Классика Алмазного огранщика: Верхний Срединный путь — Великие книги мудрости, занятие 23

[Speaker 1]
Five. Oh, okay. It has to do with, so I said, whether or not, could that be a hint, whether or not, not, not, something is, whether or not, just repeating words we already have, whether or not something is the perfection of wisdom, something, if something is something, or something isn't something, then maybe it isn't.

[Speaker 2]
This is, I actually can't read English.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, maybe if something, I know, I'm trying to give you a hint, I'm trying to give you a hint. If it's not the perfection of wisdom, if... That was pretty good.

[Speaker 2]
You were totally close.

[Speaker 1]
You were like, so close. That's what they do on Taught Without Words. If something, if something is a certain kind of proof, then it either is or isn't the perfection of wisdom, and if something is not something else, then it is or isn't the, I'll just share you the answer.

If you examine things and say that physical matter never started, then you're in the perfection of wisdom. But if you do say that there does exist the absence of starting, the starting of physical matter, that's not perfection of wisdom. So if you say...

How did you just hint to that? Well, because I was, I mean, I was just trying to say, if something's not, or if something is, that's how I hinted to it. It would have triggered it if it was, like, close in your mind.

Physical matter never started. You're asserting that there's a negative, that's perfection of wisdom. If you're saying that there's a positive thing that isn't...

[Speaker 2]
If you're saying the absence exists, then you're not in the perfection of wisdom.

[Speaker 1]
Then you're not in the perfection of wisdom. That's it. That's super cool.

Thank you, Geltsup J.

[Speaker 2]
And that makes me rub my hand.

[Speaker 1]
Next. So we only did, like, three lines of the text last time. No, not because it's...

That's true. Name any...

[Speaker 2]
It is true.

[Speaker 1]
Sorry, it's hard for me to come up with questions, but name any two of the reasons that... What color was the screen?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, I was kind of going to go there.

[Speaker 1]
Name any two of the reasons that Geltsup J. lists that determine the difference between the consequence and independent branches of the Manila School. I suppose we can all get at least one.

The independent branch requires two wits. No way. Is it even allowed to take a position?

[Speaker 2]
Whoa! Wow, nice.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Anybody else?

[Speaker 2]
Come on, Sue Geiger.

[Speaker 1]
Can you have your own position? She asked what she just said. Apperception.

Whoa!

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, okay. That's it.

[Speaker 1]
Those are two that I... Do we accept apperception? And do...

Does the school take a position, basically?

[Speaker 2]
And there was something about... Does the logic work?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, and then the self-powered reasons.

[Speaker 2]
Has Buddha wisdom in his mind?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Good. Yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 2]
You guys are freaking hot. You guys are hot.

[Speaker 1]
20 bucks for everyone. Was it just the school?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, mid-space. You have the plane, right?

[Speaker 1]
I do, yeah. But not the wallet.

[Speaker 2]
I can't hear. Common ground.

[Speaker 1]
Common ground. No, no, no. That was from something else.

[Speaker 2]
What was that?

[Speaker 1]
Was that one of the eight? About two tens.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, look at the...

[Speaker 1]
Maybe...

[Speaker 2]
I didn't write them all.

[Speaker 1]
He missed it. He did. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
There you go. And do we accept that the Buddha has wisdom in his mind? Yeah, somebody said that.

[Speaker 1]
I think he said it. But I put down these two. Generally speaking, do they accept the reasons of their own power?

Is it even possible? This is the two that I thought we would get.

[Speaker 2]
Well, I thought it was just the last two of the list that were the differences between...

[Speaker 1]
No, the whole list. Oh, the whole list. Is it different?

Yeah. We're going to talk about it today. The whole list are the questions.

We're going to talk about it today. And since I didn't cover much last time, I made the third question a Tibetan question with a little bit of... What is wrong-raking?

What does it mean?

[Speaker 2]
What is the English translation?

[Speaker 1]
That's easy. Yeah, I know. Okay, so this question is not for those of you who I would...

Those of you who know that I know that you know it.

[Speaker 2]
This is for the dharmas. What if you challenged people to do it without using a word that doesn't work on a waiter?

[Speaker 1]
Oh, that's an interesting challenge as well.

[Speaker 2]
That would not work on a waiter.

[Speaker 1]
Give me a word that would work on a waiter. I like it. If your name is word or better.

[Speaker 2]
Seeing yourself without a mirror. Seeing yourself without a mirror.

[Speaker 1]
I don't know if it's the exact... Can your mind watch itself? Can the mind watch itself?

Yeah, that's pretty good. And I might add in the same moment. In the same moment.

In a single moment. So I put it in Tibetan letters because I thought it would be fun because it was fun last time. One at a moment.

You guys ready? Wait. Wait, I'm sorry.

Oh, ha.

[Speaker 2]
Ha ha ha.

[Speaker 1]
What's this? That's misspelled.

[Speaker 2]
Rickmore. Rickmore. Is it?

Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
I knew that. No, I think that's how it was. He misspelled it.

It was that way in the text.

[Speaker 2]
Right, right.

[Speaker 1]
Rickmore. It's a weird expression. Okay, here it is.

A mind operating logically.

[Speaker 2]
Did I say that?

[Speaker 1]
No, you said... Ha ha ha.

[Speaker 2]
Why? I don't think... To be honest...

To be honest...

[Speaker 1]
If I said that, maybe it wasn't spelled wrong. Oh. Normally, Rickmore means to the mind.

To the mind. To the mind. I don't know.

We'll have to go look at the...

[Speaker 2]
I'm sorry.

[Speaker 1]
That raises a question. It could be Rick's. I don't know.

Yeah. It also could be that he spelled it wrong and I was trying to make sense based on the little notes that I had and like... Well, you better go look at it.

[Speaker 2]
Okay. It is what you saw. At least in this text.

[Speaker 1]
While Geshe-la looks at that, you guys tell me what's K to the G... Joke. Joke.

K to the joke. Yeah. K to the joke.

Oh, it looks like he wants to spell with an S. Uh huh. So that would mean to the logic of the mind or something.

Yeah. Establish in many different ways?

[Speaker 2]
Or establish by words? Establish by different...

[Speaker 1]
Like K. Yeah, yeah. It's pretty close, but...

Establish indifference. Oh, yeah. Ooh, that's a hard one.

Go. By the way, no Tibetan would ever do that without a shake. I know.

I knew you were going to say it. And Ben can vouch for me. I was wrestling with my Wiley and the fonts and I...

Just cut and paste from the Rigmor. Uh... Ha ha ha.

Well, I could have... Yeah. I could have just put it in Roman characters, but...

You guys know it? No. Okay, it means debate.

It's just... I guess it's an old word for debate or something. Yeah.

Gulwag means to argue. Uh huh. To argue.

Like even with your wife. But it came to be a word for debate. And the most famous usage is...

Nagul and Chigul. Nagul and Chigul. Our position and their position?

Yeah. Nagul... Nagul is our side.

Chigul is the other guy's side. It means previous debater and later debater. But it's always the word used for me against you in a debate.

Oh. The person who starts the debate is the Nagul. And the person who responds...

The respondent is the Chigul. And it's very, very famous.

[Speaker 2]
Chigul.

[Speaker 1]
Chigul. Yeah. Chigul.

Chigul.

[Speaker 2]
Later. Later.

[Speaker 1]
Chigul. Nagul, Chigul. Oh yeah.

Okay. So number four. Do we have the same perception of the object?

Common ground. Is it even possible that I have a Chichen that is the same object? Cool.

You can take the plane, sir. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah. What are we looking at, Mama?

[Speaker 1]
Um...

[Speaker 2]
Not from you. You may have to let go of the plane. No, no, no.

[Speaker 1]
It doesn't work like that. Keshla can take control. You know, I remember Rinpoche spending a long time on this.

And... And then Gyaltsabje, just through it, as we said, is kind of a non-sequitur.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
He just threw it into his book. He said, by the way, there's ten differences between the two middle and high schools. Okay?

And he just goes off on it. And I think it was on his mind. And I think he really wanted it to be in there.

And it's an extremely important subject. It's maybe more important than the text.

[Speaker 2]
You see?

[Speaker 1]
So, I think we should have a really healthy appendix. And it's kind of what he did. Yeah.

You see? And he was... Now I know, I studied it.

He was working on it. And it was on his mind. And so he put it in there.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
And I think it would make your book ten times more attractive to the general public. I mean, the people who know about Buddhism. If your book had a very strong appendix devoted to this aid, I think it'd be very attractive to people who know about Buddhism.

You know? If they had a clear explanation of the difference between the two Madhyamika schools. Because that's really the big difference between all the schools.

What makes you a higher middle way? What makes you a lower middle way? What's the difference?

What are the beliefs that separate them? Okay? Yeah.

So, I got this inspiration to put a really healthy appendix in your book. And so if you don't mind, I'd like to go off on a tangent. Definitely don't mind.

A planned tangent. And it's one of the most important subjects of Buddhism. I'm very excited about it.

So, and you know, I had this thing going on in New York where I would put together, like Donglan. I went through a thousand books. And I took the sweetest parts of Donglan and I made it into a lesson.

Right. But not my words. It's just a string of quotes from other sources.

And it's the best treatment of Donglan I've ever seen. It hasn't changed. It's 50 pages on Donglan.

And I'd like to do the same thing with your book. It's not as if one person has given a definitive presentation. You could be the one.

You know, you could put together the definitive presentation on the unique position. It's called the Eight Unique Positions. Okay?

Cool? And I think it'd just be really cool to do. So, it already fell into place.

It just fell into place in the last couple hours. I think it's amazing. I think, for me, it'd be a lot of fun to go there.

For real. And I think it's cool for everybody. Yeah.

We're sold. We're all very excited. We're sold.

I'll pay anybody off who's not sold.

[Speaker 2]
You know, I don't know about that.

[Speaker 1]
So, we're going to have some famous authors contributing to our appendix. Like Famous Moon.

[Speaker 2]
He's that guy. We're going to have Chanda Kirti.

[Speaker 1]
We're going to have Jayananda, who's a famous commentator in the Middle East. We're going to have this guy named Geltajay, who wrote a book called The Eight. And I found it.

Oh, wow. Okay? He wrote a book.

Is it called Gepa? No, it's called Jejang. Jejang means nose to myself.

Like, he was just taking notes. He was reading scriptures, and he made notes to himself about the eight positions. Made a little outline.

Because he didn't want to forget what he read. And I do that. I just chop things out.

Yeah. So, he has a Jejang in the Eight. And I finally found it.

People kept referring to it. First they would say, the great presentation on the Eight. I couldn't find it for anything.

And then I finally found it. It's called the Jejang in the Eight. Is it buried in another book?

No, it's a separate work. It's a little too long to add as an appendix. It's about 20 pages, which is a couple of years of work.

So, I don't think we need to go through the whole thing, but maybe we could chop pieces out of it. Lodro Leksang, who I had great hopes for. It's too spread out.

He's just spread it out all over his book. That chapter is misnamed. He doesn't treat the Eight in that chapter.

Somebody put that name on it. So, I'm sad to say we got a bail from him. Did you chop him?

But then I wrote to Art and I asked him, do you have any advice on this? And he said, umatidon. He said, keruk tenpa dage.

It seems like this is what we were talking about a lot. Well, I couldn't find it in there. And then I said, give me the page number.

I don't see it. And then he said, there's like 20. I said, but I'm looking for eight.

He says, there's like 20. So, I counted them. There's exactly 20.

Which really irritates me. Anyway, he's like, it's like 20 and it's exactly 20. Couldn't you say 29 or 31 or 19?

So, anyway, the starting point of this discussion of what differentiates the two Madhyamaka schools is, okay, here's where keruk tenpa dage says it starts. So, I got this little essay for you. And we can fill it in or we can take stuff out.

Here it goes. Umatidon. Thank you.

Okay, good. This is where, according to keruk tenpa dage, it all started. Okay.

He makes a quotation. He engages, okay, I'm going to read it from the back. He engages Jukpa in a commentary on the true intent of the root text on wisdom.

By Nagarjuna. By giving a presentation on the unique features. I'll say it again.

He makes his commentary on the true intent of Nagarjuna by listing the eight, by listing the unique features, okay. Who's he? Deayante.

I'll tell you who's he. Go to the commentary. And the commentary says, This system is unique.

Those of you who have enough intelligence, you've got to try to get it. Okay, you've got to try to understand it.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, okay. Is that a normal way of spelling sashe? Like without a...

[Speaker 1]
Exactly, beautiful question. Which one is this one? Beautiful question.

Which one? The spelling of Nagarjuna's most important work is by Chakpe Jipa.

[Speaker 2]
Chakpe Jipa? I mean, Anumana Kirti? Lemon.

Lemon?

[Speaker 1]
Oh. By convention. By convention, yeah.

Amongst scholars, we agree to misspell it. Okay. Okay?

Okay. We drop the S from sawashira. We drop the S from shira.

Okay? Sometimes you also see shira. And it might be, it might be an echo.

Echo means like when you name a book, if you can name it similar to a name that already sold well. It's called echo in marketing. It might be yeshe.

It might be the Y-E. It might be a subliminal reference to yeshe. Ye, which has no S.

Okay? That's my opinion. Okay?

So anyway, yeah, exactly right. I was going to put it down. I forgot to.

Sashe is the scholar's... Colloquial? Corruption.

You know. Of shira. It shows you're cool actually.

If you misspell it this way. It's like I'm cool. It's like wet.

In Paris they say wet, right? Wet. They don't say we.

I guess.

[Speaker 2]
I heard that. It's a sign.

[Speaker 1]
It's a sign. I'm from Paris. I don't talk like you.

Okay. So we got to find out which delpa. Yeah, right.

Which I guess you figured out. Yeah. I'm not going to show you.

Go read. Okay. I don't get to blame.

We all got to. I mean I'd like help from anybody who wants to correct my pronunciation. I'll help you out.

I'll say supply the words. Those who say. Okay?

Those who say. Kang.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
I'll tell you one more thing. Yang. Those who say.

And another thing. That what the cheda mawas say is dundam.

[Speaker 2]
The ultimate.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Those who say that what the first school, lowest, Abhidharma school. Sorry Stanley.

He's lower than you. It's not like you're the lowest. Those who say that the details.

What the details say is ultimate reality. Is what the umapa says. Kunzo.

Deceptive reality. Okay. Those who say that the details version of ultimate reality is actually what the middle way people describe as deceptive reality.

Okay. Nyam. Nyam disenpa de dak gi.

Those people who say that. They didn't get it. They really didn't get it.

At all. Yeah, yeah, yeah. They didn't get it at all.

What? They didn't get the tenshi. What tenshi?

Ume tenshi. Yeah, the commentary to the middle way. Not a commentary.

They're probably talking about entering the middle way. No, they're talking about Nagarjuna. Oh, oh, oh.

Yeah. Ume tenshi, right. Yeah.

They didn't get. They didn't get the real point. Dun gi de nyi.

They didn't get the essence. Yeah. Of the book.

Uh huh. You know. Yeah.

At all. At all. Okay.

Okay?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Somebody say it back to me whilst I eat it. Those people who say that what the detailists say is ultimate, is what the middle way people say is deceptive. Those people did not understand the essence of Nagarjuna's book.

Right. At all. At all.

Kono. Kono means exclusively didn't understand. Exclusively didn't understand it superly.

Yeah. Okay, keep going. Just kidding.

All right, guys. You guys, you can fix my pronunciation. And if it's just so bad that everybody's just cringing that bad, then everybody shut up.

Ngi tar njik ten le de pe. Len de pe. Cho ni njik ten pe.

Cho dang cho tung par. Cho. Is it par?

Yeah. Mirik pe chir te. Lung di ni tunmong mai yin no.

Sheb. Sheb. Sheb ke pa nam ki me par jao.

There it is. What? There's what Kedrup Temudagye quoted.

Oh, okay. This is the line that he was quoting. That's what he was talking about.

[Speaker 2]
Got it. Yeah. Coming from Chandrakirti.

[Speaker 1]
He said, what did Kedrup Temudagye say? Remember. The eight positions started from this sentence.

Uh-huh. The division of the positions started from this sentence.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
This is where it starts. Look in the commentary, you intelligent ones. Now.

I just want to get this right. Okay. Anyway, I'm going to go somewhere with this.

To say in this way that I would have put a mitsumba here. I want to work on that, okay? Yeah.

To say that there could be a transcendent truth. Uh-huh. And I would say, which is not equivalent to the knowledge of the world, is a mistake.

Okay. Because that's in keeping... To say that there could be an ultimate reality, which is something not the reality of the world, is a mistake.

And if you're smart, you better figure out what I just said.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah. Yeah. No.

[Speaker 1]
Because now we use two negatives.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
No, this says it would be wrong to say that what's beyond the world is of the world.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
Right. But that's the unique position of Nagarjuna. Nagarjuna goes to people and says, Yeah.

Whatever farmers think, I think. Don't think I'm some philosopher taking off somewhere. But my position explains why the world exists.

I'm not like beyond the world.

[Speaker 2]
But also, at this point in the text, Kelsap Jai just said... Kelsap Jai. Sorry, Kelsap Jai just said that if people understood the world as it is, if worldly knowledge was accurate, then we'd all be Aryans.

[Speaker 1]
No. I've gotten off to his other book.

[Speaker 2]
Okay, but this is the last thing he said.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Well, don't worry. This is all a big setup.

But the point is, somebody just said the detailest version of what's ultimate is what the middle way considers deceptive. And this author says, uh-uh, no, don't say it like that. Right.

You don't understand anything if you say that. Right. He's saying you didn't get the essence of what the version is saying.

We normally don't disagree with Abhidharmas. We don't disagree with farmers. Right.

Our version of the world fits everybody. Right. So you think that there's a...

we're missing a me. If there's not a me there, you have to read it that way anyway. I'm sorry.

Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Okay. So he's at least giving the Vaibhashikas credit for being better than Jigdambas, as it were, like people of the world, worldly knowledge.

[Speaker 1]
Oh. Where? Well, okay, I'll tell you what.

I didn't take it that way. Let's go to the commentary by Jayananda.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Now, I'm going to pop... I'm going to put GMR here, okay?

Later you'll thank me. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Thank you.

[Speaker 1]
But let's just say I'm not putting words into Chandrakirti's mouth. Right. Right.

This is Chandrakirti. Yeah. This is the most famous commentator on Nagarjuna ever.

And he says, don't give me some story that Nagarjuna somehow disagrees with the world. He's explaining the world. Don't say things don't work because they don't work ultimately.

That's not what he's saying. Okay? Don't say things don't work because they don't exist ultimately.

Nagarjuna says, things only work if they're empty. Things only work because they're empty. I'm not denying what the world says.

I'm explaining what the world says. Okay? It's a big deal in Nagarjuna.

[Speaker 2]
Yes.

[Speaker 1]
Let's go see if we get some help from Jayananda. Thank you. Who treated this same subject.

Right. And he's the only other person. Whoa.

Okay. Now, I'll give you some ammunition. When you say ultimate reality and deceptive reality, are you saying real and unreal?

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
No. That's the point. Right.

Okay. Deceptive reality is real. Okay?

It is real. It works. But it means it's coming from you.

Okay, got it? So can we say transcendent equals that which is ultimate? That which is beyond the world is that.

Sorry. Can we say that ultimate means beyond the world and deceptive means in the world? No.

No. That's the point. Okay?

They are not synonyms. Right. Beyond the world doesn't mean we deny deceptive reality.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
And of the world doesn't mean you're stuck with deceptive reality. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
Don't equate these two things.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Transcendent and ultimate.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
And deceptive and of the world.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
Don't equate those. Yeah. Okay?

Because our position explains the world.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Right. And what the world thinks explains the world, science, is totally mistaken. Right.

Don't equate of the world with deceptive and don't equate beyond the world with ultimate. I think that's what he's saying. Now here's Chayananda on it.

Okay. Go. Chitarshejavalasopasumte Jigtenbebecheshajavani Jidratmavadang Dodepedundam Pardakpaikam Nyingpaw Okay, good.

He's quoting Nagarjuna, I think. When it says, the way they think, okay? When you say things beyond the world, okay, those two lower schools, what they call, what they call, to be ultimate, kang yin po, and I think he's criticizing this idea, okay?

Don't take it as some people take it, that what they think of as ultimate is beyond the world, okay? Don't think that. Ultimate and beyond the world don't mean the same thing.

Why? Keep going. When it says, the way they think, okay, those two lower schools, what they call, to be ultimate, kang yin po, and I think he's criticizing this idea, okay?

Don't take it as some people take it, that what they think of as ultimate, kang yin po, and I think he's criticizing this idea, okay? Don't take it as some people take it, that what they think of as ultimate, kang yin po, Where were we? Okay, now you got to get chötsumpa and forget the word chö, okay?

Chötsumpa just means equivalent. So forget that chö. Don't get confused by the two chö's.

So, when you say, jikten pey chö dang chö tsum pa, it means equivalent to things of the world. So forget the second chö, don't even look at it. Equivalent to things of the world.

It would be incorrect. What does that mean? jikten pey chö dang ni jikten pey je tsuk dang ne drubpa yin gyi to say that things of the world are only established by those who live in the world, who follow the world.

And, kyi, disjunctive, to say that high subjects like the real meaning of impermanence, the real meaning of emptiness, the real meaning of no self nature, you know, exclusively without a self. To say that these are beyond the world, mayin, you can't do it. Don't say that.

Don't make a division in Madhyamika between what's of the world and what's beyond the world. It's all of the world. And that's beyond the world.

Okay? You all right? If you understand Madhyamika philosophy, it explains why seeds make plants.

It doesn't deny that seeds make plants. Seeds that are loaded make plants. Seeds that aren't loaded don't make plants.

We don't deny seeds. We believe what farmers believe. We believe what farmers believe.

I hope the point is that there's a subtlety of our viewpoint where you go beyond thinking that these things don't belong to the world. Our higher middle way, higher middle way, accommodates the viewpoints of the world. And lower middle way does not.

This is tumo mayimba. This is tumo mayimba. Our ideas, higher middle way, we are unique.

We say the world is beyond the world. And we say if you want to find what's beyond the world, go to the world. Okay?

This is our unique. Unique compared to who? All the other schools.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, lower middle way especially.

[Speaker 1]
Now, from that paragraph came the eight great distinctions between the two middle ways. From this section. Of Chandrakirti?

Yeah, of Chandrakirti. Wait, this is Jayananda. Commenting on himself.

This is Jayananda, sorry. This is Jayananda commentating on Chandrakirti commentating on Chandrakirti commentating on Chandrakirti. This is Chandrakirti's auto-commentary.

Yeah. Okay? Right, right, right.

Don't think I'm equating beyond the world with ultimate. And then just flip the detail us and the Madhyamika. It's not like that.

We accommodate the world. Okay? Accommodate the world.

And that is a unique position. Nobody knows how to do that except the higher middle way. Okay?

Got it? Yeah. Zen.

Okay, and we'll talk more about it. I think it's going to take some some really clever translation today. The point is Skip some of Jayananda's?

Yeah, I am going to skip some of Jayananda. Okay. And we can do it together or something.

Cool. I don't want to spend a lot of time on it. It's just my appendix.

Yeah, that's true. So you pulled these out of Keltuji. So this is the one we're already translating?

Is that? Well, I started with Ketuji, right? Ketuji?

Ketuji Tempadargye. Yeah, Ketuji Tempadargye, who said all this unique position stuff started from this quotation. Then I went and found that it was in Chandrakirti's own commentary to Chandrakirti.

And then Jayananda clarified it. We translated these ten already, I guess. Yeah, so I'm going to skip through these.

Yeah. I just wanted them in the same document. Right.

I'll put it together. He gives ten. Yeah.

Okay. He gives ten unique qualities. Now, Umajirin is probably the clearest presentation.

[Speaker 2]
Okay. Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
And then after that, I threw in Gyaltsepje's book on the eight. Right. He did a whole book on the eight.

That's exciting. But I started it with a summary of the book for you.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
So you know what's in the book, because we're not going to read the whole book, because that would take you two, three years. Okay? But I made a summary of it for you.

So you got the guts of his book. But actually, this is a lot more helpful. So let's read this together.

Yeah, good. Unique features. Yeah.

Which differentiate us. From lower schools. From lower schools.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
He didn't say just from Narayangipa. Uh-huh. Yeah.

It's not general.

[Speaker 2]
No. Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
So you're going to start getting overlaps. You're going to start seeing differences in the list. Yeah.

And I want you to get familiar with those first. Uh-huh. His ten is not the same as his eight.

It's not the same as anybody else's eight. Right. And I want you to be able to...

I want you to be so familiar with them that you can say, Oh, yeah. That's eight according to Gyatso Dharma. It's not eight according to Kirtan Dharma.

Something like that. Yeah. I want you to be so familiar with it that you can say, Oh, yeah, that one is an outlier.

Yeah. That one, some people say it's in the eight, but some people say it's not in the eight. I want you to be that familiar with it.

Okay. You're going to be the eighth expert in the world. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
That's great.

[Speaker 1]
So you can take these unique positions, which are not in common with the lower schools. Okay?

[Speaker 2]
Uh-huh.

[Speaker 1]
Even the main ones, if you restrict yourself to the main ones, two-ma. The numerous. There's millions of them.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
There's lots of them. Okay? But let's divide it into two.

All right. Okay. There's the tsawa-tamtsa-ge.

The main eight. There's the root eight. Yeah.

There's what I call the eight primary positions. Uh-huh. Okay?

And then there's the positions which you can consider extensions, tripa. Oh, cool. Right.

Or secondary, yenla. Okay? You can consider them, they branch off from the eight.

Okay? They're not unrelated to the eight. They are implications that snowball out of the eight.

Got it. Okay. Which unfortunately happened to be twelve.

Uh... To the art? Uh-huh.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah. Uh-huh.

[Speaker 1]
He just said it off the top of his head like he read it 20 years ago. Yeah. I think it's about 20.

Sit up, senior. Okay. Now, at the end of each form, Uh, yeah.

he says positive ones. This goes to your text, right? Tripa and kakpa.

Mm-hmm. Tripa and kakpa. And then he says, somewhere in here, kakpa.

Mm-hmm. For our positive statements, things are. And for our negative statement, things are not.

Okay? So he has them nice and organized for you. Go ahead.

I'm going to read a little slower because I'm not getting it corrected. Tangpo.

[Speaker 2]
Correct it. Don't be shy.

[Speaker 1]
Well, everybody. Yeah. If he's.

Oh. Tangpo. La-gye-yip-tay.

Mm-hmm. Rang-shin-gi-man-duk-pa-shil-je-bay-ngo-ne. Go on then.

Go on then.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, I didn't mean to.

[Speaker 1]
I was too nervous.

[Speaker 2]
Go ahead, man.

[Speaker 1]
I'm just kidding. Pakpa-la-tong-ngi-ngun-sung-du-tok-nyong-dang-tong. Den-zin-ngun-yip-dang-tong.

Chi-dun-yip-pa-tong. Shik-pa-ngo-por-yip-pa-tong. Che-pay-juk-pay-tong-cha-shi-lang.

Yeah, so Kedep Dhammadhargi has organized the eight unique viewpoints of the higher middle way into two groups of four. The first four are positive. The next four are negative.

Okay? Mm. By the way, but he prefaces them.

But he prefaces them. But he prefaces them by saying shir-shak. Here's an explanation.

Shir-shak. We had it yesterday.

[Speaker 2]
It was a long four.

[Speaker 1]
It was a long presentation of the four. Here's what we agree on before we start debating.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Shir-shak. Shir-shak means, we said Abhidharma-shir-shak, right? Yeah.

We have an Abhidharma hat on. Shir-shak. Okay?

It's very important when you walk into a debate ground, you announce what school you're going to do, because otherwise you're going to get wiped out, because they'll just take another school. Shir-shak. Okay?

Tonight, let's do Abhidharma, guys. Let's stick to Abhidharma, okay? I'm Abhidharma.

You're Abhidharma. Even Buddha was Abhidharma. Okay?

So let's stick to Abhidharma. Okay, shir-shak. Or shir-che, same thing.

Shir-che, okay. Same thing. Okay?

What's the assumption here that we all agree to?

[Speaker 2]
Mm-hmm.

[Speaker 1]
Mm-hmm. What? Rang-shin-gi-man-thupa.

Rang-shin-gi-man-thupa.

[Speaker 2]
Oh.

[Speaker 1]
Not naturally.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Not naturally. Okay? Now, distribute that to all eight.

Okay. Okay. Don't forget, I'm talking naturally.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, that's nice.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Okay? Distribute that to all eight, because in the end, they all come back to naturally.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Because the, even the lower middle way believes that fire is naturally hot. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Okay, even they say that. The lower middle way. Fire could never be wet.

Uh-huh. Which is close to saying a rosebud. You see what I mean?

Mm-hmm. It's all the same thing. Mm-hmm.

Okay? Okay, here we go.

[Speaker 2]
It's a mantra about shir-che?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
I'm sorry? Not established. Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Sorry?

[Speaker 2]
Not established naturally.

[Speaker 1]
No.

[Speaker 2]
He's an apron.

[Speaker 1]
No, he says, I'm assuming that all the eight, I don't want to repeat the adverb self-existently.

[Speaker 2]
No, I get what he's trying to say. I'm trying to get how the Tibetan matches that.

[Speaker 1]
He's saying shir-che.

[Speaker 2]
Mantra about shir-che.

[Speaker 1]
It's a priori that things are rang-shin-gi-ma-drupo. You'll need to unlock your iPhone first. Yeah, it's a priori that things are not established naturally.

In each of the eight, please add the words, not naturally. Rang-shin-gi-ma-drupo.

[Speaker 2]
Not established.

[Speaker 1]
Shir-shak. Yeah, not established as being natural. Yeah.

Okay, shir-che, go-ne, means keeping that in mind that I'm talking about ultimately. Mm-hmm. Okay?

Let's go. Okay, I read them all. And another author will say, in the end, all of these diseases come from the same virus called rang-shin-gi-drupo.

Uh-huh. To believe that anything could be natural. Yeah.

All these problems come from the same source. Uh-huh. Okay?

Papalattoni means that the Aryans have experienced emptiness directly. Yeah. If you're an Aryan, have you had a direct perception of emptiness?

So we're going to phrase them as questions? We accept or we don't accept? Yeah, we do.

Yeah, good, because it's the first of the four that we accept. If you're an Aryan, you have had a direct perception of emptiness. Yeah.

Now, who would not say that? We don't know yet. Well, it could be what you define as emptiness or selflessness.

Yeah, oh. That's interesting. Yeah, don't go there.

Don't you think, though, considering this is Ingwa Chidin, it might have to do with the direct perception of emptiness versus the direct perception of selflessness? Like tongni versus dakme?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Uh, no, we're going to... Well, it could. I'll say it could.

I'm not sure. Okay. And we believe that denzin is a nyunda.

Uh, holding on to the truth is an obstacle to nirvana. So believing that things are... Believing in the truth?

Maybe believing the truth to be... The tendency to see things as real is not a shidu. It's a nyunda.

[Speaker 2]
Uh-huh. Yeah, cool. That's kind of a big deal.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, that's a specific prasangika position. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's an obstacle to nirvana.

It's actually... More correctly stated, it's a nyomo. Uh-huh.

[Speaker 2]
Right, right, right. That's what I'm disagreeing with so far.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, right, right, right, right. Okay. Okay.

This one's easy. Anyone who can't get this has to leave the room. They have to go outside.

[Speaker 2]
They accept outer things. There are outer objects. There are outer...

[Speaker 1]
So should I... I'll just put it in. There are outer objects.

There do exist outer objects. Who says that? There are, well, the prasangikas.

[Speaker 2]
Good, yeah. Yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
As well as detailists. When you're in the bottom of the flower, you say that outer things exist. You get to the second school, you say no.

You get to the third school, you say no. You get to the first half of the fourth school, you say no. And then when you get to the high school, you go back to saying, yeah, there are.

It's one of the only things that goes like this, you know. Okay?

[Speaker 2]
I think it's only half of the lower half of the top school.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, okay, okay. Now, keep going. Sikpa ngopal yupa.

Can the ending of an object function as a functioning thing? That's what I was going to say. Can it trigger the next object?

Can the ending of a karmic seed trigger the result? Well, but saying yes, it can. You say yes.

We say yes. Yeah. Which changes our opinion of how time works.

How's that? Exactly. Sequentiality?

Yeah. Something like that. Does one moment's ending trigger the next moment?

Right. It's a long story. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Are we going to get there? We want to get to this.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, well, that sounds fun. I think we're going to spend a couple turns on this. Okay.

Now, for primary, notice I said primary. Yeah. For primary positions, which are negative.

Yeah. Okay, go. Did he say, by the way, that the a-primary assumption only applies to the first four?

He didn't say that. Cool. There's no foundation consciousness.

Cool. We don't accept apperception. There's no apperception.

Good. Let's see. What was the one that we said?

There is no ability of the mind to focus on itself in the moment. To see itself in the same moment. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Rangikitensikmepadang.

[Speaker 1]
Rangikitensikmepadang. There is no... Self-powered reasons.

Yeah, self-powered reasons. Good. There are no self...

Yeah, okay. I like self-powered reasons. Shenkye-mindupadang chepay.

Gakpe damcha shidang chepay gye yupey chir. Yeah. We deny that we deny that things could come from something else.

[Speaker 2]
We deny that we deny that... I think it's that.

[Speaker 1]
Anyway, we do things... Are things caused by something other than themselves? Okay?

Shenkye. Of course things could come from something else. That's the only thing that...

That's a long story.

[Speaker 2]
They don't come from themselves. We deny the position that they don't.

[Speaker 1]
Well, we'll get there. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Now, secondary positions.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Secondary positions. Chepay yamak tabu la.

Tumay yutey. There are many positions which are extensions. Chepay.

Of those primary positions. And can be considered almost secondary to them. This is the first position?

No, no, sorry. I'm looking at the... Chepay yamak tabu tumay yutey.

Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

And these are interesting. Let's go. Yeah, okay.

Surthang gi gyula neljor ngeunsung gyurpadang. Neljor. Neljor.

Thank you. Okay. This you have to...

This is a technical term. Yeah, I don't know. Munsum sama.

Direct value perception. There's a special case of it. Oh, yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Called neljor ngeunsung. Oh, yogic direct perception. Yogic direct perception.

[Speaker 1]
It is what's happening during the direct perception of emptiness.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
The Sanskrit is yogic. Yeah. It doesn't mean you're in Shavasana or something.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
It just means an altered state of consciousness in which you see emptiness directly. Whoa. Surthang.

What's... Surthang. You tell me.

This way. People... This way.

Yeah, this way sees. This way sees. Sosokewo.

Oh. Okay, so there is a yogic direct perception in the mind stream of Sosokewo?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah. Is it capable? Yeah, yeah.

I guess it has to be. Just that they are.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, yeah. Well, it's going to be... These are sexy and interesting, and if you learn them, you learn half of Madhyamika.

[Speaker 2]
By accident. Because they can directly perceive subtle impermanence.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, right.

[Speaker 2]
Or Chucho.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. There is a yogic direct perception in the mind stream of...

[Speaker 2]
A non-arya.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, of non-aryas. You have a non-arya. These are sexy.

This is fun. Okay. Now, next one.

How much time we have? We're out of time. One minute.

I'm just going to go through them myself. Okay, ready? Okay.

Number two. Of the two parts of nirvana, do you first achieve nirvana with a remainder or without a remainder? Different.

Different position. No, he just said what position. No, no, no, no.

I'm just kidding. Ha, ha, ha, ha.

[Speaker 2]
I'm just kidding.

[Speaker 1]
Does... Do all forms of the truth of the end of suffering have to be ultimate reality? All forms of the truth.

Ah... Ah... Is the meditative wisdom, which directly sees emptiness, the special one?

Is it... Can we consider it a special case of cessation meditation? Do we accept good deceptive things as well as bad deceptive things?

Can there be a correct deceptive?

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, cool. And we have a unique position on the point at which, on the point in the path at which you eliminate the two obstacles. Oops.

[Speaker 2]
Wow. Wow.

[Speaker 1]
Is foundation wisdom, which is a code word for lower ways perception of emptiness, apply to the wisdom of a non-arhat when they see emptiness directly? That's a tough one. Are all...

What do you call that? Are all conventional perceptions in the mind of a non-arhat unimpure? Okay?

If something is the mind... If something is a state of mind of a non-arhat, right? Is its own perceptive ability pramana or not?

Is there possibility of a pramana which is mistaken towards its object? Yeah, right. Right.

That's like a rope in the snake. If a thing exists, it must simultaneously be hidden and obvious. All objects are hidden.

All three levels of reality. Okay, great. Yeah, that's cool.

Then all kinds of... Chesed's memories, right?

[Speaker 2]
Memories, artsama.

[Speaker 1]
Are valid perceptions, as opposed to what happens in the logic school. Except there are many. Okay.

Valid perceptions. Now, listen. When you accept these eight primary positions, they end up...

In the end, they relate to our position that things don't exist in and of themselves. Okay. Now...

Come on. Okay, here's Gyaltsabje's eight from his book called The Eight. He wrote a whole book on it.

Okay. You started a few minutes ago. Nah, it's long.

And he divides them into three. Shi, lang, debu. Like tantra.

Right, right, cool. Shi means the original condition before you start studying Buddhism. Original condition.

Then path means while you're studying Buddhism. Debu means after you become a Buddha. He divides the eight that way.

He wants to divide the eight that way. And then he says, By the way, you can keep that division into accept and don't accept. It's true that there's four that you can accept and four that you shouldn't accept.

But I think you should put them into three. So he does both at the same time. Three times two.

Okay. So I filled them in for you. He's a mathematician.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Shi kap su. During your original condition, before you studied Buddhism. Even normally speaking, you got no kunshi.

We don't accept rang tsen. Which I hope means rang tsen ne ki dupa. Yeah, things.

[Speaker 2]
Examples.

[Speaker 1]
But it could mean rang tsen ne ki dupa. And we don't accept...

[Speaker 2]
I'm sorry.

[Speaker 1]
We do accept outer objects. So you got two not accepts and you got one accepts. I'm counting.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Relating to the path, de kone nyi tobay tap su rang gyu. Can you use a self-powered reason as a method of seeing emptiness? Then it's more interesting.

Not generally is it a legal logic. Can you use that to see emptiness? That's the real question.

That's a not accept. Although wouldn't the question be a self-powered reason? We don't accept that perception.

Not accept number four. We do have a special presentation of the two obstacles, nirvana and omniscience. Except number two.

Do lower way people see emptiness or not? Because according to the lower middle way, they don't. They see a selflessness, a degree.

A degree. Okay, so that's except number three. We do accept that lower track people see an emptiness which is a hundred percent emptiness.

Same as what a bodhisattva sees. Same as... Okay, related to buddhism, buddhahood.

We're almost there. Je bu kap su. At the point of the result, how is it that a buddha sees all things?

Okay. The total number of things. How is it that a buddha can perceive the total number of things?

Okay. Four of these relate to accepting something. Four of these relate to not accepting something.

Got it. Then I went through his text. Here's his eight, as he actually states them.

Well ma, the great lama gave eight. They don't fit his. And it's going to be interesting.

So the eight that you just did before, you split it up the way he gets it. Jay wants to split it up, but those are the eight that we already listed from... This is in his introduction to his book.

Oh, okay. It's straight from his introduction. The non-bolded is him.

I just split it. Right. But then when he gets into the text of his book, he says them differently.

Okay. And then well ma has a different opinion. Cool.

[Speaker 2]
That's an intense cliffhanger.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Next time, an exciting adventure is up.

[Speaker 2]
Can you send it to me one more time? In case I change something.

[Speaker 1]
You did change a couple things. Okay, you do the sashi, and I'm going to get this. Thank you.

Sashi.

[Speaker 2]
Sashi.