Бен Крамер — Книга 2: Драгоценность истинной мысли (Геше Йеше Вангчук о Дхармакирти), занятие 10

[Speaker 1]
What does Dura consist of? Many topics. Sure.

Yeah, there's how to change your oils. Clear thinking is among men. Divisions of intelligibility.

Elected topics within Dharmakirti, extracted from Dharmakirti's book on accurate perception. Sure. Yeah, right.

I think so. I think arguably on the, on the works of accurate perception in general, which, which might include more than, you know, also Dignaga. But yeah, roughly.

Yes. I think you forgot an S in Dura, if you care. I probably do.

B, B, S, D, U, S. Oh, yeah. Okay.

Yeah, that's, that sounds right. Condensed. Yep.

Thank you. Everybody know how to get rid of the transcript? Yeah.

What?

[Speaker 2]
At the bottom, click on live transcript, and then the little arrow up arrow, and then it'll say hide subtitles.

[Speaker 1]
I got it. Thanks. Chavachuky Senge also revolutionized the method of study for students of the great philosophical classics.

How did he do that? And what's the Tibetan term for the systematic study of philosophical topics in the monastery? He organized the Geshe course in the way that it is still practiced in the great monasteries.

How so? In what way did he organize it? What would it look like?

Go ahead, Venerable Gilson.

[Speaker 3]
He divided it into smaller sections, and then they studied each of the smaller sections.

[Speaker 1]
And? In smaller groups. In smaller groups.

[Speaker 3]
And then they debated them.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, cool. Yes. Smaller groups, and then they debated.

And what do we call that course of study? Or someone who does that course of study, for example? Geshe.

Geshe Weshenian. Or Tsenipa? Yeah, cool.

Yeah, great. Great. Great.

Hey, Ben, how do you get all these answers out of a word without paying him anything? I don't know. Yeah, it's catching them on the backside.

When no one's looking, there's a steady stream of money. What Indian author was Chuky Senge critical of in his teaching? And who would he favor instead?

He was critical of Chandrakirti. Cool. Anyone other than Nick or Word in Tibetan?

Or Rupala. I'd be cheating, too, I think. But I'll eventually widen it to you guys.

Chandrakirti in Tibetan. Awesome. Awesome, you know that.

Rob knows it. What's that story? Chandrakirti's name in Tibetan.

How do you say moon in Tibetan? In Tibetan? Dabla?

Yeah. Yeah. Famous.

Oh, interesting. Almost. Yeah.

Right. You had Kirti. Yeah.

Cool, cool. Oh, who did he favor instead of Chandrakirti? Instead of Chandrakirti.

Instead of Chandrakirti. Dharmakirti? Sort of.

Sort of.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Broadly, the text said that they were. The logic.

[Speaker 2]
I have it in my notes. Those stupid Abhidharma guys.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, yeah. Oh, it was. Yeah, the logic school and the detail of school.

Yeah. Yeah. Wow.

Cool. You don't hear that too often. No.

Right. I think it's neat because he wrote all these books from the perspective of that school, and it's so rare that we get books like that. But I don't know.

Like, it's not a straw man. He meant it. And even if he's wrong, at least he's arguing in good faith.

I find it sort of charming. Geshe-la, I have some questions here. So I, yeah, I probably wouldn't notice.

I've already noticed some of the same problems that you may notice, especially the last two books I was pretty confused about. I think I figured it out. That's nice.

Cool. But let me check, okay? That's cool that he did a commentary on the five books of Maitreya, right?

[Speaker 2]
It is cool.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. We're just starting that with Tim's text. Commentary on the Two Truths in the Middle Way.

Yeah, a commentary on the Ornament in the Middle Way. You notice he's favoring lower Middle Ways books, right? I didn't put it together until now.

And I don't know how you can write a commentary on Shantideva and not be higher Middle Way. Right. That would be interesting.

Yeah, I mean... Yeah, right. Yeah, maybe he's having...

No, I can't... What I was guessing was that the author of this biography has listed the auto-commentary first, and then he's making a big deal about how the root text is available alone. KYANG means alone, without the auto-commentary.

You see what I mean? And that's sort of similar to what Tsongkhapa did, actually. But all I can make of this is that he wrote the auto-commentary to clearing away this darkness of the mind of accurate perception, right?

And then there's a separate book which is... KYANG MA means just the root text itself, without the auto-commentary. But why you would list it that way and in that order, it's kind of weird, you know?

Okay, yeah, that was hard for me. That confused me for sure. And I think he's having nesting problems.

But... Okay. And then I don't think I...

You know, I thought I found him, and then I decided I didn't find him. I must have found outlines. Oh, I think I found them.

I think I found them and we sent them off to Sunam. Oh, great. Okay, okay.

Are they very long? Yeah. Yeah, they're long.

They're two pretty long texts in ume. Oh, good. Okay, great.

And then I also did see the outline, but that was very short. That was just a couple pages. Yeah, okay, okay.

Sounds very interesting. Good, okay. Yeah, I should say.

So what's Kyung doing here? The Kyung is alone.

[Speaker 2]
Alone.

[Speaker 1]
Isolated, yeah. Without the auto-commentary, yeah. Okay, that's strange.

All right, okay.

[Speaker 2]
Is there more than one auto-commentary?

[Speaker 1]
I doubt it. Yeah, I doubt it. Then Ben, I would change that and to the...

Oh, right. Well, I'm gonna have to change more than that. So yes, I will.

Yeah, I was stumped. You're right, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. Sure, deal.

I'm gonna bring this down here to... Here. Oh, yeah, let me check.

Nice. Good. Nice.

This is perfect, actually. I hate to say it. It pains me to say it.

That's good. Okay, cool. I'm trying to find something.

Maybe I don't like the font. Yeah, but that's what... You're just gonna have to put up with this Valentino Longo type.

I'm sorry. No, it's perfect. It's very, very good.

I might, when you have a very extended list, you might consider separating it with semicolons. That's the only suggestion. Interesting.

Okay. And there were a lot of ands. Each part of the list had ands in it, and it felt a little clunky, but I didn't feel like there was an easy solution to it.

Nowadays, I've been using that and symbol, like cause and effect or something, when they tie together very closely. And when there's a lot of ands already in the list, you know? So the members of the lists had the and symbol and then the and for the penultimate entry.

Yeah, yeah, exactly. And my editor doesn't like it that much. I just ignore her.

She's finding a hole through her bottom lip right now as we have this conversation. And she still loves us, but... She does.

By the way, I have big news for you guys. Yeah. This came out yesterday.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, wow.

[Speaker 1]
Wow. A paperback. Cool.

Extremely beautiful printing. It's some kind of special vinyl or something. It's a mat on the outside, and the whole book is very flexible.

I don't think it's ever going to fall apart. And it's... For the New Year's party.

It's cool. Very beautiful. That's the first copy.

That's the checking copy. All right. Boss, one last thing.

I want to ask you my daily bibliography question. Yay. That's what I like to hear.

So Geshe Isha Monchuk says that Master Ravi Gupta wrote two commentaries on both the first and second chapters of the commentary on accurate perception. I guess he did. That was not what I found.

In fact, I'm going to have to make this a little smaller, and I'll even put this on one page, and that'll help. What I found... I found two commentaries, but what I found was this one, which is not...

It just says a commentary on the commentary, right? The Vartika Bharti. I can't tell if this is the kind of thing where I would need a Geshe or the like to look and see if this is somehow a commentary to the first and second chapter, especially because this other one is ostensibly...

Well, not just ostensibly. It is called a commentary to the third chapter, of all things. Can you go back to Geshe Yeshe Wangchuk?

Sure can. Right. Yeah.

LOP PUN NYID MA'I BAD PA'I TSE PA'I SEMS NU LAS KYI NYID DANG PO NYID Well, this just says a commentary on the two... It implies one book that covers the first two chapters. Is that what you thought?

Ah, it was not what I thought. And so if this was a commentary... Yeah, yeah.

...on the first and second chapters... Yeah. ...then that would be super. And then we don't have to talk about the fact that there happens to be a third one that he didn't mention it. I would be surprised that he didn't mention it, but... Not only that, but then I would want to...

And I did try. I just ain't... You just didn't make me enough like you yet to be able to look into this book and figure out...

It was not clear to me that this is somehow a commentary on the first and second chapter. Oh, that would be pretty easy to check. Just look for Liu Dumbo and look for Liu Nipa.

Definitely occurred to me to do that. Yeah, and it'll be there. And then look in the Colophon.

I'm going to try that again. So far, that's... Yeah, I did not...

I don't think I looked... Maybe I didn't look in the Colophon. I did look for Liu's and did not find it that way.

But I'm going to look again and then I'm going to bug you again should I come up. Let me check the format of the whole thing.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, please.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, me and Utpala have been debating whether to put a hyphen between valid perception as an adjective. Oh, that's going to have a huge impact on my life personally. Yeah, but that's not the name of the folder either.

The name of the folder is Logic and Perceptual Theory. Oh, okay. Yeah, you're right.

That gets it out of the question. Yeah, that's funny. Whoops.

You can check it in another entry. Oh, I know better. That's just a straight up boo-boo.

Yeah, the rest is good. The rest is all good. God bless.

You're making momos. I'm just warning you. Yeah, well, unfortunately.

Still, it's a long time before I get to the point where Utpala doesn't have to check each of my momos thoroughly. Yeah, that's always confusing.

[Speaker 2]
Do you have two spaces after that act period? I can't tell.

[Speaker 1]
After the act? After the author's name and before the title. No.

I didn't think so. We put two. Oh, we do?

Yes, we do. Yeah. The world is moving ahead, but I'm still in the 50s.

Okay, all right. Yes, you're still well. It's because you still work on that typewriter at home.

And I'd like to say it's all really exhausting for us that we get all these typewritten pages that we have to put up with. But if it makes you happy.

[Speaker 2]
You know, we should do that.

[Speaker 1]
I vowed a typewriter to do my senior thesis. Really? I think we should count the time that we have to spend adding that extra space and then tell Geshe-la how much money he's spending.

Oh, that's right. For each of us to do the extra space. That's pretty good.

It's obviously double virtue, which quadruples in the next lifetime. You can save many years on the 2,000-year project of translating all the great books. All right, boss, I'm going to give you the plane.

It looks great, though. Congratulations. I'm working on it.

That's pretty good. Hey, Xiaoping, how does Stanley feel?

[Speaker 3]
Hi, Geshe-la.

[Speaker 1]
Are you in Malaysia or something?

[Speaker 3]
No, no, no. Right now we are still in LA. So it's 5 a.m. here. We are waiting for the results. And then we get a result and get approved. Then we can get on the plane.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, I thought you were already approved. Okay, so you're on the same time zone as the San Diego girl. Yes.

All right, let's make this bigger. That's why her droopy eyes look like mine. Again, I'm super happy to be doing this.

This is the best thing I could do with my time. You know, it's inconvenient for all of us. But I try to pump myself up and say it's some kind of bodhisattva activity to get up at such a miserable hour.

Well, it's easy for Nick to say when he gets to do the class from a sauna every morning. Is that sauna outside or something like that? Yeah.

Isn't it cold? It isn't chilly? Well, I have it on to a low temperature.

That's cute. That's funny.

[Speaker 2]
I know.

[Speaker 1]
This is a luxury version of being in the doghouse. Everyone thinks it's hilarious. It's a little box.

I'm like scrunched up in here. We gotta call it... The commentary is going to be called from a sauna.

The commentary from a sauna. There's a lot of heat in this. Okay, we finished.

So he's going to list the topics of the Dura as found in Chakpa Chukyi Senge, which are, you know, to me it's very interesting. We finished the RIGS LAM CHUNG BA which means the Dura is divided into RIGS LAM CHUNG BA, DRING, and CHE BA. These are lesser topics of logic, right?

Or more fundamental. Okay, Dan, go ahead. Lesser in this case means more fundamental?

Yeah, I would say so. I'd hate to say lesser in that sense. Hey, Nick, I'll give you something to do.

Check him. You, Tom. Translate.

Yeah, also we've got the six... What's sound and what's C? The way we count is...

Yeah, C means how to calculate. I would say parse. And in Dukdra, it's genitive grammar case, okay?

So how we parse the genitive grammar case. Yeah, and I'm going to take you through an example, and then you'll get it, okay? Yeah.

Because that's the sixth case, Geshe-la? Yeah, that's the sixth of the classical grammar cases, following the Sanskrit, actually. There's a different name for that, isn't it?

They just call it... Well, I forget what they call it. Jala, or something like that.

But sometimes they just call it the sixth case, you know? Dukdra. So yang here is not and, or also, this is yang, like, referring to grammar?

Or is this yang? Oh, this yang means... He also wrote a second group of topics.

Then gak shi tsul. Now you got that. Okay, so then this is the way of calculating the...

Yeah, exactly. I would say calculate... With the genitive, parsing is important.

With gak shi, I wouldn't say parsing. I would say, you know, how to calculate it, or something like that. Then dripang...

I'm sorry, but gak shi... Oh, this is interesting. So if you say, dun gyi shi der chu chen, right?

Take this place in front of me. Bunpa me de, tse me ma mikpay che. There's no bunpa in the spot in front of me.

And that spot where something is not is called a gak shi. Okay. Well, does there need to necessarily be nothing there in order for it to be a gak shi?

Yeah. Okay. And then dripang...

I mean... Dripang means question and expansion, and we're going to talk about that, okay? How would you...

I mean, you got any hints on translating the word gak shi then? This is like an... I mean, it's like an empty space, or it's like a...

Oh, you know, I would expand it out. I would say a place where something is absent. A location of absence or something.

Absent, you know. Okay, okay. Something like that.

And nam shak sok. These are for Lord Denglong. What's that mean?

Oh, for me, some intelligent folk. Yeah, medium intellect, okay? Yeah.

People of medium intellect. What's the gyu and lop gyu? I don't know.

Who are? Is it the present participle? Future participle.

Who will be students? No. Lop is a verb here.

Right, right. Well-studied.

[Speaker 2]
To be studied.

[Speaker 1]
Topics to be studied. Lop gyu means topics to be studied, okay? You would translate it as things that those guys have to study.

Okay. Yeah. Or have to learn.

Okay, good. I thought it'd be fun if you want to... Let's read a dukdra for fun.

Cool. Dukdra tsi tsul. Let's parse a genitive here.

I went to Adam's doodler and got it for you, okay? And then you'll be able to translate it with confidence. Okay.

So, I think Adam should check you if he's here. I don't see Colorado on my top, top screen. Oh yeah, I'm here.

Please go. Let's go, Adam. duk je nam shak shepa la.

Yeah, and I'll tell you, there's a joke here. Normally you wouldn't put a possessive on dukdra in this case.

[Speaker 2]
That's funny.

[Speaker 1]
I think he's trying to make a joke. Okay. Yeah.

What's it mean? Some jerk comes along and says, consider omissions. Good.

What's it mean? It's... Oh, it doesn't work as a realization, as an understanding?

It must be a sema, which topas ngupos. Oh, it must be, yeah, okay. An accurate perception which realizes functioning things, working things.

Yeah, which perceives... Now there's a difficult R there, ngupor. Yeah.

Which technically means it must be an accurate perception which perceives things as being working things. Okay. Okay, but isn't that kind of, isn't the R kind of yucky because it's a yin?

Oh yeah, the R definitely has implications. It's not by accident. Yeah.

If you wanted to say perceives working things, it would just be ngupo topa. So he has something else in mind. He wants to say it perceives things as ngupos.

Yeah. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
And... Sema yinpeyichir.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
By the way, is that a correct statement? Is sema yinpeyichir. Oh.

Let's take omniscience. It must be an accurate perception which perceives things as changing things, basically, because it's a correct perception, accurate perception. Do all accurate perceptions perceive things as changing things?

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
Right. So that's why it's a... It's a khyapa matrung.

Right, it's a khyapa matrung. Yeah. Okay.

tengyel gyi selwa. Selwa means the dukje chua of a tengyel. Okay.

Right? Basically number two. Component number two.

What is component number two here? Component number two is that omniscience is not necessary. No, no, you can't mention omniscience.

Oh. Oh. Okay, it's just...

Just give me number two. Okay, but doesn't the yin refer to omniscience? So how can you do...

how can you say it without referring to the object? Oh, I guess you... okay, I'll let you do that.

Yeah, okay. Let's take... So omniscience is an accurate perception which perceives things as changing things, right?

Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

selwa la. du-len tapa. If you tap the len du, this is ngep, ngep.

And then it past tensed it like su-wen dab or ku-wen dab. And it means to give an answer, okay? Tap means to give it if you give the answer, okay?

So if you say du to the selwa... Okay, yes. nam khen ngepur tokpay tsema yinpar du.

This ZRIG means it must be appropriate to parse it as meaning nam khen is a ngepur tokpay tsema, which is what you said, you know. He says, well, if you ask me to give you the second part of this logical statement, I would say it's correct to parse it as omniscience is an accurate perception which perceives things as changing things, or as functioning things, okay? That's not different though, right?

I mean, this is still what we've been saying. Yeah, it's exactly what you said. And you know, I wouldn't say there's a problem with it yet.

Okay. Okay, here's our objection. Here's our objection.

Okay, please. Okay. Ona, dak ne yin na ngepur tokpay tsema may yin pey tap har tel.

Right, down.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. So, so then, yeah, it would, then it would, then it could not be, then omniscience could not be an accurate perception which realizes, oh, oh, I'm sorry, what, Dogme, yin na, what is it, is it, oh, oh. Yeah, this is just, this is just a way of saying yupa yin na, yupa yin na.

Oh, oh, oh, I see, consider things that have no self. Yeah, which is everything in the universe. Yeah, consider anything which is not itself.

Then that can't be an accurate perception which realizes that things are working. Yeah, good, so we come back with, if something has no self nature, which is a Buddhist way of saying everything in the universe, right? Then it can never be an accurate perception which perceives things as functioning things.

We come back with, if something exists in the universe, it could never be an accurate perception which perceives things as being functioning. Okay, that doesn't follow yet, okay. Okay, let's keep going.

Okay, nang ke che chen, nang pa ta ke che ma yin pa chao. Yeah, so right, consider omniscience. It is an accurate perception which realizes that things are working.

I'm not sure why we circle back to that. Uh-huh. TSE MA YIN PAS PHYIR ZHES PA'I THEL GYUR GYIS ZHEL BA LA BRDOD LEN MI THEG PA'I PHYIR Yeah, he just repeated the whole logical statement that we started with.

We repeated. By the way, this is the reason for our THEL GYUR, okay? So we said, well, it must be the case that if something is not self-existent, then it cannot be an accurate perception which perceives things as being functioning.

Because you said that the second part of your little logical statement, okay, could not be answered with, you're correct, you're correct. Nothing in the universe can be a TSE MA which realizes that all things are working. And things, because it's not true, is what he's getting at.

And then... Yeah, there's still got to be something wrong with the TSE MA, okay? There's something wrong with saying that something is an accurate perception which perceives things as functioning.

There still has to be something wrong with that, okay? Let's keep going. DER THAL?

Yeah, that... That's true. Yeah, it's correct that we cannot say right to your TSE MA.

We cannot say it's correct to say that omniscience is an accurate perception which perceives things as functioning, okay? Because...

[Speaker 2]
Keep going.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, and by the way, our last reason was because we can't say that that's correct was our last reason? Yeah, we cannot agree to the TSE MA. Okay.

We can't answer correct to the TSE MA. Okay. Okay, here we go.

DELAN, DELAN, LATEP... Oh, sorry, LATEPE. NAM KHENG NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA YINPAR NGUR CHE CHIG GRIG PA KHANG ZHIG NAM KHENG NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA MA YINPEI CHIG Yeah.

DE DULAN THRA PA'I When you do give a yes, I agree to saying that NAM KHENG NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA, okay? YIN, NAM KHENG NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA YIN When you say DUL to that, what you're agreeing to is NAM KHENG NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA YINPAR DUL CHE GRIG PA KHANG ZHIG See, GRIG PA means it would be appropriate, it would be a possible interpretation to parse it in a certain way, okay? Now, could you parse this?

I'm going to give you a little assignment. NAM KHENG NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA YIN Okay. Is there a way to parse that mistakenly?

Well, I tried to. Could you pause at different moments and parse it wrongly? Oh, yeah, yeah.

You could, NGOPOR could be an adjective referring to NAM KHENG. I mean, which maybe it is. I mean, I guess that's okay.

It is. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But you could, NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA YIN It's not immediately obvious to me how to do it wrong.

The TSE MA? It could be TSE MA YIN or TSE MA YIN. MA YIN would be a good one, yeah.

Yeah, that would be a good one. Omniscience is not the measure of perceiving something as a functioning thing. Yeah, that's a possibility word.

That's definitely a possibility, okay? TSE MA YIN PA If you pause there, if you pause there. So anyway, the punchline is that we have to mis-parse NAM KHENG NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA YIN somehow, okay?

Which brings up the subject of mis-parsing, okay? Okay, and then what are they saying would happen if we mis-parse it? Yeah, let's read it.

Let's keep going, okay? NAM KHENG NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA YIN PA'I PHYIR Yeah, because it's not an accurate perception which realizes that omniscience is working. No, well, so far, the way we parsed it, omniscience is not an accurate perception which perceives things as functioning things, but it is, right?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, it is, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
If you parse it normally, it certainly is. Omniscience perceives both functioning things and existing non-functioning things, right? Yeah.

Okay. Yeah. Okay, by the way, it's probably technically impossible to translate this correctly.

Okay, SA BAR BDOD NA If you agree that omniscience is NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA, I'm going to put it this way to get out of the problem, okay? If you agree that omniscience is NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA, then NAM KHENG CHOS CAN Keep going. Yeah, oh, okay, then NAM KHENG CHOS CAN Consider omniscience NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA MA YIN PA LTA'O MA YIN PA LTA'O?

Oh, yeah, then it cannot be an accurate perception which realizes that things are working. BDAG MA'I YOD PA'I PHYIR Because it is an example of a thing that has no self-nature. Which means that YOD PA'I PHYIR, YOD PA'I PHYIR, okay?

If something YOD PA'I, then it cannot be NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA. Okay. And that still doesn't make sense the way we usually parse it.

Okay, let's keep going. Maybe it will reveal itself. Okay.

KHYAB PA SKAD You know, you just... That's your KHYAB PA. That's your...

You said that's necessarily the case. DUR MI NGOD TE NGAM KHYEN CHE CHEN And that would be a stupid thing to say because consider omniscience. NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA YIN PA LTA'O Now, the way he spelled the LTA'O here, the way he spelled his SELWA here, you have to read it the way word suggested.

Oh, okay. It is not a thing that is the measure of... that measures what...

I'm sorry, it's a measure of realizations as... Yeah, something like that. Here, let's do the THOG, okay?

Okay. Just read it, yeah. TSE MA YIN PA'I PHYIR ZHES PA'I SONG GYUR GYI SELWA LTA'O DON LEN THAB NGAM KHYEN NGOPOR THOKPE TSE MA YIN PA LTA'O DE PHYIR TSIG PA'I YIN PA'I PHYIR Yeah, it is a possible interpretation, or it is a possible parsing of this to say that that omniscience is an accurate perception which sees that omniscience is a functioning thing.

Oh, okay. Gosh, boy, do I wish... Yeah, now I want to go back and take another stab at the whole thing, right?

Yeah, and you can... Let's keep going, and then... Let's keep going, and you can go back to it later.

Okay, let's just keep going. NGAM KHYEN CHOS CAN And that's why you're saying it would be basically impossible to translate correctly because English won't let you preserve the ambiguity or something? Oh, yeah, you're going to have to...

It's going to be extremely difficult to translate this part when Adam... It's not your text, it's Adam's text, right? Okay.

Good for him. Yeah. NGAM KHYEN CHOS CAN YOPAR THOK PEY TSE MA YINPAR THA Oh, I should have looked closer.

Hey. Yeah. YINPAR THA Okay.

TSE MA YINPAR CHOS SHEYP PEY TONG YUR GYI SEL WA LA DUN LEN THOP PEY NGAM KHYEN NGAM KHYEN YOPAR THOK PEY TSE MA YINPAR DUT BYA'I TSIG RIGS PA YIN PA'I PHYIR Yeah, so he wants to read it as NAM MKHYEN CHOS CHEN NAM MKHYEN YOD PAR RTOG PA'I TSE MA YIN PA'I PHYIR By the way, is NAM MKHYEN YOD PAR RTOG PA'I TSE MA? Yeah. Yeah, NAM MKHYEN is one of the things in the universe.

Yeah, sure is. Okay? Yes.

So that's no problem. No, it shouldn't be. Then we say...

I'm not going to go through the whole thing, but let's do one more. Okay? NAM MKHYEN CHOS CHEN YOD PAR RTOG PA'I TSE MA YOD PAR RTOG Oh, okay.

Okay. Yeah. So he's talking about this YOD here before THAL.

YOD PAR THAL. And what he's saying is, you guys have to be sensitive to the huge difference between saying YIN and YOD. Yeah.

I would say NAM MKHYEN YOD PAR RTOG PA'I TSE MA YIN. Okay? Omniscience is an accurate perception which perceives that things exist.

Okay? But is NAM MKHYEN the existence of accurate perceptions which perceive that things exist?

[Speaker 3]
No, I mean...

[Speaker 1]
No, it's not, because that's RTOG PA'. Shoot. Oh, right.

Yeah, okay. The fact that there do exist accurate perceptions which perceive that other things exist is RTOG PA'. And NAM MKHYEN is not that.

Could it mean have, has here? Yeah, it could. It could.

But Nick, that would be correct. That would be possible. And this shouldn't be...

Yeah, yeah. Now, that's all. I don't think, you know, this goes on quite a ways, and it's not going to be part of your text, okay?

But just be sensitive. I'd like to make one point, that I don't think it's restricted to the parsing of the genitive. I think it's generally a discussion of parsing.

Okay. Okay, let's go see a RGYAL GZHI. I put the RGYAL GZHI in here.

Can we just look at that last one one more time? I'm sorry, can we look at that last one? I just, there was one thing I didn't understand.

Where was it? Ah, there, there, there. Whoops, we lost it.

This one. I just didn't know GOS. YIN GOS.

Oh, YIN GOS means, YIN GOS means whether you... GOS means to insert, here. Whether you insert YIN or whether you insert GOS.

Of course. Okay. Cool.

Yeah, thank you. Okay, so let's go back to your text. Now we're on how to calculate locations of absences.

Okay, yeah. All right, and let's see if, I don't remember what I put for you here. Yeah.

That's all. Places where an entity is not. How to CI TSUL.

How to parse and calculate that. How to arrive at a place where a thing is not. And then there's a lot of questions about how we treat GAG ZHI DANG GCIG, for example.

To be the same as a place where nothing is. There's a big discussion of how do you treat something which is the same as a place where nothing is. Yeah.

And usually when you say SDUG GIS SHES DU CHUD CHEN, DBUN PA MED DE, DNGOS PO MED PAS CHUD, let's take this spot in front of me. SDUG GIS SHES DU CHUD CHEN, DNGOS PO MED PAS, there's nothing here working. I'm sorry, there's no coffee cup here, because there's no working thing here.

Okay, that's GAG ZHI. Okay. How do you describe places where things are not?

Because it gets a little tricky, because nothing's there. Okay. Okay.

And by the way, I heard a very respected scholar one day tell me this was all just bullshit. And I strongly disagree. I think it is the perfect preparation for seeing emptiness.

Now here's GYIS PHANG, question versus expansion. I got you a different dura, which is a pretty famous one. It's called the YONGS CAN DURA by Phorbo Chok.

And let me see, here's a nice little easy example which will nail it down for you. So please, please read. And I think, I think Adam should check you, because it's logic.

DUR NA, GYIS PHANG, GYIS KHYER PAR MI. Yeah, and I'm going to say, in brief, what's the difference between a question and an expansion? I call it an expansion.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
BUM PA PHYOD CHEN, LTAG PA YIN PA DAO, ZHES GYIS NA. Yeah. Are you saying that BUM PA is LTAG PA?

Okay. Which is going down, right? LTAG PA YIN PA DAO.

Okay. So when you ask somebody else, are you saying that coffee cups never change? Is that what you're saying?

[Speaker 2]
Okay. BUM PA PHYOD CHEN, LTAG PA YIN PA DAO, ZHES GYIS RIGS ZHING YIN DU LA, KHYANG RTEG LA.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, when you go down with the LTAG, you could read it, see, okay? You could parse it. If it goes down, you could parse it as, do you agree, are you agreeing that a coffee cup never changes?

Is that what you're saying? Okay. And then it's possible he could respond, I agree.

Yeah, I do believe that. Okay. Okay.

Go ahead.

[Speaker 2]
BUM PA PHYOD CHEN, LTAG PA YIN PA DAO, ZHES GYIS RIGS ZHING YIN DU LA, KHYANG RTEG LA.

[Speaker 1]
BUM PA PHYOD CHEN, LTAG PA YIN PA DAO, ZHES GYIS RIGS ZHING YIN DU LA, KHYANG RTEG LA. Yeah, and play with this, okay? Hey Ben, if I take out the karma after PHYOD CHEN, Okay.

BUM PA PHYOD CHEN, LTAG PA YIN PA DAO. BUM PA PHYOD CHEN, LTAG PA YIN PA DAO. BUM PA PHYOD CHEN by itself, the statement BUM PA PHYOD CHEN, LTAG PA YIN PA DAO.

Okay, what if you parse it that way? What if you parse it that way? Oh, then, you know, the consideration of a coffee cup, as it were?

I'll give it to you this way. BUM PA PHYOD CHEN, LTAG PA YIN PA DAO. What's that say?

Oh, the fact of something being a coffee cup is unchanging? Is that unchanging? Is that unchanging?

Okay, that's my question to you. Yeah, it is. So, what he's saying is, you could expand it in a different way.

You could ignore the karma, and you could say BUM PA PHYOD CHEN. The fact that BUM PA PHYOD CHEN, or the fact that vases could be the thing that you're talking about, the fact that vases could be the thing that you're talking about, is that LTAG PA or MI LTAG PA? Wow, okay.

That would be LTAG PA. Yeah, because it's a fact. Because it's a fact, yeah.

Weird, but we never see a PHYOD CHEN work this way. I mean, we never see, when we say, you know, blank PHYOD CHEN and then, you know, any quality with a YIN. I mean, when do we ever see that quality not apply with that YIN to that subject?

I'm going to answer with his answer. Are you ready? I'm going to answer with his answer.

PHYOD PANG GI BSKYED PA TZAM NI DE LTAR YIN ZHING Look, that's a simple example of the difference between, you know, a simple question and an expansion of a question. GZHAN DI'I KHOR RIGS PA'I BYUNG NAS THAG SA RAG TU RIGS DU RAG ZLOG NAS BSKYED PA'I DUG You know, you want to know more about it, Ben Kramer? He's talking to you.

I suggest you go read the RAG TU RIGS DU RAG and stop bothering me. Super. Good chat.

Nice talk. Thanks. By the way, the only great commentary to the RAG TU RIGS DU RAG was discovered by A.L.L. Somebody walked into the computer center with it and we printed it. I'm sorry, we inputted it and we printed it. It was one of our first books. It's extremely rare and we found a wonderful commentary to it.

And the abbot of Harappa sponsored the printing, which is Kyongla Rinpoche in New York, who's the only surviving Harappa Geshe from Tibet. I think he's a hundred now. So, pretty cool.

That's time, Geshe-la. Anyway, it's all... Apparently, Chakpa Chuksengyi was fascinated by the difficulties that can arise because of parsing problems.

Okay. An assignment, boss? Yeah, hang on.

The next part is simple. We finished the topics for beginners and we finished the topics for medium people. The next one is so easy that I'm going to give you more than that.

Let's keep going here. I want you to finish this part to start to the Sakya Pandita. Okay.

What it is, by the way, it's simply a list of the names of the 11 chapters of his book on logic, which was probably the first great Tibetan book on logic.

[Speaker 2]
Cool.

[Speaker 1]
By the way, we're going to use the Sakya Pandita's book heavily in words text tonight. Okay. Which is kind of exciting that you guys cross over.

Oh, cool, okay. We're on to the next critical author in the Tibetan lineage. Yeah, great.

Okay, exciting. Cool. Okay.

Okay, thanks, boss. Wonderful. All right.

See you, Sachi. See you guys soon. Nick's going to give us four minutes to peepee.

We have an eight-minute break now.

[Speaker 2]
Whoa.

[Speaker 1]
And come back here for Seiji's diamond mining class. Hi, everybody. Oh, I see.

We have a break, and Seiji's going to be here with a diamond mining class. Yay. Yeah, he's the boss of DCI, so it's going to be the ultimate final word on diamond mining.

And I'm sure he's got really great ideas. He's a creative, smart dude. So enjoy that class.

Don't miss it. Okay. See you guys soon.

Okay, guys. Thank you. Thank you, Yoshua.

Thank you, Ben. You're welcome. Yay.

Thank you for doing this class, Seiji. Thank you, Nick.