Бен Крамер — Книга 2: Драгоценность истинной мысли (Геше Йеше Вангчук о Дхармакирти), занятие 46

[Speaker 1]
I'd like to welcome you to Shenzong's Tower. And today, we're actually broadcasting from Diamond Mountain Retreat Center. By the way, you have to talk like that.

Pause this. Translator. And today, we're also welcoming the Sedona College of International Management students, SCIM students.

Every term that we have in SCIM term, these students are learning to be teachers for Diamond Cutter Institute Global, DCI Global, around the world. And it's an intense, how long? 10 days more, two weeks, seven days.

Anyway, it's crazy. And very, very intense, very, very long hours for training... for training DCI teachers.

And one of the parts of the training is called diamond mining. And that means getting our DCI teachers familiar with the process that grandpa especially goes through when I design a new DCI level. And I go to the ancient classics of Asia, and I study them, I read them every day, six hours, five, six hours, I work on them.

And then I try to go diamond mining, and I try to find diamonds in the ancient books, and I dig them out, and then I turn them into a course. So you guys at SCIM, if you've been to SCIM before, you know that we have three or four experienced diamond mining teachers, like Sugeng Hsu, and you have Nick Lasha, Seiji Arao Takahashi, and myself, who else? Stanley Chen.

And we go through the process of diamond mining. We explain how do we go to the ancient classics and take out an idea. And then how do we turn that into something that will help both people who are interested in the classics of Asia, and people who are more interested in how do you use it for business, for example.

So that process is called diamond mining. And I wanted to show you today three steps in the process of diamond mining. And first step, first step would be the way that I train diamond miners is that I hold their hand for a long time.

And then I say, do this, do this. This is what this word means. This is what this word means.

And it takes a long time. It takes, I don't know, five, at least five years or something. So I help them word by word.

I would say that's stage one of diamond mining. And then secondly, I encourage them to work together with me. So then we sit together, we work together, we do the class together.

They might do the homework first, and they might show some of their translations. And then we'll work together on a new ancient text. And then that diamond mining learner will learn how to lead a discussion of how to use their text in the real world.

So that's what you're going to see today in this diamond mining class. You have a very experienced diamond mining learner, and he's almost ready for us, or he's already at stage three of diamond mining, which is where they just go off on their own and they start teaching their own students and they start diamond mining on their own. And they create programs out of their books.

And so there's three... I wanted you to know in this session of SCIM that there's three stages of diamond mining, diamond miner training. So Ben finished the first stage a long, long time ago, and he learned the basic language and how to do it.

Then he moved into the second stage, which is learning to read the book, finding new ideas. He has completed an amazing book from ancient classics called Siddhanta, which is a comparative book about viewports. And that became advanced level three of SCIM, of DCI.

And then tomorrow, we're going to use that same principle. We're going to use his book, and advanced level three, in our diamond mountain course on Arya Nagarjuna's wisdom. Tomorrow at diamond mountain, we will finish seven years of classes on wisdom, on the book Wisdom.

And what we're going to do is cover the material from Ben's book, which was used for a DCI course. So we're going to finish Nagarjuna with Kramer. Okay?

And tomorrow. So then you see the whole process. So the purpose of today's class, besides having a Shensong Tower class, is to acquaint the SCIM students with three stages of diamond miner training.

And I'd like to say one last thing, and then Ben will start. As an SCIM teacher, as a graduate of SCIM, you don't have to be a diamond miner, but you could hire a diamond miner. Or you could do a collaboration with a diamond miner.

And we have new collaborations like that are being funded. I raised funding, mostly from grandpa, to do these kinds of collaborations. Mixed Nuts Translators will be working with the great Books Institute teachers.

They will be collaborating with each other to design new courses. And that's happening right now. There's a Latin America team.

They are operating in nine countries of Latin America. And they are collaborating with our translators. So you match a diamond miner with a public teacher.

And we're doing that in Latin America right now, in nine different countries. And it's very, very cool. And we got a sponsor, which is usually Geshe-la starts.

We got sponsors to give grants to teams of the translator and the teacher from the great Book Institute. Okay? So you'll be seeing all that today.

So take it away, Ben, and I'll relax. Ben Kramer. By the way, he also did a three-year retreat here.

He did the whole Diamond Way course here. And all the three-year retreatants who did three-year retreat here, they built their own cavern. They paid for it.

And then they donated it to Diamond Mountain. So you're probably staying in a cavern that was donated by one of those retreatants. And Ben is one of them.

So I'd like to thank him. And his wife, Kendra. He and his wife, Kendra, did the retreat together, and they built the cavern together, and they donated the cavern together.

So thank you, Kendra. After that, they had Ezra. And I'd like to welcome Ezra.

So a few words about the book. Yep. The book we're studying is a commentary on accurate perception.

The point of the book is, of all the things we're learning, all the things you're learning this week, all the things you're studying, to see, is it true? How can you see, is it true? This book is a manual.

Before you see for yourself what is possible, to get a peek over the hill of everything that's in your way, right now you have this periscope, right? Like a submarine has a periscope that comes up from under the water, peeks over the water and can see over trouble. Your clear thinking is just such a tool.

Being able to use a logical mind allows you understanding beyond the capacity of your normal senses. So this is what the book is about. It's by an ancient master, Dharmakirti, Master Dharmakirti.

And we're studying a very special commentary on that book by a master named Geshe Yeshe Wangchuk. And he passed in our lifetimes. And we are most fortunate that the root text for this commentary was inserted by a 20 year old who dutifully prepared the text for us a long time ago.

How long did it take you? About three years. About three years.

So it's an honor to carry on the work on this text that you started at that time. Homework? Yeah.

Okay, good. These are hard, but it's what we covered. We had a verse in the root text, verse four of the root text, which I don't expect you to remember.

There are four ways of proving that something is missing. And I noticed that there are two ways of speaking of it positively and two ways of speaking of it negatively, though I haven't seen that pointed out in the commentary. It's just my hope to offer some help.

So, oh yeah, Nick. Hey, dude. Hey, hey, hey.

Hey, it's a weird angle to hear you from. It's good to see you at Time and Mountain. Cool, thanks.

Yeah, it's wonderful to be here. Is it the presence of something that contradicts it?

[Speaker 3]
The presence of something that proves it must be there? Like if it's there, then if that thing is there, then it is also there?

[Speaker 1]
Oh, in this case, we're just proving that something isn't there. We had proofs for the presence of a thing. So we're only focused on proving that something isn't there, like rattlesnake in your composting toilet.

He was there yesterday. Right, you want to prove it's not there before you sit down and clear thinking can help you to do that. Oh, fun.

So yes, one of them is the presence of something that would be contradictory to that thing being there. Like what?

[Speaker 3]
Like fire being in a place that was freezing cold.

[Speaker 1]
Cool, yeah. What else could be somewhere that would prove something isn't there? This is harder, but it relates to fire.

[Speaker 3]
The cause for something that would contradict it?

[Speaker 1]
Certainly not, but Natasha knows better. Smoke, which is not a cause, but a- Result. Of fire.

So if there's a result of something that is contradictory, that would not be in the same place as real cold sensation, like a whole bunch of smoke, then that would also contradict it. So we got two negatives. In West Chinese language, do you want to try?

Anyone, including Nick?

[Speaker 3]
Gal-talk or something, or gal-rit?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, good, right. Gal-nda, right? Gal-nda mikpa, seeing a gal-nda.

Or what about the smoke that Natasha mentioned?

[Speaker 3]
Drei-boeing gal-nda?

[Speaker 1]
I'll take it, something very much like that. Here, cool. Yeah, gal-nda mikpa.

Okay, so what things would be missing that would suggest that something else is missing? Saving it. Yeah, right.

Very clever, thank you. Yeah, a result. If there's a result missing.

Yeah, so for example, what would be a good example? This is hard. Chang-de-bo-chang.

Chang-de-bo-chang. Hair, oh, goosebumps. Yeah.

Yeah, oh, right. But is it the lack of goosebumps? That doesn't seem right.

Wow, we're gonna get to that today. Okay, we're gonna get to that today. Anyway, that was right, that is one of them.

Okay, a reason for the absence of something based on the absence of its cause. Right, so you can't have goosebumps or a shiver or chicken skin or whatever. Yeah.

I think they call it on the other side of the pond, something like that. If there's no cold feeling. Oh, one more, lack of something.

These are hard, it's okay. I struggle with this one here. We'll put it on the next page.

A reason for the absence of something based on the absence of its nature. The examples we had involved not having an accurate perception of something because the definition of an existing thing is what? Yeah.

Was that you? Yeah, of course it was the smart wife. In Western Chinese language?

Yeah. Tse-me. Tse-me-mi-pa-yu-pe-tse-ni.

Ah, tse-me-mi-pa-yu-pe-tse-ni. See, you find one like that, marry them immediately. By the way, they run a beautiful yoga studio in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

So if you're ever there, you can- Yeah, come visit. Take some classes. Okay.

What additional type of reason? Oh yes, additional type of reason is implied by the fact that the presence of a thing's natural opposite can prove its lack. Meaning, the fact that you can prove something isn't there with a contradictory thing, like there can't be a cold sensation where there's fire, proves or suggests another type of possible proof.

This is hard. We might have to rely on the chat or the internet. It's okay, Polly.

You don't have to give anyone else a chance anymore. Offer some money. I'd offer any multiple of $0 that you like.

Oh, sure. Oh, I like that. It's creative.

In this case, it relates to parts maybe in, oh, are you gonna guess or you're scratching your head or you have an answer? Be careful when you're scratching your head. Yeah, okay.

Yeah, sure. Oh, also scratching your head. Okay.

This is a reason for the absence of something based on the presence of what necessarily includes its opposite. It's hard, but this is what we covered. So- We need an example.

Yeah. Yeah, what would be an example? We had them in the text.

I know, I'm sorry. Let's see. So what would necessarily include, let's see, included by fire.

How about a fire, like a white hot fire? So you could say there is no cold feeling because there's a, on the mountain, because there's a white hot fire on the mountain. And then white hot fire is included by fire, right?

Okay, we'll try something like that. I'm still learning. We'll see.

[Speaker 3]
We have to learn together.

[Speaker 1]
Don't look at the answer. Maybe you needed to look at the answer. It's okay.

There's another additional type of reasoning implied by the fact that an absence of a thing's natural opposite can prove its lack. It's related. There's no elephant on this table because I'm not having an accurate perception of an elephant on the table.

Does that make sense? Okay, there's no accurate perception of an elephant on the table. But what if I just said there's no elephant on the table because there's no, oh, that's true.

Yeah, I like it. Yeah, no smell of an elephant. What would include an accurate perception of an elephant?

Accurate perceptions of elephants belong to a larger group. Yeah, yeah, who said? Yeah, cool.

See, married right away. Too late. Repeat the answer.

I promise to, thank you. Yeah, an accurate perception. You see, there's no elephant on the table because I don't have an accurate perception of an elephant on the table.

But there's no elephant on the table because there's no accurate perception at all. Would also do the trick, you see. Okay, last thing.

Because you're a very drunk person. Seriously, yeah. Does Master Dharmakirti directly mention these two types of reasons?

What about in the chat? This was supposed to be a trick question, but it's too hard to even be tricky. He does.

That's okay, we're all here to work on our powers of deduction. He mentions it directly in the auto-commentary and not in the root text, according to our author. Would you repeat that?

I'm sorry, I can't hear you. Oh, to the first one. Well, hard to show you all the answer for the first one.

You could take a picture. Oh, you did. Look how clever.

Good. No? Oh, well, if I do that, then you won't be able to see.

How about if I give you the first half? And then I'll give you the second half. Are you ready for the second half?

Oh, you were videoing, not camera-ing here. Okay, okay, cool. Okay, boss.

Oh, okay, good. You only quasi-assigned the root text as a fun thing to play with, but more strongly suggested the... Can I read to start?

It's good luck while I'm here? Okay. Shebe tsikche shloka tshiki.

Tente gondu gondre mikpe takdu be takduwe. Kangrek kok nuna me yu yube takle. Kangrek kok par nu ke.

Okay, good. Let's go through it.

[Speaker 3]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
And then check the translation.

[Speaker 3]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, sounds good. So, what's the shape of mean here? In the words that we just had that are right here that we will maybe understand after reading commentary.

Do you want to say a little bit about the author or anything? Suppose nobody ever heard of him. When did he live?

He's, what, eight, nine hundreds, something like that. He's the greatest logician of ancient India after maybe like the Buddha, who was also quite clever. But he's the one when people are speaking in terms of that line of teachers, he's always the one that they mention.

He was so brilliant that he was not understood in his time and maybe not much afterwards, except for an amazing lineage that we get to be a part of. So it's famously the hard book. And he said, as he, at the end of this book, he added some lines.

He said, no one will understand this book and it's okay. I wrote it anyway, because it helps me. And people get jealous and they don't like it when you're smart.

You can see this on TV now. This was not special to his time. If you say clever things, people will attack you and be jealous.

And I know, I know, it's okay. But I'm gonna do it anyway, because it makes my mind familiar with deep thoughts and beautiful speech. And when I pass, like the rivers drain into the sea, all of this knowledge will go away with me.

I know, but we're trying to keep it alive anyway. Cool. Okay.

So anyway, this is a commentary to his work. And we chose this commentary, why? There's lots of commentaries.

Oh, it's unusually clear and mostly seems to go through the text word by word, but it hasn't yet exactly. So it's a very clear author who is relatively close in time to us and generally speaking, if you can find a very wise author who's closer to you in time, you can get a more clear explanation. Yeah, so the original poetry is extremely difficult.

What's the book called? Commentary on... A Commentary on Accurate Perception.

And it's very hard packed, very difficult to understand. So what we're doing is we're going, we're looking at the verse from him. And then there's only one author that I'm aware of who carefully breaks it down word by word.

And that's this author. But either he didn't do it in the first part or he repeated it later, breaking it down. So unfortunately he doesn't break down every verse word by word.

Later he does. And I always use his commentary when I teach a class and this author is, when Dharmakirti is quoted, I use this commentary. But unfortunately in the opening verses, either the author changed his strategy or he repeats it again later and does it word by word.

I'm hoping it's just sort of introductory. If not, our ass is crass. Okay, so SIG CHE means?

Verses, words or verses. Yeah, and then SHLOG KA. Yeah, SHLOG KA also sort of means that, but I guess this is a group of lines or words or verses in this case.

[Speaker 3]
Same thing.

[Speaker 1]
The Sanskrit is SHLOG, say SHLOG KA. SHLOG KA. It's not SHLOG KA, it's SHLOG KA.

Okay, but the Tibetans pronounce it SHLOG KA. So CIG GIS BSTAN TE. Sorry, where am I?

This idea is indicated with a single... It's taught in, I guess, this single section or verse? Yeah, a single verse, four lines of verse.

Now there's a problem with Dharmakirti's text. You guys are studying wisdom by Arya Nagarjuna, and he keeps his SHLOG KA, he keeps his verses together. Four lines is an idea.

Four lines is an idea. Dharmakirti breaks the verse. So he'll do one and a half lines, then he'll switch topics for a line, and then he'll do a half line on another topic.

So what he's saying is, luckily we have one whole verse here. Okay, later we're not going to. It's going to get messy.

Okay, BSTAN TE. KHO NDU. KHO NDU.

I guess we discussed this above already. Yeah, earlier on, we talked about DGE'AM BDE'I DMIGS PA'I BDAG. Reasons based on seeing a result that is contradictory to the presence of something.

Yeah, so if you see... By the way, we had bad forest fire here. We almost had to take the three retreatants away.

It reached very close to the retreat valley, and it's very common in Arizona, California, Hawaii, Europe right now, because of global warming. These forest fires are very dangerous. So if you see a mountain covered with smoke from a forest fire, is there a block of ice sitting on the top of that mountain?

You can say no. So DGE'AM BDE'I DMIGS PA'I BDAG. Sometimes you base an argument on the presence of something.

And sometimes you base an argument on the absence of something. Here, it's the presence of a result which contradicts what you're saying. The result is smoke.

What does it contradict? Ice. Because its cause contradicts ice.

Got it? The fire contradicts ice. If you see smoke, there cannot be a block of ice sitting there.

Big smoke. Sometimes they say, big, big smoke. If it's just starting smoke, there could still be ice not quite melted yet.

Okay. BDAG TU THU BA THU BA, smoke. Yeah.

Saying that the mountain is covered with smoke disallows chang rik. Right, disallows the possibility that it feels real cold there. If you go up on that mountain, you don't have to take a coat.

Okay? All right, CHANG RIG SGOGS NUS NA. It can do that.

It has the ability to contradict that. MED RGYU YOD PA'I BDAG PA'I CHANG RIG SGOGS SGOGS PAR NUS DGOS Yeah, then shouldn't the result of fire also be able to contradict the presence of cold sensation? No.

The RGYU of MED. Oh, I'm sorry, the cause. Yeah.

Of course. Now, think carefully. And that's the whole point of this book, okay?

They're forcing you to think logically. Okay? Is it true that if the cause of fire is on the mountain, there wouldn't be any ice there?

Because it is true, if the result of fire is on the mountain, there's no ice there. Sorry. Yeah.

Okay? If there's huge smoke, there's no block of ice there. That's easy.

Now, does it go the other way? If you walk up there and there's lots of cause of fire, is there no ice block there? Yes or no?

Dirty rags, gasoline, firewood. Could you have an ice block? Yeah.

Okay, so Dharmakirti is saying, be careful with your logic. And by the way, he's pointing out mistakes that every human being makes every 10 minutes. Okay?

And if you could stop doing that, you'd have a better life and a better marriage. Right? If your spouse wasn't so illogical.

Okay? Right? Right, Shunzhen?

Okay. Go by nigger. Okay, it would have to.

Let's look at the translation. Okay, sure. Here's what he says.

Whoops. Whoops. Based on the presence of just a boo-boo.

Yeah, nice. Okay. Translation is good.

Why the bolded letter? Oh, anyone? Yeah.

Yeah. A good commentator sprinkles the ancient original in his commentary, or her commentary. And then he, and then as a Mixed Nuts translator, we have a rule, we bold it out so you can appreciate that he's commenting on an ancient author.

And that process is very difficult. And we always do it. It takes a lot of time.

Then you can appreciate how the author of the commentary has woven the commentary around the root text. And then also, it'll help you translate because sometimes he will twist the sentence to fit the root text. And then the sentence sounds weird, and you don't know why.

In fact, if you're a good translator, you should be able to detect a sentence of commentary because it'll be twisted to fit the root text. All right, next paragraph. Are we on, what are we on?

DE LTAR NA Yeah, this is it. Yeah, DE LTAR NA BU ZHING YOD SAR GRANGS MED DGOS PAS PHYIR NA TAK DE CHUO PA CHEN GYI TEN ZHIG TSU TEN NE I believe, yes. Let me look at it.

Yeah, DE LTAR NA. If that were true, then the presence of pershing, of firewood, should contradict the presence of it being cold. Yeah.

And so from this, we can see that such reasoning is taught as a mistaken form of reasoning. Yeah, okay. It's illogical.

Is it true that if there's a huge mass of smoke on the mountain, there's no ice block? That's true. Oh, can we go the other way?

If there's a big pile of firewood on the mountain, is there no ice block? That's not logical. So that's what Dharmakirti's saying.

You can't go both ways. You can't go both ways. Is firewood the cause of fire?

The presence of the result, especially if it's a big fat result, could prove the absence of the opposite, the ice of the fire. But the presence of the cause of fire doesn't disallow ice. Unless you can't call it a cause until it's caused something?

In which case, if you can't call it a cause unless it's caused something, firewood's not a cause for fire. Oh, you can say potential cause. You can say a potential cause.

Because if the cause is there, then it would prove the presence of the thing. What was the example? Firewood.

Firewood is not a cause unless it's produced fire. I wonder why they call it firewood. Okay, yeah.

Anyway, we're not there yet. Okay. By the way, what's interesting for me, there are many ancient words here.

So, you know, when we're studying Arya Nagarjuna, which is what these guys are doing, he'll use many, many synonyms for emptiness, for example, suchness, vastness, the very nature, essence, and those are translatable. But in ancient logic, they use many, many terms for logical ideas, which are different. Like there's probably five different words for proof.

And how do you translate that? How do you do that in English? You know, how do you translate that?

It's very, very difficult. And so we're going to struggle with that today. If we get that far, we're going to do that.

So anyway, here's a rare word, pretty rare word for a whole logical statement, or a syllogism, which is? TEN GZI TEN GZI, yeah. And that GZIG, GZIG means word, but if you spell it with an extra silent S, which is a pain in the butt, it changes means completely, changes meaning completely to mean a joint, a joint of your finger.

Tonight we'll be doing a fire offering, if the weather permits. We will offer reeds, kind of a stick, and it has many joints in it. And what's the result of that offering supposed to be?

Long life, because many periods of life. So it's a symbolic offering. You throw in a stick with many joints to represent many periods of the person's life.

And you will successfully go through your middle age, older middle age, younger old age, true old age, then old old age. And that's called ZIGS. And in logic, it means a complete logical statement with all the necessary sections.

You see what I mean? And it's very hard to translate because it means the same thing as DARK in the same sentence, R-T-A-G-S, DARK. DARK can mean a syllogism, or DARK can mean only the reason in a syllogism, okay?

Only one third of a syllogism. So the author is using ancient technical terms that are almost impossible to translate. And that's why we gave this book to the smartest translator.

All right. Next paragraph. Are you there, Mena?

Yes. MENA SHES PA'I TSIG GI NUS PAS ME DANG RJE GOG PAS RGYUD RGYAL MIG DANG DU BAS DRANG BA'I GOG PA RGYUD DANG RGYAL BA'I DRE BU MIG PA NI ZHUGS LA PANG SEMS Okay, good. Mena, good.

The word since they met, imply another two ways of missions and seeking a new path, they're talking there. Okay. What's ZHUGS LA?

Imply. Yeah, good. So it's a difficult word.

ZHUGS means power. In modern spoken West Chinese language, ZHUGS means power. And in logic, it means something completely different.

ZHUGS LA means implication, by the power of implication. So what he's saying is, there are two additional categories of logical statements or syllogisms, which are indicated in this verse, can I say? Yeah, it seems to be.

Can you give the two? I think so, yeah. And then can you challenge your students to come up with an example of the two?

Great, yeah. So when the presence of firewood is used to deny the result of cold, this is a reason based on the presence of a contradictory cause. Oh, that is one of the ones implied.

So he gives the example here already. Say the name of the class of syllogism, and then see if your students can give you a real example. Okay, so then a different one, a reason based on the presence of a contradictory cause.

He gave an example. Fire used to deny the result of the cold, like goosebumps. Okay, there can't be goosebumps because there's so much fire.

You know, did you say? A frozen leg, she said. Yeah, right.

Can you make a logical statement? Let's take the top of the mountain. Let's take the top of the mountain.

I think there is, I will not, my leg is not frozen because there is no firewood. There is firewood. Oh, because there is fire.

Yeah, because the frozen leg is the result of being real cold, which is contradicted by fire. So yeah. Let's take the top of this mountain here.

We call frostbite in English, in American English, we call frostbite. So I'm not gonna get frostbite up there. My toes are not gonna freeze and fall off because there's fire there.

Is it still logical if I say, take this mountain, I'm not gonna go up there and get frostbite because there's lots of firewood stuck there? No. So just because of this here, just because the cause of fire is present doesn't mean it contradicts frostbite.

Got it? And by the way, if you keep, it sounds like BS. It sounds like, why do I need to know all this stuff?

If you start challenging your mind to think like this, if you're interested in business, for example, you will come up with new ideas in your business. It's weird to think about this logic, even though it's painful and seems like a waste of time, it has profound effects on your deeper mind. And you will start to have good ideas that you never expected.

Okay. Cool. What's the second one?

The other one is, and we can use Inna's example. So someone other than Inna, give us a result that could contradict the presence of frostbite. Yeah, anyone but her.

Until no one answers but her, in which case it should certainly be her. Oh, Juan. Juan.

I thought something, but then I refute myself. But we can say the open sky. Oh, it might be more obvious than you think.

What we keep talking about in the context of these discussions, because that one result we keep talking about anyway, will do nicely to contradict Inna's poor frozen leg. Oh, yes, good. Yeah, smoke will do nicely.

And you'll notice it's the example that he chose for us. By the way, in some of these syllogisms, they will say a hell of a lot of smoke. Okay.

Some guy up there smoking a cigarette, you can still get frostbite. Like in Ukraine or something. Okay, boss.

Okay, good. What do I do? Do I take this out of here and put this here?

Does that work? Okay. Please.

By the way, every time we have a Saturday morning class, at nine o'clock, the translator leads a discussion for 15 minutes of how could you possibly use this in your real life? Okay, so start thinking about, I think it's great when you're having arguments with your wife or husband. But not that I ever have.

It doesn't work. Very nice logic. We're still not doing that.

I'm lucky. Oh, dang, this thing's irritating. Right?

I have to do this, right? I got so many documents that it moves slow. Okay, good.

And then after that, what happens? Peach Tree Oral News. We're so lucky to have the real director here.

We were saying, in the car on the way down, he was in the car and me and, who was I driving with, Rob? We're like, don't say anything that you couldn't report. Then he's, you know what he said after that?

He said, you know, some of those really good reporters, they accept bribes. Good idea. They should not report things.

And we're like, why are you mentioning that? What's the next one? Do you pay for informants?

SHES PA'I TSIGS BYAS Oh, such a reasonable question. Let's see. That's what we just covered.

So we are now, if you want to cover the root text of, okay, great. So verse 1.6. SHES PA'I TSIGS BYAS No, we just did that. So now we're down to, oh, sorry, it's also SHES PA'I TSIGS BYAS.

SHES PA'I TSIGS BYAS Okay. Do you want to choose someone to read? Oh, very much so.

Oh, good, please. Tell me your name. Yulia, Yulia, please.

Finra. Cool. SHES PA'I TSIGS BYAS KUTRANG REG DGOG PA LA DUG PA YOD TSOGS PAR YUL DANG DU DANG MED SOGS DU MED DANG DGOS DOGS SHES DANG NO Good, SHES PA'I TSIGS BYAS.

Wonderful. What this TSIGS BYAS is indicating Yes. Right.

is that when you use DU BA to DGOG PA DRANG REG Yeah, when you use smoke to contradict the presence of a cold sensation. Then he says LA'ANG, okay? And LA'ANG means even when you use smoke to contradict cold.

And when he says even, what he's referring to is firewood. So if you use firewood to contradict cold, you get into problems. Okay?

But sometimes you can get into problems with smoke. Right? You can still get frostbite and there's smoke on the mountain, but it's not huge smoke.

It's just the... So he says, and this is very, very profound paragraph. You know, if there's certain details that will blow up the logical statement, anyway, okay?

You can say there's no ice block because there's smoke, but you better be talking about, here it is. RGYUL, DU, and GNAS KHABS. KHYAD PA means details.

Certain details matter in logic, okay? Certain details matter when you're talking about logic. Can you give me a detail of RGYUL and a detail of DU and a detail of GNAS KHABS that might affect even a correct logical statement about smoke proving that there's no ice.

On the mountain. Right. Fire in the kitchen doesn't disprove cold sensation on the mountain.

Good. RGYUL means location. So you can't say...

It's not logical to say there's no ice block because there's fire, because they might be in different countries. Okay? You got to specify the location.

That's RGYUL. How about DU? There was a dramatic fire that came into the valley many years ago, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be cold there today.

Yeah, it might be necessary to pinpoint the time of day or the time of year or the year of the century. Okay? When you talk about contradiction.

Now, he's got another one. GNAS KHABS. GNAS KHABS.

I don't know. What is GNAS KHABS? Maybe are there beings who would not experience...

Yeah, good. I like it.

[Speaker 3]
I would go there.

[Speaker 1]
Situation. Yeah. So suppose the person is paralyzed.

Yeah, they can't feel... They can't feel cold anyway. You see what I mean?

That's what I'm trying to say. You got to... In other words, the lesson here is...

And by the way, these are the opening words. And we've been on this for a couple of years already. These are the opening words.

You have to specify certain details to stay logical. In some cases, you'll have to specify more detail to stay logical. Detail of location, detail of time, and details of the situation and the people involved.

Like that. And he's saying, so it's not true that blanket logical statements are always true. There could be exceptions according to the people involved, the location involved, the time involved.

It's a very profound disclaimer of all logic. And this kind of statement is barely allowed in the debate ground. Doug, you just said something ridiculous.

Yeah, but on Mars, if you've got three heads, it could make sense. And then you're like, yeah, come on. Let's stick to where we are.

Like that, okay? Yeah, I have a question about the MA here. Oh, yeah.

There's a problem with the ancient language here. It could have been made on Damba, which means the mountain has fire. Or it could have been DUM MA, DUG LDAN MA.

DU BA Oh my God. I think, no, I think it's DUM MA, and I'll tell you why. Many different factors could be at play here.

That's what he's saying. Time, place, situation. Then the, I tried to correct the block and I was wrong.

Okay, cool. Okay, MA fits here, but it's not what it, it does say DUM MA. Cool.

Which means there are many other factors possible. Okay, all right. But it's my grandpa's job.

One of my jobs is to correct blocks, is to correct karmic. Sometimes, like with wisdom, we're going to see tomorrow, this block is, this block is a thousand years old and it's wrong. Okay, and I fixed it.

And sometimes I fix it and it wasn't broken. And you don't know, you don't know how incredibly rare it is for anyone to be able to do that. And his students, most, once in a while, we catch one.

But to have someone who can do that, who can catch mistakes when everything looks reasonable and plausible, we're very lucky that there's someone who can do that. By the way, the reading in, that we're going to have tomorrow from wisdom, in your last wisdom class, that book, Wisdom, is found in which body of literature? I'll give you three choices.

Kangyur, Tengyur, Sumbhu. Yeah, Tengyur, which means the ancient Indian commentaries. Not the sutras, which is Kangyur.

And not the commentaries from the Himalayas, which is Sumbhu. But Tengyur means the ancient Indian commentaries. 4,000, sorry, 3,700 commentaries, okay?

That survived. About a thousand survived in China. Shenzong translated about a thousand, okay?

So why are we talking about that? Tomorrow, we're going to correct a problem that existed in the Tengyur for 18 centuries, okay? How are we going to correct it?

I have one Tengyur version, but I don't have another. I need a comparison version. I need another block that was carved in another place in another century.

Come on, you guys. We got the Nar Tarp. It was just finished.

A million pages of work by our input team. And I want to announce, before Ben takes over the conversation, we raised, how much did we raise? We raised enough money to give each operator $1,000.

Okay, and we used it. So it's about, you raised like 18,000 or something, okay? Not bad.

And that's a wonderful gift for these people who are saving a civilization. They are saving a civilization. These quiet little, mostly ladies who do the good work.

In fact, we're thinking to give the monks, sorry, the boys, half a bonus. No, because they have been out-produced by 100% by this other group of ladies. So just so you know.

And I don't know how that's going to work out. There might be a civil war. So I'm working on it.

But you should be proud that we have raised enough to give them. And that's a lot of money where they've been. Okay.

All right.

[Speaker 3]
Do you want me to share the screen again, Geshe-la? The QR code? Are we good?

[Speaker 1]
What do you say? Oh, QR code. Oh, yeah.

I'll try to dig it up. No, he'll do it. Oh, good.

Yeah, please, Nick. Yeah. So does it start with Nipa?

Yeah. Yeah, right. Yeah.

Okay, so please do Nipa soon. I will. And then do Cephe Tsegye.

Yeah. And then do it down to 1.9. Okay, cool. All right.

All right. That's your homework. Yeah, I'm getting out of here.

No. Okay, this is hard. So I do tune in.

Last week, last week, what was it? Monday, there were some very good questions at this point in the discussion, but I don't want questions. I'm here, okay?

I'm here for a couple of days. If you wanna give me hard questions, I love hard questions. Doesn't mean I know the answer, but I like the challenge, maybe especially when I don't know the answer.

But this time is not for that. We have to take very hard material and try to figure out what it has to do with our lives. So help me, Natasha.

Yes, Ben, thank you so much for the class. I love your classes. They're so hard and I love them.

I love the reasoning, the three kinds of reasoning, and I'll try to apply this. It will make me feel maybe less stupid. So today in Mixed Nuts class in Diamond Mountain, my understanding of the pen does not shukla, imply lack of my ignorance.

Say that again, what does not imply? Lack of my ignorance. What doesn't?

Yeah, my understanding of the pen today- Your understanding of the pen today. Yeah, so the time delegation today in the Diamond Mountain class of Mixed Nuts. You have to eat that microphone.

Sorry, my understanding of the pen does not shukla, imply lack of my ignorance. Your understanding of the pen does not imply a lack of your ignorance. Why?

Because you're just not there yet. Maybe it doesn't imply a total lack of ignorance, but you're coming along, I suspect. But is that the way to use this free reasoning?

I think that's nice, yeah. Yeah, we may be getting some understanding, but it doesn't mean that we're free from ignorance. Can a correct understanding stay in the same place as a misunderstanding?

Exactly, yes. Depends on three things, I guess, right? The place, the time, and the context.

This context is ripe for ignorance. We used context as types of beings. Yeah, I think that's right.

I think that's right. What else? How am I gonna use this?

Help me, this is hard. Yeah, please. Reni?

Oh. Oh, sure. I have to continue what Natasha just said.

In the same moment that you grasp that comes from its own side, like the same moment it's not possible to be and understanding the emptiness of something, I think. Yeah, so how does that help you with a fussy person? I mean, this is our main problem, right, is fussy people.

I think it's the only problem almost because it might be someone else, but otherwise, I'm the fussy person. How does it help? What do you think?

Oh, we have a hand, but then you have to throw the football.

[Speaker 3]
I think it just feels like there are so many proofs of emptiness inside.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, I think so. I think so, right. If you're sitting there trying to prove emptiness, can you at the same time be mad?

It's possible. I've seen it done, but it's harder, yes. Yeah, I think for me, it's even understanding of the seeds.

Like if I have a fight with the husband, then there is no peace because the peace is like if I'm unhappy, which is like kind of smoke, like I'm unhappy with something, so there is no inner happiness. So this means it's kind of understanding of the seeds, that's like lack of the happiness seeds, which I put unhappy seeds in me, and that is like reason why I'm unhappy with my husband or something like that. Yeah, if you're unhappy, if you're angry, there must be misunderstanding.

There must be. So then these tools allow you to get to the bottom of it. Yeah, it's wonderful.

Cool. Oh, will you translate? Yeah, cool, good.

I can't see the time. So, oh, I can. All right, good.

I'm sorry, I don't speak English. No, I'm sorry, I don't speak Russian. I have a question, which doesn't relate directly to this text.

But it's related to the pen and understanding of the emptiness. Okay. Before, like Geshe Michael Roach told that if I heard 7,000 times about the pen, I can say goodbye, like, hello, emptiness.

Like, if I hear 7,000 times about the pen, so I understand the emptiness. And then he became more kind and told me 3,000 times will be enough. That's nice.

Alexei counted that you can hear or think about the emptiness about, like, 120 times per day by himself. About the hours of the day. Even if we, like, split it on two.

60 times per day for, like, 20 rounds. It's 50 days, and Alexei should see the emptiness directly. Every day.

Yeah. Yeah. Wait, wait, you have to translate, Geshe Michael.

If you will listen. So, this is the shortest way, why we go around. If you listen for 10 years, every day about the emptiness, if you listen to the pen, then it will be good enough.

Every day, 365 days a year. I think it helps also talk about it with your friends. I think, for me personally, the greatest gift that I have had in coming to some understanding has been friends who wanna talk about it with me, that I can share it with.

And this place out here, where we will do, if weather permitting, a fire ceremony, once was the debate ground, and every Tuesday and Thursday, we would argue with each other, and then you have to find those people who can't get enough, and when it's time to go home, they won't, and then you make them coffee or tea, and you keep arguing, and then your mind stays there if you surround yourself by people who keep wanting to talk about it. I'm a very poor meditator, and I should know, because I really tried. And keeping your mind in one place is very difficult.

Keeping your mind at the heart, keeping your mind on emptiness is very hard, but surrounding yourself with people who wanna talk about it all the time, especially if you're someone like me who talks too much, it's almost like, it's almost like what they call samadhi, or ekagra, or having your mind in one place. As many things in your life as you can make about the one thing. There's a saying, I think it's a West Chinese saying, if you wanna know how to keep your sheep in the pen, build a really large pen.

So structuring a life full of reminders and people to talk to about emptiness also really helps. I'll just say, I know this is hard, and I have to stop and give it over to Juan. I do think, I have this idea, there's like an over-preparedness for other things in your life.

Practical applications. If you can understand the nature of reality, then all the little stuff is no sweat. When we got out of here, when we left retreat, Geshe Michael and team kindly raised us money.

It was like leaving prison. It was a very small check, but it felt like so much to us. It was $1,500 each that we got.

And it was, I lived here for a decade. So that felt like a lot of money to me. I was eating peanut butter out of the kitchen.

You're powdered goat milk. I'm not making that up. Okay, whatever was there.

And I had never made money. I had never had anything. And then it was time to have a home and make a business and have it.

And my life is, it's humble. You see, it's humble, but like I have everything I need and I have, I run a business and I have exactly 83 bills that I pay every two weeks and I have spreadsheets and it's easy. That stuff is easy.

If you learn four different types of proofs that were in the root text and two implied by two of those and then two others implied by just the words may not, then all the technical stuff, you wanna make money, you wanna start a business, easy, easy. Famous Juan Hasso in the flesh. Do you come take my seat?

Thank you. It's so wonderful to be here. It's so wonderful.

Thank you, boss.

[Speaker 3]
Thank you very much, Ben and Gesha. Thank you so much. So today we have a tight schedule.

I guess that's good. Lately, more and more people want to present their events.

[Speaker 2]
I think it's great that Ben Creamer is here. At some point we can discuss of extending the 15 minutes to 30 minutes every day. So just kidding.

[Speaker 3]
Well, he's not even paying attention, but anyways. No, it's okay. Oh yeah, he say yes, 30 minutes every time.

Just kidding. Anyways, let's move quickly because we have a lot to celebrate today. First, we want to acknowledge, congratulate and celebrate three people who just have their birthdays, two of them today, one of them yesterday.

[Speaker 1]
And Gesha Michael is here. He's gonna show us a wonderful tradition that's, I would say, been kept for years and years.

[Speaker 3]
So do you want quickly, Sunam, just introduce what are we doing? What is this tradition about?

[Speaker 1]
So it's good tradition that when you have birthday that you get a prediction from the King of the Dharma book for your next year. Yes, it's gonna be Madison, Edmund and Katerina. Can you stand up please?

We want to thank you very much for all you're doing. Edmund needs no presentation, super DSU producer. Madison there, lower campus manager.

Thank you so much for all you're doing. Katerina, endless dishwasher. I've seen you work, wonderful.

I'm gonna pick the quotation and Sunam's gonna read it. And we're gonna do one quotation for all three. And how it applies to your year until your next birthday, you have to meditate on it.

Okay, ready? As we prepared for the lectures, we began to see clearly that we couldn't simply go straight through the events of Je Tsongkhapa's extraordinary life in a strictly linear fashion, as does our root text by Cham Ching Shepa Dorje. We are presenting his life to several hundred New Yorkers, most of them sharp Manhattanities with busy careers, with only an occasional Western monk or monk sprinkled in the audience.

How could we convey to people who need never spend a day in a monastery, the extraordinary relevance of the master's life to people of all times and all countries, all walks of life? How could we make our talks have the effect of an inspiring movie where we walk out thinking, I'd like to be like him. Thank you so much.

Thank you, you three for being alive and keep having birthdays.

[Speaker 2]
And Diamond Mountain has a wonderful present for you, cake.

[Speaker 1]
And we hope you share. And in the meantime, while these three people share their cakes with all of us, thank you so much.

[Speaker 2]
We want to extend our gratitude to the host Diamond Mountain for having us and have it treated us so well. It's a wonderful place to be. For those of you who may not be here, I strongly recommend you try to come at least one time, but if you come once, very likely, you're gonna want to come again and again and again.

[Speaker 3]
Wonderful place, wonderful people, addiction. And in that line, Chloe has something she wants to share with us. And in a way you can see it's like a thank you present for Diamond Mountain and all the events they are allowing us to produce.

[Speaker 1]
Hi, thank you, Juan. So everybody in this room, raise your hand if you've been here for the first time. Wow, raise your hand if you've been here for one year, two years, three years, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years.

So this is a magical place and we thank everybody who built the place. And this magic is continuing to affect so many people. People gave up Bahamas to come here, wash dishes, change their lives and change so many more people.

So we had the opportunity to do one more new event, innovation retreats, which we bring people to Diamond Mountain to do the retreat. So we just wanna show everybody online as well, how much this place can carry and move forward into deep retreats. So let's show the video.

And enjoy. Can you help us with the lights in the back? Maybe it's prettier for the video.

Thank you.

[Speaker 3]
Yeah, this video is intent to have no sound. So you can go deeper. I'm just kidding.

Okay.

[Speaker 1]
We're looking at the Dunhuang cave site. Learning innovation voice. This is the future of what we can do to bring more people into retreats.

[Speaker 2]
This is during the retreat what you can do to go deeper inside.

[Speaker 1]
That's the cave. The future cave. We went to a marble site behind the Diamond Mountain, and we want to bring thousands and tens of thousands more people to come to retreat.

And this will be your new home if you haven't been here, and we'll come back year after year for your home. Thank you.

[Speaker 3]
Thank you, Chloe.

[Speaker 2]
Thank you, IR, and thank you, Diamond Mountain. And apparently our events come with Tim Lowenhaupt as one of the yoga instructors.

[Speaker 3]
So if you come, you're going to have the chance to spend some time with Tim in yoga pants.

[Speaker 1]
Just kidding.

[Speaker 3]
Yeah, thank you. Tim, also, this is a wonderful, wonderful event, wonderful production. You see how many people are happy about it.

[Speaker 1]
But people are wondering, Tim, we want more. What's next? So one of the cool things, one of the cool things about Peachtree World News is that it gives us an opportunity to all kind of blend together.

Right? So we don't have to think about brand or company or who belongs to what organization. We're all sharing what's happening.

One love, one big family. Yeah. And one of the cool things of what's coming up in December is that we have our annual event.

We have our annual event. I love everybody. Breathe in love.

Exhale Kyoto. So every year in December, we have an event that ends up being a worldview event where everybody from all the organizations come together to meet each other, to talk to each other, to get wonderful, wonderful teachings. It's called Steps on the Path.

And this year, we have a very, very amazing program happening. It's the end of our 14 years of Steps on the Path. And we're calling it the Spark of Joy, which relates to joyful effort, which is where the text ends for us before it moves into how to do meditation at an IR retreat.

So all of these teachings, all of these programs seem to, they always have these overlaps, which I find really, really cool. You learn one thing in one group. You learn something very similar in a different presentation.

And then together in Kyoto, we'll be celebrating together. And I wanted to invite Sugeng up because we have another program happening at the same time that I'd like him to share.

[Speaker 2]
Okay. Thank you. So Spark of the Joy celebration for the 14 years of the learning, especially from the House of the Staircase, will also include contents, include celebration of the SCIM Alumni Association, which is called SCAR, at the same time.

So Geshe Michael will cover the celebration, not just the Spark of Joy, but also the alumni. And of course, the SCAR, we also have our own event using the same location on the same period of time. We are going to teach you how to emanate, meaning that you can attend few events together at the same time.

And probably, but yeah, we are, this is, we are sure in the same location. Yeah. So same location, same time and different identity, different identity.

And it is going to be a very amazing event in the amazing location, which is great hotel. And we really want to see all of you. So if you are SCAR, please come.

If you come, please attend all. If you are not SCAR, you are also welcome. You must come.

At least you can get a glimpse of what we are doing together.

[Speaker 1]
So, yeah. And finally, we have, we actually have a co-production team in Japan. And we have, we have the SCAR team, which is Shintian and Sugen.

We also have our most famous Steps on the Path producer, Jasmine Yao. Can you stand up and wave? And she is doing an amazing, amazing job to push us over, push us over to, to filling up our entire event.

So we have very limited spaces available. It is getting quite tight. And you don't want to miss this program as an ending of 14 years of teachings.

But it is also a brand new beginning of our organizations in what Kesho is calling the five house world. So please see us, please come. And Juan, thank you for the opportunity to bring us all together.

My pleasure.

[Speaker 3]
And I thank you also. I have had the chance to be in Kyoto a few times. Wonderful, wonderful place.

It's so fun to be there. You know, like just walking in the streets, of course, not the need to speak about the events, the, the people that go there. This is in a way like kind of a worldview summit.

I start seeing it that way. So it's a great opportunity. I really encourage you to come.

[Speaker 1]
Yes. But, but, but yes. And, but we're, we're, we're talking about specifically going to Japan, correct?

Yes. Yes. Okay.

Jasmine. I guess Jasmine.

[Speaker 2]
Anyways, try to go if you can. And it's a great finale of the series of steps on the path.

[Speaker 3]
So I think it's going to be a huge, huge party. I hope so.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah. Next time. But this time we are going to Kyoto.

[Speaker 1]
And because my participants are all from China. So I would like to speak in Chinese. And the main point for the translator is I will welcome more Chinese people to come to the 14 years anniversary, anniversary.

Ah. Ah. Ah.

Ah. Ah.

[Speaker 3]
Ah. Ah. Ah.

Ah. Ah.

[Speaker 2]
Ah. Ah. Ah.

Ah. Ah. Ah.

Ah. Ah.

[Speaker 1]
Ah. Ah. Ah.

Ah. Ah. Ah.

Ah. Ah. Ah.

Ah.

[Speaker 2]
Ah. Ah. Ah.

Ah. Ah. Ah.

Ah.

[Speaker 1]
Ah. I reiterate everything she just said. Thank you.

Thank you, Jasmine. Thank you Susan, Chintian, and Jasmine as co-producers of this event. Thank you.

And we hope to see you there! And now for – who's class is next? Right?

Oh, we're done. Yeah. Oh, yeah, you can tell them more, I'm just kidding.

Oh, no, it's, do you wanna say something? She just has an announcement. She's telling us it's time to go, bye.

Thank you, Juan. Thank you, thank you very much.

[Speaker 3]
Thank you all for having spent this beautiful time in this retreat. Thank you team for producing it. Thank you so much for all you're doing.

Now I have had even the chance to attend to some of your classes and I think are wonderful. So I'm extending my admiration and appreciation for all you're doing. Thank you so much.

Thank you.