Бетси Грир — Книга 2: Интерлюдия о пустоте, занятие 23

[Speaker 2]
So, one of the books by Maitreya, Lord Maitreya, explains the eight ways that things don't start. First of all, what is the title of the text in English and in Sanskrit? And then second, how do we determine which philosophical school it relates to?

Is that my only school? No, I said, how do we determine which philosophical school it belongs to? Because of the five books of Maitreya, some are mind only and some are middle way.

But let's answer the first question first. Does anyone remember?

[Speaker 1]
That's a nice homework question. I don't remember.

[Speaker 2]
I have the eight written down, but I didn't get the text.

[Speaker 3]
Okay. Was it Sutra Alankara?

[Speaker 2]
Yes. I mean, we had five guesses.

[Speaker 1]
But that was one guess, just Sanskrit and Tibetan.

[Speaker 2]
So, how do we, it's got middle way in the title, right? Or greater way in the title. But how do we determine what school it belongs to, this text?

[Speaker 3]
It's in the title. If you're offering money, I'll answer.

[Speaker 2]
I offer $1.50. No. I offer $25.

[Speaker 1]
No, I don't want to take your money. Okay. Maybe you should go check the Tenggyur for free.

That's a free answer.

[Speaker 2]
One way to tell is by looking at how the source file is cataloged in the Tenggyur collection. And in this case, as Sugong says, it's in the mind only section.

[Speaker 1]
That's easier than mine. It's number six. You mentioned the young group.

[Speaker 2]
But it could be that, you know, Prasangika would talk about.

[Speaker 1]
It's true.

[Speaker 2]
Those silly mind only ideas that are important. We need to understand them. So, how does Lord Maitreya explain the meaning of things not starting from the beginning?

The expression that I wrote down was tokmadangni. That's the Tibetan. That's the second part.

So, yay, you win the free prize. So, but what does it mean? Things are free of starting from the beginning.

There's something that doesn't have a beginning.

[Speaker 1]
The silence?

[Speaker 2]
Things not starting from the beginning means there's no beginning to the circle of suffering. And the Tibetan is tokma. So, please give the distinction between these two ways that things don't start.

And then I hesitate to say this because you like to answer part B before part A. But then give the Tibetan for each. So, first, what is the distinction between that things don't start that itself and itself?

Because those are two of the eight ways. There must be some reason they're both there.

[Speaker 3]
Wrong day and wrong is my guess for the Tibetan.

[Speaker 2]
You got one of those right.

[Speaker 1]
He's torturing these guys.

[Speaker 2]
Okay, the first one is something which is already arisen doesn't start again from its own essential nature. And that is that itself. So, then what do you think about something not starting from itself?

[Speaker 1]
Something which hasn't already arisen.

[Speaker 2]
No, that's the first one.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, I thought it says has.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, no, that has already arisen. But no, it's not that. It has arisen, which is a clue.

[Speaker 1]
Does start again from its own essential nature. Is that the mercy of its causes?

[Speaker 2]
Ah, very good. A dominated thing exists at the mercy of its causes and could not come from itself. What is the Tibetan for that itself?

[Speaker 3]
Wrong? No. Wrong knee.

Oh, we're up there. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
And then we had, of course, wrong before.

[Speaker 1]
Sorry about that.

[Speaker 2]
And because there were three Tibetan words in there, that's it. And there is not starting. Nice.

So, Geshe-la, I'm not going to share my feeble translation because it's the second section. So, I thought I would do it in the time.

[Speaker 1]
All right. How do you feel, by the way? Do you feel okay?

[Speaker 2]
I'm a little better, but I'm not there yet.

[Speaker 1]
Wow. You think it was the booster shot?

[Speaker 2]
I have heard from others that they got fatigued from the booster. So, maybe so.

[Speaker 1]
I've heard people say they get fatigued from Ketubji. I don't know.

[Speaker 2]
Well, this section, oh my gosh. Yeah, okay. I'm completely like, God, I don't know.

Here we go. Maybe I should be translating some children's book or something.

[Speaker 1]
Well, I kind of agree with... I mean, I don't know why this is all happening. I didn't think this is what we signed up for.

So, I thought it would be... Personally, I decided to stop and go back and look at why we're here. Why are we discussing the three characteristics of the Mind-Only School?

[Speaker 2]
Can I have this version of your text? I don't have this version of your text.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, really? No. Let me send it to you.

[Speaker 2]
The bit that says, go to outline below first. I don't have that.

[Speaker 1]
Check the last one you got. I think I sent it to you, but if I didn't, I'll send it to you now. Let's see here.

I'll send it to you right now. Maybe that was after I decided to do this. Here you go.

It's coming, it's coming. Okay. It's coming, it's coming.

Slowly, slowly. My internet is not exactly...

[Speaker 2]
I think all of Verde Valley's internet is not exactly...

[Speaker 1]
It's very similar to Stanley's quarantine hotel internet.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 3]
Fishing village.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. By the way, I don't think... I think Alison's going to be upset that I said that.

I was just making a joke, okay? As you know. Okay, did you get it Utpal?

Not yet. It's coming. It's just got to go...

[Speaker 2]
Down the block.

[Speaker 1]
Down the block.

[Speaker 2]
Maybe I should run over and get it. It might be faster. My phone got it.

Let's see if my computer can get it. Yay, there it is.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, take your time.

[Speaker 2]
Okay, got it.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, now look for the word outline and go to the bottom of your manuscript. Got it. Okay, so I personally...

I'm starting to forget why he's talking so deeply about the three characteristics of the mind-only school, and I just felt like I was getting lost, you know? And that happened with your other text. Yeah, right.

And I didn't really see the structure of your other text until we were done with it. I didn't understand. Chinese translation has leaked into the room.

I'm really excited it's happening though.

[Speaker 2]
Translators? Translators, you can find the text on Google Drive.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, so I think we're going to do a 10-minute review of where the heck are we, and why are we talking about all this stuff. And it actually makes sense, okay? So the first section of your book is just about Arya Nagarjuna's life story, okay?

And so there is no outline structure of the first three pages, which is very unusual. He kind of just wants to tell the story of Arya Nagarjuna. And then he says, hey, let's explain emptiness according to Arya Nagarjuna.

And that's supposed to be his book, you know, and that's what I signed up for. And then he went through these steps. And I'm just going to say them, okay?

So we don't waste your time. DE KHO NA NYID SO BA RIG PA'I RGYUD TSEN The reason why it's a good idea to look for the meaning of emptiness, okay? That was the first part.

We finished that. SANG MO RTOG PA NI LA DMOS PA'I PHAN YIN The benefits of having a wish to understand emptiness. Then, CHOS DE NYIN PA PO'I GANG LA ZHES PA'I NUS What is the correct kind of student that you would want to teach emptiness to?

And then ZHES PA BYAR CHOS NGOS SO And then he's actually going to cover emptiness, okay? And that took us up to page seven. Then he started a section called, let's investigate what teachings of the Buddha were literal, and what teachings of the Buddha were figurative.

Then he went to a discussion. Then he said, let's divide literal and figurative according to Arya Sangha, and then later we'll divide it according to... Nagarjuna.

Well, it's called the sutra taught by never-ending wisdom, which is the system of Nagarjuna. Then he says that's the system of Nagarjuna. So we didn't reach that yet.

That starts on page 24. We're back on page 11, I think. Yeah, we're on page 11.

So we're right in the middle of this explanation of a Sangha's idea of what sutras are literal and what sutras are figurative, right? That's why we're discussing, having these confusing discussions about the three characteristics of the mind-only school. And how they got to that is interesting to me.

He says, well, there were three turnings of the wheel. There were three different stages in Lord Buddha's life when he was teaching. And here's the key part for us now.

korlo dangpo pungso rang gi tse nyi kyi yuwa nyam In the first turning of the wheel, he said that the body and mind of the person are all the same, because they do exist through some quality of their own. They're all equal in that sense. That was the first turning of the wheel.

Then in the second turning of the wheel, he said, no, no. All right, yeah, middle. He said all those things are equal in not having any nature of their own.

And he made distinctions. I'm sorry, he did not make distinctions between some things having a nature and some things not having a nature. And because he did not make that distinction, we can say it's figurative.

It would only be literal if he had made a distinction between having a nature and not having a nature. But he made a blanket statement that nothing has any nature. Therefore, we have to take it as figurative.

We cannot take it...

[Speaker 2]
According to Arya Sangha.

[Speaker 1]
Then in the final turning of the wheel, he said the only thing that doesn't have a nature is imaginary things, like the husband who's not my fault. That's the only thing that doesn't have a nature. And caused things and emptiness do have a nature.

They do have their own nature. That's the final turning of the wheel. Called when...

The name of the third turning of the wheel is when he finally made the distinctions. When he finally made distinctions. He said this does have a nature, and this doesn't have a nature.

So here's a summary. In the first turning of the wheel, he said everything does have a nature. In the second turning of the wheel, he said nothing has a nature.

In neither case did he divide between having and not having. Then when he got to the third turning of the wheel, he said, you know what? The husband who doesn't come from me, he does not have a nature.

And the husband who does come from me, and the emptiness of the husband who doesn't come from me, those do have a nature. They have a nature. Then he goes to...

Do de gong drang, which is the what I really meant. The sutra called What I Really Meant. Hi Amalie.

He went to the sutra called What I Really Meant. That sutra explains the second turning of the wheel. Imaginary things don't have any essence of their own.

Caused things don't have any birth of their own. Empty things don't have any nature of being ultimate by their own. Then he goes and gets that section.

Now here's the argument we're in. Therefore, anybody who says that anyone who claims that in the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras, which is the second turning of the wheel, anybody who says that those sutras say that nothing exists, nothing has any nature of its own, those people who say that refers to all deceptive... that was meant to describe all deceptive kinds of entities.

Those people don't understand the sutra called What I Really Meant, and they're also contradicting Asanga and his spiritual children. Who's that?

[Speaker 2]
Vasubandhu.

[Speaker 1]
Oh sorry, the two brothers. They're contradicting the two brothers. If we stick it out for about four more terms, three or four more terms, we will reach the Nagarjuna's version of emptiness.

We just have, I'd say, three more terms. We're stuck with this mind-only stuff. Now we can go back to your book.

Now I understand it better. He is writing a book about emptiness. He just got stuck for a long time in the mind-only school.

[Speaker 2]
Geshe-la, did you create this by going through the text, or is there an outline written somewhere?

[Speaker 1]
I went through the text. No, I went through the text. I didn't finish the outline.

Obviously those outlines can take 20 hours to do for the whole book. I just did the first part because I myself was getting lost. I didn't know why we were spending so long on discussing why changing things do have a nature, they don't have a nature.

It was getting irritating to me. There's a quotation from Suryamati which we covered.

[Speaker 2]
No, we didn't. No, 185 we haven't covered.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, we can do that. Let's see why we're discussing it. Okay, let's see why we're discussing it.

King of Jays says, there's a commentary to dividing the middle from the extremes. It talks about how if you think all things in the universe are like the horn on a rabbit, and that they have no nature of their own, you are dissing the Buddha's teachings. We want to block you.

We want to block your idea. So we say, yang da mayin kun do yur The one that is not pure is the imaginary one. rang shing gi shejad sik gi hlak mo I would say the other two, meaning that the other two characteristics of the mind-only school are all right.

So here's the actual quotation. Wait, is that right? Yeah.

Wait, hang on a second. I think we have... Oh yeah, this starts with La La Land, right?

Remember?

[Speaker 2]
Starts with yang da.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, it starts with La La Land.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, the one you just talked about starts with La La Land.

[Speaker 1]
So I went and got it for you. Thank you. And here it is.

Let me see something. Yeah. Yeah, we finished that one.

Okay. That's where we are. And it's just the same quotation.

So let's read from here. I'm going to group it all together. Hang on.

Okay. And I'm going to ask... Who is there?

What handsome man? Stan Lee. He's going to check your pronunciation.

Go slow, Stan Lee. Criticize her every time your internet works. Okay.

[Speaker 3]
All right.

[Speaker 2]
Here we go. Okay. Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, good. Wow, perfect. Yay!

This is a commentary to the Thirty Verses. It's also by Sthiramati, the same author. And he says there's two options here.

There's two options here. Some people say all sheshas, all existing things, are similar to consciousness itself. Why?

They do have a nature. They do have substance. They do have a nature.

Zen Yi. So he says all objects in the universe are similar to the mind. Why?

Because they have a nature, which is what the mind has. That's one group. Here comes another group.

No, you have to say it the opposite way. Just as every object in the universe is deceptive, the mind itself is also deceptive. Okay?

Two extremes here. Some people say all the things in the world are similar to the mind because they do have a nature. Okay?

And then somebody else says, no, no, no. The mind is similar to all things in the world, which are fake. Okay?

They don't exist ultimately. ,DON DANG PAR YOD PA MA YIN NO, ,GNYAM DU, SEMS PA THAG CIG TU MA BA, ,DI RNAM PAR NYID, These two groups, which are making such extreme statements, out there on the edge, THAG CIG TU, making these blanket statements, THAG CIG TU means making blanket statements like this, I seek to block both of them. I seek to disprove both of them.

I'm going to disprove both of them. And that's why I wrote this chapter. RAB TU BYAS PA means this chapter.

TZAM SO means that's why I have written this chapter. Okay? They want to block two different guys, some who say that all the things in the universe are similar to the mind because they do have a nature, and others who say that the mind itself is similar to all things in the world, which don't have a nature.

And now I'll give you a $50 question. And I'll give Venerable Utpala a chance first. How would you relate this to the Buddha's career?

[Speaker 2]
The Buddha's career?

[Speaker 1]
Yes. I don't want to make it too easy because it's $50. If you want the $20 question, I can do it to you.

[Speaker 2]
Those are... I don't know. To me, those are the two extremes which the middle way runs between.

But I don't know. So it's the second turning of the wheel? No.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, great. Yeah. Well, what about the first one here?

All the things in the universe...

[Speaker 2]
Oh, okay. So then it's all the... The shesha and nampar shepa being ze ni is the first turning.

[Speaker 1]
Nice, nice, nice.

[Speaker 2]
And then shesha and nampar shepa being kunzo ni is the...

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, saying everything is wrong is kunzo. Fake. Which turning of the wheel?

[Speaker 2]
I guess that would have to be the second turning.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, good, good. And then he says, my goal in this world is to reject both of them.

[Speaker 2]
Right, which would be the third turning.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, he believes this. So that was a difficult $50, but you did it. And shelping, that's $50 for Venerable Utpala.

Okay, so bottom line... It's very interesting. In the first turning of the wheel, Lord Buddha was thinking that everything was like the mind, and it had to be substantial, it had to be real.

And then in the second turning of the wheel, they said the mind's... The status of the mind is that it's the same as everything else. It doesn't have any nature of its own.

But I'm here to tell you, neither description is correct. Now, what's the Mind-Only School going to say about the mind?

[Speaker 2]
What is it going to say about the mind?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, here you go. I'll give you the answer for free. Please read 186.

Brent Kramer wants to check you.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, and this is the one I was supposed to have translated. That's okay.

[Speaker 1]
Good, okay.

[Speaker 2]
I can only do the first.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, that's okay. What do we have to say about the relationship of the mind and shesja, right? Well, we believe outer objects, mepa, don't exist.

But we believe namshe dun dam du yuk.

[Speaker 2]
Consciousness ultimately exists.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, good. And this is clearly explained in the third turning of the wheel. As the Abhidharma Samuccaya says, a sangha, right?

[Speaker 2]
The epitome of all the teachings on higher knowledge.

[Speaker 1]
When something is empty of something, we say it is de...

[Speaker 2]
When something is empty of something. Where do you get the something is empty of something?

[Speaker 1]
kang la kang mek.

[Speaker 2]
So, mek there means empty?

[Speaker 1]
Well, I'll say it differently. When you say that something doesn't have something. Okay?

When you say that something doesn't have something. For example, the husband who's not my fault. Okay?

When you say that he doesn't have something, what you're saying is, it is empty of that thing.

[Speaker 2]
Yep.

[Speaker 1]
Okay? That's all. You want to know what emptiness means?

Yeah. It means something doesn't have something. That's all.

[Speaker 2]
Where is the possessive there?

[Speaker 1]
I'm sorry?

[Speaker 2]
The something that doesn't have something. Have something. Where is the possessive between mekpa and kang la?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. The construction la with yi or me in Tibetan means to possess or not to possess.

[Speaker 2]
Thank you.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Na la pong yu means I have a pong. Okay?

Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Thank you. Because I came up with something totally nonsensical.

[Speaker 1]
So, it's a beautiful description of emptiness. When something doesn't have something, we say it's empty of that thing.

[Speaker 3]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
And that's the way we want you to look at it. Then you're looking at it correctly. Now...

[Speaker 2]
Afterwards?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
You're looking at it afterwards correctly?

[Speaker 1]
No. What's that jesu?

[Speaker 2]
Jesu tote.

[Speaker 1]
It's just an anu in Sanskrit. Forget about it. Yeah.

It's just an anu. It's just a... You know, recognize, maybe, instead of see.

Okay? What's the R-E in recognize? I mean, you know.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Thank you.

[Speaker 1]
So... I'm sorry. You should understand that when we say something is empty of something, you should view it as meaning something doesn't have something.

[Speaker 2]
Okay. Thank you.

[Speaker 1]
Now, if anything's left over after that process...

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Okay? de la hla ma kyan yinpa de So, you take their husband out of the kitchen, who's not coming from me. If there's somebody left over, who would that be?

The one who comes from yelling at the kids. Oh, that one exists. That one really exists.

Got it?

[Speaker 3]
Uh-huh.

[Speaker 1]
So, the word hlakma, in your class today, is going to be important. And what it means is, what's left over? After you cancel all these things, if you cancel the husband who doesn't come from you, well, what's left over?

Well, that exists.

[Speaker 2]
That exists. Okay. Which is the shen wang and yang du.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Uh-huh. Yeah, exactly.

Exactly. yang dapay ji tawa shen And those exist in the way they appear. Okay?

Those really exist. You should understand. rap tu shepa You should grasp.

When you see rap or added to something, or jesu added to something, you can... In English, you don't add another prefix. You just change the whole verb.

So, shepa means to understand. And then, rap tu shepa, you can say comprehend. Okay.

Don't say super understand or something like that.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Good. So, there's the kote.

[Speaker 2]
So, is there anything like the ji tawa shen du? Is that like just as it is?

[Speaker 1]
As they appear. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
As they appear.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Or, yeah, you could say that. Or, those are correct.

Those are okay. That's the opposite. That's the opposite of kun dzok.

Okay. Those are not fake. Those are real.

And that's the way things are. All right. Please read this.

And Sugeng wants to check you. Sugeng, is that a background, or that's your real house behind you? No, it's a background.

Oh, when Shinten comes into being and out of being, I know it's a background. Okay, go ahead. Yeah, this is my real bedroom.

It looks ugly, no? I'd rather have the palm tree. Yeah, it looks better, much better.

[Speaker 2]
ZHES GSUNGS PA'I SDUG BSNGAL GONG DU SHES PA LTAR KUN THAB BSTAN PAR ME CING DE RTONG PA'I LHAG MA GZHAN DBANG LDAN PAR DUG PA LA ZHES DGOS TE GSUNGS NI NI SA DE RNAMS NA'ANG ZHIN TU ZEL LO Good, good.

[Speaker 1]
ZHES GSUNGS PA'I SDUN means, what is quotation talking about? Well, kong du shepa tar, what's that mean you guys? Earlier explanation.

Yeah, as we explained above, and by the way, this explanation is going on too long if you ask me. As we explained above, once kun dak denpa mey par, once you've established that imaginary things, like the husband who didn't come from me, are not real, den de tongpay hlakma, what's that mean? Utpala, think about it carefully.

[Speaker 2]
De tongpay hlakma.

[Speaker 1]
This hlakma is crucial to your class today.

[Speaker 2]
Well, it's not leftover emptiness.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, it is. Oh, what's leftover after? After you decide that things are empty of that kind of imaginary husband, well, what's hlakma?

What's leftover after you cancel the thing that's not there? After you cancel the husband who's not my fault, what's left? Shen wang.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, dominated things.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, cause things. And you better recognize that these are really real. These are really real.

We canceled the unreal stuff when we canceled the husband who's not my fault. What's left is the husband who comes from yelling at my kids, and that one is real, totally real.

[Speaker 2]
It must be, right? Good?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Or you must establish it that way.

[Speaker 1]
It must be explained as being real. So, Dini, this way of thinking of it is extremely clear in Dey Nam, Sat Dey Nam.

[Speaker 2]
Chandrasekhar.

[Speaker 1]
Nyenthekisar.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, in Maitreya's?

[Speaker 1]
In Asanga's Bumi. It says the Bumi books. And we have a footnote up above, I think there's nine of them or something.

Yeah. The Bumi books. All right.

Yay! You ready to get lost? Here we go.

Okay, Xiaoping wants to check you because she finally had some sleep last night.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Good. There must say... Okay, now I don't know why he's doing this to us, but he says not only that.

If you go to the Samuchaya, which one?

[Speaker 3]
Abhidharma.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, the Abhidharma Samuchaya. It talks about the four searches, or I guess, and the four understandings. Or it could be the four efforts, I have to check.

Let's call it the four efforts and the four understandings. So or she, and the four complete understandings. In the Abhidharma Samuchaya, these are explained dot-sam.

[Speaker 3]
Only briefly.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, only briefly. But in the DONG DE'I KHO NA NYID KYI RLU, what's that mean?

[Speaker 3]
The chapter on suchness.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, in the chapter on suchness from CHANG CHUG SEMS PA'I SA.

[Speaker 2]
Levels of bodhisattvas.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, they are GYES PAR ZHIG PA.

[Speaker 2]
They are explained extensively.

[Speaker 1]
Good. And in that chapter, they explain that GZHAN DBANG GIS DNGOS PO, those things which are caused, okay? DE'I RANG GI TSE NAS KYI GDUG PA.

[Speaker 2]
They're established by definition.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, and GDUG PA LA. GDUG PA ZHIG PA. DNGOS PO TSUL BAR RTOG PA YONGS SU ZHIG PA.

Yeah. GDUG PA ZHIG PA. And to understand that they exist through their own nature, you're going to have to go through the process of looking for things, and then understanding the things completely.

And that's called the four... I believe TSUL BAR here is looking for. That's called looking for things and understanding things, okay?

[Speaker 3]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
And I went and got you a commentary, all right? So don't fret. Don't fret yet.

Okay? Hey, that could be a mantra. Don't fret yet.

Okay. Nick wants to check your pronunciation on the next one, and then I'm taking you on a detour to understand these strange four and four.

[Speaker 2]
Good. GDUG PA ZHIG PA. DNGOS PO TSUL BAR RTOG PA YONGS SU ZHIG PA'I DANG DUG BSRUNG LA Good.

[Speaker 1]
Then there's a concept called imputing the basic thing and imputing its features. Okay? There's a concept called...

[Speaker 2]
Oh, its essential nature and its features.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, right. And there's two kinds of imputation, or two kinds of imagination. One is to...

So what would be the DNGOS? Maybe it would be the husband who doesn't come from me. And then the feature of him that you're making up stories about is exactly...

Yeah, where did he come from? Or something like... Oh yeah, you could say he's hungry, yeah.

LTA PA TZAM DU SHES PA GNYIS And perceiving those two, understanding the nature that you imputed, and the quality that you imputed. DNGOS GNYIS DU SDOG PA SKYES PA DU SDOG PA You want to see how does something get called the essential nature of something, and how does something get called the features of something. How do you...

SDOG PA How do you name the essential nature of a thing, and how do you name its qualities? SDOG PA And that has to do... Looking for those is YONGS SU SHES PA'I DON That's what we mean by total understanding.

Okay? And they don't make any sense here, so I went and got it for you, okay? Okay.

And this is a commentary on Chang'e by a good geshe from the early part of the 20th century, from Seraje, I think. And here's his explanation of the four searches. Four searches, okay?

And the four understandings that you get, okay? The four searches and the four comprehensions, I would call them. Okay?

So, here's his treatment of the four searches and the four comprehensions, okay?

[Speaker 2]
And who is he?

[Speaker 1]
Sorry?

[Speaker 2]
Oh, Jigme Damsugarso, sorry.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. So, please read, and the word is... I'm going to check your pieces.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Here's something very useful for me. I'm going to go back. I won't forget this.

He just glossed DOG PA equals DAG PA. That makes a lot more sense. Okay, DAG PA.

Thank you. All right. Yeah, that makes a lot more sense.

ZHES TSUL ZHI. Okay, let's talk about ZHES TSUL ZHI. The ZHES here stands for YONGS SU ZHES PA, which means comprehension.

The TSUL means looking for, okay? So, he means the four to distribute to both. The four comprehensions, and the four what?

[Speaker 2]
Looking for, searching for.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, the four searches. So, he actually has them in the wrong order, which is also confusing, okay? All right.

RDOG DE RGYUN, the Sutra Alankara, and KUN TU, what's that?

[Speaker 3]
RTSANG BA CHAD.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, and...

[Speaker 2]
I'm sorry, I didn't catch that.

[Speaker 1]
Abhidharma Samuccaya.

[Speaker 2]
Thank you.

[Speaker 1]
He's listing one, two, three, four books here, four famous books of the Mind-Only School. The Sutra Alankara by Maitreya, the NGON PA KUN DU Abhidharma Samuccaya by Asanga, THEG DU...

[Speaker 2]
Mahayana Samgraha.

[Speaker 1]
I forget, Asanga probably, I don't know. And BYANG SA, Bodhisattva Bhumi. He claims they occur in all four books, and I'm going to teach it to you as they describe it.

Now, here's the four searches, and it starts to get sexy, and it starts to get understandable, which K.W.J. didn't deign to help us with. MING YONGS SU TSUL BA, what's that mean?

[Speaker 2]
Name.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, searching everywhere for the name.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, searching exhaustively for the name?

[Speaker 1]
Good, I like your exhaustively. That describes how I feel too. Then...

This should be NAM, by the way. And God, I have to figure these things out. DON NAM NGON PA YONGS SU TSUL BA Looking for what?

[Speaker 2]
Searching for meaning or things?

[Speaker 1]
Looking for the thing which has the meaning. Okay, looking for the thing which got the name, or you can say, looking for the entity. Okay, you can call it either one.

So first we're looking for the name.

[Speaker 2]
Probably one entity, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, and then we're looking for the thing that got the name. Then we're looking for, exhaustively, for what was imputed to be its essence. All right?

That goes back to here.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, the different...

[Speaker 1]
Okay. So below this is, it goes again, DAG PA.

[Speaker 2]
DAG.

[Speaker 1]
I'm giving you these notes for later, okay?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, thank you.

[Speaker 1]
So we're looking for the essence which was imputed to the thing. And then the last one is easy. We're looking for the...

[Speaker 2]
Characteristics.

[Speaker 1]
Good. Or the features.

[Speaker 2]
Or the features.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Which are imputed. We are searching exhaustively for them.

Those are the four searches, okay? Those are the four searches, according to this author. And I like them.

Then he says, hey, you want to know what the four knowledges are? The four comprehensions? Here you go.

Please read and... Who do I got? Rebecca, wake up here.

You got to check her.

[Speaker 2]
Yay! Me so wide.

[Speaker 1]
Eyes are so wide.

[Speaker 2]
Chirpa, Chirwa, Yangdakpa, Jitawa, Shin, Shepadang. Deshindu Jarte Dunnam, Ngopo Tsowar Kirpadang. Ngawonidu Dakpa Tsowar Kirpadang, Kyepardu Dakpa Tsowar Kirpadang, Yangdakpa, Jitawa, Shindu, Shepade, Shepa Shile.

[Speaker 1]
I'm still not sure about this. Okay. A double question mark means I'm really not sure though, because he's repeated it twice.

MING RTZA BA RGYUR BA When you seek the name and you understand it as you should, that's what we call the first comprehension.

[Speaker 2]
Understand it as you should?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
YANG LDAG PA JI LTA BA BZHIN Oh, understand it perfectly correctly?

[Speaker 1]
Yep. And he didn't say YONG SU, but he should have. That's the first of the four complete comprehensions.

What's the second one? He says follow the same pattern. He says follow the same pattern.

You're looking for the object of the name, or you're looking for the thing, and then you understand it finally completely. That's called the second comprehension. When you look for how the thing was imputed to have an essence, when you understand that process, that's called the third comprehension.

When you understand how the object was imputed to have a characteristic, that's called the total comprehension of characteristics.

[Speaker 2]
Do we want to use like, khyapa is going to be features and chedrak is going to be characteristics?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, by the way, this R in khyapa is not a laden.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
It's part of the word... yeah, once you spell it khyapa, it's a noun. And it's confusing because it sounds like an adverb.

It just means features. And then he's got the laden, which is do, as a feature. And here's what he means by...

And now it gets interesting. Now finally it relates to us. Please read this sentence.

Rebecca, you're still checking.

[Speaker 2]
ming de dun de la ne tsu kyi wang gi shukpa yin min chupay tsuwa de tsuwa dangpo yin te Yeah, so here's a description of the first search.

[Speaker 1]
The first search. The search is trying to check whether or not the name belongs on the thing. ne tsu kyi wang gi is an old way of saying by its very nature.

By the very way it lays. So when you're checking whether or not yin min, chupa, checking, when you're examining whether or not the name belongs to that thing by nature, automatically, shukpa means apply, that's called the first search. Do you have to call a rose a rose?

Does the word rose apply to that red flower by its very nature? By the way, I just received this nice roses, and nobody put their name on it. Must be one of those admirers down the street.

[Speaker 2]
Secret Santa.

[Speaker 1]
Anyway, if you're the guilty party, please let me know. V is wondering, she probably thinks I have a girlfriend. Okay, never mind.

Secondly, please, please, please, who's going to check? Alex Rivas, you want to check her? If you're there.

[Speaker 3]
Yes.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, go ahead.

[Speaker 2]
,RDOD DE RGYEN GYIS GYIG BRAL LAS, ,DE LA DNGOS PO LA MING SLOB PAR BA, ,GNYIS DU YANG TSUL TSUL BA NI, ,MING YANG TSUL TSUL BA YIN PA RIG PAR BYA'O, ,ZHES GSUNGS PA'I PHYIR Now, I don't know what's the yig drel.

[Speaker 1]
Yig is the first name of Vasubandhu. Yig Nin. It might refer to him.

I didn't have time to check it. Anyway, there's a commentary to the Sutra on Ankara which says, when you check, when you are searching exotically, whether a name applies to the thing, Lobudu. Here's Lobu, we had it a couple of days ago.

[Speaker 3]
Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Adventitiously. Oh, adventitiously.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, is it adventitious as opposed to Netsuki Wangi? Netsuki Wangi means true its very nature. Lobu means someone stuck the name on it after the fact.

Someone stuck a name on a thing. Or did that name belong to the thing naturally? It's interesting that he expresses the question in the opposite way.

He doesn't say, was that name natural to this object? He says, did somebody just stick that name on there because they felt like it? If you check that, you are checking names.

You are searching for names. What do we expect to come up later? Anticipatory translation.

[Speaker 2]
Well, about the... I'm sorry, about the thing that got the name, and then the essence that was imputed, and the characteristics and features that were imputed.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, good, good. Now, de la yena means... This is an Abhidharma concept, by the way.

When you're examining, you can divide names into three kinds. This is an Abhidharma thing. You can divide names into...

Please read, and Alex, you're still checking.

[Speaker 2]
Okay, good.

[Speaker 1]
de la yena. If you divide names, there's three different kinds of names. Some are called ming gi tsok, which means collections of names.

And then there's tsik gi tsok, which means collections of words. And then there's yik gi tsok, which means collections of words. And then yik gi tsok, which describes words, in fact, as collections of letters.

Ready? So, that would be three more searches, investigating the parts that make up... The name parts, the word parts, and the letter parts.

And he calls them three more sulwas, although I don't think that's the classic sulwa. Then he says, all three kinds of searching involve... Each of the four kinds of searching involves tse ma, yi che, and che she.

Each one has three. tse ma, yi che, and che she. And they can also be divided into kun dzob denpa and dun dang denpa.

These are famous synonyms for states of mind which are not quite tse ma. Yi che and che she are famous states of mind which are not quite pramana. They're called not quite pramana.

And yi che means to estimate something. I don't know. Somebody says, how many trees are out in front of your house?

I said, I don't know, 300? That's called yi che. It's not really a tse ma.

It's an estimate.

[Speaker 2]
But it's not a wild guess, right?

[Speaker 1]
Well, I wouldn't say necessarily wild, but it's a guess. If you don't know that, the words themselves are confusing, because yi means mind and che means examination. These are idioms in the study of pramana.

If you don't know that, you would get lost here.

[Speaker 2]
Absolutely.

[Speaker 1]
Che she means recall, but it emphasizes rough recall, which makes it a non-pramana. It's a run pramana. Tse min.

And there's a classic list here that I got you of the five not quite semmas. One is called che she. Yeah.

It came up in my Q&A today about che she. Doesn't the logic school say that it is valid perception?

[Speaker 3]
No.

[Speaker 1]
Or the middle way school?

[Speaker 3]
Middle way does.

[Speaker 1]
Maybe middle way would.

[Speaker 2]
I hate to say this, but we're five minutes over.

[Speaker 1]
Let's finish this thing. He's saying each one of the searches involves three states of mind. Accurate perception, inaccurate estimation, and inaccurate recall.

Each one involves features of being fake and features of being ultimately real. Those of you who are interested, you can read this list of not quite pramanas. They are che she, recall.

Lok she, which means misperception. Tetsong, which means doubt. Yi che, which means estimation.

And you guys know Nanga Mangepa, a very famous example. You're on the couch thinking about the boy who kissed you today at school. And your mom yells out...

[Speaker 3]
It's time for dinner.

[Speaker 1]
Dinner. And then five minutes later she's in the room yelling at you, didn't you hear me tell you it was time for dinner? And you say, I heard something, but I don't remember what you said.

That's called, I caught it, but I didn't catch it. I heard it, but I didn't catch it. Something like that.

[Speaker 2]
Inattentive or something?

[Speaker 1]
It means, I heard it, but I didn't get it. Okay. Okay.

So, we'll go back, we'll come back. Here are the quotations, by the way. Here's the brief reference from the Abhidharmasamuccaya.

I went and got it for you. Here's the more detailed reference from the Bodhisattva Bhumi. I went and got you that one.

[Speaker 2]
So is this going to be a four-page footnote?

[Speaker 1]
Well, you don't have to include these, you just give the page number of where you found them. Next class we will discuss why did he bring these searches up, and why did he bring these understandings up. What's the point?

[Speaker 2]
And what's my homework?

[Speaker 1]
Hang on, let me pick you a good one. What's the day today, the 10th?

[Speaker 2]
The 10th, oh my gosh.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, good. All right. This is too nasty.

Thank you. Look how much is there.

[Speaker 2]
I know, pages and pages.

[Speaker 1]
Five pages and notes. Yeah, 191 and 192.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, good. Yeah, 191 and 192.

[Speaker 2]
Thank you.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. I'll see you guys in how long, Nick? Five minutes?

Five minutes. Yay, thanks. Thank you, Geshe-la, that was awesome.

That text is amazing. Yeah.