Бетси Грир — Книга 2: Интерлюдия о пустоте, занятие 50

[Speaker 1]
You can think of a sexy name. Jim, I'm a gray smear. Something's wrong.

I'm going to write a negative review on that hotel website. Get those guys to reality. That's true.

[Speaker 2]
I mean, if you're willing to take a salary cut.

[Speaker 1]
I need my inflation rates. I got a ticket. Can you hear me?

Yeah, I can hear you loud and clear, boss. You didn't hear the bad things I said about you, did you? Just all of them.

But I didn't take it personally or not too much. I'm having fun working on your book, by the way. I was hoping to do a little more editing on it before you started, but I feel good about it.

I'm excited you're working on it. It's starting to look irritated to me. Okay, it's 431, man.

Let's do it. I'm ready. We're ready.

Okay. We're ready. So welcome to the quiz for class three.

From last week, which I know was like a million years ago before the break. And unfortunately, because it was a bit of a, I don't know, challenging class, the quiz might be a little challenging. I did the best I could.

But I appreciate your interest. May it result in us all seeing emptiness directly.

[Speaker 2]
I find it reassuring when you lower your expectations like that at the beginning.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. So, each day says the consistent potential of the immediately preceding moment is just the ability of each previous moment of awareness to trigger a later moment of awareness that is similar to it. True or false.

[Speaker 2]
Yes.

[Speaker 1]
Doesn't matter which school. We're in the mind only school. Okay.

Oh, she doesn't want a one word answer. It's true. It's false.

And the reason it's false is because of this word just. While it's true that it is the ability of each previous moment of awareness to trigger a later moment of awareness that is similar to it, that's not all. When each previous moment of awareness stops, whatever remains is sneered or imprinted on the foundation consciousness.

[Speaker 3]
False.

[Speaker 1]
Give the Tibetan for similar to it, as it's used in that statement and here's the statement just in case. Similar. Yeah, who said that.

Yeah. That was Rebecca. Rebecca.

Popcorn inspired her brain. Yay. What is the implication, according to the mind only school of the continued appearance of blue appearing as blue to the eye consciousness, being triggered by a consistent potential of the immediately preceding moment.

Are you going to interpret it from the three characteristics of the mind only school is that where you're going. Oh, that, that, you know, could have a could play a role. Oh, okay.

Well, that's all I'm doing. I'm not even supposed to just been. I remember this part of the class, but I don't know the answer exactly but just to participate here I do remember the blue.

Due to the, you know, they might they talk about can write the result that happened just before coming up right. So, the implication of that, that blue comes from blue. Um, that the appearance of blue as blue to the eye consciousness is not established conceptually.

This is the part about the mixture. And is this a dig towards some other school.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, little layers.

[Speaker 1]
What's the Tibetan for that implication that I've got in italics there. Oh, it's not established conceptually. Yeah.

I don't know. Shame. Shame.

Nice. Please complete this statement of the apparent conundrum that ended the last class, if you can remember that far back. Oops.

[Speaker 2]
Flash.

[Speaker 1]
That blue is the basis of the words for it. Did everyone see it. No, I'm not supposed to say something.

The fact that if the fact that blue is the basis of the words for its essential nature and characteristic appears to the eye consciousness due to the power of the potential for articulation, then I know you take good notes. The fact. This fact is changing, instead of changing.

It would be a cheap. Wouldn't that fact be a functioning thing. Whoa.

And what's the Tibetan. Too much. Oh, Rebecca says I'm up on my own.

Oh poor me, Jerome. That's okay. Thank you.

It's like Emily's word. Sure does. Now, for the fun part.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah. Oh, Mr. Sorry. There we go.

[Speaker 1]
Let's see here. If that's the case, Okay. Or you could say also the appearance.

What if this towel goes down, how would it change your translation? I must apologize, my brain has been in editing mode for about six hours and so I haven't done the hard reboot into translation mode. Yeah, when you say that a coffee cup or a vase is appearing to conceptual state in mind, okay, are you saying that that's a result of people talking to you about vases for countless years?

The fact that it appears to you to that way? By the way... Oh, it should be a tongue here, right?

Well, let me say one thing, okay? Read it this way. RTOG PA DAG PUNG PA CI ROL GYI YOD DU NANG DBANG PHYIR CHEN Consider the fact that a vase is appearing to the conceptual mind as an outside object, okay?

Is that a result of millions of years of calling it outside? It is, it is. And that's called a NGON CHUG GI BAG CHANG, okay?

So the fact that it appears outside is due to a seed that was planted by talking about things that's outside for millions of years, okay? Now, different question. I'm not talking about the fact that it appears outside.

I'm just talking about the fact that it appears to be a vase. Is that coming from millions of years of talking about it that way? Our classroom says NGON.

Who used to talk like that? NGON. It was somebody's kid.

I don't remember. Might be, yeah. She learned NGON, yeah.

I remember she learned NGON, and then life was different after that. Okay, so yeah, that's the point, Venerable Upala. Okay, so let's take the fact that something appears to you to be a vase.

Now, it appears to you to be outside vase, that's easy. That's due to the seed planted by millions of years of talking about things that's outside. But what about just the fact that the vase appears to you?

Is that coming from that sort of seed? Because we say YIN PA PA. Oh, it must be according to you.

Why? Because that's what's making the appearance, that's what's making the appearance appear to your conceptual mind. If a seed for talking about something in a certain way for millions of years is causing the impression of an appearance to the conceptual mind, then when a vase appears to you, is that fact of its appearing also coming from that kind of seed?

Because the appearance that is appearing to you is coming from that kind of seed. Okay, so it's a changing thing. Let's go to the next paragraph and hope that it helps.

Even if it doesn't help, I'm not going back. That's my attitude. DE YIN PA'I BAG CHAGS KYIS LAS PA'I DBANG RGYAS SHAR BA DANG BAG CHAGS ZAB DUN DU BYED NAS KHYAD PAR MIN DRAG BA'O Therefore, arising due to the influence of potentials, and arising...

Yeah, no, it's worse than that. Therefore, the fact of something appearing to you a certain way because your mind is influenced by a seed, okay, the fact that something's appearing to you a certain way because your mind is influenced by a seed, and something arising when a deep seed functions as a mental seed are not the same thing. It's not the same thing.

I'll say the two again. Number one, things appearing to you due to the influence of your deep seeds is worse. Number two, things starting because a deep seed has functioned as a seed is the second one.

And he says they're not the same thing. The fact that something appears to you a certain way due to influence of a mental seed, which we can say as outside, for example. For example, he didn't say that, but that's one kind of seed.

And then when a BAG CHAGS functions to create an object, that's a different function of a BAG CHAGS. That's not the same thing. The fact that a BAG CHAGS makes you see something a certain way, and the fact that a BAG CHAGS creates an object, is a different thing.

I don't know who's talking. I don't think there's any Shana coming up, but there could be. And I still say he's talking about the difference between, in my opinion, the BAG CHAGS of the vase of the previous moment is creating the continuation of the vase in time.

The coffee cup is staying in my hand for more than a few seconds. Seeds of the previous cup are triggering the next cup, and then the seeds of that cup are triggering the next cup. So there's a whole separate flow of causation going from my left to my right.

And then there's another causation going from myself to the coffee, where the seeds in my mind are making me feel that it's outside. But there's a different seed causing the continuation of the cup. So there's two kinds of BAG CHAGS going on here.

One is sustaining the cup through time while I'm sitting here. And I see it almost left to right, going from past to future. And then there's another BAG CHAGS which is creating the false impression that that cup is outside.

Cool. What's sustaining the cup is a BAG CHAGS, and that's a normal Abhidharma cause. It's called the factor of the immediately preceding moment, DEMA THAG GYEN.

And then that's for the continuation of the cup from from three o'clock to four o'clock. And then the illusion that the cup is outside is created by a different kind of BAG CHAGS, which was planted from millions of years of talking about it that way. But the second kind of BAG CHAGS is not the one that's making the...

that's sustaining the cup from moment to moment. That's a... what do you call that?

It's a seed for the continued existence of the thing. Oh here it is, RIG TUM PA'I BAG CHAGS. That's RIG TUM PA'I BAG CHAGS.

RIG TUM PA'I BAG CHAGS DE NYID THOG MED KU BYED NI KHYEN ZHIG NANG NAS RGYUD KHYEN DU SHES DO Yeah, RIG TUM PA'I BAG CHAGS means what I'm calling the seed for the continued existence in time of the thing. According to the two brothers... who's that?

Asanga and Dasa Bandhu, if you look at the four kinds of conditions or factors presented in which chapter of which book, second chapter of the Vedic literature, translated by Stanley Bandhu, they say look there's four different factors in the world and the one that's relevant for the continued existence of the cup is a gyuri ken. And gyuri ken... what did we take a...

we took a footnote from another book. No, I added one. Oh okay, causal condition, gyuri ken.

Okay, explain these four briefly. What's a gyuri ken? Gyuri ken is just a gyu, it's the same as cause.

Yeah, it's basically a cause, but it's not really a cause. It's kind of a cause, and it's kind of a condition, but it's not the principal cause. According to the Great Dictionary, I couldn't find anything else.

Gyuri ken is a cause. We have a footnote on this. If you want me to pull it up.

Gyuri ken is searched everywhere. Which book? I'll send it to your email.

Thank you. Yeah, anyway, as far as I remember, gyuri ken... and by the way, these are a little slippery.

They slip around sometimes. But gyuri ken is basically anything that causes another thing. Okay, and these are not clean divisions.

Immediately preceding condition is demotakken. That's good. And you can say the cup of the millisecond ago is the cause for the cup of the millisecond after.

Okay, and then the mikken. That's an easy one. The cup itself is a trigger for the visual awareness of the cup.

The cup triggers the eye perception of the cup. It's called object trigger, object factor. That one's easy.

It's hard to reconcile with Madhyamika presentation of the pen. Yeah, okay. And then dakken.

That's the eye consciousness if you're looking at a thing. Yeah, and by the way, sometimes I've heard people explain it as dak because it is included into a living being. It's a component of a living being.

Something like that. Okay, some people... It's not the meaning dominant.

It's more like meaning self. Other people gloss it as dominant. Yeah, I've seen it both ways.

Okay, anyway, the one that we're interested in here is, yeah, just the thing being... So do you agree, Utpala, with Arya Sangha and his brother? They're not very important people.

Well, they're important people. They're just important people to a school that doesn't quite have it right. If it's you, and I say there's a bakchak, there's a couple bakchaks running around here.

One keeps the cup going through time. The other creates the appearance that the cup is outside. Okay, long appearance.

If I was talking about the bakchak, the seed, the bija, that causes... sanskar? Bija.

No. Seed. Anyway, if I'm talking about the seed that makes the cup continue to flow through time, which of these four conditions, in your footnote, would you automatically think was the right one?

Well, you'd automatically think it would be Demah Takhyen. I mean, that's what I would think. That's exactly what I would think, right?

If I ask you, do you know Stanley Bandhu? Yeah. Do you know he's working on the second chapter of the Dharmakaya?

Yeah. Do you know he reached the four conditions already? Yeah.

Do you know what they are? No. Well, one is just another thing.

One is something that causes the thing immediately after it to be the same as it. One is an object in the outside world that makes you see it. And one is some kind of cause inside the human being.

Now, which of those four would you think is the one that sustains the cup through time? It'd be the second one. It'd be the one called the immediately preceding cause that triggers the next moment.

But what this text says is, no, it's the first one, according to Asanga and Vasubandhu. All right. You okay?

Awful quiet out there in Zoom land. Okay. I don't know.

It's a pretty clear afternoon here. Let's go to the next section. NANG SOS THAR GYI DON THAR NYID DU YANG MING DANG DREG GO NAS KYANG YOD PAR SHAGS MI NUS PAS THOB THAG BU'I THA ZHIG PA GSUM GSUM GYI CHA YIR YOD LA Yeah, nice.

Let's see how the translation goes here. Yeah, right. Pretty unique.

I didn't know about this GSUM GSUM. So I made something up. For any single appearance of something to sense consciousness, for every single occurrence of something to your senses, every time a cup appears to your senses, there's always three different conditions going on at the same time.

Anytime something appears to your senses in this school, there's three different conditions going on. Each...GSUM GSUM means each...every time there's three. Okay?

Three each for every occurrence of...every time you see something, there's three elements going on here. Okay? And they happen to correspond to...

The three...that's why I used aspects. Yeah, they happen to correspond to the three aspects of the Mind-Only School. Describe them briefly, Utpala, for me.

Are we going to get to that right here? Well, just describe briefly what they mean. GZHAN DBANG KUN DAG YONG DRUG.

Okay, GZHAN DBANG is a thing that is...I mean, we can just call it a changing thing. It's something that's under the influence of other things. Yeah, it has no power of its own.

Whatever the other thing does, it has to do. It has to follow. And it's talking about cause and effect.

So, if the cause is sour, the effect has to be sour. If the cause is sweet, the effect is sweet. The effect doesn't get to have an opinion.

That's called GZHAN DBANG. He's under the power of somebody else, meaning his cause. Okay?

And what's the second one? KUN DAG, which is a mental construct or concept, which is...it's really a mental fantasy. It's like a fact or something, like democracy exists in the United States.

That would be a KUN DAG. But in the Mainonis school, we could say the fact that the blue is outside. Yes, sir.

It's just made up. KUN DAG. It's just a fantasy.

So, so far we've got two things. Anything that triggers another thing is called...or anything that's triggered by another thing is called under the power of other things, in the Mainonis school. Oh, by the way, the whole universe is divided into these three things.

So, everything that has a cause is called dependent on other stuff. The fact that certain things don't exist the way they seem, and the appearance of a blue as outside is like a mirage, right? That's called imagined, KUN DAG.

And that's the second kind of thing in the universe according to the Mainonis school. Now listen, the fact that the first ones never have the second ones is... Is the third one.

The third one, which is emptiness in the Mainonis school. The fact that things that are produced by causes don't have existence in certain ways, like they don't exist outside the way they seem to have. The fact that they don't is the third quality, which is emptiness in the Mainonis school, okay?

The fact that nothing...the fact that no blue in history has ever really been outside is emptiness in the Mainonis school, okay? Now, what's cool is K.W. Jay says every...how many perceptions you have per second? 65.

He says every one of those 65 has three aspects. Three Mainonis aspects. It's complete in every millisecond of perception.

That's the point he's trying to make, okay? All three deep philosophical principles of the Mainonis school apply to every millisecond of your life. And he says let's have fun and find them in a couple of different situations.

So his first example is, let's say something's appearing to your eye power, sense organ, a certain way, a sense perception. Ranggitsenikhi, let's read your translation. Therefore three unique things appear to a single sense person due to a firmly established potential.

Yeah, I like the firmly established potential. And by the way, that particular kind of potential is different from the potential created by billions of years blah blah. That's the one that...the billions of years bhakchak seed is the one that makes you think that objects are distant. There's distance between you and the ball, okay? This other one called bhakchak tenjun, which is kind of a nasty deep-seated bhakchak, okay? It's usually blamed for thinking that the identity and the details of an object are part of it.

Like banana is a fruit, right? And banana is impermanent. That's the classic example, okay?

Just the fact of being a fruit, is it part of a banana? Is the fact of being a fruit part of a banana? Yeah, it's not coming from you, it's part of a banana, okay?

Okay? And the second one, is a banana impermanent?

[Speaker 3]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
And is that a permanent part of a banana? Impermanence is a permanent part? It feels like that, okay?

Those two perceptions, that banana is a banana by itself, and that the banana is changing by itself, those two perceptions are blamed on a bhakchak called tenjun, which is called like a solid bhakchak or something like that. Solid bhakchak, okay? The identity of an object and the features of an object, for example its impermanence or its changing nature, are supposedly caused by this bhakchak, this seed called a seed for solidity or something like that, okay?

All right? So when you have a case where you're believing that the blue is A, blue, and 2, changing, okay? When you have that case, the three qualities of the mind-only school are relevant here.

The three qualities of the mind-only school are relevant here. What's the first one? Shenwang.

When you think blue is blue by itself, and when you think it's impermanent by itself, and no one made it blue, and no one made it impermanent, what kind of causation is going on there? It's one of those weirdo, nasty seeds, like the one from talking about that way for millions of years, okay? Is there a causation here?

Yes. Causation for what? You think the banana is a banana, and you think the banana is changing.

Did anything make you think that? Yes. Well, what's that?

A special kind of bhakchak. What's the name of that bhakchak? A solid bhakchak, okay?

And it made you see the banana as a banana, naturally, and as changing, naturally. It made you see that. In the mind-only school, which of the three characteristics is that?

The changing part would be the... Shenwang. Cause and effect.

Cause and effect. An ancient weirdo seed has forced you to see the banana as a banana by itself, and as changing from its own side, okay? That's an example of causation, or Shenwang, under the power of something else, at the mercy of something else, in the mind-only school.

So that whole Shenwang goes all the way back to detarna, Utpala, and it's important to understand that, okay? The Shenwang part goes all the way back to detarna. Only the Shenwang part?

Yeah. Yeah. Oh.

That process of a seed causing you to think that a banana is a banana, and a banana is changing, both from its own side, that's all, that misperception is triggered by a special kind of seed in your mind, okay? So the bak chak teng chung gi wang she kyi nang wa la, that does not apply to each three of the three? Just the first one?

Everything up to yinpa dang is describing Shenwang. Oh, so this... I think.

But let's keep going and I'll prove it to you.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
That's a Shenwang. What are we looking for after that? We got the causation part of the three characteristics of the mind-only school.

What's another part that they talk about? Buntak. Yeah, an idea about a thing which is all fake, and totally made up in your head, okay?

Got it? That's called kuntak, imaginary in the mind-only system. What's the classic example concerning blue?

Yeah, the blue being outside is a fantasy. It's a creation of the mind. It's imagination.

Right now, we're talking about why does a banana appear to be, A, a banana from its own side, and B, a changing thing from its own side. Essence and characteristic, which is another interest... it's another thing the mind-only school is interested in.

Where's the imagination here? Where's the fake imagination here? The idea that that could be just names and words is a fantasy, according to the mind-only school.

In the upper middle way school, it is the truth of the thing, okay? So, in the mind-only school, if you go up and say, oh, the banana being the banana from its own side, and the banana being impermanent from its own side, those are just creations of names. They have no other reality.

If you say that in the mind-only school, that's fake, that's imaginary, and that's the... what do we call it with emptiness? Gakcha.

That's the Gakcha. This opinion that the banana is just named banana, and is just called changing, is stupid and fake in the mind-only school. In the higher middle way school, genius, okay?

So it's called fake, or kundak, in the mind-only school. Okay, we okay now? The fact that that banana being the banana and the banana being changing, the idea that it could be just made up in your mind with words, is fake reality, fake news.

Let's call it fake news, kundak. Fake news. That's fake news.

Okay? Yay! tan yin de ming de yinpa shak, min nupe tokpa ta shikpa sum.

And the absence of things existing just through names, the fact that fake news is fake, that's the third quality in the mind-only school, which is emptiness, yonggun, mortality, which is their version of emptiness. Cool? So we're not talking about blue appearing to be an outside object.

That's one fake news according to the mind-only school. But please remember they have another fake news. What's their second version of fake news?

That a banana could be called a banana from its own side, and a banana could be called a changing thing from its own side. Its essence and its features. Okay?

And to say that those essence and feature inherited the banana naturally, that's fake news in the mind-only school. And every time you have any perception, if you're observant, you can find the three qualities in mind-only school going on there. Whether you're talking about outside blue, or you're talking about bananas that are bananas, and bananas are changing.

Okay? Okay? People are stunned with this sentence.

How does this phrase fit in to this whole mess of words? I think he's describing THAR GNYEN DU YANG MING DANG DE'I GO NAS KYANG YOD PAR ZHAG PA as TOP ZHAG PAR ZHIG PA, which just means, which means, just calling it that. And the end of the ZHAG PAR ZHIG PA is the end of the third quality.

But the interesting thing that he's saying is that every single perception of your senses in the mind-only school, you can find traces. We got to go back to this idea of traces and the rose plants, right? You can find traces of the three qualities of the mind-only school there.

It's very beautiful. It's really beautiful. Cool?

If you know how to, if you know how roses get their color, if you see a certain color, you know that Maitri put Epsom salt on it. Okay? And we're still on this thing.

We're going to go back to this thing. Okay? That you can see evidence of different kinds of causation in the result.

[Speaker 2]
Hey, cool.

[Speaker 1]
They put you on the Chinese news. They put your class on the Chinese news. Oh my god.

Stanley said it's a traffic update. Nice job. Extremely difficult stuff.

Don't get depressed. We'll figure it out some other day. There's a traffic jam in VOC at the building.

Where are we? 320. Okay, who are you going to pick on?

Well, I think because Rebecca got that answer correct that she should have the reward of reading. You think the sun can come up on Kichwa? I don't know.

Oh, don't talk like that. That looks really good. Un poco.

Un poco. Stop kicking champagne glasses. Upala, is it 320?

Yep, here, you got the cursor? Let's give you a big cursor. You never know when you might need to curse.

She doesn't curse. She's about to curse now. Samba.

Lowering their head here. Okay, go. Un poco.

Yeah, very difficult. Don't go away, Rebecca. De la nangway dun la shenpa.

What's that mean? Nangway dun la shenpa. What's that mean, Upala?

Oh, the way we think about the object that's appearing? Yeah, good. The way you feel about it.

Tokpe shenzu, the way in which you conceptualize at that moment, also has the same riktsum. It has the three, what do we call that, types? Or the three characteristics of the mind-only school, for example.

So we're going to use characteristics for rik? No, we shouldn't, right? We should save that for tsen yi sum, right?

I'll say three manifestations, three types. Now, and what this refers to is each separate conception. But, the key is but.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
It's not that we are ngepa. It's not. Nge, and then I'm pinning it so slightly.

It's not that we're actually...

[Speaker 3]
Splitting out.

[Speaker 1]
Having three discrete conceptions. Ngepa means to split out, right? Ngepa means...

It's not that we're splitting out three ways in which a single conception is feeling about something. We are not doing that. We're saying that there's actually three separate conceptual events going on here.

Or, you can say that the three characteristics of the mind-only school are applying to this perception. It's not that we're saying there's three types of perception going on here. We're saying there's three truths going on about each perception.

We're not saying that each perception has three different flavors. Okay? You okay?

All right. Who are you going to pick? I would like Venerable Chunzang...

No, I want Venerable Chunzang to do the next one. I would like Anjali to read this one. Hey, she's ready.

Hang on, she's getting up here.

[Speaker 2]
321?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, 321. Slowly. You are in charge of the cursor.

Okay, loud! TUL WE TUL WE TUL WE NYUR NYUR No tongue. All throat.

NYUR Okay, good. LAR YANG DUS NAS MES SO The R is silent. This is pretty funny.

We should have had Hasso do this one. I know. LAR YANG GNAD ZHES PA DAG GIS Look, this point is something you should know from what I said.

This is something that you should understand from what I explained earlier. Way earlier. Way earlier.

Way earlier? Yeah. LAR YANG NYUR Look, you can actually understand all the points I just made from what I explained last year in this class, because we move at a very steady pace.

And then he says MES means... MES means admittedly. Admittedly, right, right, right.

Look, I have to agree. MES means I have to agree. What?

I have to agree that you all should have been able to get these points from what I said way before in the book. But there are people among you whose LOD DROD YI SHIN TU LTU is pretty dull. No, very dull.

Very dull wisdom. Or intelligence. This is real...

Kitabje is sounding like Gyaltsabje, right, Nick? Absolutely. Yeah, he's talking to me right now.

From what I taught you last year. But I know there's people among you who are particularly thick. And for you, LOR means to you.

Especially for you, LOR means to you. LA YANG MED LA YANG MED It's not at all easy. I had to repeat myself.

I had to repeat myself. But I did a DUD DUG PA. DUD DUG PA I did it to make it shorter for you.

I taught you all this stuff last year. You should have been able to figure everything out from what I taught you last year. But there are people among you who have a very dull mind.

And for you, I repeated everything just teensy-weensy for you. That sounds like Gyaltsabje got in the room and wrote something in the book. I think that was so depressing.

It's bad luck to stop Anjali on that paragraph. What do you think? I totally agree with you.

All right. I agree with me too. All right.

You got the cursor. By the way, he's going to smash you in the head with a totally new problem. Oh, and by the way, have hope.

Because as we did with Ben Kramer's book, we may actually see an end to the... World? No, end to the mind-only?

Mind-only section, and we'll reach the middle way section, which we all understand it's our mother tongue.

[Speaker 2]
We've got four minutes, Geshe-la.

[Speaker 1]
We're bored to death. So enjoy the weird mind-only school while you're there. Because we're about to get to the middle way.

Okay? All right. We've got three minutes.

Okay, loud. Day?

[Speaker 2]
Is it sun?

[Speaker 1]
Da. Da. Okay.

Da-la-ma-jung-way-gyu-key-long-shay? Yeah. Long.

[Speaker 3]
Nice.

[Speaker 1]
Young. No. Young.

Sul-da-la-ji... Read what's in the curly brackets.

[Speaker 2]
All right. Jung-wa-dang-keh-par-meh-mu-key-deh-ta-nang-jay-key-tok-pa-la-nyang-sul-tar-gi-dung-shay?

[Speaker 1]
In chi, Sharma. Okay. Okay.

Shar-yang-dey-ta-nya-ngay-ga-ma-shar-wa- Ma-shar-way? Shar-way. Nyang-sul-tar-gi...

Oh my goodness. Da... Da-jor?

Da-jor-ma-shay-pa-sam-sig-keh-pa-ro. Nice. Now...

By the way, Ben, I have to get in the snacks while I'm here. Because my wife won't let me eat this stuff. Okay.

This is like... Never mind. It's sweet pepper.

Now I'm going to ask you a question, Venerable Apollo.

[Speaker 2]
We all want you to eat well, Bob.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Yeah, we do. Kind of.

Just so you know. Well, I do have this stuff here, but it's... I don't know.

Water.

[Speaker 2]
Just get a better salad dressing. It doesn't taste like anything. Lettuce has no flavor of its own.

Just eat your vegetables, young man.

[Speaker 1]
What's weird is you sound just like my wife.

[Speaker 3]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Now I'm going to ask you a question, Venerable Apollo. Would it make any difference in the previous presentation if you know the English word for the object you were looking at or you don't know the English word for the object you're looking at if you're an English speaker? Would it make any difference in that whole complicated thing we did today?

About the three aspects? Yep. No difference.

You say no difference. You're right, by the way. I hate to say it.

But that's the point he's making. And we'll start. We may not finish, but let's start.

Yeah, we got less than 60 seconds. Okay. We'll use the time.

That's what Matt says. Da la ma jang wa, you guys, for $50. It's just what we call it.

That's how people say it. Forget that. You owe me $50.

Okay. Or you owe me a lofty bag of coffee beans. Sure, no problem.

Coming up. It's not the way we call it? Don't send me the decaf stuff, Nick.

It's insulting. No decaf. You got it.

So is it saying that it's not just the way we call it? Da la jang wa is a Tibetan idiom for a person who knows the name of a thing. Oh.

So Maitri is not da la jang wa yet for a lot of stuff. And he is da la jang wa for some stuff. He knows how to say no.

He knows how to say candy. But he doesn't know how to say vegetable yet, or something. So, okay, well, I want you to translate it, but just be sensitive that we're talking about the difference between a sense perception in the mind of a person who doesn't know the name of the thing and the sense perception in the mind of a person who does know the name of the thing.

And they're going to discuss the differences as regarding these three Mainoni qualities. Okay? Oh, joy.

By the way, he has to go there because he's about to reach Middle Way. Middle Way. Not about.

I mean, about is a relative term. Yeah, right. I don't see it anywhere, like, in this term.

In this epoch? Maybe when I'm 65. When I'm 65.

Okay. So you guys doing neat. How many verses am I doing?

Oh, yeah. One. Two.

And 324, you hardly get credit for because we covered that whole thing in Word's book. So if you're smart, you'll go buy the Golden Key from Rosa. By the way, if you're a real scholar, you need at least six copies at home.

Hey, I got one on each computer. All right. Okay.

Just two? No. Three, I think.

One, three. Down to this verse. You know what?

You mean 324 and then 25? Do me this. Do 322.

Oh, 322, okay. Do 323. Got it.

Skip 324. Because I know you're going to cheat and look at Word's book. And then do 325.

Okay, deal? That'll be the last time I ask for clarification. Yes, sir.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for editing all the books.

I know you spend all day on it, and I bow down at your lotus feet. Okay. Thank you, Geshe-la.

Uncle Nick, what's next? Take a five-minute break. Hey.

You don't have dinner over there yet, right? Hey, Earl, did you get any celery lately? No.

I could send it to you.

[Speaker 3]
Just had some great homemade granola, Geshe Michael. Highly recommend it.

[Speaker 1]
What kind of granola? Homemade. I got a good recipe for you.

I'll send you. But you cannot share it with any cafe.

[Speaker 3]
I'll send you my mom's recipe. I'm kind of stuck on it. You need some Mom Bernie recipes in that cafe, Geshe Michael.

We got mom's corned egg recipe.

[Speaker 1]
The cook tried to make it with different ingredients last week, and mom came in and threw it out. All right. See you guys soon.