Медитации на пустоту: объяснение шагов к пониманию того, что ничто не является самим собой, занятие 25

[Speaker 1]
Okay, I have trouble with impulse tension, it's so hard, and I had to go back myself. I'm going to take you back, but not too long, because I know you want to go forward. So look, this is where we are.

We're in the mind-only explanation of how to meditate on emptiness. Her book is about how to meditate on emptiness. I think it's significant that the first sentence here was, I already told you what's the mind-only version of the no-self nature of people.

I already told you. Then I went back and tried to find where he already told us, because I don't remember he already told us. This is what he said.

All he said was, the independent group on down, say that the person is devoid of ze su dupa, right? Rang kya thupa. Substantial in the sense of being substantial.

He didn't mention specifically the mind-only school. He just said the lower middle way on down. Have the same idea about what it means to have no self nature of a person.

So for him, that subject is finished. Just throw them in with everybody else. About people.

But now about things. No self nature of things. That we have to talk about.

CHOS KYI BDAG MED SBYOGS TSUL NYID NYID DE When we get to how things don't have a self nature, we got to talk about two different arguments. One is NGOS DANG KHYAD PA LA KUN DAG PAS KUN DAG RANG GI RTZE NYID DU MA RGYUD PA The way we label the thing, and it's... Where's the word in English?

But really it means it's modifications. The stages it goes through. The cup, the start of the cup, the staying of the cup, the ending of the cup.

It's called it's characteristics. How we call the cup and how we call it's... You can say aspect, but I want to say it in time.

All right. No, it's... There's a word in English.

It's manifestations or it's the changes it goes through over time.

[Speaker 2]
Phases?

[Speaker 1]
Phases is pretty close. Anyway, so the question is, when I see a thing, and when I see it exhibit stages of its development, the starting of it, the staying of it, the ending of it, which here is called characteristics. Features.

Is it coming this way or is it somehow being ascribed by me? DAG PA Here, B-T-A-G-S KUN DAG What's the process by which I name things? What's the process by which I name things?

Don't forget, we're not talking higher middle way, we're talking mind only school. Is the way I identify things, how does that happen? How does it happen that I identify things?

How does it happen that I call something a car? When I see the parts of a car, or I see the whole car, what's the process by which I identify it? That's the first big subject of the mind only school's presentation of the no self nature of things.

Then the second part of how they describe the no self nature of things is when they get into the subject of CI DONS. Do outer things exist or not? CI DONS Here, right here.

CI DONS GZUGS SBYA Visible things, hearable things, are they outer things or are they emptiness of being outer things? Got it? These are the two great subjects of the mind only school's presentation of the no self nature of things.

Good. So one is, how do I identify things? How do I label things?

And then the other one is, do outer objects exist or not? These are the two great subjects of the mind only school's presentation of emptiness of things. How do they come into the six flavors of emptiness that you learned long ago?

One is, well the kunta is the labeling, or things are emptiness. But how did we say it in the six flavors of emptiness?

[Speaker 2]
Emptiness of being by definition, having a name by definition.

[Speaker 1]
Good. Emptiness of being what it's called. Emptiness of being called what it's called by definition.

A rose by any other name would be this name. And what's the application of that? It's something like ...

Is it ... Names don't apply to things self-existently. I believe we said problems.

You don't have to look at this as a problem. You can call it a problem, but maybe you could call it an opportunity. Something like that.

So in the six layers of emptiness, and later in Buddhism, it became ,GZUGS PA'I GZUGS ZHOD RANG GI MTSAN NYID KYIS MA GRUB PA, ,GZUGS PA'I GZUGS ZHOD RANG GI MTSAN NYID KYIS MA GRUB PA, It called it, it called what it is. ,GZUGS PA'I GZUGS ZHOD RANG GI MTSAN NYID KYIS MA GRUB PA, That it is what it is called self-existently. It's it called what it ...

And then we finished the first of these two, and we finished it in three parts, and you don't remember, but I spent like two hours trying to remember. What was that? Yeah, first one.

And then he quoted Thich Duc, he quoted a sangha. He went to a sangha, and he gave a nice verse from a sangha. It starts out, where is it?

There it is, yeah, Thich Duc. Yeah, it's called Mahayana Sangraha. Mahayana Sangraha.

And Thich Duc said, it gave three arguments why something didn't have to be called what it was. ming mi ngarul nol me chir, mangway chir dang mang de chir, de dang mi dang mang dang, dang de gangway drupak jen. If something was called what it was called by definition, gyur kyi shepay juk shir, rang gi tsenay gi drupa, yinpa rang gi tsenay gi drupa, then when you first saw a car, you would say car in your mind.

The car would be saying car to you. You wouldn't have to ask your mom, Mom, what'd they call that? If the name was attached to the thing, automatically, then the first time you saw it, you'd say kwa, get the kwa mom.

If somehow the name was attached to the object, ngarul nol, before someone taught you the name, you would think of it. You could think of it. Oh mom, that's a car.

If names were attached to cars automatically, rang gi tsenay gi drupa. Then he had two arguments about things which have the same names. Like Ishvara, he had three words for Ishvara.

Shakra, and some other word for shakra. So these are three different names for the same deity. But if the name attached to the deity automatically, then if there's three names, there's got to be three deities.

Three different deities. Got it? If there are three different names, it has to be three different deities.

Then he went the opposite. Does anybody remember? He flipped it.

[Speaker 2]
Two guys named Joe.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, if two guys are named Joe, then there'd be the same guy. There'd just be one guy. If names applied to their objects self-existently, then if they have one name, it'd always be one person.

Even if there's two guys with the same name. And if they applied to their objects self-existently, then if one thing were called by three different names, then there'd have to be three of them. And you'd have to understand the name the moment you think of it, and no one would have to tell you their name.

[Speaker 2]
You'd never have to have a vocabulary class.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, we wouldn't have to take Tibetan.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, now...

[Speaker 1]
So Utpal is going to be happy to know that I'm moving on. We went through the three arguments about names. And now we're ready to go on to what?

The second subject that they're interested in. Outer objects. So for him, pretty much the name thing is finished.

And he's going to go on to outer objects pretty soon. Or did he already? Let me see.

Anyway, a little bit more about... Let me see. Hang on.

I'm going to go back to ONA. It's a few lines above where we started. Yeah, we did start.

And I'm just going to review. And then we're moving on. ,'ONA RIG PA DE DAG GIS, ,'NGOR DANG SKYES BU LA KUN DAG PA'I KUN DANG, ,RANG GI MTSAN NYID KYI MA GRUB PAR MTHONG NUS KYANG, Okay, I like all your three reasons, and I can understand now that things are not called what they're called by themselves.

But, ,KYANG GSUM SOGS PHYI ROL DON GYI MTHONG BA JI LTAR RTOGS NUS But how am I supposed to grasp the fact that visible things, hearable things, etc. are empty of being outer objects? That they are not outer objects.

How do you want me to understand that? I got your first point. I got your first mind-only emptiness.

Things are not called what they're called automatically. I understand that. Now, let's move on to the second kind of emptiness that you mind-only guys like when you're describing the emptiness of things.

How are things not outer objects? What do you mean when you say things are not? When you say empty of being an outer object, which is your second kind of emptiness, what do you mean?

NUS DE Yeah, you can do it! We said, how am I supposed to understand? We said, you can do it!

NUS DE You can do it, don't worry. ,GZHAN MA THAGS PA LTAR, ,GZUGS SO RANG BZIN RTOGS PA'I GZHAN, ,GZHAN RANG GI MTSAN DU KYI GRUB PAR, ,KHAS PA NA DE TSE SNANG BA LTAR, ,GZHAN PA'I RTOGS PA DE GZHAN YUL NA, ,MTHUNG BAR GRUB PA DE GRUB PA'I RTOGS, ,MTHUNG BAR GRUB PA DE GRUB PA'I RTOGS, ,KYIS DE DAG RNANG BA'I DBANG ZHIN RNAMS KYANG, ,RANG GI RNAM YIN LA MTHUNG BAR GRUB, ,DE GRUB NA DBANG ZHIN RNAMS, ,RNGUB MA SOGS KYI RNAM PAR ZHANG BA DE, ,BYED DU BDE BA'I RNAM PAR ZHANG BA ZHIG, ,DE NAS ZHAL BA MA YIN GYIS, This is so cool.

Finally I got it. And this is the sexy thing. I woke up at four, I couldn't stop thinking about it.

He says, it's brilliant. It's super brilliant. Choney Lama says, the two are connected.

The two are connected. And I never heard anyone say that. I never heard anyone say that.

The fact that things don't have their names by themselves is why they're not out of order. I never heard anyone tie it together like that. And he has a logical progression.

Okay, ready? You can understand that things are not out of order. Why?

,GZHAN MA THAG PA LTAR, as I just explained to you. Okay, MA THAG PA means just. Just.

As I just explained to you. ,GZUGS SO RANG BRTZON LTA BU'I GZHAN, ,GZHAN RANG GI MTSAN NYID KYI SGRUB PAR BSKYED PA NA, BSKYED means Gag. It's a past tense.

If you, once you have denied, once you have disproven that things can be the object of what the mind takes them to be automatically, meaning name, okay? Once you kick that, once you cancel that kick, ,DE'I TSE SNANG BA LTAR, ,GZHAN MI STOB PA GZHAN YUL LA, ,THU BAR GRUB PA LA, then kick and grub come together. Gag grub come together.

In Adam's text we're going to have a section called gag grub, negatives and positives. If you denied this, and your text had a big one, that I believe it's the one where people could, no, your opponent proposed that he would prove why there's no scripture, that there's nothing that proves Buddha taught emptiness in the lower way, and there's proofs against it. You see what I mean?

You go khek grub. First of all, you can disprove the idea that the Buddha taught emptiness in the lower schools. And secondly, you can prove in many ways that he didn't.

Khek grub. You can disprove and you can prove. You can disprove that he did, and you can prove that he didn't.

Your text. So khek grub is a pattern. So if you disprove that things are called what they're called automatically, then you automatically prove that the state of mind which thinks that about them is mistaken about its object.

He's not done yet. He's not done yet. No, he's making it step by step.

So what you think is there, shen yu, shen yu. This shenpa means like shenpa shi drel, right? The four attachments.

In the study of perception, it means what you think you see, which is something that got its name by nature. This has to be called cappuccino. We cannot call it coffee.

Sorry, tea. It has to be called coffee. This is not, this, I didn't order this.

This is tea. I wanted cappuccino. Cappuccino is cappuccino.

This is tea. This has to be called cappuccino. You can't call this tea.

This is the source of all friction among countries, and people, and wives, and husbands. So once you understand that things are not called what they're called from their own side, then you understand that what you used to think about them was wrong. DE'I GRUB PA RTOG GYI, and when you prove that, then the power of that proves something else.

What? RTOG GYI DE DAG SNANG BA'I DBANG ZHIN RNAMS KYANG RANG GI GNOD YUL LA MTHU BAR GRUB That implies that even sense consciousness are mistaken towards their objects. The fact that you're thinking the wrong way about things because you thought they had to be named coffee, implies there's something screwy about your sense perceptions also.

There's something wrong with them. It infects. Now, MUN GCOD KYI DBANG GYI Very, very cool in the mind-only school.

Do you remember? Remember GCOD KYI DBANG GYI? MUN GCOD.

Big thing in mind-only. Huge thing in mind-only. No, what's GCOD mean?

Japanese text. Yeah, expression. What they say in the mind-only school is that you've been using words wrong for so many lifetimes that you're stuck on it now.

The wrong use of words has poisoned your mind. SNGON PAR GRUB PA'I DBANG GYI You're used to it. It even poisoned your sense perceptions.

You've talked about cups of coffee wrongly so many lifetimes that now you cannot even see a cup of coffee properly. Your mind is poisoned by billions of lifetimes of using the wrong language about things. I, me, give to you, you, I.

And we, me, get good karma. You see, that's how we should talk. Got it?

Our language is messed up. I, come on, who's I? You can't be I Geshe-la if you don't get Stanley coffee.

You're never going to get coffee. I didn't get a coffee. Bullshit.

You didn't give a coffee. Okay, got it? Language itself.

Okay, got it? Alright, so anyway, what he's saying here is that because you feel the wrong way about names, it has infected your sense consciousnesses also. Okay, you've been thinking about things wrong for so long, it affects, even you feel like, and this is the idea in the Wheel of Life teaching where every link is defective.

Your instruments, right? We talked about it in Buddha Buddha, your instruments are defective now. You can't see things straight.

Okay, your instruments were born of ignorance. Your eye consciousness is messed up. That's why it's part of the Wheel of Life.

The empty houses, Rangpa Geshe, link number five. Your sense objects, your sense instruments are broken, cracked, bent, distorted. You can't even see things correctly, even if you wanted to.

You can sit in a class all day and you'll go out there and you'll still see blues coming from blues time, because that's the nature of your eye. Because it was born of ignorance. It's powerful.

It's very powerful. So he says, just as your understanding of things and names is messed up, that has messed up your conscious, your sense powers. You can't see straight.

You can't hear straight. Every time you hear me talk, you think it's coming from me. No, because your mind thought the cup had its name by definition, that has created circumstances that when you were reborn, your sense powers are faulty, twisted.

They believe it's coming this way. We're getting there.

[Speaker 2]
I believe it's doing this.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, and we're going to talk about it. Okay, their dukma, if you establish that your sense consciousness is messed up, DBANG GZHAN LA LUNG PO SOGS KYI RNAM PAR BZHAG BA DE, PHYIR ROL BDUN GYI RANG BRAS RNAM PAR TSUL STE NAS ZHAG MA YIN GYIS, so when blue makes its appearance to your eye, okay, when blue makes its appearance to your eye, PHYIR ROL BDUN GYI RANG BRAS RNAM PAR TSUL STE NAS ZHAG MA YIN GYIS, it's not that that outer object is sending you an extra image of itself, TSUL. Yeah, it's not like the cup is saying, oh Geshe-la, here's what I look like. It's not that things, objects, it's the whole science thing.

The light of the sun is coming from the sun. It looks like this is sending me pictures of a cup. Every moment, oh look, picture, picture, picture, picture, hits my consciousness.

Oh look, cup. What's between? What's the medium?

What happens between here and here? What's going on? Is it like cloning another cup image and it goes boo-boo-boo-boo-boo-boo and it hits your eye and you see a cup?

Because that's what you think. Oh picture, picture, picture, picture. It's sending me, you feel like that, you really do.

Oh look, it's appearing to me as a cup. Look, I'm a cup. And you feel like it's sending you a picture to your eye.

You didn't, your eye didn't touch it. Something came across the medium, a medium. There's a, there's a distance, you see?

And so you feel like, automatically you feel like, because you believed it had its own name, you feel like it's sending images to your eye. He connects the two mind-only emptinesses together. It's brilliant.

It's amazing. It's really amazing. These three sentences are extremely important for the mind-only school.

SOGS KYI RNAM PAR BZHAG BA'I DE'I PHYIR RO BDUN GYIS BY the outer object, the cup, BYIR RO BDUN GYIS, down here, see? PHYIR RO, outside object, BDUN object, right? PHYIR RO, outside.

PHYIR RO BDUN GYIS, the outside object, the cup, DE'I, directs, right? DGE SPA, sends you, like DANG BA, it sends you, SWORD, to your eye, a copy of itself, a clone of itself. RANG RDA'I RNAM PAR, an image of itself, a copy of itself.

You feel like the cup is sending you pictures of itself. You see what I mean? You automatically feel that.

You always felt that. Think about it. What did you think was happening?

I didn't touch it. Something went from there to here. Did it go from here to there, or did it come from here to here?

You think it's coming this way. But how? Oh, GENS LA, it makes little pictures, every millisecond.

It's an image that comes off and goes here, and then another image comes off and goes here. You feel like that. That's how you feel about it.

Why? Because your consciousness, your sense consciousness is messed up. Why?

Because you spent billions of years thinking it was called itself. That's what it was. I'm very quiet in here.

I'm sitting in it. It's brilliant. It's very brilliant.

SHAR BA MA YIN, but that's not what's happening. It's not appearing this way. It's not sending messages to your eye, the way you always thought.

It's not. What do you think was happening between here and there in the past? It was sending you pictures, and they touched your eye, and then the eye reacted, right?

Scientists say the cones and rods, digital, some on, some off, and then you see an outline. Because why? Because images were thrown off of it and touched your rods and cones.

Science says that. Science says that. This is exactly what science is.

And then he says, MA YIN, that ain't what's happening. KYIS. Well, what is happening?

Now we're ready to start a class. RANG RNAMS MKHAN GYI DBANG BYAS RNAMS NGO SO'I DE DANG DE DAG NYID DU SKYES PA RTOGS PA'I RANG RNAMS MKHAN GYI DBANG BYAS Okay, ready? RANG RNAMS MKHAN GYI DBANG BYAS The sense consciousness which is appearing as a cup.

RANG means cup. RNAMS MKHAN, the one which is appearing as it. Meaning, your sense consciousness.

The visual consciousness which is appearing as a cup which now takes on cup aspect. RANG RNAMS MKHAN GYI DBANG BYAS RNAMS NGO SO'I DE DANG DE DAG NYID DU SKYES PA RTOGS PA'I At some point, you will understand that your sense consciousness is taking on an aspect of cupness. Your sense consciousness has taken on a cupness.

The cup projected a picture. It came to your consciousness and the consciousness took on the aspect of cup. It's one of the tsultrim deng nga.

Yeah, it's the appearance, right? It's the aspect. It took on, in the Yoga Sutra?

[Speaker 2]
A crystal, a ruby?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, putting a ruby on a white piece of paper and then the paper looks red. Okay, got it? It's infected, right?

DE DANG DE DAG NYID DU SKYES PA RTOGS PA'I Once you understand that it's really your sense consciousness is taking on the aspect of the object, NGO SO'I DE DANG RNAMS MKHAN GYI SKYES PA'I DANG RDZA'I PHYIR GYI RTOGS PA'I You therefore establish that the blue is of one substance with the sense consciousness, which is the mind-only school's refutation of outer objects.

[Speaker 2]
Did you say that one more time?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, your eye consciousness takes on an aspect of blue, right? Or brown, right? That's how you see.

But that's not happening from the outside, it's happening from the inside, from seeds in your foundation consciousness. The cup and your procession of the cup are the same stuff. Same stuff.

You're not seeing a cup out there. You're seeing a part of your mind.

[Speaker 2]
So this is the one that's the...

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, well, it ends up there. You're watching part of your mind because of all the steps I just took you through. It's not that little pictures are coming off the cup.

There's a mental karma. There's a seed in your mind. Cup's coming out of there and you're watching your own mind.

There was never any outer objects. Why? Because you made them yourself and they didn't have their own names.

Got it? You okay? It's very cool, right?

Nobody can deny, even in the old way, science would still say, the image peels off the cup. The image comes through your rods and cones. The rods and cones react to the color.

Well, they say that light bounces off it. Okay, light bounces off it. The photons are...

They're not just the same, no, it's not. And then... But what happens the moment after that?

But what happens the moment after that? The moment after that, you can close your eyes and you can say, I saw a cup. And you have a cup in your mind, you see?

Then you're looking at a cup in your mind. And the mind only school says, that's how it always was anyway.

[Speaker 2]
Like if you stare at the light and shut your eyes, you can still see the light.

[Speaker 1]
Not so much like that. Look at the cup, then close your eyes. And at that point, the cup is part of your visual consciousness.

It's now an image in the glass.

[Speaker 2]
But isn't that the difference between a visual consciousness and a memory of it?

[Speaker 1]
Well, yeah, but I'm just saying, you're looking at an image reflected in the crystal of your sense consciousness. The crystal of your sense consciousness took on an image, but it didn't come from getting hit by an image from the outside. It came much more simply from seeds in your own mind, ripening inside the sense consciousness crystal.

[Speaker 2]
I don't mind that he's saying that, but is he saying that that's established by the fact that...

[Speaker 1]
Things don't have their own names? He wants to tie it to that.

[Speaker 2]
Right, but it's not a proof.

[Speaker 1]
I don't know. I think it's pretty sexy. Think about it.

Read those three sentences. He doesn't go directly. He goes through steps, right?

You want to do them again? I know you want to do them again. I don't want to do them again, but anyway.

NUS TE Okay, here we go. NUS TE This is an answer to our question. Okay, I got your point about names, but how am I supposed to understand the no outer object thing?

And he says, look, you can. I'll take you there. SHES MA THAG PA I just told you, as I just told you, as I just explained to you, GZUGS SOGS RANG BRDZIN STOB PA'I GZHAN PHYIR RANG GI RTZE NI SKYES DUG PAR BSKYED It's not true that things exist in the way that the ideas that you have in your mind about name them from your mind.

Because your mind thinks they're named from their own side. This has to be called coffee. This has to be called good or bad.

You think that. Now we just cancelled that thing about names. Three different ways.

You would have known the name before you knew it. One thing with different names would have been multiple things. And two guys with the same name would have been one guy.

I just told you that. So that cancels the idea that you used to have that things exist the way you thought, about how you perceive things, how you name things, how you label things. DE'I TSE SNGA BA LTAR GZHAN PA'I LTO PA'I DE GZHAN YUL LA MTHUR DU PA So you understand that the way you thought about them before was mistaken.

Got it? DE'I RIG PA'I RTOG GIS And once you establish that, then the sense consciousness that also makes assumptions about what things are called, that's a pretty problem.

[Speaker 2]
That's the sense consciousness.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. The feeling that blue is blue. Even to sense consciousness.

KYANG RANG GI MNOD YUL LA MTHUR DU We can establish that they are mistaken towards what they think they see. Even the sense consciousness. Because of how it feels about it.

How you feel about blue. Why don't we put it that way?

[Speaker 2]
Not the eye, but the sense of awareness.

[Speaker 1]
Based on the sense of power.

[Speaker 2]
Are you saying the sense consciousness? Or the sense?

[Speaker 1]
Well, he says sense consciousness. Wrong shape.

[Speaker 2]
Does that have anything to do with, somehow related to the fact that a Buddha with all his senses experiences all different things?

[Speaker 1]
Well, that gets complicated. The Mind Only School would probably say that proves that it's coming from you. That proves it's part of your mind.

By the way, it's going to get more complicated. DE'I GRUB NA, DBANG GZHAN LA DNGOS PO SO'I RNAM PAR BZHAG BA DE And when you establish that, then when blue appears to the sense consciousness, PHYIR DU BDUN GYIS RANG RES RNAM PAR TSUL STE NAS It's not the case that the cop is sending pictures to the consciousness. It's not the case.

Well, what's going on? RANG RNAMS KYIS DBANG GZHAN LA DNGOS DANG DE DANG NYID DU BSKYED PAR STONG NAS Your sense consciousness has taken on an aspect of blue. MO SO RANG RNAMS KYIS BSKYED PA DANG ZAD CIG RGYU PO And that establishes that your sense consciousness and the blue itself are the same stuff.

And it was never an outside object.

[Speaker 2]
But it doesn't prove it.

[Speaker 1]
It doesn't prove what?

[Speaker 2]
It doesn't prove that as an outer object, it doesn't exist. No, it doesn't prove. We can't jump from this to...

[Speaker 1]
It's appearing... The only place it's coming from is your mind.

[Speaker 2]
Well, but it doesn't prove that there is nothing...

[Speaker 1]
It grew inside your sense consciousness before it was outside.

[Speaker 2]
But that's what he didn't establish.

[Speaker 1]
I think he did establish it.

[Speaker 2]
He didn't say where it came from.

[Speaker 1]
Well, let's see. He says ZAD CIG RGYU PO It has been established. No.

Past tense. Doop.

[Speaker 2]
He said it was blue, but he's not saying that there's something out there that's making it blue. Yeah, but the crystal is blue. Is it because it was near your mind or because it was near the thing outside?

He didn't say. He didn't say that.

[Speaker 1]
Well, sit with it. Read it a couple of times. Let's go on.

Because he goes one more step. He goes one more step. Maybe it'll help.

Probably not. DE'I GRUB NA If you establish that, DE NO SO RANG RANG BA'I BSHAD PA LAS DE'I THA DE'I KYI STON PAR DO It is established that the blue and the sense consciousness which appears as blue are empty of being separate substances. Which in the mind-only school means that they're the same, coming from the same seeds.

Yeah, empty of coming from different seeds. Therefore, PHYI ROL GYI DON MED PA GONG DU SPYOD PAR RGYUD BA Anyone could grasp GONG DU SPYOD Anyone would come to the conclusion that there don't exist other objects. GONG DU SPYOD You can get it.

He says you can get it. GONG DU SPYOD means get it. You can get it.

SPYOD, you will. In future tense. Let's keep going and then if you want we'll come back.

But your text is going kind of slow already. By the way, I think that last page is epic. Very important for words text, for example.

[Speaker 2]
So I would just say don't read my translation from turn four because I need to totally read that.

[Speaker 1]
That's why we're not translating them into Chinese until we finish them. Because you get another quarter way through and you say, oh, everything was wrong. At the end, there's no more reason to say everything's wrong, even if it's wrong.

Okay.

[Speaker 2]
We got the words in there, but they're all jumbled.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, please read. Please read.

[Speaker 2]
GZHAN YANG GZHAN YANG, DBANG BSHAD LA THOS PAS PHYI DANG MI ROL PA LA PHYI ROL DU DGON BSHAD LA STE PHYI THA BU'I GZHAN YANG Okay, good.

[Speaker 1]
GZHAN YANG Now he's kind of shifting gears. GZHAN YANG means I'm going to go at it a different way. Maybe it'll help you.

But that last exchange is very, very important. Let's do it again if you want next time we meet. Let it cook for a while.

GZHAN YANG, moreover, DBANG BSHAD LA THOS PAS PHYI DANG ROL PA LA If we're going to deny ROL PA, outer objects, PHYI DANG, relative to our sense consciousnesses, this is the LTOS that comes in Sugeng's text as THOS GRUB means dependent. It's the definition of dependent origination. THOS GRUB This THOS means to rely on.

LTOS It's very similar to words for seeing, so be careful. And it probably relates to them. DBANG BSHAD LA THOS PAS PHYI DANG ROL PA Relative to our sense consciousness, if we are denying outer objects with reference to the inner sense consciousness, that they are separate.

Here's sense consciousness half an inch inside here and there's outer objects over there. If relative to that inside-ness thing, we are denying the outside-ness thing, then can you say a little bit more about what you mean when you say outer object? Can you say a little bit more about what's it mean when we say outer object?

We're asking the writer. Can you say more about this outer object thing? Because so far you've just defined it as opposed to the inner sense consciousness.

Can you say a little bit more? Ready? Hello?

Okay. DE LA THO MA DON MA DE NYIN Please read.

[Speaker 2]
DE LA THO MA DON MA DE NYIN GYIS PHYI DANG ROL ZHIG DRIN GZE'I RGYUD PA BYAMS PAS Okay.

[Speaker 1]
You want to know more about outer objects? What people think about outer objects? THO MA Let's start with THO MA DON MA DE NYIN DON MA BA Let's start with the object talkers.

The object talkers. It means PHYI ROL DON MA BA Yeah, the two schools that like the idea of outer objects. Yeah, good.

The two Hinayana schools. Let's talk about what they think is an outer object and that will help us understand about outer objects. Got it?

DON MA means PHYI ROL DON MA BA PHYI ROL DON MA BA Those who claim there are outer objects. Those two groups. By them.

Let's talk a little. CHUNG ZAD CHUNG ZAD means just a bit. Let's talk.

RGYUD We had that RGYUD in NYON PA RGYUD PA? Express. Let's talk a little about what they believe, how they believe, the two outer objects exist.

Let's talk about how they describe outer objects. Got it? Because they are the two schools that we, the Mainomi school, are denying.

Don't forget, we're only up to the third school. What's your hat right now? Yeah, I'm a Mainomi hat.

Okay, the crucial word here is how am I doing on time, by the way?

[Speaker 2]
Nine minutes?

[Speaker 1]
RGYANG means to a distance. To a distance. RGYANG RIM means distant.

Like you're looking at something to a telescope. It's RGYANG. RGYANG PHRAD means bridges the distance.

cuts the distance. RGYANG PHRAD So, they believe that a person, RGYAS BU, who's grasping blue or cop or whatever, they believe there's some separation. The distance is they are separated.

I'm sorry, RGYANG PHRAD should be you are at a distance. RGYANG PHRAD Yeah, no. Sorry, I take it back.

RGYANG PHRAD means they believe there's a way in which the object jumps the distance.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
TSUL DU Right? Somehow GZUGS RGYANG PHRAD KYI TSUL DU You're going to shrink the distance when you perceive something. Somehow that distance is going to be closed.

The gap is going to be closed. But RGYANG PHRAD means RGYANG PHRAD means it exists at a distance. I'm here, it's there.

Therefore it's outer. Their description of outer is it's out there. It's out there.

You can say out there for RGYANG PHRAD, how's that? It's out there. Got it?

It's to a distance. It's separated by a distance, how's that? RGYANG PHRAD KYI TSUL DU SNGA BA LTAR GRUB PA It appears to exist at a distance and that's what PHYI DON means for them.

It's at some distance from me. So it's an outer object. That's how they describe an outer object.

It's at a distance from me. So it's outer. It's over there.

I'm over here. It's outer. That's pretty simple, right?

So when you TSUL KHYIR, you can say coffee cup. Visible thing. When a person is perceiving a coffee cup then they perceive it to exist at a distance and therefore they call it an outer object.

They say there do exist outer objects. Things that exist far away from me. Therefore it's outer.

SKAD PAR PHRAD DAG MANG BA'I And more particularly the detailists say DE LTAR RNAMS BA'I SNGON PO LTA BU MI DBANG GI RNAMS MED THUB PHRAD DU BRDZIN PA BSDOD Now there's this idiom for how the Vaibhashikas think it happens. Then it's nasty. RNAMS MED THUB PHRAD Say RNAMS MED THUB PHRAD It occurs 23 times in a million pages.

It's a difficult idea. RNAMS MED THUB PHRAD does mean there's contact through a medium. RNAMS MED means without a medium there's contact.

Somehow there's contact between my sense power and the cup that cuts across the medium. THUB PHRAD means contact, makes contact. THUB means to make contact.

THUB CHUNG means I met him yesterday. We hooked up. THUB PHRAD means also to touch, to make contact.

THUB PHRAD means touch. RNAMS MED means without a medium. Now that's who's cool.

Now I'm just going to anticipate your confusion. Which I spent, look how many pages and notes I had on this. That's how much I got.

It took me that much to learn this idea. And where it comes up is in the discussion of if as the Vibhashikas say there's some kind of magic bridging across the medium. If there's a contact of my eye with that cup somehow, some kind of magic bridging, then shouldn't it be the case that if something's a meter away or something's a hundred meters away I should be able to see them the same.

That's how people fight the Vibhashikas. They want to say there's some kind of magic mediumless THUB MED, right? RNAMS MED Mediumless contact of the coffee cup with the eye.

And then their opponents say well then, you should be able to see a cup a hundred meters away as well as you see a cup ten inches away. If that's the way contact is made between a cup and your sense power, if it's some kind of magic bridging of the distance between, then you should be able to see it as well. And they have a very interesting answer.

And it's kind of cool. And they say, yeah, but my karmic seeds are not as good for the thing far away. Which is a very higher school answer.

And by the way, his text, what's one of the eight differences of the two Madhyamika schools? What's one of the features of Prasangika? CHI ROL DON YOD They go back to saying there are other objects.

Higher than mind only. Mind only says no other objects. They're supposed to be smarter than the Vibhashika and the Sutras.

And they say, we establish no other objects. Then Madhyamika, higher mind, he says, nope, there aren't. And the Vibhashika's got it pretty good.

It is seen. See, it's a very rare case where the fourth, up four B school is saying one school's got it right. Number three.

It's very cool. You get Madhyamika, Prasangika defending the Abhidharma school. Which is only going to happen once or twice.

Cool? Okay, so... Yeah, I woke up at 3.30 and decided that was medium. I looked up everything, I studied every single occurrence of it in the Ancad log down also. And there's nobody explained it. Nobody.

But I'm inferring from that argument. I'm inferring from that argument. The people who said, well, if it's that way then things at a distance should be as clear as things nearby.

So I take it to be no medium. You see, there's contact across the medium. There's no namba.

Literally namba means it doesn't have to appear to you. It doesn't have to send appearances to you. There's some kind of magic contact between your sense power and the cup.

It just goes... And it's not like it bridges the medium or something like that. There's no aspect of a cup being sent out to your eye consciousness.

[Speaker 2]
Got it. Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
The Mind Only School would say, yeah, duh, because it's born inside your eye consciousness. This image came up inside your eye consciousness. Think of your eye consciousness as glass.

As made of glass. And think of the image as just forming inside the glass. A picture of something forming inside the glass.

And that's the Mind Only School. But I encourage you, even if you don't buy it today, See, somebody of the stature of Choney Lama has said that this worldview derives from the other worldview. Somehow, the fact that things aren't called what they're called by themselves relates to the fact that outer objects don't exist.

Somehow they're connected. Because I've never heard anyone say it. But logically there must be a connection somewhere.

It's a single school. One school has two ways of describing the no self-existence of things. And there must be a connection between the two ways they describe it.

If his three or four part progression between the two kinds of emptiness is true, it's landmark. It's very important for understanding the Mind Only School. Then it's not just two unrelated ideas of the Mind Only School, which doesn't make much sense.

You see what I mean? He says they flow from one to the other. We can say we don't understand yet how exactly.

But the fact that he thinks they do is kind of sexy. Okay? And that's from your text.

And by the way, his text is, I mean, his is going to get really hot. And it's going to go here also. What are the three things focused on in the foundation consciousness?

What does foundation consciousness focus on? Three things.

[Speaker 2]
Object.

[Speaker 1]
Blue. Sense consciousness. Holding blue.

And the two C's for misunderstanding what they see. Which doesn't mean they look at those seeds. It means those seeds infect it and it thinks that the blue is outside.

And that's the definition of foundation consciousness. And one of your eight features of your school in your appendix is KUN ZHI MED And RANG RIG MED Two of the great eight features of the Prasangika. We don't...

Bullshit. Foundation consciousness is bullshit. The whole thing is bullshit.

Nothing is true about it. That's his school. Forget it.

Let's go back to Abhidharma. Outer object. Okay, got it?

That's Nagarjuna. That's Nagarjuna. By the way, I mean, technically they don't have it quite right.

They just generally agree that there's outer objects but not for the same reason. Okay. I'll give you a challenge.

It's coming up in your text. Does that mean the blue is not physical in the mind-only school? I'll throw that out to you.

Because Choney Lama accuses other mind-only people of misunderstanding this point. Is the blue physical? That's the common belief of why they're called mind-only.

Choney Lama objects to it.

[Speaker 2]
That's the common belief of why they're called mind-only. That's the common belief of why they're called mind-only. That's the common belief of why they're called mind-only.

That's the common belief of why they're called mind-only.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Am I downstairs now?

[Speaker 2]
No, you have another class.

[Speaker 1]
One more class here. Oh, hers is hard. Can you ask that when I do go downstairs that I can project my computer?