that spiritual development will be impossible in these states? I do believe that our mindstream or soul will continue to exist in some form. And I also believe that we have no way of knowing what form this will take. But I question how anyone can know that spiritual development will continue or cease depending on the state the new existence takes. I'm sure that Teacher Rinpoche is basing this on his own far more extensive knowledge than mine. Perhaps you could explain? I am relatively new to all this and would appreciate the help. Thank you.

celticpassage's picture

If you're looking for an intellectually satisfying answer you won't find one.
No one knows the answer to your questions: The greater knowledge of the 'teacher' doesn't apply. His knowledge is only greater knowledge of some branch of Buddhist practice and belief.

Indeed, all statements regarding the nature of reincarnation (or even of its existence), the state of mind or soul after death (if indeed there is such a thing), the various bardos etc., are all points of faith; Buddhism is a religion after all.

You must accept or deny (or somewhere in between) these assertions based on faith alone.

Dominic Gomez's picture

Certainly faith is a requirement in the pursuit of Buddhist truths. At some point actual experience justifies intuition.

celticpassage's picture

Intuition is another word for faith in your beliefs which actual experience cannot justify (in the case of the spiritual) except to oneself, which is really just a round about name for faith.

Dominic Gomez's picture

Perhaps in the case of teachings based on external deities. Buddhism bases itself on reality, i.e. actual experiences.

celticpassage's picture

"Buddhism bases itself on reality" that's a collective delusion of Buddhists.

Dominic Gomez's picture

And your logic behind that is...?

celticpassage's picture

While we can't explicate epistemology on this forum, the basic idea can be formulated thus:

All esoteric experiences are personal and internal and consequently cannot be verified as being based in 'reality'. While "actual experiences" are real in the same way that emotions are real, there is no way to extrapolate back to what constitutes 'reality'. So, I would say that Buddhism is not based in reality, but is rather a cultural expression of perceived truths, as are probably all religions.

These truths, however, cannot be verified as being a true understanding of what constitutes reality: They remain forever esoteric and enigmatic. Furthermore, I think that subjective spiritual states such as 'enlightenment' merely multiplies the issues.

If by being based in reality you mean that Buddhism is an approach, response, philosophy, or set of beliefs in response to the events of life as they occur to persons then of course Buddhism is based in reality, but this is in the trivial sense. In this sense, all approaches, responses, philosophies, and beliefs of living are based in reality simply because people can respond to their environments. However, this says nothing about the truth or reality of said approaches, responses, philosophies, or beliefs.

In their ability to asses and respond to 'reality' then, Buddhists are no better off than Christians or Jews etc., and Buddhism is not based in reality any more than any other religion. Indeed, those religions which believe in an external creator god may be in a better position than Buddhism to assess what is truly real since their god comes externally: from outside the system as it were. Of course, an external creator god cannot be assessed either, but if such an entity is actually as prescribed, then the assessment of what is truly real would more approximate reality in that system than in Buddhism.

Well, that was far too long-winded, but hopefully clarifies what I meant.

marginal person's picture

Faith replaces doubt with certainty and the anxiety of questioning with the consolation of belief.

Dominic Gomez's picture

Buddhist faith is daily life. Certainty and confidence as you carry on with samsara is more beneficial than anxiety about it.

marginal person's picture

It might be clearer to say, "My Buddhist faith is my life and it gives me certainty and confidence."

Dominic Gomez's picture

Faith in the Law brings forth the confidence with which to courageously face the reality of life.

marginal person's picture

It seems by capitalizing law and taking it out of the matrix of contingencies in which it exists , "the Law" becomes another external deity. Some "thing " to cling to. The law like any contingent phenomena is empty of any intrinsic reality, it arises and passes away along with the circumstances that created it.

Dominic Gomez's picture

The Law is the arising and passing away of circumstances. As such it is also known as the ultimate reality.

marginal person's picture

So your faith is based on impermanence

Dominic Gomez's picture

Buddhism places greatest importance on the present moment. Developing yourself today sets the stage of your future lifetimes.

trailpaloma's picture

I struggle with this mindstream that is reborn. no self and impermanence are part of right view. Is this another paradox, notions that can't carry the truth? concepts that need to be let go of?

junechun's picture

I may not have understood your question correctly, but
reborn,no self and impermanance is not paradox per Thich
Nhat Hahn. Everything changes every moment, even our body's cells die and reborn every nano seconds, and then
how can we say there is a self? I now age 71 am totally different from when I was born, who is really me? So noself goes together with impermanance. Reborn doesn't mean that we will be reborn in some other physical body. The cells, molecules that makes the cells etc. constantly die and reborn, so our bodies also will be in the universe forever as molecules, chemical elements in the tree, in the human, in the flower, dying and reborn (transform) forever.
I was surprised when I read discussions about emptyness,
a lot of people don't seem to understand emptynessand consider it as some mysterious states.

trailpaloma's picture

Yes, but the article says this: "And once our precious human body is lost, our mindstream, continuing its existence, will take birth perhaps among the animals, or in one of the hells or god realms..." and so isn't he saying that the mindstream continues? is that not a kind of self?
Thank you both for sharing your insights

kentc33's picture

Maybe it's just the sense of self that is reborn in the various (6) realms. Try viewing DKR's teachings as skillful means pointing to direct, non-conceptual knowing/understanding.
Blessings