Занятие 12, часть 2

[Говорящий 1] (0:00 - 0:29)
So that completes a section which I didn't finish in Phoenix from before, from up above. Why did I say that? Because he's about to quote Nagarjuna, Arya Nagarjuna, who was brought to us by Master Chandrakirti.

Like, I don't know, to put it in 1960s terms, Master Chandrakirti is Ed Sullivan, and Nagarjuna is The Beatles.

[Говорящий 2] (0:30 - 0:31)
Okay?

[Говорящий 1] (0:31 - 3:41)
All right. Somebody asked me who The Beatles were the other day, and I thought really bad. Okay.

So Arya Nagarjuna says, where was that? Here he goes. NERA LENG PA MA THOG PA'I DAG YOD MA YIN BYAS PA'I TSE NERA LENG NI DAG YIN NA GYUR GYI DAG NI MED PA YIN ZHES SUM PA LTAR This is one of those Nagarjunian incomprehensible verses, and I'll give it to you incomprehensibly.

NERA LENG PA MA THOG PA'I If there were no self that were not the parts of Nick, if there were no Nick that were the parts of Nick. Did I get that right? Yeah.

Sorry. There's no Nick who is exclusive of his parts. How's that?

There's no Nick which is exclusive of his parts. In Tibetan, the word parts here is NERA LENG PA. NERA LENG PA means that which was taken on, and it always refers to the parts that you took on when you were born, your body and mind that you assumed when you were born.

So if there were no body and mind which Nick assumed upon his birth, then let's say there's no Nick which is separate from the parts he took on when he was born. Let's say there is no such thing. NERA LENG NI DAG YIN NA Then the guy would have to be his parts.

Then the guy would have to be the parts he took on. KHYOD KYI DAG NI MED PA YIN If it's true that he is just the parts he took on, then he's not Nick. Because Nick's the whole thing.

Okay? Okay. Here we go.

KHYOD KYI DAG NI MED PA YIN KHYOD KYI DAG NI MED PA YIN ZHES SUM PA LTAR Now he's going to try to clarify. NERA LENG BYAS PHUNG PO NGA LAS GZHAN PA'I NERA LENG PA'I DAG MED PAR RGYUR BA'I KHYON You took on a certain body and mind when you were born. Is there a person who took the mind?

No. It's a question. But the word for your body and mind in Tibetan and in Sanskrit is that which was taken on at your birth.

But who took the mind? All right. See, I took a rebirth.

[Говорящий 2] (3:42 - 3:42)
Right?

[Говорящий 1] (3:42 - 4:00)
Who took? Who? You are the rebirth.

Okay? I took on parts when I was born. I took on a body and mind when I was born.

What do you mean I? You were the body and mind. You are the body and mind.

Okay, then it's we.

[Говорящий 2] (4:02 - 4:03)
You see?

[Говорящий 1] (4:03 - 5:41)
No, they're just trying to point out that there's a fundamental mistake in how we think. And by the way, I like to say, although people don't like to hear it, it's reflected in the use of language itself. Our languages are defective.

you can't express in our languages, any language in the world, you can't express truth because those languages are a reflection of a mind which was always making a mistake. Those languages themselves are mistaken. The use of you and me is a contradiction.

There's no such thing as you and me, but we have those words, and we can't actually think or express ourselves differently. It's very difficult when your words themselves are defective, your language is defective, but that's another story. Okay.

NIRNAMI PHUNG PO NGA'A LA'I GZHAN MI NIRNAMI DANG GYI RGYUN DANG DER MA ZAD Not only that, GZHUG PA LA'I. What's GZHUG PA? There's two famous GZHUG PA's.

UMA LA GZHUG PA and CHOD PA LA GZHUG PA. So which one were we probably talking about here? Yeah, the UMA LA GZHUG PA, okay.

MA BYAS MI DKA'AVATAR, MA BYAS MA DKA'AVATAR. Entering the Middle Way, written by Master Chandrakirti, okay. So he's right away, he's jumping to Master Chandrakirti.

So you can think of our whole emptiness lineage as Buddha, Arya Nagarjuna, Chandrakirti, Tsongkhapa, and us.

[Говорящий 2] (5:42 - 5:42)
Okay.

[Говорящий 1] (5:43 - 6:43)
DER MA ZAD GZHUG PA LA'I LEN PO RANG NYER LEN GCIG RIGS NGOS MIN DE LTAR NA LAS BYAS PO GCIG NYID RGYUR It would be a contradiction to say that Nick had taken on Nick, okay. It would be a contradiction to say that Nick had taken on Nick at his birth. DE LTAR NA, if that were the case, then the agent of an action and the action itself, or the agent of an action and the object of that action would be the same person.

The taker and what was taken would be the same person, and that's a contradiction. You can't take, you can't reach out and take yourself because you're richer. Okay.

It's not possible.

[Говорящий 2] (6:44 - 6:44)
Okay.

[Говорящий 1] (6:44 - 17:55)
DE LTAR NA LAS BYAS PO GCIG NYID RGYUR ZHES GSUNGS PA LTAR NYE BAR LANG BYA DANG NYE BAR LEN PA PO GCIG TU RGYUR NA KHYEN CHUNG If Nick, what he's basically saying is that if Nick were the sum of his parts, okay, if he were just one, okay, if we could see Nick without checking out his parts, you see, if he were just one, then NYE BAR LANG BYA DANG NYE BAR LEN PA PO would become the same thing. The one who took his birth and the birth that was taken would be the same, which is a contradiction. There has to be a taker before he has to take something that he took.

Okay. You can't, one has to precede the other. Okay.

LU DANG LU CHEN The body and the one who possesses the body would have to be the same thing, right? Nick's body and Nick would have to be the same thing. But then you couldn't say Nick SUH because Nick SUH means he's different from the body.

You know, John's book, Ben's pen, you know, they're different stuff. That's why Ben can have a pen because he's not the pen. Okay.

So the minute you say Nick's body, it means Nick is different from his body. But Nick's not different from his body because he took away the body, he wouldn't have a Nick. Okay.

YEN LA DANG YEN LA CHEN The one, the limbs of the body in Tibet, they consider five, which are arms, legs, and head. Okay. And the person who possesses those limbs, okay, can you say my head, my arm, my feet?

You say it, right? Then, but are you separate from those? You're not separate from them.

So basically when you say my head, you're saying head's head. Or you're saying my, my. And they're both crazy.

And it's not just a game, okay? We're not just playing a game. It's not just, what do you call, soccer streets?

It's not just, it's not just like word games. It's that your perceptions are screwy and it's reflected in the words you use in all of your languages on your planet. Okay.

You say Nick's body, but Nick can't exist without the body. Nick has to be, in a sense, the body. And so he can't be, you can't say body's body.

And you can't say Nick's Nick. Because then they'd be separate. And Nick isn't separate from Nick.

Nick is just one. Nick's not plural. We already said that.

Okay. If your language is screwy, that means your thinking is screwy. Okay.

And that's why Aspen doesn't work on your planet. Okay. Cik tu gyurwe kyun chung.

DER MA ZAD DAG PUN PO DANG GCIG YIN NA BYOD PA LAS So suppose I, suppose Nick is his body and mind. All right. Then, now we got to BYOD PA LAS.

The same text, Master Chandrakirti's text says, PHAL TE PUN PO DAG NI DE PHYIR DE MANG BA'I DAG DE DAG KYANG MANG PO'I RGYUR That's not a big deal. Are Nick's parts Nick? Is Nick's leg Nick?

Can you have a Nick without legs, arms, and head? I mean, technically, I guess you could. There was that movie.

But now you're going to spend all night trying to figure out which movie. Can't have a Nick without the basic parts of a Nick. But if Nick is his basic parts, then there's lots of Nicks, because there's lots of parts.

If Nick is his body and mind, then he's already two. There's already two Nicks going on. If he's not his body and mind, then where else is he?

Okay? There's just a basic fundamental problem with everything. MANG BA'I DAG RAG KYANG MANG PO'I RGYUR ZHES SUM PA LTAR PUN PO NA YOD PA BZHIN DU There are five parts to the classical parts to a person, and then there would have to be five Nicks.

Because if he's his parts, if Nick is his parts. If he's not his parts, then what is he? Is he somebody else's parts?

Okay. YANG NA DAG GCIG LAS MED PA LTAR PUN PO YANG NGAR MI THEG CING GCIG TU THAL GYUR If you go the opposite way, okay, if you say, look, Nick's not plural. Nick's not five Nicks, or two Nicks.

There's only one Nick. Well, then he should only have one part, because that's who Nick is. Okay?

You're screwed up either way. If you say Nick is all his parts, then there's five Nicks running around. If you say, no, no, no, Nick is only one, well, then he only has one part.

But he doesn't only have one part, because he's got at least body and mind, that's two. Got it? If it's confusing, you got it.

Okay. YANG NA DAG GCIG LAS MED PA LTAR PUN PO YANG NGAR MI THEG CING GCIG TU THAL GYUR DAG PUN PO NGAR YIN SHIN DU MA YIN NGEL DU NING TZAM GYOR WA DUN MED PA'I KHYEN So he's listing problems with what it would be to say, there's a Nick who owns his body and mind. If you say there's a Nick who owns his body and mind, if you say there's a Nick who took on a body and mind when he was born, which is to say there's a separate Nick from his body and mind, because he had to be there already to take them on, okay?

Then there's all these problems pop up. He's just listing problems, randomly, okay? Here's another problem.

Then it would have been meaningless to come into your mother's womb, because he was already Nick. If Nick took on a body and mind when he was born, then there's no reason for the body and mind to develop in the mother's womb, because Nick took them on. So there must have been enough to Nick already without the body and mind that was produced in the womb, okay?

All right. Yeah, are we out of time? At least I have a few more, okay.

By the way, I was late because I was doing some service for my teacher, and that's the way it should be, okay? That's most important. Did you remember Connecticut?

Who was there? They bought a tent. They put all the chairs out, and a couple hundred people were coming, and then my mama gave me a job that weekend.

She said, you have to do it this weekend, and I just canceled it. And there were like a couple hundred people sitting there in the tent waiting. So you're lucky.

I never went. Then there was the backlash. That was pretty funny.

The lady who paid for the tent took me into a room, and that was a long time. But she was quite big, and she took me into the room and slammed the door, and then all my students were waiting. And then she sat down on the couch, but she fell off because she was so mad she missed the couch.

And then you know who. And then there was a huge crash, and they thought that she had thrown me through the window, and they all rushed in, you know, and she sprawled on the ground. Okay, anyway.

These are passing into myths. It's true. That was pretty funny.

So, if Nick is his body, okay, if he is his body, okay, if Nick is his body, then you know when a person dies, you burn the body, right? And the body becomes plasma. It becomes powder.

And then in that case, I would also have to become powder. Nick would also have to become powder. Nick would become powder.

The Nick who took birth and took on the body would also be pulverized, okay? But you don't say that. You don't say we burn the body and Nick got pulverized, okay?

All right. So, I'm going to say not only that. Who takes rebirth?

I mean, let's take it from the other end. Let's take it from the death, you know, going on. Who crosses over?

Those of you who want to become translators, okay? A very weird phrase means, who crosses over? So, who is it that crosses over?

Did you ever think about it? I mean, how much crosses over? Because that must be the real you, in a way, right?

Who crosses over? If Nick is his body and mind, there's no one to cross over because the body and mind were left behind. Who crosses over?

Okay. If Nick were his body, okay? We're still trying to figure this out.

Is he his body or is he the possessor of his body? Because neither one works. If he's his body, all these problems pop up.

If he's not his body, then who the hell is he? I mean, where is he? Okay?

All right? Because he can't be there without his body. Here we go.

So, if you were your body, then when you died, who takes the next birth? Who crosses over? The body is destroyed.

The body is gone. If Nick is his body, then where's Nick after he dies? Who crosses on to the next birth?

Because body is left behind. And then, you know, these are not compelling arguments to people who grew up in a culture that doesn't believe in rebirth, anyway.

[Говорящий 2] (17:56 - 17:56)
Okay?

[Говорящий 1] (17:57 - 33:59)
But that's another story. So, in that case, since the body can't cross over, then neither could Nick. Okay?

All right? And, if Nick is his body, then is it the case that there are no beings who don't have bodies? And we posit people who live in the formless realm.

We say there are people who are almost body-less. They're just minds. They're just, what do you call them?

Disconnected minds. There are places where people live just as mentally. They have very subtle prana bodies, but basically they are not physical.

They are just consciousness. They are just beings of consciousness. They don't have a physical body, and they don't live in a physical place.

So if Nick were his body, then he couldn't take birth there, because there wouldn't be anything left. Okay. But you don't believe all that.

Anyway. dak phempo mayin pey kyun che chung There would also be the problem of saying that Nick were made of atoms. Phempo means molecular substance.

Stuff that is made of molecules of atoms. Is Nick made of atoms? Is Nick made of atoms?

You can go like this, or you can go like this. You're doing pretty good for having colds and all that. Not so many colds as earlier.

Could Nick be molecular matter? No, because he has to possess that matter. It's Nick's body.

Nick is separate from the body. Or you couldn't say Nick's body. Okay?

Are you telling me he's not separate from the body? Is he separate from his body or not? If he's not, you can't say Nick's body.

If he is, then you're running around saying body's body. Or Nick's Nick. Okay?

Either way, it's a problem. Okay. na sem dan chik yena So he just covered the problems of saying that Nick is his body.

Now let's see what happens if you say Nick is his mind. sem dan chik yena sem la kyak tok min jung we na la kyak tok jung mi sipa What's kyak? And how does it differ from kyak?

I'll tell you another funny story. I like this story. I was in Tucson.

His holiness the Dalai Lama was in Tucson. And he has this friend of mine. He has an Oxford translator friend of mine.

An old debate partner. And so he was translating for him. And his holiness was talking about patience.

And so somebody asked a question. Someone keeps bugging me over and over again. What should I do?

And his holiness was like, Go to them once and ask them not to do that. And then if they keep doing it, then go to them again and ask them politely not to do it. And then if they keep doing it, be a little more forceful and try to make it clear to them that you don't want to do it.

And then if they keep doing it, tell them to kyak pa so which means eat shit. And then the translator was like And he's in front of like 5,000 people. And he goes through the whole thing.

And I'm waiting for the end. And his holiness is waiting for the end. And he gets to the end and he says, Express your extreme displeasure.

So anyway, this is not that kyak pa. This is kyak pa which means ice or to feel cold. People who don't learn Tibetan carefully get into problems.

You ask for a glass of water with ice but you say the wrong word. Then this would be a good place with all those stopped up toilets. Anyway, if Nick's mind were Nick, then Nick could never say, I'm cold or I'm hungry.

Because only the body can feel cold or hungry. Not the mind. And if you got cold or hot or if you got hungry or thirsty, etc., it would become wrong to say, I feel cold or I feel hungry. Because those are only detectable through the bodily senses. If Nick was limited to being his mind, then there's those problems. He couldn't say, I feel cold.

Because the mind cannot detect cold without the body. So look, we just gone through demonstrating that Nick is not Nick's body alone. And then we went through proving that Nick is not Nick's mind alone.

So what would be the next thing to disprove? Yeah, Nick is not the combination of his body and mind. Which is the more difficult one.

Here we go. If you are your body and mind together, then what sense would it make to ever say, my body or my mind? Because then you're positing a person who's separate from you.

If you are the combination of your body and mind, which you are, almost, it would be illogical to say my body and my mind because then you would say the body of the body and mind and the mind of the body and mind. It wouldn't make sense. You almost are your body and mind together.

But one more thing has to happen, which is there has to be a seed in your mind which forces you to see it that way. We'll do just a few minutes. The block got broken.

Moreover, if I were my parts, if I were my parts, then if I were one thing, if I were the Nick who had the parts, because that's what we think, right? We say Nick's body and Nick's mind. So we think there's a Nick who's not the body and not the mind.

He's the possessor of the body and the mind. If I were that, then I would always have to be one in all times and all places and in all ways. And what does that mean?

He quotes Arya Nagarjuna again. GAL TE PHUNG PO DAG YIN PHYI RGYUN BYAS PA'I TSUL GYIS SKYE RGYI BYAS PA BZHIN DU DAG KYANG RGYUN BYAS PA'I TSUL GYIS SKYE RGYI BYAS PA THAL BA'I KHYUN GAL TE PHUNG PO DAG YIN This is Nagarjuna. If Nick's parts were Nick, SKYE RGYUN BYAS PA'I TSUL GYIS then it would also have to come in and out of existence.

Who's it? Nick. If Nick is the part of Nick, if Nick is his body and mind, then Nick also would have to come in and out of existence.

There's a couple ways to read this. I'll tell you one and you can go to bed. KHYEN GYIG KHYEN GYIG BYAS PA'I PHYIR MI THAG PA'I TSE NI KHYEN GYIG KHYEN GYIG BYAS PA'I PHYIR MI THAG PA'I TSE NI The definition of a changing thing is that it goes through continual cycles of instantaneous destruction and recreation.

All of all things that are changing, all the things basically around you are going in and out of existence in an instantaneous stream. They last for a second. Some texts say they don't even last.

They're there for a second. They come into being in a millisecond. They last for a millisecond.

They go out of being in a millisecond because they are results of karmic seeds. The seeds pop open. The seeds die.

The thing stops. And then there's another seed that pops open. So you are a series of stills.

You over 50 years, 60 years are a series of stills. You are frames in a movie. And each frame comes and each frame goes.

All things are like that. All things are like that. Because they're coming from seeds.

And the seeds only last for a moment. For a millisecond. And then those frames fly by at 65 per second.

And then we were talking about to get video to work on YouTube without looking jerky it has to be about that. So your life is your life is flowing at exactly the right speed for you to think there is a time going on. It's just a bunch of stills.

Seeds going off and you're having discrete impressions at the rate of 65 a second. And they give you the they give you the what's the word? The impression that there's a better one.

The illusion. They give you the illusion of your life going on. And passing through time.

Because there are seeds coming you're getting actually it's only still photographs being made in front of you at the speed of 65 a second. Is it? Jason?

65? It's around that. Not to look jerky.

100? IMAX. Okay IMAX.

Anyway that's good enough. He does that for a living. So it happens to be that the mind throws up discrete pictures at the rate of 65 a second.

And that gives you the illusion of time passing. And of the world moving. But it's not the world moving.

It's just discrete pictures being thrown up in front of your mind at 65 a second. That's what your body consists of and that's what your mind consists of. Nick's body and Nick's mind are just photos of his body is like this.

Not really. But at 65 it's even like and then it gives you the illusion of movement. But in truth those each still is coming in and out of existence.

Each still. Each frame is coming in and out of existence. Therefore ergo if Nick were his body, Nick would be coming in and out of existence constantly.

That's all. If Nick were only his body if there were no Nick beyond the body and mind who owned the body and mind there's all those problems. But one of the problems is that if Nick was his body and mind Nick would be here and gone 65 times every second.

And we know it's only 65 times every minute when the room is warm and he's tired. Like he's in and out. I'm just having fun.

It's not the case that he disappears every 65th of a second. If he were only his body then he would. Nick would be in and out every 65th of a second.

Alright. Maybe we should stop there. This is hard.

That's why I read you that little paragraph up above that said if you really want to get to the bottom of stuff you've got to crack some kapha and it's not going to happen on the first time you hear it. You can boil it down to in practice. I think it's important to do it in practice.

In practice you have to boil it down to recognize the Nick that's not there. And I think it's easier to talk about the Nick who's not at fault that he was blamed for stealing the books in the centennial room. Right?

The Nick who's not at fault who was blamed who was accused of stealing books. The Nick who didn't who wasn't at fault when he was accused of stealing books. That Nick what?

Never existed. Doesn't exist, couldn't exist. There's no such thing.

Just stay there. That's enough. That's a practical emptiness.

Why? Because the next time you get accused of something you didn't do or criticized by anyone who doesn't realize you're perfect then then you won't get so upset. Okay?

Because the person they're accusing doesn't exist. The person who was wrongly accused doesn't exist. So you don't have to get upset about it because he's not there.

You don't have to defend somebody who's not there. Okay? Then you save a lot of time and wear and tear on your body and mind.

[Говорящий 2] (33:59 - 34:00)
Okay?

[Говорящий 1] (34:00 - 34:17)
This whole thing of trying to defend a Nick who's not there consumes most of your life. So if you could get over that you might find other interests. Okay.

Like golden rules.

[Говорящий 2] (34:22 - 35:33)
Yay. ... ...

... ... ...

... ... Okay.

Hang in there. You're doing good.