ACI 15 «Что на самом деле имел в виду Будда», занятие 10

Class 10,
Transcribed by: Karen Becker

(laughs) Okay, we'll start. So we did the whole class up to
class eight in the Mind Only School and then we changed hats to
the Independent Group inside the Middle Way School, okay, just to
give you a little bit of review of the last class...they're...we
have the Independent Groups ideas that there are three degrees of
what they call "selflessness", okay? Which would which would be
the what'd we call the subtle lack of a self to the person, and
then the gross lack of a self to things and then the subtle lack
of a self to things. And according to the Independent Group,
only the third one is true emptiness, although you could
wor...use the word emptiness for the other two. Then there was
sort of a preliminary kind of selflessness which was the gross
lack of a self to persons. That one was...well, let's start from
the top. Real emptiness in this school is what...how do they
describe it?

(student: (unclear))

Huh?

(students: (unclear)

She was ousted, (laughs). That's lucky.

(student: (unclear)

Huh? Lack of what?

(students: Lack of (unclear)

Huh?

(student: Self of the parts of (unclear)

Huh? (laughs). Lack of existing truly, how's that... or
something like that. Okay. The lack of existing truly. And
what is it to exist truly in this school? What is the existing
truly that they say doesn't exist?

(student: (unclear))

(Yu rung gyi tummong ma yinpay duluk kyi ngu ne druppa), right,
(lo nu me la nangway wang gi shakpa ma yinpar yul rang gi tunmong
ma yinpay duluk kyi ngu ne druppa), okay, the fact that things
don't exist from their own side through their own identity, but
rather simply by appearing to a state of mind which is
unaffected. Okay? And and if anything existed from its own side
as the who says they do?

(students: Mind Only)

Mind Only, everything?

(student: No, just (shen wangs))

No, just dependent things and emptiness. Im...imaginary things
don't exist from their own side. Okay? In the Mind Only School.
 Okay. So, if something did exist...anything at all did exist
from its own side, according to the Independent Group, that would
be a self-existent thing. The lack of that is?

(student: Emptiness)

Emptiness, which is the subtle form of the lack of a self to?
Self nature to things...okay? Got it? And that and that's real
emptiness in the in the according to the Independent Group, okay?
 What was the the...what was the lack of a self...the the rough
lack of a self or the gross lack of a self to things...like
me...medium selflessness?....I mean you did your quiz in
just...was that today's quiz? No. (laughs). Is it (suk dang
suk ndzin gyi tsema dze shen gyi tongpa), right. (Suk dang suk
ndzin gyi tsema dze shen gyi tongpa). The fact that you and the
thing you are perceiving, your perceptions and the thing which
you're perceiving, are void of having a separate substance, or a
separate karmic seeds, okay. And that to them is a kind of
selflessness. In your reading you'll see that they don't accept
that as being emptiness. In fact they accept it as being a
deceptive reality which takes it out of the realm of
ulpti...emptiness altogether. Okay. And then what about the
subtle lack of a self nature to people or to persons...how do
they describe that? (Rang kya tuppay dzeyu du druppa) Okay.
Say (rang kya tuppay) (repeat) (dzeyu du druppa) (repeat). Okay.
The fact that people are devoid of any nature of being self
supporting, self-standing, and and having any substantial
existence. And then what did I promise you?

(student: Five (unclear))

Yeah, so that you didn't have a four hour class last time, that
we would do the five different flavors of "substantial"
existence, but to get to that you have to describe to me, what's
the gross lack of a self nature to persons. Say (tak) (repeat)
(chik) (repeat) (rang wangchen gyi dak) (repeat). You gotta be
able to rattle this stuff off or else the class is useless, you
know what I mean? You won't ever be sensitive to the different
flavors of emptiness, okay, like what twenty different people
think emptiness is. The whole point of this class...the whole
point of this particular course is that when your student comes
up to you and says, "I understood what emptiness is", and you
say, "what"? And it says, "I heard"...I repeat that I heard this
from a a Buddhist scholar who's been teaching in University for
twenty years, you know, and they say, "oh emptiness means
everything changes". You know. (Tak chik rang wangchen gyi
dak). That doesn't even qualify as any kind of selflessness in
in the top three. You know what I mean? They just never studied
it. So don't forget it in, you know, a week. You're gonna have
to have this in your head for the rest of your life, okay? Say
(tak) (repeat) (chik) (repeat)(rang wangchen gyi dak) (repeat),
which means "a a self that could be (takpa), unchanging, (chik)
unitary, whole, (rang wangchen), independent", okay? And
no...you know it's hard to find a Buddhist school that would even
think that. But but here's, you know, one of the top three
professors saying that's what emptiness is, okay? I mean, that's
...hopefully you gotta learn all those distinctions, okay? All
right. So we go on to (dze yu) and (tak yu). Say (dze yu)
(repeat) (tak yu) (repeat) (dze yu) (repeat) (tak yu) (repeat).
(Dze) means, in Tibetan, "substance or stuff". Okay. (Yu) means
"substantial", okay? (Dze de yu pa, dzede yupa) meaning
"substantial". (Tak yu) is the opposite. I'm translating it in
your reading as "constructed"...meaning "not something which is
substantial or natural", okay, and we'll have to see what the
difference is. Okay. The reading that you're gonna get, which
comes again from Changkya Rolpay Dorje...Changkya Rolpay Dorje
lived about three hundred years ago, and served as a Lama to the
Emperor of China. The Changkya line in general, I think the
first Changkya served as the Emperor of the Chinese Lama. And I
think it was the first Changkya...yeah, who was there when Marco
Polo reached the court of Khublah Khan, okay, and and so, I'm
sorry...no, that was Pakpa... cancel that...anyway, of that
lineage, who took the lineage, the... recognized as high
reincarnations by the Emperor of China and taught the Emperor of
China. So, in this line, which by the last...the last member of
this line was...Pabongka Rinpoche, okay? And and due to certain
circumstances in Tibet at that time, they they they called him
Pabongka...they called him the reincarnation of Pabongka Lama,
when in fact he was the reincarnation of Changkya Lama, 'cause
there were too many...there was a lot of sentiment against
Chinese stuff at the time so they thought it would be safer to
call him Pabongka Rinpoche, okay? So anyway, his name was...that
is Changkya Rinpoche. Changkya Rinpoche, the Changkya Rolpay
Dorje which is one of the later Changkya's, not the first one, he
wrote a book comparing all the different systems of philosophy.
It's like three four volumes long and it's incredible, you
know...every kind of Buddhist philosophy comparing each school.
So I've taken this selection from him. He wrote a beautiful
description of what (dze yu) means and (tak yu) means. He starts
out by saying...and you'll see in your reading...he says, "look,
you look in scripture there's all these different meanings...they
cop...keep talking about substantial stuff and stuff which is not
substantial, and it seems to have a whole bunch of different
meanings, so I'm gonna go through them for you", so he goes
through five different flavors of (dze yu) and (tak yu) for you,
okay? If you become a serious student of Tibetan scripture, this
is very useful to know, 'cause otherwise you'll get totally
confused, all right. So we're gonna go through them one by one
and discuss the the difference between them, okay. And then
later on tonight we'll get to the, we'll get to the highest
Madyamika interpretation of what's emptiness and what's not, and
and that'll wrap it up. Then the final thing tonight we'll have
Je Tsongkapa's own viewpoint about which is correct, you
know...at the end of his book, somebody says, "well, which one do
you think is right", you know, "the Mind Only School or the
Middle Way School"? And he goes into an answer on that, okay.
So here we go. Say (yupa) (repeat) (mepa) (repeat)(yupa)
(repeat) (mepa) (repeat). The first meaning of substantial or
not substantial is "existing" or "not existing", okay? (laughs)
Is this real, you know, is this substantial. Does this have any
substance to it. And then in the very most broad interpretation,
it means, "does this thing exist or not?" Okay. So you say,
this is substantial, you know, this has some existence. You'd
say, yeah. It exists. Okay? And then insubstantial or a
construct would mean "something that doesn't exist...something
you've made up in the mind which doesn't exist". What would be a
classic example, in this sense, of something that was the
opposite of substantial, something that was (tak yu), something
that was just imaginary.

(students: (unclear))

Huh?

(student: A flower that grow in air)

Yeah, you could say a flower that grows in mid-air, without any
without any water or soil or anything. But can you think of a
even more meaningful example?

(students: Snake and the rope?)

Huh?

(student: Snake and the rope?)

The snake and the rope, yeah...you could say the snake...or or,
what the snake stands for, which is what? The self nature of a
person, and the snell, the self nature of objects, meaning your
hand and your head and your chest, okay? The the non-
existence...those imaginary things, okay? A boss who is bad from
his own side, okay. A friend of yours who irritates you who's
irritating from their own side and not because you're making them
that way. Okay. That person that you get angry at, doesn't even
exist. The irony of samsara, you know, the irony of our
suffering is that we are creating it and sustaining it because of
out attitude towards a thing which never existed, couldn't exist,
doesn't exist, won't exist, okay? That's the irony of of our
situation. We are here in this rilm, realm, and we are dying
because of our belief about something that can't exist anyway,
okay. And that's and that's a perfect example of a (tak yu). In
the first sense of the word, meaning something which is just made
up in your mind, just a construct of your mind...constructed by
your mind. Okay. And the opposite of that would be (dze yu),
something substantial, this pen, my mind. Okay. Stuff like
that, okay. That's the first sense. You can put another nu,
number one next to it, okay. Now for the second sense. Say
(mupo) (repeat)...I'm sorry...(ngupo) (repeat) (ngume) (repeat)
(ngupo) (repeat) (ngume) (repeat). (Ngupo) means "anything that
can perform a function; anything that does something,", okay?
It's a synonym for a changing thing, which is a synonym for a
caused thing, which is a synonym for a produced thing...they're
all the same. Anything which changes, has causes. Anything
which performs a function changes...by performing its function.
Okay. So that's a ...(ngupo) means that. So in this, in this
school, or the people who think that substantial means that,
anything that ca...you can do something with it, is substantial.
And anything you can't do something with it, is not substantial.
Okay. There's an idea in the Sutrists School of a thing called
(chi tsen)...say (chi tsen) (repeat) (rang tsen) (repeat) (chi
tsen) (repeat) (rangtsen) (repeat). We'll study it some day,
okay. (Rang tsen) means "a pen in the sense of this pen, a pen,
the pen - a pen, the pen, this pen", okay, an actual example
of...of of a thing. Okay. (Chi tsen) means "pen as a concept,
the idealization "pen"...the...what'd they what'd Jung call it?
The archetype...of a pen, you see what I mean? And then there's
lots of pens, and then there's a (chi tsen) of a pen, okay, and
(chi tsen) according to this to the Sutrists School never change.
 Okay. They don't...and they don't perform a function. Pen. As
opposed to a pen, the pen, this pen. Okay. Pen. Pen itself is
a...is like a, is a perfect idealization of a pen and will never
change, you see? It doesn't like run out of ink, okay...the
concept of pen, okay, the idealization of a pen, okay. That's
called (chi tsen). And this is (rang tsen). So, (ngupo) means
"functional thing". (Ngume) would seem to mean "something which
is not a functional thing". And in philosophy, in Buddhist
philosophy, we are careful to say, "an existing object which
doesn't function"...so learn that. Those of you who are gonna
learn Tibetan, (ngume) has a totally different meaning than what
it looks like. It looks like it's saying, "not a (ngupo)" or
"lack of a (ngupo)"...or something that...it doesn't mean that at
all. It means "an existing object which is not a (ngupo)" which
is totally different from...something which is not a (ngypo).
Okay. Meaning, you can't define existing things which don't
function as everything which is not a functional thing. Because
things that don't exist could could be that also...you see what I
mean? Like the pumpkin that's smashing the Twin Towers is not a
functional thing. But that doesn't make it a an existing object
which is not a functional thing...big difference. Okay. So
(ngume) means...although it doesn't look like it should mean
that..it's a it's a standard term in Tibetan Buddhist philosophy
that means "an existing object which is not a functional thing".
The Abhidharma only gives three...(so so tak pe...so so tan go,
so so ta ming gyi koppa) and (du me chi kyi nam ka). Got any
ideas? (laughs). (Du me chi kyi nam ka)...empty space. Okay.
Does empty space change when you fill it?

(student: No)

No. It's not like the space changed, you know...I I I filled the
space, I emptied the space...the em...the space is always there,
okay, it doesn't change, okay. It it it doesn't..the presence of
this doesn't allow another thing to move into that space but the
space doesn't change. When this planet is melted and gone away,
empty space will still be there. The location. So don't think
of empty space as some black thing in the sky, okay. That's a
mistake. (Bu ka nam gyi kom nyi ngo) said Vasubhandu. Master
Vasubhandu. (Du...bu ka nam gyi kom nyi ngo) means "oh space
means that black or blue thing over our heads...you (ngo)...and
in the (b:Abhidharmakosha) (ngo) means "they say"...meaning, "who
could believe, you know...that's a dumb idea". Okay. Space
means...don't think of space...space in Buddhism means "place".
How's that? Okay. Empty space. All right? That don't never
changes. So that would be a (ngume)...that's not substantial.
Okay. And and then the (ngupo)s, things which do something, now
that's substantial, you know. They have substance, okay? That's
the meaning of of substantial in the second meaning of the term.
Now here's the third one. Say (tenpa) (repeat) (min gyurway)
(repeat) (tenpa) (repeat) (min gyurway) (repeat). As opposed to
(mitakpa) (repeat) (mitakpa) (repeat). Okay. (Tenpa) means
"stable". (Min gyurwa) means "unchanging". Unaltering, how's
that. And then (mitakpa) means "changing". Okay. People
translate it as "impermanent"...I think we discussed it before
why it might not be a good translation. When you talk about
death and your own impermanence, in that case, (chu wa mi
takpa)...it's a good translation. But in philosophy, when you
say "permanent" as opposed to "impermanent" meaning something
which lasts forever or doesn't last forever, that's not what it
means. Okay? Like...how shall we say...does the
emptiness...does this pen last forever?

(students: No)

No. So we say it's...in English we say it's "impermanent", okay?
How 'bout the emptiness of this pen?

(students: No)

Does it last forever?

(students: No)

No. When the pen is destroyed, the emptiness of the pen goes
away. Okay? Goes out of existence, all right? So, would you
call the emptiness of this pen "permanent"?

(students: No)

No. So th that's a demonstration that the word "permanent" is a
bad translation for (takpa) and or and "impermanent's) a bad
translation for (mitakpa), 'cause 'cause in... because the
emptiness of this pen is (takpa), okay, it is what they use...the
Tibetan word that they use to translate...that they translate as
"permanent". So that's a bad translation. So what it really
means is "unchanging. Okay. Constant". Meaning the emptiness
of this pen is totally constant. It's never less than one
hundred percent not anything but your projections. Okay. And in
that sense it's (takpa) meaning "unchanging". Does it go out of
existence? Yes. Is it what we call "permanent" in English? No.
 Or eternal? No. Okay. You gotta get used to that, okay.
Those of you who are translating. 'Cause otherwise you're gonna
hit this thing and it'll say the the the permanent emptiness of
the pen goes out of existence...you know, and then you're gonna
be in trouble, okay. All right. So that's this the the third
meaning...is something which is stable and unaltering as opposed
to something which is changing constantly, okay. That's almost
the same as number two, okay. Number two was stressing more that
it either performed a function or didn't perform a
function...that it did something or didn't do something. And
then number three is more stressing that it either lasts
for...it...I'm sorry...almost made the same mistake...that it
either changes...doesn't change at all or changes constantly.
Okay. Those are the...but...but in Buddhism those are equal.
Those sets are equal. Okay. Yeah?

(student: (unclear))

(student: Yeah)

Say how?

(student: (unclear))

Yeah, you're right, you're right. It's a good point. Chilton
brought up a good point...they actually reverse each other from
two to three. In two, the functional things were substantial,
which are actually the changing things. And in number three, the
it's the changing things that are insubstantial, okay? So they
actually reverse. That's a really good point, okay? Number
four. Say (rang kya) (repeat) (tuppa) (repeat) (rang kya)
(repeat) (tuppa) (repeat)...as opposed to (den min) (repeat)
(duje) (repeat) (den min) (repeat) (duje) (repeat). Okay. (Rang
kya tuppa) means...we had it last last class...(rang kya tuppa)
means "self-standing, can stand on its own". And then (den min
duje) is just one example of something that doesn't stand on its
own, okay, but it covers most of them. (Rang kya tuppa)...there
are two things that are described as "self-standing", physical
matter, okay, is self-standing and states of mind are self-
standing. So mental stuff and physical stuff is "self-standing"
according to the fourth idea...of self-standing, of (dze yu), of
substantial. Okay? And then something that's not self-standing
would be (den min duje). (Den min duje) is a code word for, you
know, it's it's translated a million weird ways...all it means is
"stuff which is neither...changing stuff which is neither a nor
b. Changing stuff which is neither a - doesn't have (den min)
okay, means doesn't (den) physical matter and (min) mental stuff,
okay". It doesn't...it neither possesses physical reality,
physical matter nor is it (min), a state of mind. But it's still
a (duje) which means "a changing thing", okay? A functioning
thing, something that does something. (Duje) literally means
"factor" meaning something which affects another thing. So how
many things in the world affect another thing, but are neither
physical nor mental?

(student: (unclear))

Concepts. Okay. Concepts are like that. Like a Ann,
okay...like Marie, all right. Is Marie Placide physical?
Purely physical? You see what I mean. Is Marie Placide
mental...purely mental? You know, or is Marie Placide a concept
that we apply to something physical and something mental...you
see what I mean? So so it's the concept...concepts are called
(den min duje). Changing things but they they aren't fully
physical or wholly mental, you see, (den min), okay, and that's
the meaning of that. Yeah?

(student: But aren't concepts "not changing"?)

She says, "aren't concepts things that don't change?" Depends on
which school you're in (laughs), okay. Generally speaking, here
we're talking about concepts that change, okay? So we're not
talking about the idea "Marie", we're talking about the thing we
call "Marie", how's that? (laughs) Okay. And there's a
distinction, all right. Does Marie change? Of course. Does
quote "Marie" change?

(student: No)

You see...there's a dis there's a distinction there, and you have
to think about it. Yeah?

(student: Do you think that you could use the example of Tashi,
for (laughter) (unclear)?

Yeah, the person...what shall we say...Tashi as a person changes,
you know, he gets older. Tashi is getting older, okay? But
"Tashi", the concept "Tashi", the idea...we should say the
idealization of "Tashi", is different, and then we're playing
between schools, okay, different schools have different ideas.
Generally most schools accept a thing called (den min duje) which
is which could be...a person would be in there, person, the
person, would be in there. The idealization of the person would
not be a (den min duje). Okay.

(student: Which school is that?)

These are mainly the Sutrists Schools but it would also be
accepted by the higher schools. Okay. And I think even the
Abhidharma school you could say...but they...each of the schools
has a little bit idea how much stuff you throw in there, all
right. That's a little bit different. Like where are (chi
tsens), where are (rang tsens)...that's a whole different
sch...thing, okay. So that's another example. Now we go to the
fifth one. This is a special idea about substantial and not
substantial, okay, like...Geshe Thubten Rinchen gave the example
of American guy, okay...American guy. If you want to think of
someone as an American guy, do you have to think of something
else first?
(students: Yes. Uh huh.)

To perceive "American guy", do you have to percei...do you have
to perceive something else before you do that?

(student: Yes)

And we would say yes. And we said, "what"? He said, "his head,
his hands, his his eyes, his nose, his ears...you know, you take
all these pieces in your mind and then you put them together, the
co...you composite, and then you call it "American guy", okay?
So you can't just open your eyes and say "American guy". First
you have to examine the eyes, the ears, the nose, you know, all
the pieces, and then you put it together and then you label it
"American guy", okay. That would be something which is not
substantial. And something substantial would be...I think an
example would be colors? You know, like you don't have to piece
together colors, you just open your eyes and it's blue, you see
what I mean? And that that would be somehow more substantial,
and that's another meaning of this...of this word.

(student: So it's colors and shapes?)

You could say...I I believe they would say most physical objects
are like that. Are are like substantial because you don't have
to sit there and conceptualize to perceive them. Okay. You
don't have to like glue it together from other parts or something
like that, and that would be the difference between substantial
and constructed. Okay. (dze yu) and (tak yu). Okay. By the
way, the text says, Changya Rolpay Dorje says, "cross out number
five here and call it 'four b'", because he says, "that's what
they mean when they said 'four'". Got it? What was number four?

(student: Self-standing)

Yeah. Self-standing. He says, "self-standing means that". And
that's the only one that's really means substantial or
insubstantial. Okay. He says, this, what we just said, is the
real meaning of substantial and insubstantial. And the others
are things that they call substantial and insubstantial, but
that's not the real meaning of the word. The real meaning of the
word is this one. Does it stand on its own or not? And what
does that mean...stand on it's own or not? It means, to perceive
it, do you have to perceive other things first. Then it would
be...insubstantial. If you don't have to perceive other things
first, it's substantial. Okay? And that's the
meaning...Changkya Rolpay Dorje says, "this is the real meaning
of the word, and those other three are like impostors". Okay.
So change four to "four a", change five to "four b", and that's
the real meaning of substantial. Which one of these four and a
half meanings, (laughs) okay, is the one that the
Mi...Independent group was saying is wrong when you think about a
person? Obviously wrong, okay. They said, "a person is not
substantial", and if you perceive that, you've perceived sort of
an elementary kind of selflessness. You know, like, not very
subtle kind of selflessness. It didn't even qualify in the top
three, right. It didn't qualify in the three degrees of
emptiness. Which one of these...trick question, okay?...is it
that you see that a person is not, when you see some kind of
selflessness according to this school? Which one do you guess?

(student: Four b)

Four-b or four...four a and four b are the same thing...get used
to that, okay...four b is what four a means. Okay. So, is it
like a big spiritual step forward to realize that to perceive a
person you have to perceive their their parts mentally, or is it
a big spiritual step forward to perceive that a person is or
isn't functioning, or is it a big step forward to perceive that a
person exists or doesn't exist, or is it a big step forward to
perceive that a person changes or doesn't change? None of the
above. Okay. None of the above. And your...the last part of
your reading that you're gonna get tonight from Tuesday, says,
Changkya Rolpay Dorje says, "oh, and by the way, when the when
the Independent group says that substantial things 'don't exist',
and that's a basic kind of selflessness, they're talking about a
big flavor of substantial. They mean substantial in a whole new
way that we didn't cover yet." Okay. I mean, Changkya Rolpay
Dorje's cool 'cause after all that, there's a little footnote at
the bottom that says, "by the way, when the Middle Way lower
school, right, the middle group in the Middle Way School, which
is called the Independent, when they say a person is not
substantial, and you better understand that, and that's the very
kindergarten step of understanding selflessness, they don't mean
any of the above. They mean something different. Okay. They
even use the word (rang gya tuppa), they even use the word "self-
standing", and they don't mean that in the same way. They don't
mean it in the way that everybody else means it...they mean it in
a whole new way, okay, and here's what they mean. Okay. And if
you don't...what's the use of knowing this stuff...by the end
of tonight we'll demonstrate that if you understand real
emptiness according to the highest school you can reach (tantric)
enlightenment, and if you don't, you can't. Okay. So you better
know all the wrong ideas about emptiness. You know, this has
been a whole course in the wrong ideas about emptiness. And you
better know them, you know, because then the next time you hear
somebody get up and say, "oh, lack of substantiality to myself is
emptiness", you can say, "ah, come on. That doesn't even qualify
 as Mind Only", you know, okay. With authority you can say that.
 You can pull out your notebook and everything (laughter), okay.
Here's the last meaning of it. Yeah, this is the one they
they're canceling when they talk about the emptiness of this, you
see what I mean?

(silence)

Oh, sorry (laughter)...I figured everybody knew Tibetan by now.
(unclear).

(silence)

Say (wang) (repeat) (gyurwapo) (repeat) (wang) (repeat)
(gyurwapo) (repeat). Tell me what the word (gyur) means.

(student: (unclear))

(Gyur)

(student: (unclear))
Yeah, uh, that's (gyu). (Gyur)...to become. In a different
spelling, okay. It can mean "change"...in a different spelling.
In this spelling it can mean "translate", for example. To change
in the sense of change words or change languages, right? (gyur
wa)...you know, who's the who's the (ke gyur) of this person,
means "who's his translator", (ke gyur) means "language changer;
language exchanger". Okay. But then a (gyur) has a whole nother
meaning and that you should know it. What's a (korlo gyurway
gyalpo)? (Korlo gyurway gyalpo)?

(students: Turning wheel...)

Huh? It's in the mandala, actually, okay. Ac...actually
those...all of that stuff belongs to the (korlo gyurway gyalpo)

(student: Wheel weilding Emperor).

Yeah, a wheel weilding Emperor, and "weilding" is a bad
translation of (gyurway) which means "empowered by the wheel".
(Gyurwa) means "to have power", to be empowered. How does he
draw his strength from? Where does he draw his strength from?
His flying saucer right? How far can it go in a day? Half a
million miles. How wide is it? Two thousand miles or something
like that. I mean, it's big, okay. It fits like thousands and
thousands of troops inside, and he gets inside and flies to other
continents and controls them. And therefore he's called
(charkavartan). "He who controls with the wheel", and the wheel
is his spaceship, okay, and it can be golden or bronze or silver
and there's a big thing about it, okay...you have to read your
mandala offering text, okay, then you get the dimensions of
it...and how many people can fit it and how many elephants, you
know, and stuff like that, okay. So (gyurway) here means "to be
empowered". (Wang gyurwapo) means "the the person who directs
the show", okay. (Wang gyurwapo) means "the one who has the
power...the one who who's in charge. Okay. And and isn't that
what we talked about last class, right? As the very most obvious
lack of a self, come on, there's nobody in charge of your body
who's independent of your body and mind, right?...you gotta throw
that in, who doesn't directly depend on your body and mind, but
you think there is. Will you own...will that shirt be on your
body tomorrow? Will you will you...do you have control of this
shirt...there's a whole funny thing about ownership, right? Very
very interesting. Do you own that shirt? Do you own the blouse
or shirt that you have on right now? Do you own it?

(student: Yes)

Yeah. Why? 'Cause I can do what I want with it, I mean that's a
test of ownership. I can't rip up your blouse or shirt because I
don't own it. If it was mine I could spill whatever I wanted on
it and you can call me stupid, but it but it's mine...I can do
what I want with it. So the meaning of "mine"...that I own
it...right, own, right?...as the owner, is that I can do what it.
 But you can't tell me if the if you'll have that shirt tomorrow,
you know? You you literally can't tell me if you will own that
shirt tomorrow. You know, someone could mug you coming out of
here, somebody could steal it from your house, you might be dead
and in another realm by tomorrow...you telling me you own it?
What does "own" mean if it doesn't mean that? Can you control
it's it's usage, can you control it's location up to thirty
minutes from now? No. Okay. (laughs). It's funny, but we have
that concept. That's the most obvious form of a self that
doesn't exist. It doesn't even make it into the into the debate,
you see...it's so obvious. Of course you don't have power over
that. Of course there's no such thing as the owner of the body
and the mind, okay. Or he's a real schlock, you know, he can't
do anything at all, he can't even guarantee you're gonna have it
on in half an hour, you know. And and so there is no such
person, okay. That's just so obvious they don't even...it
doesn't even count as a kind of emptiness to realize that that
guy's not there, okay. The driver who's driving your body and
mind, who controls your body and mind and your shirt, (laughs)
okay? Okay? All right, forget that one. That's so obvious it
doesn't...that's not emptiness to realize that, you see what I
mean? It's helpful, it's it's humbling, okay (laughs) but it's
not emptiness, okay. It's just a a fact which is not emptiness,
okay. All right. So that's the...that's the one, says Changkya
Rolpay Dorje, that they're talking about when the when the
Independents say, "no substantial person exists", okay? So now,
when your friends ask you on the street, "what does the
Independent group in the Middle Way School mean when they say
there's no substantial self even though they don't accept that
the lack of that is true emptiness?", and you'll say, you know,
"a guy who's in control of my body and mind and who's not part of
my body and mind", you see what I mean? Some independent guy
who's self-standing, driving me, my mind, okay, me...my body and
my mind, okay, that one is what they think...the lack of that is
the is the very gross or obvious lack of a self-nature to a self,
and that's not true emptiness, okay? To repeat from last week.
We had all these flavors of emptiness. I really wish you could
rattle them off, but I won't ask again 'cause it's embarrassing,
and they're kinda hard for me to remember when I'm tired, okay.
Lack of a...of a driver, basically, okay? Sorry...I'm sorry.
That was the, that was the most subtle one, yeah. Lack of
a...lack of an unchanging, permanent, eternal soul. The most
obvious one, okay...I I just made a mistake. Lack of a...eternal
soul or something like that. Most obvious one. Lack of a
driver, okay. Lack of the fact that you and that your mind and
the things it holds come from a different karmic seed, and lack
of a fact that something could exist from its own side, through
its own identity, without depending on your mind to see it, okay.
 Those are four flavors of selflessness in this school. I'll say
it one more time. Get used to it. Lack of an eternal,
unchanging, solitary, whole, little self. I think what...what I
used to think of when I was a kid when mom said, "your soul will
be there after you die", you know, I was like this clear bubble,
okay, and then and then, second one up, lack of a director who's
independent of your body and mind who's driving it around. Just
because you hear your thoughts you think there is such a thing
but it's not there, okay. Third one, lack of any person who
could be...who's mind could be coming from a separate karmic seed
than everything that mind is seeing, okay. And then last one,
which in the M...which in the Independent group is the only real
emptiness, lack of a self-nature of this pen such that it has its
own identity coming from its own side without my mind cooperating
in the mission, in the process, okay? Whether my mind was here
or not to perceive it, and my unaffected state of mind, right, it
could exist from its own side, okay. By the way, they're half
way to Prasangika right? They're halfway to the real truth,
okay. Okay, so you've got four flavors of selflessness...in that
school, only the fourth one is emptiness.

(student: Can you repeat the fourth one?)

The fourth one again, I'll repeat. A nature...a unique
nature...a unique identity of the pen that could come from its
own side without my mind cooperating from its side, you see what
I mean? A pen that could exist with a nature from its own side,
without depending on my mind to perceive it also. Okay.
Question. This is the question I wanted to get to when I started
this whole thing. Which one does the Mind Only School say is
real emptiness?

(student: (unclear))

The third one, okay. The third one. The fact that this pen is
empty of any nature of being of a separate karmic seed from the
from the visual consciousness which is perceiving it, okay. They
also say there is another kind of emptiness to this pen...what
would that be? The fact that the pen is empty of being called a
pen by definition. Okay. Those are their two flavors of
emptiness. You should be able to cruise around those six kinds
of emptiness like nothing, okay. You should understand those six
kind of emptinesses like "no problem". I'll do 'em one more
time, okay? (laughter) We'll start way back in the Mind Only
School, okay? First one...I mean let's give 'em little names
that you remember, okay. (laughter) Who who likes to talk about
this one? Mind Only School. Do they say it's real hundred
percent emptiness?

(student: No)

They do, okay? Equals emptiness. They got another flavor of
emptiness, what's that? Subject and object, okay? Which school?
 We'll say Mind Only now, okay...it's gonna come later, right,
and it is a real kind of emptiness according to them. Number
three, I I'll make it easy, okay? I I think what we think of as
soul is is the most obvious one. Nah, I don't like that
one...scratch it, 'cause you do have an internal?
(student: Mind)

Mindstream. Okay. That's a little dangerous...let's cancel
that. No, I'm changing. Little ball. So, okay. Something like
that, okay, all right? (Tak chi go wang chin gyi dak), okay,
independent. Little little thing inside you, okay? No such
thing. No unchanging little ball of self, okay? Visualize that
and you've got it right, okay? Who what school? I mean, lots of
schools, but right now we're talking Independents, and they say
"obvious selflessness, self-less-ness, of a person". And by the
way, this is the one you get the most in bad explanations of
emptiness, you know...they didn't even get up to real Middle Way,
okay, and you and you...I've heard that people...I've heard very
authen...you know, very qualified people make very strange
statements about emptiness. Okay. Like very very strange. I
heard one really good scholar say emptiness is the fact that when
you feel yourself, it's not that...or something like that. And
and of course there's a self that exists, you know...Michael
Roach exists...he's standing up here talking, you know, I feel
him, he's real, you know...it's not that. That's not what we're
denying at all. You know, the sense of a self is is true. Of
course you're yourself, you know. You function, and you're
there, you know...that's not what we're denying at all, okay.
The the Buddha has a sense of a self, Da Dalai Lama thinks he's
himself, you know...he is. (laughs) Okay. All right. I think.
Okay. Number four. (unclear) Substantial. Substantial. Self-
standing. Self...we'll put here in parenthesis, (driver), 'cause
that's...you know now after that long shpiel that's
what...substantial means. No such thing. Substantial in the
sense of an independent driver, okay, who's not part of your body
and your mind, who's driving you around, okay. A boss. A
director. Okay. This is what school? Independent. By the way,
some of these are shared by lower schools...I'm not getting into
that, okay? Probably 'cause I can't, okay. Independent...this
is the subtle...subtle lack of self to people. Got it? Okay.
Number five. See number...peace, peace brother, okay. (laughs)
see number two, okay, but the Independent, right...you know,
okay? Same idea...basically, okay...that that th the bis...the
visual consciousness and the pen that it sees don't come from a
different karmic seed, and that's the gross lack of a self to
things. Last one. You get it, you get to have a cookie. I
think there's cookies...I hope (laughter) okay. What's that?
That's the subtle lack of self to things. Right? Subtle lack of
self...you gotta be able to drive around these six like nobody's
business, okay. If you're really gonna teach emptiness to
people, you gotta be able to teach them what's wrong in order to
teach them what's right. Okay. You we haven't gotten to the
right one, okay? In the whole ten classes (laughs) we haven't
got to the right one yet, okay? What's this one supposedly?
No...what's he say..."not exist...from own side without
unaffected mind." It takes the magicians spell and the spelled
state of mind for you to see the horse there. Okay. Gotta come
from both sides. The stick has to be appearing as a horse and
your mind has to be under the influence of the spell. There has
to be a cooperative effort. From the object side, there has to
be appearance of something. From the state of mind side there
has to be seeing something, okay. Ne...neither one exists by
itself. There has to be a cooperation between the two, okay?

(student: It's like the tree falling in the forest thing,
right?)

This whole thing is the tree falling in the forest thing, Okay.
The Mind Only School would say what?

(student: Trees can fall...)

Trees can fall in the forest and they exist as soon as the sound
comes from the tree, it exists...from its own side. Mind
Only...sorry, Independent School would say? Doesn't exist until
somebody is sitting there, hearing it fall down. That's a good
example. Prasangika?

(students: (unclear))

There were some decibels and you made it a tree sound. But were
the decibels there before I thought of them as decibels?)

(students: No)
No. When you focus on them, they too become empty, you see what
I mean. But when you're discussing the sound, you stand back
from the raw material...the raw data, and you don't examine
it...you just leave it there...okay, okay...there were some
decibels and I and my mind, my karma made me hear them as a tree
fall. Okay. But what about those decibels, you know...this is
Mrs. Ribush's question. Nick Ribush's mother in Australia
actually came to my house, banged on the door, and said, "what
about the, you know, that talk you gave last night, you
know...what about the...what about the decibels...aren't they the
same?" I said, "yeah, when you focus on the decibels, then
it...then you're you're karma is forcing you to see decibels from
parts of decibels. Okay. You gotta get used to that, okay? You
gotta get used to that. But we're not gonna do that yet, because
that's

(student: Peeling the onion)

Yeah, it's an onion peeling thing. And until you get down to the
next level, you leave the next level alone. It's there. Okay.

(student: I...)

By the way...excuse me...that's very bad to not teach it clearly
because then people will get disoriented...they'll say nothing
exists, nothing matters. Right? If you just say, "Oh, there's
nothing there, and your mind is just making everything up", you
know. Well then a dream and a drug fantasy and and real life
becomes the same. You see what I mean...and that's not true,
okay. Yeah?

(student: Unaffected mind...is that the same as like centered?)

Yeah, she said, "explain unaffected state of mind". Basically
you can say one which is not on drugs...they would say...this is
a careful point. They say, "unaffected by temporary causes of
error". Meaning, alcohol, drugs, moving in a train in a certain
way so that the trees look like they're walking or something like
that, you see? Those are all called temporary...(trel gyi chu
gyu - trel gyi chu gyu) means "short-term causes of error", but
(pu gyi tru gyu), you know, your tendency to see things as self
existent, your mind is always affected by that...so unaffected
doesn't cover those kinds of aff...see...when we say "unaffected"
we mean by, you know, short-term causes like drugs, and alcohol
and and extreme jealousy that makes you see something that's not
there, or something like that, okay. Yeah. But it doesn't...
unaffected doesn't mean free of ultimately...ultimate factors
that cause your mind to be screwed up, which is your own
ignorance that you came...the baggage that you carry here from
your past life. Yeah?

(student: So when you look at the decibels and parts of
decibels, does it infinitely regress?)

She said, "when you look at decibels and parts of decibels, does
it infinitely regress?" Yes. (Ta nyi dak pa dak den tse way ten
(unclear) chu)...because when you look for the thing that gets
the name and you and you not satisfied with leaving it alone and
you keep digging, you don't find anything. Okay. And that's a
sign in in Prasangika that you found emptiness. Okay. Does that
mean nothing exists or nothing matters? Absolutely not. The
minute you understand emptiness, you gotta be? ...strictly moral,
strictly ethical, okay? It means you, now you do have to be
ethical (laughs), okay? But if you, if you stop at the onion
skin thing and keep going down and in the middle there's nothing,
you know, and you just go home...you say, "okay guys, go home",
you know, it's it's breaking a bodhisattva vow. You you're not
telling then what's important to tell them. Whether you see an
onion or an apple, depends on your karma, (laughs) okay?
(laughter) And who wants to be surrounded by onions all the
time...I mean personally, you know. (laughs) (laughter) Okay?
All right? You have to give them the second half. So you have
to go home and keep your bodhisattva vows, you have to go home
and keep your books, you will become a (tantric) deity, you know
what I mean? You gotta tell them that stuff. It's very bad to
leave them with the onion that no...nothing in the middle, okay?
Yeah?

(student: (unclear) say that the definition of substance as well
(unclear)
Sorry?

(student: It could be the definition of)

Yeah, that that would sound like...yeah. Yeah, in in in
Prasangika they say nothing exists substantially and that's what
they mean. That's true. We could put that as number six, but we
were in the M...Independent School at that time. Ten minutes ago
we were in the Independent School, okay (laughs). (Dze chik
druppa) to exist substantial, is the (gak ja) in the higher
school. Yeah. It's what we deny when we speak of emptiness.
It's one of the synonyms for emptiness. And I I put in your
reading a really cool section from the monastic textbook that
gives you all the synonyms for self-existence...substantial,
natural, by definition, from its own side, (unclear) ultimately,
you know...all that stuff. It's very beautiful. And then he
says, by the way the the Independent School doesn't agree with
this one, this one, this one. And the Mind Only School doesn't
agree with this one, this one, this one. And its very cool...you
won't find it any place else but in the Sera Mey (yikchas)
(laughter) okay. Probably. Okay. Have a break and then when
you get back we'll talk about...we'll finish off with the highest
school, okay.

(break)

You're gonna be getting tonight a a schedule of of of ACI stuff
through the next year...the whole next year, okay, up to the time
of the three year retreat, so...huh?

(student: Literal or?)

Literal or figurative. The dates are pretty much fixed because a
lot of them involve travel arrangements that have been made in
other countries, so, you know, it's a really really nice
schedule. We're gonna end up doing stuff...there's a tour of the
Far East...we were asked to go back to Australia and then the Far
East, so it'll be Singapore, Taiwan, probably Tokyo, and Perth,
Australia on the west side of Perth...west side of Australia, and
then the FPMT, Lama Zopa's organization has asked us to to do a
tour of their centers in southern Asia, so that'll be...we'll be
going to Bodhgaya, and doing the (b: Diamond Cutter) in Bodhgaya,
which I think is really powerful

(students: Ahhh)

and then Dharamsala and Kathmandu, and then after that's all done
we plan to go down to Sera Mey and get the second half of this
course.

(students: Wow)

Which is the Madyamika half, from...he's an am...incredible
teacher, Geshe Thubten Rinchen, I mean he's he...you know, we
asked him how long he'd been doing this, he said, "thirty years,
but I did take a three day break once" (laughter) (laughs) you
know. And he teaches...he has hundreds of students and he's
actually given us the time, you know...committed to do that, and
it's amazing...it's really amazing to get it from the the source,
you know. Then there'll be a tour of Ireland, which all the
Irish Buddhist Secret Association has to come, okay (laughter),
Case, Sikes...got it (laughs) (laughter), all right. I don't
know if...you gonna make it or...no (laughs), he's a big secret.
All right. And then a bunch of...there'll be North Carolina,
Washington D.C., California...a couple other places. Okay.
Reading ten you're gonna get at the review class, okay? And now
we'll go over what that that is, all right...by the way, the
reason to give you the schedule is so that you can schedule next
year. We'll be we'll be reviewing the seven years in one year.
And it'll be really cool. You can get the whole geshe course
instead of doing eighteen years, or seven years, you can do one
year (laughter) (laughs) all right. And it'll be a really nice
review of the whole, of the whole thing, if you hope to get your
final final certificate from ACI you have to come to the review,
okay. So we just tried to give you that so you could plan your
life for next year. I don't think the date...the dates of the
courses will change much...oh by the way, we'll also be going to
Indiana in August for His Holiness' Kalachakra and Khen Rinpoche
will be giving his initiation a little bit earlier next year, in
August, so it'll be early August, so...those are...because he
can't do it during...while His Holiness is here. Okay. All
right.

(student: (unclear))

And in meaning His Holiness is giving the Kalachakra in the
United States, Khen Khen Rinpoche won't...

(student: (unclear)

All right. We're on to the Prasangika and we'll do
it...you...this...you've had this many times, but we'll do it
sort of. Say (teln) (repeat) (gyurwa) (repeat) (teln gyurwa)
(repeat). (Teln gyurwa) means "Prasangika". As we said last
class, their name comes from a special kind of logical device.
It's a form of...it's a it's a kind of formal logic and it and
it's the sarcastic absurdity, you know...so I said, "oh did you
really think this pen came from its own side?" and that's a
(teln gyurwa). Okay? (Rang mu nyi druppa yin ba ta), okay.
(Rang mu nyi druppa yin ba ta). Okay. And you end it with the
word (ta). (Ta) means "come on, are you saying it's coming from
its own side?" And they they named that school, you know, the
Absurd Consequences of your...of what you just said, okay...is
Prasangika means that...Prasangika's a kind of logic. This
school believes that just based on that, you can get a pretty
good idea of what emptiness is. "Come on, you really think this
thing's coming from its own side? So a dog sees it like that?
Come on", you know. And I didn't sit there and say, "by the way,
it doesn't come from its own side, and this is why, and blah blah
blah. You just give somebody a (teln gyur), Prasangika, okay,
and they can pretty much get it from that. Is that their main
viewpoint? No. But they're given that name from for that
reason, okay? Excuse me? Okay. So, that's the meaning of
Prasangika. This is the ultimate viewpoint of emptiness, okay?
This is what Lord Buddha believed, really, figur...liter
literally, (laughs) okay. This is what Nagarjuna taught, this is
what Chandrakirti taught, this is what all the Dalai Lamas have
taught, this is what Je Tsongkapa taught, this is what Khen
Rinpoche teaches...this is what all of (tantric) practice is
based on, okay. So this is it, all right? Really? Okay. Last
time Lord Buddha said that it wasn't the case, right (laughter)
(laughs), third turning of the wheel, right? This is what I
really meant. No. I'm...this is not...definitely not
figurative, okay, this is literal, really. You need to know this
and you can prove it to yourself in your own mind by the by the
end of tonight...which will not be too long from now, okay, so in
your own mind you can establish it...why? Because it makes very
good sense that if you want to reach a (tantric) deity's body and
paradise in this lifetime, this viewpoint is very very
compelling. This viewpoint...this explanation of emptiness is
something that's very very logical and makes sense, you know,
that I could do it...if that's the way things are, I can do
it...you see what I mean? And you'll you'll get that sense
tonight. And and they are...it is the highest viewpoint. Okay.
And and if someone teaches you a different viewpoint, it's wrong.
 Okay. I mean, maybe they're doing it for a good reason, maybe
they have some other motivation in mind, but it it will, it is
not the ultimate viewpoint that will that will save you or or or
cause you not to die in this lifetime, okay? And and the subject
we're gonna base it on is called...say (chu bap) (repeat) (chu
bap) (repeat). (laughs), okay. (Chu bap) is a special section
from Chandrakirti's explanation of Nagarjuna's (b: Root Wisdom),
okay. It's called (chu bap). (Chu bap) means "waterfall" or or
a a "river that's falling down these rocks, you know, and flowing
out to sea", okay. (Chu) means "water". (Bap) means "to fall".
And (chu bap) means like "a stream making its way to the ocean",
okay? (Chu bap). It comes from a very famous quotation that
says, "if a hungry ghost, right, a preta"...wha...I like to call
them, what do they call it...

(cut)

craving spirits 'cause that's their nature...hungry doesn't quite
catch it. Craving means "because they were cheapskates in this
life (laughter) (laughs) they always short of stuff", you know,
they always need something. They always want something and they
never quite get what they want. They they're they are afflicted
by hunger and thirst often, and they...when they see some water
and they and they run to the stream, to the side of the stream,
and they look down, they just suddenly it has become pus and
blood. It's suddenly it's this disgusting slime that no one
would ever want to drink, you see, that's their karma. See, as
they approach...from a distance they see this see this beautiful
running water...I mean, this happens all day, right, in New York
City (laughter) (laughs) you know...sounds like a good offer and
then you get closer and it's like, whoa (laughter), you know
(laughs) (laughter) okay? And so anyway, you get to the side of
the water and then se...look down and suddenly it has become
something else okay. And and this is taught in in the monastic
textbooks in the following way. And I always picture it in the
basement at Thirty-nineth Street, which is maybe an appropriate
place since that's where we started the seven years, okay? With
six students, all right, and and there's a there's this dark
basement and three beings have been sitting around a table
playing poker, okay. There's there's one hungry ghost, there's
one human and there's one deity...worldly deity, okay, or or you
can call it a (tantric) deity...it doesn't matter, but there's
three beings from three different realms sitting around a table,
okay? Like ET or something, you know, the bar scene or something, you know,
like they're really strange...three
different totally different beings, okay. First of all it is
possible that two realms can
be going on in one room at the same time...we talked about it
Friday night. I mean, to a dog this is a whole different realm,
it's a whole different level of reality, and it can coexist with
with our level of reality. Whose is right? It'd be fair to
animals, okay...animal rights, okay (laughter), their reality is
just as real as yours (laughs) okay, and it's running parallel,
so the the idea of parallel different realities didn't start with
Carlos Castenada, okay? (laughter) It's it's...there are two,
at least two realities running in this room at the same time...no
problem with that. It's not like some deep philosophical thing,
okay. Once you admit to two, you might as well admit to five,
or ten, or twenty...you know what I mean? In theory, there could
be many many different realities going on in the same space in
the same time...totally different realities. So in (chu bap), in
Madyamika Prasangika, explanation of emptiness...don't forget now
that we've changed hats, okay? We're Prasangika now, we're
Consequence School...Consequence meaning "absurd consequence of
what you just said"...come on, okay. The Consequence
School...put on their hat now...they say it's possible, three
beings are sitting around a table and someone walks in with a
glass of liquid. Okay. Someone walks in with a glass of liquid
and sets in down in the middle of the table. One glass. And
sets it down...in the middle of the table, okay. You can use
also a?

(student: Cylinder)

Cylinder, okay, in in Madyamika...the reason I chose this reading
which also appears in course five, okay...I copped it...it, the
reason I chose this reading is is because to me it's the most
appropriate thing to make the last thing that we teach in the
seven year course, okay. To me, this is Madyamika in a nutshell.
 To me this is the most important piece of reading that you could
ever have, okay? Somebody comes in and sets a glass of liquid on
the table between these three. This is...and and the thing about
the pen...I just want you to be sensitive to the fact...I didn't
make it up. This is Madyamika, Prasangika, (chu bap) section,
Chandrakirti, explaining Nagarjuna who's explaining Lord Buddha,
okay. And it is the viewpoint of emptiness accepted by all the
highest being's who've ever lived, okay? If you see emptiness
directly, you are seeing it this way, and you can only see it
this way. And the Middle Way explanation of three different
degrees of emptiness is totally wrong. Okay. There are no
degrees of emptiness. It's either emptiness or it's not
emptiness, and there's no degrees of it. Is there a difference
between the emptiness of the parts of a person and the emptiness
of a person...yes, we we agree to that in Prasangika. But only
because the the the thing that the emptiness applies to changes.
Not because one is more empty than the other, okay? They're both
hundred percent empty. One happens to be applying to Jay Hahn.
One happens to be applying to Jay Hahn's hand, Jay Hahn's arm,
Jay Hahn's head, okay. But but are they like different degrees
of emptiness? No, okay. So you gotta get that. We agree that
there's two different flavors of emptiness depending on where the
emptiness is sticking to, okay, but not like one of them is
different from the other or more empty than the other...we don't
accept that. Okay. And and so that's a big difference. Here we
 we we're rejecting the idea of of (de me tra rak sum), (dak me
tra rak sum), that there's three flavors, three degrees of
subtlety in emptiness. We don't accept that. It's all hundred
percent emptiness or it's not emptiness, okay. So three guys are
sitting around the table, and they're all looking at this liquid,
okay? One of them, according to the scripture, sees water and
that makes them a?

(student: Human)

Human. Okay. That's what it is to be a human. And then another
one is sitting there and they're a a craving spirit hungry ghost
and they see pus and blood, in the same glass, same thing, okay.
I didn't make it up, okay. It's great comfort to me that you
know I didn't make it up, okay, 'cause it's the most important
thing I ever said in this class, okay? And then the third person
is this deity and they see the the nectar of immortality. One
sip of that, you're out of here forever, you know. And and
amerta, okay...dutsi...and and that's it...you're out of here.
If you take one sip of that, everything's finished, okay? And
and three different beings are seeing three different things.
Then there's this huge debate...I mean, the reading is like
thirty pages...I don't know how many pages, but and and half of
it is very difficult, I mean don't get frustrated, okay. The
principle you understand. And there's some details in there
which are very very subtle and difficult to prove, and stuff like
that, so don't worry about that. But the question...the first
question is, are they all having valid perceptions...and by the
way, that's why we say "valid" rather than "correct". Valid
meaning "given the data at their disposal and the brains that
they have", are...is what they're seeing valid?

(students: yes)

Yeah. So from that sense it's correct, okay. It is blood to a
preta, it is water to the human and it is dutsi to the to the
deity, okay, to the (tantric) deity, okay. It is...it really is,
okay? Can one thing be three things at once? Not to one
mindstream, but if you have three different mindstreams, yes.
Okay, and that...and that's proof that it's not coming from its
own side, okay. If you want a classic example, your favorite
song is a good example, okay. Almost nobody else agrees with you
(laughter) (laughs) okay? I mean, probably you really like the
people who do agree with you (laughs) okay. That's it. The song
is not the best song in the world from its own side, okay. It's
the best song in the world because of what you think, all right?
That's a perfect example of emptiness. You don't have to go to
black spaces to get to emptiness. You your favorite song is a
perfect example. That's why you have fights with other people
about music. That's why people hate critics. Okay. Okay. I'll
go through your homework. The (b: Abbreviation of the Great Way)
says that quote "each being, according to their class", meaning
were you born as a human, were you born as an animal, etc, "has
differing perceptions of a single thing and that therefore,
quote, "we can say that these things have no reality. Does this
mean then that we should never consider anything to be one way or
another? Why or why not? And this is discussed in the reading.
Okay. (Ka chik ma), an opponent comes up and says, "well if the
liquid can be three different things at once, then nothing is
better than another thing, you see what I mean...then nothing is
different from anything else, really...it's all just the way you
see it, okay? And then they say, "not quite", okay. And the
example given in there is, "are there certain ways of looking at
reality that function better than other ways?" Yeah. There are.
 You see what I mean. Things still function even though they're
empty. You gotta get used to that. Things can be more
functional or more useful than other ways of looking at things,
you know. Is it valid to look at the world as full of creepy
people who are out to get you? Yeah, in a certain way...if
that's your state of mind. Is it valid to say that maybe any
particular person you might run into, even if they treat you
badly, is trying to help you? Is it valid? Yes. Which is more
useful? Which is more pleasant? Which gives you more good karma
(laughs), you know. Which actually leads you to enlightenment,
you know. The second one. Okay. So what one is more useful
than the other. Things can still be more functional than other
things, okay. Yeah?

(student: Speaking of...)
He's basically saying that if doing good deeds is done in an
illusion-like atmosphere, then why would that be necessarily more
functional or or useful than something else. It alls boils down
to the purpose of Buddhism which is to escape (laughs) pain, you
know, (laughs), you know what I mean? Constantly thinking of
things in a positive light. If a person misunderstood, you know,
didn't see things quite this way...didn't explain things quite
this way, but were imagining themselves to be an illusion, and
and and purposely followed exactly the same moral code, but
thinking that I'm in an illusion and I'm doing it, you know, in
an illusion, and they were misunderstanding what Buddhists mean
by illusion, I guess you could say it this way. If someone
followed a perfect moral code because they thought, for example,
there was a god watching them, and was keeping score or
something, but but if they kept the same moral code that, you
know, all the way up to their (tantric) vows that anyone else
would keep, would they get the same results? You see what I
mean? It's unlikely that they could sustain it. Buddhism says
it's unlikely that you could sustain it under a delusion like
that, you see what I mean? At some point you would break down.
You know, at some point, really understanding how things work
gives you the ability to sustain it to the end and and a belief
in in in some other belief, you know, I can see Moses sitting
down and saying, you know, "gee, if I tell the truth about karma
and emptiness, half these guys aren't gonna get it. Let's tell
them there's this big daddy, you know, your Father, up in the
sky, and he's keeping track"...yeah, that's useful. They say
they say...what do you call it....(de be jye dong), you know, I
mean they're doing their good deeds out of a semi-correct
understanding and a semi-false understanding of reality. And and
they have a certain energy and a certain...it's very slow, it's
very unstable. It's very likely to stop before you get to the
final goal. I mean in the end, I I believe you would have to say
that you need to perceive emptiness to sustain it. You have to
have Prasangika viewpoint to sustain it to get to (tantric)
enlightenment, you'd have to, okay? And and it's much much
quicker if you understand the process, you know, if you're
purposely doing everything, if you're purposely keeping your
morality because you understand exactly how it works, it gives
you the energy to keep your morality in a way that no one else
can do. That's what how...that's what the scriptures would say,
and I think that's true. Okay? That's the (b: Perfection of
Wisdom), by the way. That's what it means. To do your good
deeds knowing exactly why and exactly how it works, and
apparently it's only that kind of knowledge that can sustain it
until you finally turn into a (tantric) deity, okay? Okay. So,
does this mean that we should never consider one thing one way or
the other? No. And an example is what? Well, there's some
philosophical viewpoints that that work. And some that don't,
okay? Okay. I mean, people say, "it's not pc for me to get up
here and say, 'some philosophical viewpoints, some religious
viewpoints, don't work'", okay, they don't ultimately work. They
really don't work. And people say, "that's not...you're being
sectarian", you know. Everyone says that. All fanatics say
that." You know. Mine is the only way. But I...and I and I
answer you just one way, I mean, consider the possibility that as
in the physical world, you know, like, can you take the parts of
a car engine and just randomly put them back together and will it
work, you know? And are there ten thousand ways you can put a
car engine back together? And is it true that nine thousand nine
hundred ninety-nine of them don't work? You see what I mean. I
mean, it can look good. It can look like a car engine. It can
have all the parts there and it looks pretty cool and it just
won't work at all, you see what I mean. It can have some
renunciation, it can have some teachings about compassion, it can
have some idea about emptiness, it can have some talk about
compas...you know, doing good deeds, you could have some..you
know, people...that's a very common viewpoint, you know..."this
this spiritual path is okay 'cause it you know it has a lot of
good things in it", you know. That's like saying a car engine
will work because it has all the parts, in the wrong order, or
not fixed together, or couple of them missing, or, the odds are
similar, okay? I I consider the possibility that in the
spiritual world it works the same as in the automotive world.
(laughter) I mean, I'm not kidding. Consider the possibility
that if you don't have certain concepts there, as a whole, you
won't get to the end, you won't get there, you know. I mean,
consider the possibility. I'm not being fanatic. I'm not trying
to say one thing is better than the other...I'm not saying that.
I'm saying, consider the possibility that spiritual mechanisms
work just as precisely as a car engine and you must have certain
elements there or you will never make it, okay? And it...and
there are many things that are sweet and good and holy and pure
and and interesting and and are missing an essential part and
will not get you there, okay. It's possible. Yeah?

(student: Can they take you up a level like in the same way
that)

Yeah. She says, "would it get you up a level?"...come on, you
guys are (drang nge) scholars, you tell me.

(students; Of course. Yes.)

Of course. Should we, you know, wipe them all out from the face
of the earth, those guys who teaching incomplete paths. No, for
gods' sake...they could be Buddhas, they probably are Buddhas,
you gotta be very careful, you know. But since you're in this
class, why not go to the one that works (laughter), you know,
with (laughs) you know, go straight up to the one that works.
They say, "go straight up to compassion and wisdom". You know.
You can mess around on the lower tracks. Go straight to
compassion and wisdom. Yeah?

(student: I was gonna say the same thing)

Okay. All right.

(student: (unclear))

Yeah, and I think it's very important to be to be...I mean, from
a (tantric) point of view, the sutra stuff is is so slow, it
...you could almost say it doesn't work, you know what I mean?
And and then you'd be saying Lord Buddha is a dummy or something
like that, you know what I mean, you gotta be careful. You gotta
be very careful. Lord Buddha taught many things as (tap tsul)
was the opening lines of this class, you know, in in...because
these are very clever ways of leading people farther than they
were before. Okay. Yeah.
(student: Would you say that no other traditions get off the
Wheel then?)

Wo would I say that no other traditions can get you off the
Wheel? I don't know...I I would say that you have to put...you
know, if you press me, you must see emptiness directly to get off
the Wheel, must, must, and the day you see emptiness directly,
you can confirm what I'm claiming here, directly. You see your
future lives, you see the day of your enlightenment. Then you
don't have to ask me in the class, you know, are there other
traditions or something like that. I mean, it's...consider the
possibility and then work towards it, you know what I mean.
The...on the day that you see your enlightenment directly, right
after you've seen emptiness directly, meaning on the day you see
the four?

(students: Arya Truths)

Arya Truths, okay, you will see all this stuff directly, you
know. I'm just saying it's possible, okay. I'm not I'm not
saying you don't get to leave here if you don't accept it, okay.
I'm just saying it's actually the way it is, okay, and I'm not
ashamed to say it, and it's correct, and and you must see it, you
must see emptiness directly, then you won't have to ask me any of
these questions. You know. You you'll be absolutely sure
yourself. And there's no other question about it, but you you
must see emptiness directly. You can not see emptiness directly
if you don't meditate about an hour a day and study emptiness
seriously. Okay. You can't play piano well if you don't
practice it. They are about the same level of difficulty. And
the likelihood that you could play at Carnegie Hall without ever
practicing and seeing emptiness without meditating an hour a day
are very similar. Okay. It's totally unlikely. Maybe it
happened once, you know, Madonna made it to Carnegie Hall
without, you know (laughter), yeah?

(student: Can you say that all these bright scholars who thought
about (unclear) stuff and come up with these ideas, none of them
have ever seen emptiness directly, and are describe it.)
Which scholars do you refer to?

(student: Well, the other schools.)

Oh, the other schools. She said, the question was..."are you
saying that all great thinkers of of Buddhism in the past who per
who per who taught the other school's systems, are you saying
that none of them saw di emptiness directly?"

(student: And were describing it?)

And were describing it. The question comes up about Arya Asanga.
 Who was the great re-vigorator of the Mind Only School, okay?
And people say, "did he see emptiness directly?", say, "yeah...of
cour...he's Arya Asanga (laughs) please, okay" (laughs)
(laughter), okay, okay...Arya means "someone who's seen emptiness
directly". "Well, did he see emptiness directly?" "Yes. Well
how could he if he was stuck in the Mind Only School?" "He
wasn't stuck in the Mind Only School. He taught it out of
compassion for people who couldn't get up to the Prasangika, from
his own viewpoint is Prasangika, and in many places he says, "I'm
reporting the Mind Only School system". Master Vasubandu in the
last pages of the (b: Abhidharmakosha) says, 'I'm reporting the
Vaibashika School", you know. And Je Tsongkapa at the end of
this book, which we are about to get to, says, "ask me who I am,
ask me what system I like...the one that gets you to
enlightenment. The Prasangika". Okay. And he's gonna say that,
all right? So, and I don't...I'm not gonna press on it more, I'm
not gonna, you know, insist anything...I'm saying, on the day you
see emptiness directly, all things will be known. You can reach
that. You have to try. Okay. All right. Number three. All
these are questions, okay. The Mind Only School has asserted
that things can exist from their own side through some unique
identity of their own. The Independent part of the Middle-Way
School has asserted that the perception of things depends on
their appearing from their own side to a state of mind which,
from its side, is unerring. So it's a cooperation, right. So in
one...in the Mind Only School system, it's out there and it's
existing towards me. In the Independent School system, it's
existing towards me and I'm cooperating and somewhere in between
we make a pen. Okay. All right. Both things have to be there.
Like in the magician...in...like in the example. By the way, the
thing about the magician, it's not so much the falsity of it,
it's more of an example for how how perception happens. There
has to be a horse appearing from the stick and you have to have
your mind under a spell. And then you can see a horse, okay.
That's the only, that's the point of that example. On that
level, okay. So, how does the Consequence part of the Middle Way
 School assert that things exist? Okay. What's the Prasangika
say? Here's it is...here's what they say. You guys there's
only two pieces of Tibetan in this whole homework...you'll be
very grateful. (laughter). Say (tokpe) (repeat) (par) (repeat)
(tak tsam) (repeat). (Tokpe) (repeat) (par) (repeat) (tak tsam)
(repeat). This is the way everything is according to Madyamika
Prasangika, okay...this is the way everything exists. This is in
fact the meaning of dependent origination. Okay. (Tokpe) means
"by your projections"...forced on you by your?

(students: past karma)

Past karma, okay. (Par) means "from your side". (Par) means
"from your side". It's a long...it's been a long way from the
Mind Only School that said, "things existed from their side",
okay? Now we got "from your side". (Par) means "from your
side". (Tak tsam) means "just labeled; just creations; just
constructs; things that you have created through your
projections; coming from your side". Okay. That's all. That's
the on...that's how all things exist. All things exist merely
through your projections. Coming from your side, okay. So is
there a cylinder out there? Yeah, leave it alone and there's a
cylinder, you know. Don't go in, don't dig into it and there's a
cylinder. And then you can call it a pen, okay. But then when
you focus on the cylinder you're actually focusing on two pieces
that you're calling a cylinder, and when you focus on the top,
you're actually focusing on two pieces that you call the
top...you see what I mean? And it keeps going like that. All
right? But don't mistake that for saying nothing exists, okay,
okay. Don't mistake that, you know. Relatively speaking,
nominally speaking, there is a cylinder out there and I'm
thinking of it as a pen. Because I'm a human, okay, 'cause my
karma is making me see it that way. That's all. But be careful
not to go into some extreme and say, "oh oh oh, Michael Roach
said the cylinder also didn't exist, so I guess the parts of ...
and on...on...on...onion skin and you get to the middle and
there's nothing, you know, I don't know what to do (laughter)
(laughs) you know (laughs), it's like Cheerios, you know, you
know like that. It's not like that, okay? It's not like that.
Always say that something appears...you you call it something,
okay, forced by your karma to do so, and that's how you...that's
how everything exists. Okay. Next question on your homework
says...well, one of the next questions say, "well when we say
that things are only projections does that mean we can make
anything anything we want it to be? If this is just my
projection, can I make this a hundred dollar bill?

(student: No)

Wh...if it's just my projection, why not?

(student: Forced upon you by your past karma)

Yeah, forced upon you by your past karma, okay? Can you go to
the dentist and wish it to feel like cotton candy...when they hit
your nerve...when they do a...what do they call those things?
Root canal. You know. Can you by wanting it to feel that way
make it feel that way? Another version would be when I was a
child, and I'm not being critical, I'm just saying, you know, go
to the church, sit down on your knees and pray that your aunt
doesn't die...you see what I mean? It's a very similar
thing...it's exactly the same thing, you know. You can't...they
are your projections, you can't change them by just wishing it or
nobody would ever have any pain. But but we can't control pain,
so obviously things don't work that way. Yeah?

(student: (unclear) lack of existence including karma itself,
then your projections are also lacking (unclear))

He says, "if everything is a projection, then karma itself is a
projection"...right. And your projections would also be
projections. That's correct. Emptiness has its own emptiness,
okay. Emptiness also. Your current understanding of emptiness
is that forced on you by your past deeds. Which is why Tibetans
who are about to start their Madyamika studies, like Khen
Rinpoche, went up in a cave and meditated big time and did very
holy practices to try to purify themselves, you know. they're
trying to purify their karma so they can project emptiness to be
what it is...you see what I mean? And and he almost died...I
mean, he got very ill, and did a good job, you know, purifying
himself. So that actually between the course on Independent
School and the course on Prasangika School, meaning after your
twelfth year and for the before the next four years, you you
actually stop and go do some kind of holy practices, so that your
karma can improve that you're projecting (laughs) a better
understanding of emptiness, okay? No problem. Just don't ask me
 can karma change then...and the rules of karma, 'cause I get
nervous when you ask that. Okay. Number...next one. Does the
fact that things are only projections mean that leading an
ethical way of life is unimportant? (laughter)

(student: No)

I mean, anybody who's studied emptiness at all, in...especially
in these classes, better giggle, okay. And and I hope it doesn't
mean that when lectures are being given throughout New York
explaining why you can misbehave to your heart's content, if
everythings empty, that you'll giggle, you know, right in the
middle of the guy's (tantric) explanation. Say, "pht, come on,
figurative right, figurative right" (laughter)(laughs) okay, not
at all like that. Okay. The more empty things are the more
ethical you have to be. And you know why and I don't have to go
into it, okay. You've had this...I've been feeding you
Prasangika for years, okay, so it should just seem like, "oh
yeah, that's easy", okay. Number seven. Why does the
Consequence presentation of the meaning of emptiness have
especially important implications in our own search for
enlightenment. This is a very important question. Yeah. Why
does the Consequen...why does the Prasangika presentation have
special meaning in your personal life? In your own search for
enlightenment?
(student: You're the only one who can clean up your own act.)

She says, "you're the only one that can clean up your act".
But I'm talking about their presentation of emptiness as opposed
to the other presentations we've had.

(students: It's the only one correct)

She says, "it's the only correct one".

(student: You realize how absurd your positions really are)

Would...you realize how absurd your positions fully (unclear).
Actually it's like this...

(student: It's the only one'll get you out.)

(unclear) says, "it's the only one'll get you out.", but why?

(student: (unclear))

You see...the other ones are not emptiness. The other ones are
not really emptiness. If that pen, if that cylinder had any
penness about it, whether it was a penness that came from its own
side, or whether it was a penness that we had to do fifty-fifty,
you know, then I'm stuck with a pen forever. You see. If my
body has any nature of being a wrinkly, balding, freckly, hairy
armed thing from its own side, whether its fifty percent that way
or a hundred percent that way, I'm stuck here. I can never
become a Buddha. I can never reach (tantric) enlightenment. You
see what I mean? If their viewpoints are correct, you is in
trouble, you know, if things have the least bit of existence from
their own side, you in big trouble, you can't get out...you're
gonna die like that, okay, I mean it's very profound. You must
see that this is the meaning of emptiness, you know. Those other
mean...the other ones don't work, you know. If if it's true that
you have any kind of self existence...if you have...if
those'll...under...if those explanations of emptiness are at all
correct, the six that we went through, right...if they have
anything correct about them, you are stuck here forever. Because
because it's coming from its own side, you can't change it, you
know. It's not your projection. You can't you can't change it
by being good or something like that, okay? Then why did Lord
Buddha spend twenty-five years teaching people to be good and
twenty-five years teaching them to be empty if there wasn't some
connection...you see what I mean? Why? You see what I mean?
Th...if if those explanations of emptiness that you hear are in
anyway correct, you can't become enlightened. You know, forget
it. Okay. It it's only the Prasangika explanation that that
explains how a person can get enlightened. Why? Why can you get
enlightened? 'Cause your body and your mind are empty, okay, and
they will become whatever you project. And whatever you project
will come directly from? Keeping your book. And I'm not
kidding, okay. Checking your vows every two hours or so, okay.
Then beautiful, you're out of here...so cool, and and it's cool
to watch it change, you know, and it's cool to know why it's
changing. It's cool tus to to know that you you have a now found
a method that works from mo...from from day to day, and things
start to change. That's very cool. That's very exciting, you
know. Everything you ever dreamed of about religion, to, you
know, all those things you ever thought of when you were a little
kid, actually happening to you. It's it's cool, it's amazing,
you know...they're only possible if you hold that viewpoint,
okay. It's only possible if this viewpoint is correct. So yeah,
I would say something like...given that things are creations of
my projections forced on us by our past karma, then we can, by
leading an extraordinarily virtuous way of life, actually put an
end to the projections of aging and death, become a (tantric)
angel, and enter a (tantric) paradise in this very life, okay?
(laughter). If if that viewpoint is correct, okay? Everything
is possible, okay. Last question, almost. The (b: Heart
Trut...Sutra) says that the real goal of Buddhism...I mean I got
interviewed today by someone who's book is nu...number one on a
best seller list somewhere, for it's a Buddhist book, and and I
said, they said, "wh...does Buddhism say anything about
life...you know, dying...can you", and I said, "yeah, I mean the
whole point of Buddhism is you can stop aging and death", they
said, "I never heard that before". (laughter) You know..I
I...direct quotation...okay, "I never heard that before". (Ma
rikpa me...ma rikpa se pa me pa ne ga shi me ga shi se pay par
du yang me do), never heard (b: the Heart Sutra), okay? Here's
question eight (laughter). (b: The Heart Sutra) says that the
real goal of Buddhism is to quote "stop the process of aging and
death" through quote "stopping our ignorance" quote, okay. Is
this a literal or a figurative statement?

(students: Literal)

Quite literal. Okay. And don't skip it. That's the whole point
of Buddhism. I mean, I can't believe it. It's amazing, you
know. It's amazing that that this is not taught in any Buddhist
class that I'm aware of, you know what I mean. The whole point
is that. And people say, "you're exaggerating". I got a letter
from somebody said, "don't exaggerate. It gives people false
hope", you know. I don't know. That's what (b: The Heart Sutra)
says. Okay. (laughter) If it's literal, then why have we not
see any person who's stopped the process of aging and death?

(student: You have to be very close to it to see it yourself)

You have to be very close to it to see it yo...in anybody else,
okay. Do you see His Holiness the Dalai Lama as Avalokiteshvara,
or you just kinda think he might be because Tibetans say so...
you see what I mean? I'm afraid the case is the second, okay.
Do you see Khen Rinpoche as as an aging man with bad knees or or
do you see him as as Yamantaka? You know what I mean. If he's
ever got mad at you, you (laughter) (laughs) okay, no, 'cause
you're karma's not up to it. Okay? Okay. Really. Really. Is
the glass of liquid water...oh, is it true to say that the glass
of liquid is not amerta...deathlessness nectar because you can't
see it that way?

(student: No)

Is it true to say that this is not a pen because somebody else
sees...because lower forms of life see it as something to chew
on. I mean...did...if if all the dogs in the world swore to god
there were no pens in the world, would that be the case? You see
what I mean? Of course you haven't seen anybody like that. You
have to be very close to it to see it, and you will. You know,
you'll get very close, you'll start meeting these people, and
say, you'll say what Master Asanga said when he met Maitreya. "I
been trying to meditate on you for twelve years. Where were
you?" Maitreya says, "I was sitting next to you in your cave.
You spit on me all the time, you know (laughter), I was like
dodging your spit all the time". He says, "but I didn't see
you". "Of course you didn't see me, you weren't pure enough
until you finished your twelve years," okay? That's all. Direct
quotation, okay. Direct...real experience. Yeah?

(student: (unclear) I got my Mind Only hat on...

Okay, that's good. He says he's "I'm putting my Mind Only hat
on".

(student: the (unclear) are teaching their (unclear) to bring
people up to the Mind Only (unclear)

That the who is bringing?

(student: (unclear))

Oh, he says, "if I was a Mind Only hat on, could I say that, you
know, the the Prasangika guys, those Middle Way guys, are just
bringing...trying to bring up people to the Mind Only School".
Of course that's exactly what they say. Why? The say the second
turning of the wheel was?

(students: Figurative)

Figurative. They say the third turning of the wheel was?

(students: Literal)

After all, it's the last one, you know. And that's the one where
Buddha would have said, "okay, I'm about to pass away. I better
tell you guys the truth now" (laughter) you know, "I didn't mean
it when I said everything was empty and nothing had any nature of
its own, or didn't exist from its own side", okay. They say
exactly that. They say, "you nihilists". Say nothing exists.
Okay? Of course there's a pen there. You think there's no pen
there? You want me to write on your face with it, Mr. Middle
Way?", okay, (laughter), you know what I mean? They would say
that. Right. We went through that. Okay. Last thing. There's
a very very beautiful section...Geshe Thubten Rinchen was very
very adamant that we go through it, and he said he had heard
about some conferences in India where they invited scholars from
all over the world to come and discuss Buddhism and they's a
Middle Way conference, it actually took place...I'm sorry, Mind
Only conference...and and then people were trying to argue that,
that that that the Mind Only School's idea of emptiness was the
right one, and that even people like Je Tsongkapa believed it.
You know, so so Geshe Thubten Rinchen, he's memorized this text
backward and forward...he can recite it backwards and forwards,
he says, "look on page two hundred and thirty six", you know, and
we looked back at two thirty six and there is Je Tsongkapa's
final words of the book, which is a very good place to leave it,
okay. So here's Je Tsongkapa's final words. They ask him, he
says, somebody comes up and asks him, "well which...you've now
spent all this yo...part of your life explaining the Mind Only
School and the Middle Way School, meaning the Prasangika School,
and he said, "now which one's right, okay. Which way of
interpreting reality is literal and which way is figurative. Who
who's got it right and who's got it wrong? Which one do you
believe?" Okay, and then he, he says a very beautiful thing.

(silence)

Say (lu drup) (repeat) (luk sang) (repeat) (tsowor) (repeat) (min
dzin) (repeat) (su) (repeat). Okay. Last thing, okay. Last
last thing. (Lu drup) means...(lu) means "Naga", (Drup) means
"Ar ar arjuna" (laughter) (laughs), okay, Naga Arguna, okay,
(laughs) Nagarjuna, okay, (Lu Drup) means "Nagarjuna". (Luk
sang) means "that beautiful system", you know, of Nagarjuna,
which is, by the way, exactly what we've been talking about with
the pen for the last two years, or three years, okay? Or
whenever. (Tsowor) means "tiptop; best", okay. (Min dzin), "not
consider it the best; not consider it the best". (Su) means "who
on earth", you know, "what'da you think I am...a shmuck", you
know? (laughter) I mean, who who would fail to recognize that
that this explanation is the highest. Okay. This let's you be a
(tantric) deity in this life. This lets you get out dying and
old age and wrinkles and all that stuff, you know. It's gonna
put the cosmetics companies out of business, okay. This is
something great, you know. He says, "of course", you know. By
the way, the lines before that say, "look. I really respect all
the other systems", you know, he takes care to say, "I I greatly
appreciate certain elements of all the other systems. But come
on", you know, "this is the one, okay. This this explanation of
emptiness is the one". The one that Nagarjuna taught, okay,
which is the one that we just talked about, okay? That that the
way things exist is as a projection forced on you by your past
karma, and if you wanna get to heaven, okay, you just have to
clean up your karma. Okay? Is it enough to know that? No. Is
it enough to have that viewpoint? No. Then you actually have to
keep your vows. You have to study all the vows you have and you
have to keep them. And the only way to do it in practice is to
check them every few hours, and that is a (tantric) commitment.
I'll teach you...I'll break all the rules. (laughter) That's
one of, that's one of the most (tan)...important (tantric)
commitments. You must stop every hour or two and sit down and
open your book and check your next vow and see how you're doing.
You must. (Ten druk la me nelnjor). Must do it. Okay. And
it's not enough to sit there and recite something, okay. You
won't change. And and if you do do that on a minute minute to
minute hour to hour basis with whom? All sentient beings or your
family, the people at your work place and your friends.

(students: For all sentient beings)

For all sentient beings, but it's gonna be the people around you,
okay. I mean, unfortunately this is...all sentient beings for
you. And and these are the people that you have to keep your
vows with. It's not like some cosmic thing, you know. You have
to keep your vows with the people that it's hardest to keep your
vows with, which is your immediate friends, family and workers.
And that's and that's how you get enlightened. It's very
amazing...and it's it's thinking about little things like
stealing pens, making phone calls, you know, looking at someone's
husband or wife...it's by keeping those virtues that get you
enlightened. It's very cool, and...because everything's a
projection. Okay. Yeah.

(student: How long have you been keeping a book?)

How long have I been keeping my book? (laughs) Oh about, eight
years or something (unclear)

(student: Did Rinpoche get you to do it or how did it start?)

Did Rinpoche get me to do it.

(student: (unclear) do it, or how did he help (unclear))

That's a very...I can't talk about that much, okay. Did Rinpoche
get me to do it? Of course. (laughter) When you take a
(tantric) initiation, you swear to do (tun drup), okay. Okay.
That's a good place to leave it. We'll do a prayer.

(prayer: short mandala)

(prayer: dedication)

Okay. Thank you very very much. Okay.