Классика Алмазного огранщика: Нижний Срединный путь — Анализ зависимости, занятие 14

[Speaker 2]
Satsviputti Jyotirmen Toksham Prirabdhi Chidinde Gemsadhi Sanghe Singnum Itte Uwargi Drukunam Gacchim Lajupasyo Kidamudu Radhamandala Pramiryatayami Sanghe Chidam Sokhi Choknamla Jamchu Bhardhu Dhammi Khyapsuchi Dakhi Chunyam Khipe Sunamki Dholapenshir Sanghe Juparsho Sanghe Chidam Sokhi Choknamla Jamchu Bhardhu Dhammi Khyapsuchi Dakhi Chunyam Khipe Sunamki Dholapenshir Sanghe Juparsho

[Speaker 1]
Sanghe Chidam Sokhi Choknamla

[Speaker 2]
Jamchu Bhardhu Dhammi Khyapsuchi Dakhi Chunyam Khipe Sunamki Dholapenshir Sanghe Juparsho

[Speaker 1]
Well, what do you want? You want a 40, 640? 640 makes more sense.

But anyway, it shouldn't be after the class starts, because then people don't focus. Okay. Okay.

All right. Read, please, since you read so well. Nibbani Rangyot...

Cheer up for your wife. Nibbani Rangyot La Denpe Kansaki Gyuki Sokla Mikna Ramkya Thupe Ngat Nang Wey Ngadei Wangyur Chajin Chajin Thetokpalaua Tabua Who taught you to read? Word?

No, he taught himself. YouTube I watched your videos.

[Speaker 2]
Wow.

[Speaker 1]
I was going to say you have a good teacher. Now I'm sure. I was saying whoever taught you should teach the other people.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, right. The ones I've been studying for 10 years.

[Speaker 1]
No, I just mean the new people.

[Speaker 2]
He's given up on the rest of them.

[Speaker 1]
No, I'm going to go back to paragraphs. It says the tendency to believe that the person is themselves, right? Holding to the self nature of a person can be divided into that which focuses on me, that which focuses on mine, and that which focuses on other people, and other kinds.

Okay? Got it? He finished the first one which is focused on people.

Me. And now he got to focus on mine. And this is extremely important for everybody because the first link of the Wheel of Life is supposed to be focused on me or mine.

And then the mind, he defines the mind. And it's not what you might expect. So when you teach it, it might be good.

It's not talking about my computer. It's talking about something else. So, I think it's important to according to him, this is what the my is.

And it's not what you might think. So I think it's good to know that. And maybe that's important.

Maybe focused on your computer is not important. Okay? So here's the second one which is focused on my.

RANG RGYUD LA BSTAN PA'I GANG ZAG RANG RGYUD LA BSTAN PA'I RANG RGYUD LA BSTAN PA'I is an idiom. RANG RGYUD LA BSTAN means who has it in their mind. Okay?

So the one who has it in their mind. RANG RGYUD LA BSTAN PA'I It's confusing. RANG RGYUD LA BSTAN PA'I GANG ZAG RANG RGYUD LA BSTAN PA'I GANG ZAG In their mind.

In the mind of the person who has it in their mind. Okay?

[Speaker 2]
Got it?

[Speaker 1]
In the person. Their eye power. And their nose power.

Etc. LA MIG NE By the way, I wonder if that wasn't RNA. Because it's unusual to go from eye to nose.

It's more common to go from eye to ear. So I would check the carbon. Okay?

You can make a note here. So LA MIG NE Focusing on on the eye or the nose or the ear. Right?

MIG NE RANG RGYUD THUB PA'I Self-standing. Okay? NGAR As a self-standing NI NANG BA'I NGAR DE NANG BA'I The me which appears as me.

Okay? NGAR DE DBANG RGYUR CHAR DZIN PA'I To believe that I am that, sorry, to believe that that is what I am in control of. DBANG RGYUR CHAR means what I am in control of.

Okay? An object of my control. So this RGYUR this DBANG RGYUR means to be in control of.

DZIN PA'I THUB PA'I THUB PA'I here means the idea and the implication is wrong, mistaken. He has an idea that I don't like him. So we don't say he realized that I don't like him.

That would be RTOGS. Without the S so these are two separate verbs. Without the S it means he it's like in American English you say, you go like this he has some idea, you know but it means it's not true.

He has some idea, you know. and then he says THA BU'O which means this is just one example. You know, like similar to like here's an example.

So THA BU'O means that's just one example. But think about it. This is a little tricky.

The idea that which holds to to this state of mind it looks at the eyes and the ears, okay? And then those appear to be a self-standing me. He didn't say mind.

And I'm not sure if it's a carving error or a writing error I'm not sure. It would have been more comfortable here if it said NGAYIWAR if it said as a mind you see what I mean? It would have been a lot more comfortable.

And if there's a way to check it, I don't know. We'll have to see if it comes in the third part. Don't say NGAYIWAR.

Where we argue back. He argues back. Maybe he attacks this definition and maybe it will be spelled differently.

Because as it is now it says it says the eye and the ear appear as if they were a self-standing me. But you would prefer if it said a self-standing mind. Okay?

But maybe he meant it this way. Maybe it's supposed to be this way. I don't know.

I don't know if there's a carving available. We used to have trouble in the monastery I remember trying to find a carving. We had handwritten copies.

People had handwritten copies. No, not this one. Actually, I did print this one.

Oh, I did print this one. But I don't know if we still have this hand. They were the first people to print this.

This is the first book we ever printed. Off the computer. It was five books of SOKU which means Extra Classes?

SOKU Extra Classes? Yeah, it means... What's the word in English?

Extracted Topics. SOKU of the Prajnaparamita. And it was the first book we ever printed on the computer.

And it's two volumes. Two thin brown volumes. I don't know.

And it set the standard and all books in Tibet are printed that way now. It was a landmark. It was a milestone in Tibetan printing.

All books are printed that way now. By everybody. They follow the same format.

Western style? Well, they use the same headers and the whole design. Everyone has copied it.

Everybody. Tens of thousands of books have been printed from that one. Is it part of the ACIP project?

It was the first book printed by the ACIP project. So anyway, it was five subjects that were missing. One of them is Kunchi.

But it's not very useful. Is it a formless one? Yeah, it just deals with the question about the formless one.

It deals with weird questions about Kunchi. And it's not very helpful to figure out some complex... OK, anyway, let's get back to the subject.

Let's look at the elements of this because it's easy to lose them. It's easy to lose the definition because there are so many parts. First of all, it has to be focused towards the eye and ear of the person who has it in their mind.

If I focus on your eye and ear, that doesn't qualify as the first link of samsara. It has to be of the person who has it in their mind. OK.

This wrong view must focus on the eye and the ear that are possessed by the body in which that idea is in the same mind. That's the first part here. Because if you focus on somebody else's eye and ear, it cannot cause samsara.

It is not a cause of samsara. It has to be yours. OK, it focuses on that, mik, and it sees it in it, and the eye and the ear appear to it in a certain way.

OK? They appear to it in a certain way and then it takes it in a certain way. So these are different verbs, right?

Mik, to focus on it, then they appear in a certain way and then it takes it in a certain way. So three parts. And that's typical in the study of perception.

I look at Qin Tian, something appears to me, and then I take it. And that's called mik yu, dzin dang gi yu, sorry, shen yu, dzin dang gi yu and then shen yu. There's three different objects in perception.

So first one, it focuses on what? Yeah, this eye and ear, etc. That's interesting.

It doesn't say computer, house, car. You see, apparently it has to be connected to you, in his definition, to be a cause of samsara. OK?

It focuses on those and then it, those appear to be self-standing. OK? They appear to be self-standing and they appear as a self-standing me.

OK? Maybe it means all together. They appear as a self-standing me.

And then I, then I take those, I take, I take that me to be what I'm in charge of. OK? A dzin, I hold, nga de, oh, I'm sorry, I hold that I am, I'm sorry, I hold that they are what I am in charge of.

They are the thing I am in charge of. So this really should have been nga yi wa, it gets more uncomfortable. OK?

So I take the eye and the ear to be what I own. This is what I run. OK?

I run the eye, I run the ear, I run the arm. And it causes samsara. OK?

That idea causes samsara.

[Speaker 2]
Is that related to the meditation of the death when you identify yourself with the joy, when you say, I am the joy? When you try to perceive emptiness directly when you are dying?

[Speaker 1]
Oh, yeah. Yeah, you can say that. But you can shift what you identify with.

What you identify with here is, you know, those belong to me and I have control over them. And it's a false thing, right? You can't control your arm.

You think you can. Raise your arm, Geshe Michael. Put your arm down, Geshe Michael.

I like to give that example when I teach it. OK, you belong to me, now go up. You belong to me, now go down.

But then sooner or later there comes a day when you... when you can't. And then suddenly you're like, wow, I don't control it.

What really happens? The seeds open that I wanted to go up. And then after that, the seeds open that it goes up.

But they're not related. It's like writing with a pen. OK?

The writing's not coming from the pen. The seeds are laying down the pen, seeds are laying down the paper, and then seeds lay down the writing in succession, but they're not related. The pen's not causing the writing.

The paper's not causing the writing. The pen, the paper, and the writing are coming from me in three stages. They're not connected this way.

They're this way. They're like this. But these are not connected.

It's very interesting. There is no cause and effect, as Buddha described it. OK.

Because then you get frustrated, and you get angry, and then you have kleshas. Then you can have, oh, this didn't cause that. I told my wife to come, but she's late.

Instead of the telling and then coming and not coming, three things are coming from your mind. They're not related. So you don't get frustrated about the normal causation because it doesn't exist.

It never existed. Trying to deal with something that never worked is what's so frustrating and makes people angry. It never will work.

The movie will never end exactly the way it did. OK. Sumba.

Someone tell me while I have my coffee because I think I'm going to have time. OK. Come on.

I did it first thing, but it was three minutes ago. We talked about the three sections. Oh.

We're on the third part. No, we're on the third part of Rangshapa. Let's go back.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
I really have no idea. We're here. Yeah.

Other kinds of damdzin. Other kinds of grasping to the person.

[Speaker 2]
We covered two already.

[Speaker 1]
One is saying that, me. One is saying that, my. Now other.

What's the other? We don't know yet.

[Speaker 2]
OK.

[Speaker 1]
Here it is. By the way, just to tell you, the third one does not cause samsara. That's the difference.

One and two do. One and two do. They are yama, dambur, gyurpe, which function as the first link, but the third one is not.

And that's why we make, that's why we're studying it. Please read. Sompany, laydzin, gyurki, chudin, rangkyatukpe, sayyid, dunzinpe, tokpa, tabun.

Wow. Pretty impressive. John and Joe.

OK. So, when you want to say so-and-so saw so-and-so in Tibetan, you know, in English you say, John met Mary. You use these standard names.

Here's the two standard names in Sanskrit. Laydzin and chudzin. They are damadatta and damadatta.

This is John and Joe. Anytime you just want two different people, and you just give them any name, Mary met Jane. It's kind of a reflection of who's...

Laydzin, chudzin. Who's... Who has more power in your culture by what name you choose.

It's never a Jewish name in the old first great books. It's always a Christian name. And the people didn't know.

They didn't understand that they were doing it. They never said, Fatah met Ali. Never.

So, it's a symbol of your culture which name you choose. When you're just trying to choose a random name, you can tell something about the culture. Anyway, Laydzin is damadatta, which happens to be the name of Lord Buddha's cousin.

The one he didn't get along with. But here it's not that. It's just Joe.

And this is John and Joe, which are two very Christian names. Number three. Laydzin Giyuki, the idea, in the mind of John, which believes that Joe is self-standing, is substantial in the sense of self-standing.

John looks at Joe and says, he's self-standing. So, this is the third kind of holding to the self-existence of a person, that you can have. So, it's the three flavors of holding that people are people.

Number one, about me. Number two, about mine. Number three, about him.

Somebody else. John thinks that Joe is coming from... It's outside.

It's not a causal thing. Yeah, but it doesn't cause John to stay inside. So, jikta is not a naive word.

It must hold me or mine. It cannot hold Joe. Can I say that...

To cause samsara, to spin the wheel, it has to be focused on me.

[Speaker 2]
That's an angry husband. Angry husband.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, that's a good question. Technically, maybe she thinks he's hers. He is hers?

I'm not sure.

[Speaker 2]
He's going at me.

[Speaker 1]
I'll tell you, technically, they would say no. Not what spins the wheel. I mean, I believe that's why this definition is so important.

He didn't say your friends, your wife, your kids, your house, your computer. He said your ear, your mouth. So, maybe it has to be that person.

I don't know. It seems like he's going that way. Whether he would, in the debate ground, whether he would say yelling at your husband is not a cause of samsara?

Okay, that means you can just do it. Well, of course.

[Speaker 2]
It's a special kind of samsara.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Okay, got it.

[Speaker 2]
Dabu yin means that. Just one example.

[Speaker 1]
Like that.

[Speaker 2]
But it's substantial in the sense of self-standing, right?

[Speaker 1]
Yes, substantial in the sense of self-standing. Now, so far, as I pointed out the other day, he's only been defining marikpa. He didn't say...

Yeah, and he didn't say yin la, dang po, gyur pe, marikpa. He didn't say misunderstanding, functioning as the first link of the wheel. Because after all, we're supposed to be studying dependence, right?

So now, finally we get the definition of misunderstanding, which is functioning to spin the wheel. But first he had to cover general misunderstanding, misunderstanding about you, misunderstanding about my, misunderstanding about the person next to you. And now he's going to say, so this brings us...

Now we have enough information to define misunderstanding as the first link. Here we go. And so this is really the guts of your whole text.

And somebody like Vasubandhu, I read his whole commentary. It took me a long time to the wheel. It's 130 folios, 250 pages.

And I roughly translated it because I was writing a book about the Wheel of Life, but then I got busy. But he spends about half the book on this question. See?

It's not so important what is contact, what are the sense powers. This is the guts of the Wheel of Life. It's the first link.

So most commentaries spend about half the time on the first link. Okay? Because that's where you're going to break it also.

Okay, please read. RANG NYID KYI KUN NAS RANG JAR YUL PAS YAN LAK NYID PHAN DU CHAD KYI LAS SAR DU KUN NAS LONG CHAD KYI JIG TA YAN LAK DANG PO MA RIG PAS Wow, I should send this video to everybody. This is a verb from Kunlong.

KUN LONG KUN LONG DU Past tense. Which means motivated. We talked about RGYUD KYI KUN LONG and DE RGYUD KYI KUN LONG The motivation you have just before you do something.

And then the motivation you have during it. And that's going to come up here. Right there.

Okay? It's going to be important here. Here it's called RGYUD KYI KUN LONG This is the abbreviation.

So we're basically defining the first link by its function in motivating the second link. Okay? So link number one, misunderstanding, is largely defined by what it triggers.

The word trigger and link are very much Wheel of Life vocabulary. Unique to the Wheel of Life vocabulary. It triggers.

KUN LONG CHE PA KUN DU LANG BAR CHE PA It triggers. It motivates. I like the word trigger.

It's like this. You know. That's the idea of the Wheel of Life.

It can happen in milliseconds. A trigger is what? KUN NAS LANG BYA I would say KUN NAS LANG BYA You might think about it.

Or CHE PA. We'll talk about it. But let's use motivate for right now.

So LANG CHAR GYUR PA means the thing which is motivated by it. LANG NYID The thing which is motivated by it. So JA means the object of a verb.

The thing which is motivated by it. MIG PA BYA BA MIG PA BYA BA means the thing you're focused on. So KUN NAS LANG BYA BYA BA means future tense.

The thing which you are to be, which is to be motivated. And then RANG NYID means by it, meaning by the first week. The thing which it motivates.

So RANG NYID KYI KUN NAS LANG CHAR GYUR PA And this may be, should have been, what? BA should be Now sometimes you're allowed in writing to say OF. But it's kind of inelegant.

It's not very technically precise. It's not precise but it's allowable. And if people are in a rush they say KYI.

Instead of KYI When I make it long it means there's an S on it. You can say KISS but that's your wife. RANG NYID KYI So it should have been motivated by it.

But you can say it's motivated thing. Possessive. But it's not very precise.

RANG NYID KYI And we can check the carving if we ever get it. That'd be nice to check the carving. Okay.

KUN NAS LANG CHAR What does it motivate? What is motivated by it? It is the first it is the misunderstanding.

What does it motivate? YAN LAG NYID PA The second link. The second link.

What's the name of the second link? DU CHE KYI LAS Sanskara Karma. Karma in the form of sanskara.

And I really encourage you to think you know and it took me many years to clarify it in my own mind you know we grew up with all these translations like they call this compositional factors. Okay. No, forget it.

Don't write it down. You know when I was 20 we were like compositional factors. In fact the first book I read about Buddhism at Princeton and it was incomprehensible.

And this was called Compositional Factors. And Rinpoche said, when Rinpoche got there he said fresh karma. Fresh karma.

And we were like well what happened to the compositional factors? And he said well really the point is to distinguish it from the tenth link. The ripening karma.

Which is karma which is about to open. So and it for me it really really really helps me if I think of it now that I'm a gardener that you know in April I put the watermelon seed in the ground. That's Duche Kille.

That's link number two. Then like a few weeks go by nothing happens. Something's happening inside the seed.

I like to, sometimes I like to close my eyes and imagine there's a big factory there and all the guys are like oh come on we got to get this going you know. And they start putting the connections together and you know trying to start the engine and nothing's happening on the outside you know. You're just looking at it and it still looks like the same that you planted.

And then suddenly it cracks. Just before it splits open that's link number two. So the difference in the watermelon seed from when you drop it in the ground and then three weeks later it goes.

Just before it goes that's the difference between two and ten. And don't call it I suggest you don't call it compositional factors and becoming. See that was the traditional translation of chupasipa.

Becoming. It's closer but it's still weird. It's still not something that's going to make you understand what I just said.

So Rinpoche was he just looked at me and he said well it's a fresh seed and then it's a ripe seed. Or something like that. And that's more we're just thinking about the open.

So think of it that way. And I suggest you use that for your translation. You can have a footnote that says this is a compositional factor.

You know. But leave it in the footnote. Charagyopi yelanyupa duchyakile sardu kunlong chepa.

Sardu. Now we have this sardu, this troublesome sardu in the definition of pramana which we've been talking about all week downstairs. This troublesome sardu.

In the study of pramana it means the perception must be fresh and it's meant to disqualify recollection. Recollection is not considered valid. It's too shaky.

You know. Try to remember what your boss said to you yesterday. It's dangerous.

Or your ex-wife. You know. But a fresh perception.

So here it says, it's interesting he said it has to be fresh. And please don't translate it as newly because we don't say newly in English. Do we?

Newly elected president. That's the only case. But if you By the way, nowadays I used to do New York Times searches.

That was the standard. But now you can do Google searches. Search newly.

See how many hits you get. And then search fresh and see how many hits you get. I wonder.

No, just forget it. Just by itself. I'm just curious.

I hope I'm right. Newly 433 million Newly 433 million Versus 1.75 billion Ok, so it's 4 or 5 times more common. 600% more common.

That's for sure. Yeah. No, you can do that if you're not sure.

You know. Or you can do the waiter, you know. Could I have a, newly have a pizza.

Could I have a pizza newly? Or could I have a fresh pizza?

[Speaker 2]
In the ACI menu.

[Speaker 1]
Newly? Yeah, well that's old. Ok, anyway.

I would say fresh. That was in the good, I mean I was just like young.

[Speaker 2]
We all got hit with it.

[Speaker 1]
When Joni Mitchell went to play at Carnegie Hall and said, play you know what's it called? River. And she said if Picasso came here, would you ask him to repaint the first painting?

She hates it. She said, listen to my new music. Ok, anyway.

Lai sar du kun ney long je. Which motivates. Ok.

Which motivates second link. Ok. So now you got this weird thing.

It's the destruction view which motivates the thing which is motivated by it. Ok. The destruction view which acts to motivate the second link which is motivated by it.

And that's required in a Buddhist definition. Because it might motivate a different one? Well, you'll see in the Thupa Boma you'll see why he says it that way.

So in the definition it's the wrong way of looking at things which motivates freshly a fresh version of the second link which is motivated by it. And that's important and you'll see why. You have to see that.

It sounds weird but it's... This is the thing which causes the thing which is caused by it.

[Speaker 2]
It sounds singular.

[Speaker 1]
It sounds singular but it's not. There's some precision to it. Wow.

And if you don't say it, you're in trouble in the background. You will get beat. Ok?

So here you have the contrast between lang jar, past tense, which is motivated, and here you have long jay which motivates. Here's the present tense used with acts and the past tense used with which was done by. Acting upon.

So it motivates the second link which is motivated by it. Basically. Now here's the guts of it.

Here's the most important thing here. jikta. jikta.

There is no nice way to translate it. I'm sorry. There's no smooth translation.

It has been translated as the view of the perishable assembly. The perishable assembly. Two syllables went to ten.

Two syllables went to ten. That's generally not acceptable for this school of translation. We even want you to get shorter than the original.

But to go 500 times more than that? 500% more than the original? It sucks.

Anyway. I like to call it destruction view. Yeah.

Why is it called destruction? What's the classic reason why it's called destruction view? Two reasons.

First, it will actually cause the wheel to turn, and then the second one, it can be destructed. Yeah. Well, classically, the first part is that it focuses towards the five parts of the person which are themselves impermanent.

They will be destroyed. So what it focuses on, the five parts of the person will be destroyed. Or, if we keep working hard, we will destroy this way of thinking.

So you can't say destructible view because then it only fits the second half. You know what I mean? So you've got to leave it a little clunky.

In my opinion.

[Speaker 2]
But you can play with it.

[Speaker 1]
That's your problem, not my problem. Okay. It's the definition of misunderstanding as it functions as the first link.

A misunderstanding as the first link. And as we said, it's not the same as misunderstanding. Misunderstanding as the first link is different from misunderstanding.

If I misunderstand Jingmei, that's misunderstanding, but it's not first link. Okay? Got it?

Which implies that my misunderstanding of Jingmei would not trigger the second link. That's right. Yeah, that's correct.

For me. How's that? Something like that.

It has to be personal. Something about it has to be personal. To cause some sorrow, it has to be somehow personal.

In that case, so the pen itself is not me. Yeah, the pen is a bad example.

[Speaker 2]
After all, he's here.

[Speaker 1]
I should have taken Geshe Michael's finger. Oh, sorry. Okay.

Okay. Now, Adam's going to tell us why de la de jirikigone. This de jirikigone.

Okay. Anybody? We're going to divide it into different types, but only de jirikigone.

Nominally. Yeah, only nominally, meaning this division is false. It's not a real division.

Usually it means one of the divisions is wrong. It's not real. It sounds good, but it's not.

De jirikigone is a way of alerting the reader that it looks like a nice division, but it's false. Okay. There's something wrong with it.

It means, but he's going to do it, right? So, it's a nice thing to do. It's a right thing to do.

But warn your listener. You know, just nominally, you can divide it this way. Okay.

In reality, you're not going to get one of them. Or something like that. Okay.

So, jirikugone and jiyukigone. Misunderstanding, which is the motivation during the causal motivation, just before you do something. And then misunderstanding, which is sustained during the action.

Okay?

[Speaker 2]
You okay with that?

[Speaker 1]
And it's not uncommon to say, de jirikigone, apalena abhidharma aniya.

[Speaker 2]
Because it's false.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, it's like, you know, people do that. People divide it this way. It's like, you got to go like this.

This is de jirikigone.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
People divide it this way, you know. Then he says, dhamma dhanyenla dhammo nyi dönchig. This is a very pregnant statement.

There's a lot of ideas can come out of this one sentence. I never saw it before. And it's very powerful.

And you could argue it for a year. Say it again. The first and the first link mean the same thing.

No, it's more difficult than that. The first of these two and the first link are one. No, it's more difficult than that.

Both of them are dhamma dhanyenla dhammo nyi dönchig. Dhamma dhanyenla dhammo nyi dönchig. Well, tell me what these five syllables mean.

Dhamma dhanyenla dhammo nyi. Dhamma dhanyenla dhammo nyi. The second first.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, the first two links.

[Speaker 1]
The first two links. The first two links. This part, dhamma dhanyenla dhammo nyi means the first two links.

So the second part of the comparison is the first two links. And then it says dhammo. The first and the first two links.

[Speaker 2]
Yes.

[Speaker 1]
The first of these two motivations equals the first two links together. Oh. The first of these two motivations equals the first two links together.

I see. And that's a kind of, I don't know, controversial statement, if you ask me. Okay.

Yeah. Yeah. Misunderstanding which triggers a...

Misunderstanding which triggers an action is equal to the first two links together. Oh, okay. And don't get confused by the chick here.

This just means the same thing. It's just an idiom that means the same thing. These are the same thing.

What? Causal motivation and the first two links together are the same thing. And that's kind of a cool idea.

But you would think the motivation is only the first half. That's what I thought. You just meant the first of these and the first point.

Is that possible or not? Well, that's possible. Maybe I'm wrong.

Well, probably not. Yeah, you're right. I think he's right.

I think I'm wrong. Say it. I think I'm wrong.

I think he's right. This first one, okay, two things. This two means two things.

What? These two things are the same. I'm going to change my opinion.

He's correct. I mean, it happens. If a monkey hits a typewriter for six weeks.

A word will come out. A word will come out.

[Speaker 2]
I'm sorry.

[Speaker 1]
He's correct. I'm wrong. He's correct.

I'm wrong. But it was so sexy the other way. Anyway, these two things are the same.

What? The first of these two motivations and the first link. Those two things are the same thing.

It just means the first of these is the first link. So, Gyu-i-kun-long is the same as the marifa. Yen-lak-dam-bo gyur-pen marifa.

[Speaker 2]
Yen-lak-dam-bo.

[Speaker 1]
Which functions as a first link. Yen-lak-dam-bo. Yeah, I like how he read it.

It's better. It's correct. Mine was more interesting.

Ah, so the nyi is part of nyi-dung-chik. Yeah, now these two things. What?

Gyu-i-kun-long and the first link. Those two things are the same thing. It just means which of these two is the first link?

The first one. Now, apparently now I have to change the subject before everybody figures out how wrong I was. It's just a debate tactic.

That means the second kind of misunderstanding is not the first link. The misunderstanding with which you sustain an action is not the first link. It has to be the misunderstanding which gets you to do the action.

That first starts the action. The misunderstanding that causes you to start an action is the first link. But the misunderstanding which causes you to continue in the action is not the first link, according to Drek.

But it's a danger to keep going.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, okay.

[Speaker 1]
You can say an artificial distinction. Okay. In English, in American English we say it's an artificial distinction.

It's not really so. We're just not really correct. Can we say that?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Now this is an idiom for Adam. Say, chuky khyapa.

Chuky khyapa. Whenever you have a wrong link which is when you finally say what your system is after many debates we're in the wrong link section. This is supposed to be what's true.

And then we're going to have he comes back and he gets to rebuttal. But he gets to argue back. But this is the section where we're supposed to say what's correct.

So everyone, you know debaters who don't have much time before the debate round, they skip the first section. They're looking for a wrong link. You know, where's the wrong link?

I gotta know the wrong link. I can't go to the debate round unless I know what we're supposed to say. Which is a very western way.

Okay, anyway. Chuky khyapa is a common word used in ranguk. You'll have seni and then you might have yewas.

Then we said classic examples. Or you might have chuky khyapa. Chuky khyapa means let's discuss its features.

Okay? It doesn't mean dharma in particular or anything like that. Chuky khyapa means let's discuss its qualities.

Let's discuss the attributes of it, the features of it. So typically it will be a discussion of is it a good seed or is it a bad seed? Is it virtue or is it non-virtue?

That's a typical chuky khyapa. Another typical chuky khyapa is when do you get rid of it? Is it a tongpang?

Is it a gongpang? Is it a jorlong pipang jang? At what point do you get rid of it?

And then you might say who can possess it? A pratyak jena or an arya? Who can have it?

Someone who saw emptiness or someone who didn't see emptiness? So these are chuky khyapas. These are typical features that will be discussed.

And these happen to be the next three. Here we go. Here's the qualities of it.

And if I were going to lay it out with the Tibetan, I would split the three up. You see what I mean? Even though it makes very short sentences.

Here's some qualities of this. Of what is this? What are we talking about?

The first the motivation? Yeah. Misunderstanding which functions as the first line.

Misunderstanding which functions as the first line. It has three qualities. Number one.

Nangne is an idiom for Adam. If you're a bad translator, you say from among. From among.

From among. Come among these ten people. There's one who gets everything.

Always knows the word. Word. Word.

Just use among, right? No, we just say of. Of all these people, word is the one.

So please don't translate it as from among. That's not English. It's a translation.

Of all these people, there's one who... In English we just say of all. Now, there's three choices here.

We said ten people, right? Here's three choices. Gesok sum.

Somebody tell me. Those are the three kinds of virtue? No.

Yeah, virtue, et cetera, which means? Good karma, bad karma, neutral karma. Gewa, nigewa, numaten.

Say gewa.

[Speaker 2]
Nigewa. Numaten.

[Speaker 1]
Numaten is neutral. Neutral karma made the color of the third line from the top. Nobody cares.

It's not upsetting me and it's not making me happy. But it's in my world. That's called the result of neutral karma.

Good karma is defined as something that makes me happy. And bad karma is defined as something that makes me upset. Okay, so of the three, now this is very, very interesting.

And when I met this, I was upset. And I asked Rinpoche over and over and over. I didn't get an answer that I liked.

You know. So now I'll pass this discomfort on to Sugeng and you can live with it. Okay.

It's numaten. The first link. It's numaten.

And then he doesn't even say numaten, he says kona. It must be numaten. It only comes as numaten.

He uses two different words for has to be. It has to be only neutral karma. The first link that triggers samsara is neutral karma.

It's not a bad thing. It's not a bad thing. The first link that triggers that triggers all the pain of this whole world.

Why we're here in this class? Instead of in bed. It's neutral karma.

Because of the wood grain is facing to the right.

[Speaker 2]
I don't know.

[Speaker 1]
I mean, you know, if I were you, you know, you're going to teach other students, right? So, when you get your own students, I mean when you teach this to your own students, ask them to write a doctoral thesis about this. Like, they will have to go through the whole database, look for all the numaten next to niyamatamo.

See if someone tried to explain it. But this is a firmly held position. This is not an occasional position.

Somebody thinks this is important. Why? I don't know.

I mean, why it's that way? I don't know. I can speculate, but I'd rather you speculate now.

So, I'm turning this discomfort on you. So, gesok means? This sok means mi gewa and numaten.

The three of virtue, etc.

[Speaker 2]
It just means etc.

[Speaker 1]
And everybody knows it's talking about the three bad seeds and neutral seeds. So, good seeds, etc. From among those three of all those three, it can only be and always be neutral karma.

Anyone want to gloss the word for neutral karma? It means they don't bother mentioning it in scripture. Num tu matemba.

Buddha never clarified it. Buddha never said this is a bad seed or this is a good seed. And that's enough to say it's neutral.

Num tu matemba. There's a famous 14 num tu matemba. That's a different num tu matemba.

Those are the 14 questions he refused to answer. For example, does samsara have a beginning or an end? And he said, he just went...

He refused to say anything.

[Speaker 2]
Does it have a beginning?

[Speaker 1]
Does it have a beginning? Does it have an end? It does.

So, why didn't he say that? He was afraid they would misunderstand. So, he's like...

Then he looked at the student and he's like, you know, let's have some coffee. He changed the subject or something. There's 14 famous questions he refused to answer.

And those are also called num tu matemba. But in this context it means neutral karma. Buddha didn't clarify it.

Now, just because he doesn't clarify it, does that mean it's neutral? I guess. I mean, literally the word means un-clarified.

But we're supposed to translate it as neutral karma.

[Speaker 2]
Got it?

[Speaker 1]
Why he refused it? Why it's neutral? Because Buddha never clarified it.

Oh! I'll say this, okay? Let's look at the tricky care parts of the second link.

Let's look at the features. When he gets to the wrong link, when he gets to our system, for the second link, let's see what he says on the features. Because if he says the second link is...

What's he going to say? Well, that could be good karma or bad karma. Could a...

Could something which is always a bad karma motivate a good karma? Maybe there's a clue there. Okay.

Now, tongpang dang gongpang ngeekay chaya. It has part... It has parts which are tongpang and it has parts which are gongpang.

I like to say eliminated nowadays although people accuse me of... It sounds like diarrhea. Okay.

There are parts of the first link which you eliminate permanently or get rid of when you see emptiness directly. And there are other parts of the first link which you get rid of later when you get... before you reach nirvana.

Are those the definition, meaning of this tongpang? Yeah, this means... This is an abbreviation of tonglam kipangpa.

Tonglam kipangja. Eliminated by the path of truth. And this is an abbreviation for gonglam kipangja.

Eliminated by the path of habituation. Okay. It has parts eliminated by more.

You guys can say it also. Yeah, I thought it felt like a long time. But let's finish this last one.

You've actually pointed at him to say something.

[Speaker 2]
Get off my back. While you're looking for troubles.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Nangne means from among. Of these choices, what are the choices?

Kepak. Abbreviation. Radical abbreviation.

When you start... When you become a papa? Kepak means...

It's a radical abbreviation. From among. Arya is a...

Yeah, so this K means normal people or Arya. Which one do you guess? He's going to have the first link.

[Speaker 2]
The first link.

[Speaker 1]
The first link. The normal people, right? Yeah, only people who are not seen.

This ten means body and mind. This ten means body and mind. Okay.

It can only be supported. It can only exist in the body and mind of a person who has not seen emptiness directly. Does that mean someone who has seen emptiness directly is out of the wheel of life?

No, not always.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, okay.

[Speaker 1]
So that means yes? On the way out. They are not spinning the wheel.

But they still have the old... They still have two to twelve from their past number one. Speaking of number one...

Okay, so from their past misunderstanding, the wheel is still... the wheel is going. But they are not spinning new wheels.

And we talked about it in Buddha Buddha how wheels spin, more wheels spin, more wheels spin, more wheels spin.

[Speaker 2]
So they stopped this one. But these are still going.

[Speaker 1]
Only in Arhat had stopped all the spinning. This corner is the same as the corner?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, only.

[Speaker 1]
Only? And it's kind of very a strong word. Like nobody else.

It's meant to eliminate any other person. Only these people have it. Who?

Sosoke was. So here's a not so radical abbreviation. Soke.

Here's a very radical abbreviation. The full term is Sosoke was. Okay, cool?

We're going to stop here. I checked here. By the way, we reached the third part.

We're done with the wrong... This is his rebuttal. He gets to come back and say, you know, you were picking on me, but your system is also weird.

He gets to complain about our system. Hopefully, we're hoping that in there he might clarify that not you are. By the way, most yik chans, monastic textbooks, come in pairs.

A chi dun and a ta chu. And originally, they were an overview and an analysis. But they've gotten mixed up.

So, there is a... You're in the... I think you're in the ta chu.

Where's the title? Oh, here it is. You're in the analysis, which means there's also an overview by the same author.

So, it'll have the definition again. And you can use it to check the money. You can use it to check.

And as I remember, there are two. I chose the analysis for you because it was more detailed. But we can go to the chi dun.

Let's do it right now. We'll be late. I don't care.

So, we go to the documents. We go to the... We go to the sungun.

We go to Lower Middle Way, which is called Prajnaparamita. We go to the subject of dependent origination. We go to Kedug Dhamma Dargay.

And there's two books. And here's the overview. And we call it up.

Well, I'm going to call it up with word, right? You are so weird. I could stop.

This one, right? Okay. So, what shall we search for?

Let's search for Ngai Iwa. Ngai Iwa. Nope.

[Speaker 2]
Ngai Iwa.

[Speaker 1]
Ngai Iwa.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, because you're looking for what?

[Speaker 1]
Oh, no. This is unfortunate. He didn't divide it into three.

He divided it into two. Misunderstanding, which is jikta, and misunderstanding, which is not jikta. In the other text, he divided it into three.

Jikta, which is focus on me. And misunderstanding, which is focus on mine. But here he just divided it into two.

Here's the first one. It's focused on me and mine. The second one is focusing on the I, which is part of somebody else.

Like Joe and John. Okay, John and Joe. Okay.

And he didn't give us anymore. But see, I would rather say Ngai Iwa. Because he kind of did here.

And the second one, that's all we have to work with. And we can check another text. But I wouldn't do it today.

Let's do it next time. Now, I spent a couple hours on his thing. His Four Seals.

Because I got interested in it. But we could do it for a whole day if you want. We could spend a whole hour looking at it.

It'd be interesting. That's where it'd be interesting to call Geshe Thich Nhat Hanh and say, why? Because he knows.

And that'd be an interesting channel to open. Because I haven't opened it. But it'd be nice.

He would ask this question every few days. We could do that. That'd be cool.

That'd be cool.

[Speaker 2]
We need an inside man.

[Speaker 1]
It'd be interesting to get his take on it. I'm sure someone else has treated it. I'm sure it's in the scriptures.

But it'd be interesting to hear a living master opinion. Because I'm sure he's been asked this question many times. He teaches 300 monks every day.

For the last 40 years. But sometimes he goes on retreat in North India. So sometimes he's not available for a few months.

Okay, let's go.

[Speaker 2]
Chanting Chanting Chanting Chanting Chanting Chanting Chanting Chanting Chanting