Медитации на пустоту: объяснение шагов к пониманию того, что ничто не является самим собой, занятие 5

[Speaker 1]
All right Utpala, are you ready? I'm sorry to take some of your time, but that's my dream. I thought China Software was a good name to sell it with.

Call it a China Software MBA and encourage businessmen to know something about their culture. And maybe use it in their business, so we could use what we learn in REN TSOS in the other two parts of the course. You see, we could teach REN TSOS and innovation, and REN TSOS and leadership.

You see, and we can use it in the leadership part of the course, or we can use it in the in the innovation part of the course. What would REN TSOS say about this subject? Because I was thinking when I write the innovation course, DCI course, the biggest innovation is in viewpoint.

You know, how you think. Buddha made innovations in how you think, which is the source of all innovation. And that's kind of interesting to me.

And how he thinks is a big discussion about the three turnings of the wheel. He innovated twice. Well, he innovated three times.

He broke out of Hinduism to teach the four truths and dependent origination. Then he broke out of that to teach emptiness, and then he broke out of that to teach the mind on this course. So he broke out of viewpoints three times.

And that's the subject of REN TSOS' sixth chapter. So I just want to do the sixth chapter of REN TSOS. I don't want to, you guys can do the rest afterwards.

Okay. Are you ready? I think it'd be exciting to use REN TSOS for leadership and innovation and tie it all together.

So it's not a language class. Yeah, it's part of the business school. I will give you guys my copies of the text because I have made notes and I have cut them up logically.

Some of what I wrote, like this comment, should be removed. You see what I mean? And DONG CHEN CHEN MO, do we have it?

I don't know. It's K DUB BYAS. And there's the, there's the tohoku number there.

And we don't have an input as far as I know. And it's one of his most important words. And that's, and that's why I had this, that's why I had Kat trying to find the tohoku numbers that were missing.

So, so try to get me this one. It's called DONG CHEN CHEN MO GAL SANGS DMIGS RJE. Opening the eyes of GAL SANGS.

I couldn't find it, but I didn't try too hard.

[Speaker 2]
Okay. We've got eight years of stuff that is just around this. I know.

[Speaker 1]
It's possible we have it in there. I think we might have found it.

[Speaker 2]
We went through this like a year ago.

[Speaker 1]
We did. Okay, let's go Udpala. You want to do this mandala thing?

DAM DU MONGS KYI CHEN YIN RGYUD PAS SOS RNAMS KYI SBYOR LA PHAN CHE'I SANG YOD DU PAR CHOG All right then. I believe we're still in the middle of a quotation from DONG CHEN CHEN MO. And I think Nick and I looked it up.

We were in Vietnam or something. Dong tun is a genre and not a text. So tun means like tundru, a session, a period of study or of meditation.

So tung tun is like, what do we call it?

[Speaker 2]
Oh, draw a drop of emptiness or something?

[Speaker 1]
No, somebody else translated it that way. The one translation into English, which is by a person who studied at Sarawak. I was there briefly.

It's not a drop.

[Speaker 2]
No, we call it a touch or something like that.

[Speaker 1]
Interlude. It's interlude. We translate it as interlude.

It means take a break and do a little emptiness. It means an interlude because it's like tundru. Tun means time of day or period of the day.

So we called it an emptiness interlude or something. Anyway, it turns out to be a genre. It turns out other people have written them.

I believe we're still in the middle of it, but I can't confirm that until I get the input. By the way, Sinem, the manager of the Tibetan input, has been cranking out the text that we don't have really nicely. I'll tell her, look, this is corrupt.

Like Choney Lama's early input was corrupt because we didn't have a good copy. We had the only copy in the world and it was bad and a lot of mistakes in it. So she's cranked it out in a few days.

So we have good, clean input that we didn't have before. Rang de ...

[Speaker 2]
Sorry, I'm looking for that book now. There's no Mao on that too?

[Speaker 1]
No, that would be Harmony. Rang de kha chik. Some of our own group, meaning Buddhists, Rang de.

dak chik rang wan chen gyi kang sak tu dzinpa They believe that the tendency to hold to a person who is unchanging and who is ... How do you want to translate it, Rong Rong? Autonomous.

Autonomous. Yeah, that's pretty good. Okay.

Faster. Alright. Let's cut that, but I am Mitha, but not dak.

Okay, anyway. They believe, döpa, they hold, their position, döpa, is that it's kang sak tu dzinpa len kye That it's the inborn tendency to hold to a person as being itself, you can say, if you want to be radical. So they believe the tendency to believe that a person is unchanging and independent is the kind that you're born with.

So the viewpoint that people are unchanging and independent is the kind of holding to the self-existence of a person that all of us are born with. That's how they would describe it. Döpa dang kha chik de kunda yin kyang But some people believe that's not something you're born with, it's something you learn later.

To think of the person as being dakpa, unchanging, and as being independent. Okay, and having read ahead, when I was growing up, I grew up in the Christian church, and I enjoyed it, and I still enjoy it, but we were taught the idea of a soul. And we would ask our mom, you know, what's a soul?

And she'd say, there's even that most famous children's prayer, Now I lay me down to sleep, pray the Lord my soul to keep, if I die before I wake, pray the Lord my soul to take. We taught this prayer as a little kid. If I die in my sleep, please take my soul to heaven.

And then we'd ask our mom, what's a soul? And she says, well, there's a permanent part of you. Like the body dies, but there's a soul inside, and it's a permanent part of Mike.

Mike is the soul, and that's the part that Jesus is going to take after you die. I believe, reading ahead, that's the viewpoint. It's a soul that's independent of the body and the mind.

It's a separate thing that's inside of you that's not part of your body or mind. Yeah, it's like that, okay? So just think of it that way.

Some little invisible, what do you call it? Transparent, jelly-like glass thing inside of you. And when you die, it stays.

You see what I mean? And that's the real Stanley. And Stanley's body is not that, and Stanley's mind is not that.

It's pray the Lord my soul to take.

[Speaker 2]
Geshe-la, kachig de.

[Speaker 1]
Say it again?

[Speaker 2]
Kachig de. Doesn't it refer to the same previous kachig?

[Speaker 1]
Kachig de. Maybe. No, no, no, it's different.

The de doesn't refer to the kachig. The de refers to kansaki dangchen. You can put a comma after kachig.

[Speaker 2]
Some other people say that.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's a good question. Some people say that that is. Some people say that that is.

It's not that kachig. Kachig de doesn't. You're not meant to read a kachig de.

It's kachig, comma, de kunda. Other people say that thing, kansaki dangchen, is, sorry, dak chik rangwa chen gyi dak dzinpa, kansaki dzinpa, is kunda. Got it?

It's a good question. That's a question of phrasing. Which words do you read together?

[Speaker 2]
Do you find that that de or de would occur equally as often as would be referring to the word directly in front of it, or does it usually refer to the word directly in front of it?

[Speaker 1]
Most often it refers to the phrasing directly before it, but not always. And there's a famous grammar text that says, go look for the de. Go look for the reference.

You have to go look for the reference. Kachig de kunda. I can't recite it anymore.

I used to be able to. Kachig de kunda yin kyang. And others say that it's kunda, but dot dot dot.

And he ends the quotation from Dong Tun. You see? Sungpay chuno.

[Speaker 2]
I'm sorry. Oh, right. Yeah.

Dot dot dot. Where's the dot dot dot?

[Speaker 1]
I thought you said kyang, but I thought you just said that.

[Speaker 2]
But some people believe it's something you learn.

[Speaker 1]
Others believe it's something you learn. Period. But maybe he's going to disagree with both of them.

But that ends the quotation from Khen Rinpoche. You see? Although we need the input to confirm that.

[Speaker 2]
It seems that it's not in his drafted works, something with that name.

[Speaker 1]
Kelsang mik je. M-I-G, possibly B-Y-E-D. She sok sungpay chuno.

So he goes on. Okay, got it? You okay?

He's using this to prove something. I don't remember what it was. It's to support the statement in section 37.

He's quoting Tungten. That statement was the great majority of them, whoever they are, detailists onto sutras.

[Speaker 2]
Is this the book?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, it is. I believe it is. It's not even called Tungten in the book.

Okay, that's the table of contents, I think.

[Speaker 2]
So this she sok sungpay chuno.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Dot, dot, dot. You have to go to section 38.

And it says, as the Great Interlude on Emptiness puts it. So he's using the quotation from the Great Interlude on Emptiness to prove the statement in 37. You've got to go back to 37.

And 36. 36 says, Other detailists, as well as all the schools up from the sutras, say blah, blah, blah. Then he says the great majority of them would say that that's the inborn version.

And he proves that statement by 38 and 39. And the cheer down here in 39, chuno, is the is the THAG after day. This day means because.

Blah, blah, blah, blah. From Tungten Chenmo. It's a huge logical statement.

He's making his assertion here. And he's backing it up with the quotation from Tungten Chenmo. And that's why there's a cheer at the end of the Tungten Chenmo quotation.

Unfortunately, that quotation is in two pieces. Probably there's other material between these two pieces. See, because he says DANG.

So he says, because Tungten Chenmo says this, and Tungten Chenmo says this. And apparently they're not continuous.

[Speaker 2]
And then the SHES SOGS means, that's your dot, dot, dot, basically?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, this dot is a yeah, this SOGS is a dot, dot, dot. I'm not giving you the whole sentence. He stops in the middle of a sentence.

[Speaker 2]
So then we say, and so do this translation underneath the Tibetan Roman. We would say, and also, and then Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Correct, because you've got to cover this SHES DANG. Now technically you might want to put that down here in paragraph number 39. Although it feels better up here, but in English it's going to come down here.

And you're going to start this section with, it also says you know, okay. You'll get there in 20 years.

[Speaker 2]
SHES DANG, would you leave it up there?

[Speaker 1]
Oh yeah, I'm giving Utpala the choice. You can put the SHES DANG. Actually the SHES belongs here, and the DANG belongs here.

I would leave it there. But down here I would say it also says, and then you can drive the hypertexture a little crazy. But the SHES is the quotation mark.

What is the SHES in my translation here? Where am I indicating the SHES?

[Speaker 2]
Oh, the indent.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, it's the indent. The indentation indicates that it's a quotation. So if you're a hypertexture, you have to say indentation.

Is it like that? Good luck. That's the way in English that we indicate that this is a quotation.

We indent it. A classic translator mistake is to expect a word for every word. Sometimes in English we format the text to show the word.

The fact that it's indented means it's a quotation. We don't have to translate the word SHES. Okay, all right.

,'O NA BSTAN PA'I DANG, ,MED DE'I RDOG GANG GI BSTAN YIN ZHES NA, Well then, ,'O NA is a gentle way to change a subject. It's a segue to a new subject. Well, ,'O NA, ,RDIN PAS BDAG MED DE, That kind of a lack of a self-nature, that kind of a lack of a self-nature, meaning BDAG GCIG RANG BANG CHEN, Sorry, we just had BDAG and RANG BANG CHEN.

Unchanging and independent. By the way, to me, the independent part, autonomous part, means the soul can survive without the mind and body. That's the point.

That's the point. And it never changes. You can die and it will be still there.

Don't worry, go to bed. If you die before you wake, the soul will be there. So that's really kind of this viewpoint.

,RDOG GANG GI BSTAN YIN ZHES NA, Okay, which sutra presents that idea? Which sutra's meaning is it? Which sutra does that belong to?

That point appears in which sutra? Where did you get that from? ,RDOG GANG GI BSTAN means, it is the meaning of which sutra?

This kind of a self-nature, BDAG, Sorry, this lack of a self-nature, meaning lack of a self-nature which is unchanging and independent of the mind and body. Where do you get that? Which sutra do you get that from?

That's the meaning of that sentence. It's kind of convoluted.

[Speaker 2]
,ZHES NA, You may ask.

[Speaker 1]
It's a rhetorical question. You may ask, which sutra? What's the sutra source for that idea of that kind of a lack of self-nature?

Which sutra did you get that from?

[Speaker 2]
And then you get the, ,'O NA, Oh, in this case, you may ask, in this case, which sutra?

[Speaker 1]
Oh no, it's part of the, ,ZHES NA, Well then, you may ask, which sutra does that come from? Or something like that. It's more subtle than that.

You have to be careful changing the wording here. Because it's, which sutra made that point? Because it may not be specifically stated in this sutra.

You see what I mean? Which sutra made that point? Which sutra presents a lack of self-nature that way?

Okay. And then the answer is, this is very interesting. ,DE, ,KHOR LO DANG POS, ,RTEN PA'I DANG MED KYI SDOD YIN PA, ,DE, The R, that that is the meaning of no self, which is taught in the first turning of the wheel.

That that is the meaning of no self as taught in the first turning of the wheel is accepted, ,DE, by Dukta Mawashi.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, great.

[Speaker 1]
By all four schools. Do they accept it as no self? No.

Do they accept it as what Buddha taught as no self in the first turning of the wheel? Yes. All four schools.

Got it? Now they may agree with it, they may not agree with it. But they all teach it.

They all agree that Buddha taught that. All four schools. Are you okay?

You want to turn the air conditioner off for a while? It's pretty cold.

[Speaker 2]
I'm afraid she'll get sick.

[Speaker 1]
She got sick last time. That this is the meaning of no self taught by Buddha himself in the first turning of the wheel. All four schools agree.

Whether they agree with it is a different thing.

[Speaker 2]
So they agree that it was taught by the Buddha.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, they agree that this is what the Buddha taught in the first turning of the wheel as the meaning of anatma, of no self. Everybody agrees. And here's a soft disjunctive.

Wow. It's more disjunctive than and. You can't use and.

Or you could say whereas. Or wow. It's a soft disjunctive.

It's not kyang, which would be but. It's not that strong. It's between but and and.

In Russian, it's a soft disjunctive. I agree totally with what Sugeng said. While I do believe that.

You're not contradicting 100%. But the prasangika, the consequence. By the way, I was reading my old translations in the ACI course, because I have to teach the ACI course.

I called it the consequence branch instead of consequence group. I think that's a great translation. Sometimes my earlier translations were better before I had all this.

Anyway. I like branch because it implies there's two branches. That they both branched off from the same school.

So the consequence branch of the middle way school. Rather than calling it the consequence group of the middle way school.

[Speaker 2]
In Tibetan, is it typically de or yed mak?

[Speaker 1]
No, they don't call it anything. They just call it umma tengyurwa or umma rangyupa. They just put umma at the beginning of it.

The tengyurwas, the highest school of middle way. DE TZAM LAS BAR YANG GZHAN DO They also, GZHAN means accept. GZHAN is a little stronger than DE.

DE means believe. GZHAN would be assert. Good, good.

They though would assert that it's not, it's a little bit different. It's not exactly that. They would expand on it.

I kind of think you need to call it expand. DE TZAM MIN PAR means it's not exactly that. Or it's not just that.

It's not limited to that. Not limited to that. TZAM means but, just only.

It's not limited to that. They would expand on it. And I believe, although I'm, this is an assertion of my own, that the next section is meant to show how they expand on it.

Yes, we agree Buddha taught no self nature that way in the first turn of the wheel. But you have to add a little bit. You have to say a little more about it to get it just right.

That's the fourth school. The fourth school. Well, 4B.

[Speaker 2]
4B, yeah. The Tibetan version is like explicitly negative, but you have an English idiom. It's like there's more to it than that.

[Speaker 1]
That's okay. I'm fine with that. That's a ma'ingar.

That's a kind of negative.

[Speaker 2]
Okay, cool. Great.

[Speaker 1]
He's fat and he doesn't eat at night. He doesn't eat during the day. He's fat and he doesn't eat during the day.

You don't know these? Okay. DE LTA YIN KYANG That's true, but the commentary to Uma Lajupa, entering the Middle Way, says, and I went and looked it up.

It happens to be Je Tsongkapa's commentary.

[Speaker 2]
I found it.

[Speaker 1]
It's Gomba Rabsel, actually. Okay, so it's interesting that this author, who is that? Choney Lama?

He hasn't called it Gomba Rabsel. He's called it the commentary to entering the Middle Way. By the way, this you'll see it different ways, but the short, DGIGS RGYA is a Sanskrit word that means commentary.

DGIGS RGYA DGIGS RGYA Then sometimes Tibetans shorten it to DGIGS so it wouldn't have the second RGYA on it. And then oftentimes the typists will mistype it as DGIGS RGYA with one K. But it's just DGIGS.

Like, DGIGS DGIGS. And then K becomes a suffix letter illegally. Which is not allowed.

So it confuses typists. But when there's two K's it's DGIGS RGYA. And then you get a diphthong which is illegal in the Tibetan.

So a little bit nicer. ,GANG ZAG RANG RGYA THUG PA'I RTZAD YOD DU RDZIN PA NI, ,DUG LTAR RLONG MA SBYUR LA YOD MO, The important here is ,MO. Anybody can explain that to me?

[Speaker 2]
Oh, that usually means to harm somebody.

[Speaker 1]
No. That's ,MO.

[Speaker 2]
Instantly. Disrespect.

[Speaker 1]
That's ,MOD PA.

[Speaker 2]
I have it several times.

[Speaker 1]
Don't look it up somewhere. Admittedly. It means admittedly.

And it's always followed by ,KYANG or ,GYI. Okay, look. I admit that blah, blah, blah.

[Speaker 2]
But...

[Speaker 1]
I admit that Sugeng's suggestion is really good. But... our ,MO means I admit.

Or admittedly. It means it's true. Sometimes we say in English, that's true that blah, blah, blah.

But it's true that Gibson's suggestion is very valuable. But I disagree. It comes just before you shoot somebody down.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
I agree. Admittedly. The idea, right?

Believing that a person could be self-standing and substantial. But here he puts them together. Substantial in the sense of self-standing.

He doesn't say, RANG RGYAL THUG PA DANG MDZAD YOD He says, RANG RGYAL THUG PA MDZAD YOD Substantial in the sense of self-standing. So you have to translate it that way. There are not two different elements here.

One is modifying the other. Substantial in the sense of self-standing. It's true that the habit or the tendency to believe that a person is concrete in the sense of self-standing.

They don't need to depend on other things. To hold that, is that kind of idea is possessed. This phrase is very important for your text.

SBYUB MTHA' LO MA'I RGYUR BA SBYUB MTHA' LO MA'I RGYUR BA This RGYUR means what? Changed? Good, yeah.

RGYUR, changed. It's the word in Tibetan for changing money, for example. So it's obviously related to the verb to become.

RGYUR It's obviously not the word RGYUR because RGYUR has a prenasal. RGYUR So RGYUR means to become. RGYUR without anything, third column, RGYUR is became.

And RGYUR without the voicing and without the prenasal. So listen to these three different sounds. This is RGYUR, past tense.

This is RGYUR to become is RGYUR and became is RGYUR. So the third and the first are not the same. Listen, RGYUR, RGYUR RGYUR, RGYUR This is a real English G.

This sound we do not have in English. KA, KA RGYUR It's not RGYUR. And the Tibetan will get confused if you don't know how to pronounce these three.

If you mix these two especially because English doesn't have this one, they say, change what? When you want to say became. Say RGYUR.

Say KA. Different sound. That's a real English G.

God. Say God. God.

I believe in God. Then say KA. It's a different sound.

This is GA. This is KA. RGYUR became.

Which means is in Tibetan. Because when you have become, you are. So RGYUR can mean is.

Yeah, no prefix here. Yeah, good. Here prefix B or S, or both.

RGYUR Sorry, here RGYUR. Here AO or MAO. RGYUR So what we have here is RGYUR BA means to change.

This is classically put in the instrumental tense. This RGYUR LTAR here should have been put in the instrumental case. Which would require a soft key.

It should have said RGYUR TE LO MA RGYUR LA Whose minds have not been influenced by philosophical schools. That's LHAN SKYES. That's LHAN SKYES.

Yeah. They haven't gotten to the age yet where they went to a bad teacher who told them emptiness is black, black, black. Someone who came to believe in their 20s because they met somebody stupid in their teens that emptiness means black, black, black.

It's RGYUR TE LO RGYUR BA They have learned it. It's a learned wrong belief. So the word for learned So learned is past tense of learn in English.

But as an adjective it means something you pick up in school. A wrong idea you pick up from somebody. A learned mistake.

So RGYUR TE LO RGYUR So RGYUR TE LO RGYUR is the Tibetan word for an idea that you have developed later because you went to a dupta. You went to some kind of school and somebody taught you wrong. Let's do a vote just to prove how smart Geshe Michael is, which is the only reason I exist.

So RGYUR TE LO MA RGYUR Okay. And RGYUR TE LO MA RGYUR Let's see who wins. Let's run it in two different windows.

We can get instant numbers that way. Okay. Hopefully everyone is literate.

RGYUR TE LO RGYUR This is the instrumental and this is the sloppy one. And I wager the carving might be wrong. I don't know.

But here, let's take a vote here. There's one. Let's start the other one.

And you will get statistics at the bottom in your window.

[Speaker 2]
75 on the right.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, 75 agree with me. One agree with Choney Lama. That's probably Choney Lama.

So I would feel confident to correct the text. Later, when Phil's done with his work, we'll be able to say, show me all of Choney Lama's and just restrict it to Choney Lama. And show me, did he use it in other books?

And how did he spell it in other books? Because that's what we can't do with our database as a flat file database. We can't do that.

Without physically going and moving all of Choney Lama's books in one file, in one folder. Because you might want to, when he's done with his work, you can say, how did Choney Lama do it before he was 40 and how did Choney Lama do it after he was 40? So that's why we're paying him to keep trudging on.

So I would change it to Duk Teh Lama Gyalwa.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, we could do that.

[Speaker 1]
That's a good idea. Why am I doing this as I go through texts? Your graduate students, in order to get their degree, your students are going to go back and correct all the database from my notes.

Anytime there's a curly bracket and a percentage sign, they're going to correct the syllable before it. On my computer. Duk Teh Lama Gyalwa Laya YOD MOD KYANG They also have it.

They also have this tendency. So someone who learned, there are people who learned it later, sorry, who haven't been influenced. That's why I say, when I was a kid I had a sense of soul.

I believed my mom right away. I said, yeah, I know what you're talking about. I also feel that.

I think there's something inside that's unchanging and doesn't die when my body dies. That's might. That's the real might.

When she said it the first time, it's like, oh yeah, I know what that is. I've been thinking about that. So, Duk Teh Lama Gyalwa.

I didn't learn it in school yet. It's just something that I was put. So he says that, I admit, this is a telang gyur, prasangika, and he's saying, yeah, there are people like that.

,GANG ZAG PUNG PO DANG, ,RTZE NYID MI THOS MA GZHAN DU, ,YOD PAR BRJAN PA NI, ,DUG TE LAMA GYAL BA LA MED DO, But, this particular variation of it doesn't exist, me, in people whose minds have not been influenced, meaning changed, by learning it in school somewhere or from somebody. So, he's going to talk about that the prasangikas So, the Dharikas are going deeper. Yeah, okay, there are people who haven't gone to school yet, who believe that there's a self, which is substantial in the sense of being self-standing.

But there's a variant on that which only people who went to school have. Only people who were influenced by philosophy classes have. Now what is that variation?

Here it is. GANG ZAG PUNG PO DANG ZAN NYID MI THUN PAR I'm going to translate this because I had to work on it. To believe that there exists an aspect of the person which is inconsistent with the nature of the heaps.

To believe that there is a person whose nature is something different and is inconsistent with the heaps. Inconsistent with body and mind. Think of it that way.

Meaning soul. Inconsistent with body and mind. The way he says it is, PUNG PO DANG ZAN NYID MI THUN PAR ZAN NYID normally means definition, but sometimes it can mean basic nature.

Sometimes the word ZAN NYID can mean basic nature. There exists some part of you which is separate from the basic nature of your mind and body. So they're clarifying what they mean by soul.

It's basically inconsistent with body and mind. That's how they're phrasing it here. People who believe that the self, who actively believe that the soul is inconsistent with body and mind, that they have to learn in school.

That's not natural. That's not inborn. So Prasangika's want to clarify, is this something you're born with or not?

Yes, you can be born with a feeling that there's a part of you which is part of God or something. But to have a feeling that that actually contradicts your body and mind, that has to be taught in school. They go deeper.

They make a deeper distinction. Got it?

[Speaker 2]
You okay with that?

[Speaker 1]
Do kids have a sense that there's a deeper part of them? Yes. Do they actively think this is not my body and not my mind?

They don't go there. They think it's separate. They don't think it's inconsistent with body and mind.

That has to be learned. Someone has to tell you it's not your body or your mind. They're just going deeper.

They're just going deeper. Got it? You okay?

Who's they by the way? Which tengyawa? Tsongkapa.

Tsongkapa. Here's the way he put it. I just wanted to check, anytime you have a really difficult part, the first thing you should do is go make sure it was quoted properly.

If you can't figure it out, there's a good chance it was just typed wrong.

[Speaker 2]
Was it?

[Speaker 1]
No, unfortunately it wasn't typed right. By the way, there's dupe lo ma gyurwa used by Tsongkapa. With the instrumental.

[Speaker 2]
And then the RGYA again.

[Speaker 1]
I'm sorry? Oh yeah, yeah, yeah. Because the frequency of RGYA compared to RGYA.

You want to do something sexy? Let's do a vote. This is going to be huge.

Only a computer could do this. Don't forget to put the space. The typist has typed RGYA.

Okay, I'm going to guess the number. 50,000 times. And RGYA comes about, I'll give it 300.

125,000 times, opposed to 1,100 times. It's 99 out of 100, it will be RGYA. So the typist is just on RGYA mode.

RGYA MTSO, RGYAN, RGYA. So they're going to mistype RANG RGYAL very often. So you have to be used to that.

Okay, here we go. ZHES PHYI MA DE LA KUN DAG GIS, KHYAB PAR ZHES PA NI, THAN GYUR BA'I LUS KYI, DBANG BA'I PHYIR PA SREL TE The idea that the latter, L-A-T-T-E-R, or the explanation, ZHES PA, that the latter is always KHYAB KUN DAG. That's how that KHYAB and the instrumental work.

The idea that the latter, the explanation that the latter, the second one I mentioned above, must be learned in school, is its obvious self. It's obvious that this is relative, is made relative to the prasangika system. Meaning, not other systems.

Not swatantrika, not satsutras, not cheda mawa ladbhashika. That statement that Tsongkapa made, that second kind of thing he's talking about, has to be learned in school. The part where you distinguish it from mind and body.

It's not my mind and body. The idea that the way you see your soul is that way, that it has to be learned in school, is only made with reference to the prasangika school. Tsongkapa said it, but he was only talking about the prasangika school.

That's clear. He's afraid that the listener, the reader, is going to say, oh well, Tsongkapa said everybody believes that. Now he didn't specifically say prasangika, but its self, it's obvious, relative to.

It's obvious self, that this was made relative to wang du che. It's an idiom. Wang du che doesn't mean to put under the power.

It means with reference to. Wang du che means with reference to, to the prasangika system. Tsongkapa said it, that the idea that your soul is not your mind and not your body, that it's separate, a separate entity, can only be learned.

It's obvious that he's talking only from the prasangika point of view. Lower schools would believe it's something you're born with. So don't forget, we're distinguishing between believing there is a soul, which is permanent, and believing that it's very specifically divorced from your body and mind.

Almost running your body and mind. That it's inconsistent with se ni mi dun bar, your body and mind. The specific perception that it's inconsistent with body and mind is learned.

But who believes that? Thyang gyur way wang du che pa. It's only relative to the prasangika school.

Well, how do you know that? It's self. It's obvious.

Colon. It's obvious. Colon.

Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Where's the colon? De.

[Speaker 1]
Right here in this de.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
De. I'm going to go to the end of this paragraph. There's the verb.

Okay. De. It's obvious, because if it weren't that way, you would contradict gyelwa.

If it weren't that way, now you have to skip to the end of the paragraph, you would contradict who? Explanations. Now let's go to the middle.

Found in chang nge nam je, found in tong tun, found in gang del, found in de dun mik gi yik gi mun sel, etc. That blah, blah, blah. Okay, now I'm not going to do the blah, blah yet.

Okay, because that's complicated. But if you think he wasn't referencing the Prasangika, you contradict explanations found in these four works. Chang nge nam je, tong tun, gang del, and de dun mik gi mun sel, etc.

What you contradict in those four works, etc., he's going to say next. But you're contradicting. If you believe Tsongkapa wasn't referencing the Prasangika, then you contradict these four books in the following way.

I'm not going to do the in the following way yet. Let's just name the four books. He doesn't name them clearly.

I had to go spend a lot of time on it. Chang nge nam je is a nickname for Lek She Nyongpo. Okay, apparently.

I went and found it. Now tell me what je would be without the prenasal and tell me what it would be with the prenasal. Chang nge nam je.

Good, yeah. Now with the prenasal, nje. Yeah, distinguishing between what is figurative and what is literal.

The book that distinguishes between the figurative and literal, which apparently is a nickname for Tsongkapa's classic that we just talked about in the yun tse thing. Distinguishing the literal from... By the way, Tsongkapa's explanation, half of which treats that sutra that Yuen Tse commented on.

It's a great presentation of the Buddha's schools, by accident. In discussing what did the Buddha really mean, by the way, he gives the best explanation of the four schools ever. Or actually, the higher schools.

Mind-only, lower middle way, higher middle way. By explaining what the Buddha really meant during the three turnings of the wheel, Tsongkapa gives the best explanation ever of the mind-only school, lower middle way, and higher middle way. And it's tough.

It's hard. And I did it with my teacher for years. And we finished it.

Thank you. Okay, now. So the first book we got.

Second book is easy. That's K. Duke Che's Emptiness and Delusion?

What do you call it? Emptiness and Delusion.

[Speaker 2]
I just sent it to you guys, by the way.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, great. God bless you.

[Speaker 2]
Not to everybody.

[Speaker 1]
Now, the third one is god damn frustrating. I'm sorry. But, Condell, give me a break.

[Speaker 2]
Commentary on the difficult points.

[Speaker 1]
What if it were BKA?

[Speaker 2]
Who should be? No one.

[Speaker 1]
DKA is hard. BKA, as in conjure, is the word of the Buddha. BKA, apostrophe, means the word of the Buddha.

DKA, apostrophe. BKA, apostrophe, means the word of the Buddha. DKA, as in conjure.

Conjure means translated word of the Buddha. Tengure means translated commentaries to the word of the Buddha. The gyur is translate, right?

Change. When you spell it with D, it means difficult points. There's about 10,000 commentaries named Condell, explaining the difficult points.

I believe, okay? I'm taking a shot. I feel pretty strongly that it's this one, which is by the second Dalai Lama.

And it treats chang ne. I looked up instances where those books were mentioned together. Kind of smart.

And I spent a long time on it, but that's what you can do if you have a database. You can say, who else mentioned these books together? And then see if someone gives more than Condell.

So I feel pretty strongly it's the second Dalai Lama's Condell. I'm not 100% sure. I'm about 90% sure.

But to be frank, no one's going to tell you any different. No one's going to prove any different. Unless you have a relational database and you can see which Condell did Choney Lama favor quoting.

In that, you need him to finish his work.

[Speaker 2]
Did you also look at how many books named difficult points from which schools?

[Speaker 1]
I did. It's hopeless. There's too many of them.

I did. I used to go for it and I went that way. I went that way first and I gave up.

Actually, tell me the best way to confirm that.

[Speaker 2]
To confirm that that's in fact the book. See if that quote...

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, see if he discusses this question about the learned belief in the soul. Go see if he... If you and you have time, Yeah, when you have time, go look up Ranggya Tupa in that book by the second Dalai Lama.

If you don't have it, input. Tell him to input it.

[Speaker 2]
You have to read and see. No, you just...

[Speaker 1]
If there's a long discussion on Ranggya Tupa, I would say I don't think we're covering it. Okay. Okay, Deyden...

Deyden Mensel is Deyden Yiky Mensel, which is Khenpo's famous book on logic, which I would love to translate. I started it with Ningbo. I learned about...

When we do the winter debates, one month every year, with Olympic teams, the best teams from each monastery go, I voted myself on the team. And I went for unprecedented, I went four or five times, which is unprecedented. Nobody goes to the Olympics four or five times.

Nobody goes, and I just went. I paid the money, I said, I don't care, I'm going. You can kick me out if you want.

And I struggled through those goddamn days. It's all day, and sometimes it's all night. And you lose your voice about the fourth, fifth day.

And you just... Anyway, I got turned on to this book. It's cooler than Geltsubje's, which is...

Geltsubje is what they use in the winter debates. But a lot of my classmates from other monasteries were quoting this one. And it's better.

It's more clear. It's not better, I mean, it's just a more Western-style presentation of logic. So it's called...

de du nye kyi mun tsel means clearing away the darkness in the mind about the seven books on logic. The famous seven books on logic. Okay, so in those and other works...

Now, what did they say? We didn't cover that yet. So far all we have to this sentence is, if you hang on to that...

Okay, ready? If it weren't that Tsongkapa was referencing the Prasangika when he said that that is learned, then you would contradict these four and other books. And then he says about what?

He clarifies about what? ,RANG GI PHUNG PO DANG SEMS NI MI THON PA, ,THON PA'I RANG RGYAL THUB PA'I MDZAD YOD DU, ,RDZIN PA'I RTOGS PA NYID, I'm going to start here. RTOGS PA NYID This one idea.

For NYID, put one. This one wrong idea. Sometimes in English we can say idea.

She has some idea that I don't like. We don't say perception. We do.

We don't say realization. She has this realization that I don't like her. That's a different thing.

That means I really don't like her. But when you say she has some idea that I don't like her, it can be a wrong idea. The implication is it's wrong.

So this one idea that holds that the person, Kongsak, is MDZAD YOD, substantial, in the sense of, not or, or not in, in the sense of being self-standing, in the sense of being, twice, got it? Got to go backwards. The person is substantial in the sense of being self-standing, in the sense of being of an inconsistent nature with the parts of a person.

So he's saying substantial means, self-standing means, that soul is inconsistent with body and mind. That that one idea, according to all those books, is RANG GIS PA MAN CHAD GYI RANG BDA'I LUGS KYI DANG ZIN LHAN GYIS SU SHES PA is explained in those books as being LHAN GYIS. The inborn form of holding to a self in those people whose own system, or you could say Buddhist system.

I would say, yeah, you could say Buddhist. Our own side. RANG BDA'I LUGS People of our own system who are RANG GIS PA MAN CHAD.

What's MAN CHAD mean? MAN CHAD means on down. Now there's always a debate about whether the thing mentioned on down is in the group or not.

Everybody from 5th grade on down. Does that include the 5th graders?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, it does.

[Speaker 1]
So MAN CHAD does also, so you have to make it clear. So what he's claiming is, got it ready? Everybody from the lower middle way on down in our own tradition, meaning Buddhists, although you could translate RANG BDA'I as who's school is.

Probably that's more correct. No, but he's already talked about our own schools. I think it's Buddhist schools.

Everybody in Buddhist schools from the lower middle way on down believes that this one idea that the person is substantial in the sense of being self-standing, in the sense of being inconsistent with body and mind, is a inborn form. Got it? Now, hold on.

Put your seatbelt on. Okay, ready? If those four books and other classics say that the idea, that that RANG idea is inborn, who's left who would have said it's learned later?

Yeah, got it? Did they say the Prasangika believe it's learned? No.

But they said everybody from the lower middle way on down thinks it's inborn. So if somebody says, everybody in the room except Nick believes it's inborn, guess what Nick believes? Are you contradicting books that said the Prasangika believe it's learned?

Is that what he's saying here?

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
You're contradicting books that say everybody else except Nick thinks it's inborn. Got it? Not easy.

Yeah, it's also my in-guide. Got it? You okay?

Did those books say that the highest school of Buddhism believes that that tendency to think that the soul is basically separate from mind and body is learned? It didn't say that. It just said everybody else thinks it's inborn.

The implication is the Prasangika believes it's learned. Got it? And if you think when Tsongkapa said it's learned, that he wasn't talking about the Prasangika, you contradict them.

Would you like them to lose four books? You know, I do. That's a standard I have.

I stop, I go read the four books. But I don't read the whole book because then I'd never translate anything. But I go look for RANG RGYAL THUB PA NIR KUN THAG in those four books.

But if they haven't been typed in yet, it's difficult.

[Speaker 2]
Wouldn't it be RANG RGYAL THUB PA NIR KUN THAG if they don't explicitly say it?

[Speaker 1]
That's true, that's true.

[Speaker 2]
Wow, we're pretty well over time.

[Speaker 1]
Well, she lost six minutes. You got your six minutes back, so don't complain to the management. Are you kidding me?

[Speaker 2]
I'm kidding.

[Speaker 1]
Now the rest is easier. The rest of your text is easier. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
We have a copy of your...

[Speaker 1]
Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Could you just put it in the drop box? We have this drop box.

[Speaker 1]
Can I do it after all the classes?

[Speaker 2]
Today?

[Speaker 1]
I mean when I have some time.

[Speaker 2]
I can make a folder in the year one text folder for each text that says GMR version or something. Yeah, and I'll keep updating it.

[Speaker 1]
I put the date on the file. I always put the date on the file because I might change it tomorrow.

[Speaker 2]
And if anybody else wants to keep that as their version of the update, but I also encourage you not to look ahead because you'll get confused.

[Speaker 1]
I ask you not to look ahead at my notes because if you had looked ahead at this, you would have got confused. Okay. All right, take a break.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, wait.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. By the way, is that kind of soul our main interest in Buddhism? Is that what we want to say is the trouble of all samsara, that people believe in the soul?

Is that the big problem?

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
With the pen, for example? No, it's not. It's not that the pen has something inside it that's more pen or something like that.

I mean that's a lower idea of Buddhism. That's not the problem. It's the tendency to think that it's not coming from you.

So that's a less subtle form of self. Ours is more difficult. Ours you're doing, you're not doing once before you go to bed and you do your prayers.

Ours you're doing every second. Every moment of the day you're feeling that things are coming this way. It's more subtle.