Гибсон Чан — Книга 2: Восхваление зависимости, занятие 22

[Speaker 2]
All right, all right, it's almost time. Gibson looks like ready.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, give me a minute to... No, take your time. I just said your name.

You look prepared. I don't know. You don't need to be.

You have like at least 40 more seconds. So I'll just kill the time. Okay.

Yeah. Thank you, everybody, for coming. Welcome to Schoenstatt Tower.

I'm really happy to be here, really grateful for you all. We will try to entertain you today with some very interesting philosophical ideas with our esteemed Mixed Nut Gibson Chang and his work translating Jason Kappa. You ready, sir?

Yeah, give me 10 more seconds. Okay. I was going to get Amelie to count.

She can count to 10 in a variety of languages. In Spanish? She can Spanish, French, Portuguese.

Oh, Tibetan? Tibetan, no. All right, I can share right now.

Let me see. Oh, no worries. Are you still in Japan?

Yeah, still in Japan. Nice. Okay.

Here. All right, let me see. All right.

Okay. Oh, boy. So this kind is pretty hard, okay, for me, because I just going through the two translations, and the third gesture, give me this one.

I almost emotion breakdown every time I try to translate. So Nick, please help me if I stop today, okay? I will do what I can.

Okay. All right. So we are in the very beginning of the text, the Essence of Eloquence.

And this text is basically Jason Kappa used the two main texts for Nick's Essence of Eloquence. One is to add this point, viewpoint of the mind only. The other one is the viewpoint of the Middle Way School, okay?

To describe the three turning of the wheel, which one is literal, which one is figurative. And the mind only school and the Middle Way School apparently, they have a different point of view. Which one is correct?

Haha. What do you ask for? For Middle Way or for the mind only?

Good question. Yeah. So the first one is according to the Sutra of what I really mean.

What are the three different lengths of self nature that the Buddha was referring to, when he said that nothing has any nature of its own? Let me see the chat. Oh, it's in the chat.

Oh, in the chat. Oh, cool. First one is the quality of liking any affinity of the nature.

Cool. So what is the Western Chinese? Nice.

Cool. I think the quality, right? Yeah.

And they have a knee under each word, okay?

[Speaker 2]
Oh, I see.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Yeah, that makes sense. So the second one is the quality of liking any nature of growing.

Yes. Yes. Right.

The third one is the quality of the liking being ultimate. Yeah. He said the number.

Okay. Cool. So these three is very important, maybe in the following 10 or 12 classes, because they are going to talk about why you present these three, because there's a lot of emptiness and why you summarize into these three.

Okay. The second question, according to the text, what's the specific position regarding the Sutra such as those on the perfection of wisdom about nothing in the universe have any nature of its own? What caused one to contradict both the commentary of the Sutra by Rinpoche and the text of Master Asanga and his brother, Brahmananda wrote, and also leave behind the system followed by the Ayurveda.

So what is the position? Let's give it one minute. Yeah.

When someone says, yeah, that means, um, um, means, uh, uh, deceptive reality when he talks about, uh, then he's making all these mistakes. Yeah. But why?

And he screwed the other one, which one is, uh, I believe he screwed the number because he say everything in the universe. So suppose someone say only refer to the deceptive part of the things and not, not the thing that belong to the ultimate type, ultimate type, then he contradicts, uh, the Buddha and Ayyanagarjuna, Vasubandhu and Ayyadeva by Asanga. Yes.

Okay. All right. So the third, what are the two reasons why Roboda grouped all things from physical matter to the omissions of an enlightened being into three different types of things with no nature of their own?

Oh, well, one is for people to understand better. Yeah, that is a second one. Because grouping them this way made it easier to teach disciples how all these things don't have any nature of their own.

The first one. Okay. Because all things can be summarized into type of thing with no nature of their own.

Very true. And yeah, very true. Typical.

So what's it called? Easy to understand. Yeah.

Easy to understand. No essence. Yeah.

Nothing has any nature of its own. Tantamba? Anyone?

Ultimate. Ultimate. Yeah.

Ultimate reality or ultimate type. Okay. Let's go to the translation.

Let me see. So, um, you did some translating ahead. That looks awesome.

Uh, if, um, if we're going to go through it word by word, maybe we don't need to read the English ahead of time. Because, yeah, I think we just, we just read this one and word by word. It's much more better.

But maybe if you could scroll up so that those who are doing live translation will have some clues. Yeah. Yeah.

When they get to translating our discussion. Okay. Thank you.

Let's go word by word. Let me see. Nick, can you read the first one?

Okay. Cool. So Nipa Ni is referred to, Jason Kappa is going to explain something in a very brief way and some extensively, and also give the example to illustrate this idea.

So the second one, he's going to explain why he going to summarize these three into everything to these three in a very extensive, in an extensive way. Oh, okay. This is the extensive explanation of why he summarized everything into these three.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. So what is the Celtic? I don't want to hug you.

If. If, yeah, let me see. We can split it in this way.

What is, okay, let's start from here. So what is this? Somebody else.

Jump in there. Well, the teaching of the Buddha, which says nothing has any self nature. So what is the chair here mean?

Existence. Teaching. Yeah.

I also think it's a teaching. I think it says existence thing, right? So, so here maybe say.

I think it's, I think it's the, I think it's, I think it's the existence, I think. I don't know. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

This is what I mean. I think soon here means the teaching. Yeah, when Buddha say.

Everything in the world have no nature of its own. Let me see. All the things that Lord Buddha refers to when he talks about to no self nature.

Mm hmm. I can. Yeah, I think, I think.

I think you're right. When Lord Buddha referred that things don't have any nature of his own. He's saying, oh, we'll need to do now.

So I do a research. Caltech always come with the now, right? Yeah, often.

Yeah, often. So, so. If it's the case that nothing has any nature of its own.

Yeah. You collect all things into the three types of. No.

I think the Buddha summarized. All of the things that he talked about that have no nature of their own into. The three types of three times.

And he say, Connie. I think. If we in the, if we are considering the.

The teachings on. The teachings on not having an essence, right? If we do now, right?

If we group those into three, right? If we divide those into three. Yeah, we're dividing the two nuns, not the teachings.

We're grouping them, not dividing them. Well, just the same thing. It is the same thing in this content.

Yeah. Oh, we're abbreviating them. What, but we're taking the.

Lack of essence. And we're talking about it in three groups. So you could say that you have a lack of essence that you're dividing into three.

Or you could say that you're putting it into three groups. And I think you could get away with either in English, maybe. I don't know if it says to do some.

Sometimes means that to condense, right? To it does. Yeah, to group.

Yeah. So he's saying all the emptiness of all things into three. Yeah, somewhere to be three.

And he said, hey, soon, Connie. What are the three? Yeah, yeah, well, well, at least three.

Yeah, well, well, at least three. And no one image. How into these?

Yeah. How these three is lacking any nature of the affinity nature of growing and ultimately. How, how, yeah.

How are they lacking of this nature? So he asked these two questions. You know, young, young, young.

Consider if we consider that. Yeah. If we think to ourself, if we are wondering, consider.

And no one in Meba. Here's an explanation for the explanation of the first type of lack of essence. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Sorry. I thought it's a temple shape, but right. It's an old Meba temple.

The first lacking, lacking of what's the definitive nature. So he's going to explain the chaining. Oh, and he quotes the from the.

What I really meant. What I really mean. Yeah, Taylor.

What is the Taylor? I'm a little bit confused here for a little while. We should find the quote.

Right. Oh, Taylor is referring to the quote. OK.

Well, when it says lame, it usually means that what follows is a quotation from that text. Yeah, whatever Taylor means. What referring to what he was talking about right before in the quote in the book on that.

Before in the book, it just means on that. Yeah. As regards that.

OK, before. Yeah. All right.

True. So this is the only Meba temple. Yeah.

So this is the first lacking the everything in the world have lacking of the definite definitive nature of its own. You may wonder what that means. You may wonder what that means.

And that is. So that is the construction or imaginary thing in the three attributes. I think that's a guess.

I also say if you can link these three to the three attributes, then you are my only. So here you give the answer. The first morning changing or changing only made by the gunda.

OK. OK. How do you translate that?

Go and talk. Oh, could not be Cheney. I translate the attribute of the imaginary.

But I think I should also translate as the construct, construct or construct. Then he says characteristic to. Characteristic.

So is there any problem if I change the attribute? Necessarily might maybe consistency. But besides that, it means similar things.

All right. OK, you could say the attribute of being an imaginary thing. Oh, being being.

Well, just to make the English flow. All right. Yeah.

It makes more sense if you say the whole sentence. Yeah, yeah. Thank you.

To attribute, if you want to. Yeah, the good attribute. Yeah.

Yeah. All right. Thank you.

Yeah. Refers to that Cheney, that quality of things, which is that they are gunda. They are imaginary.

Yeah. So what is the imaginary thing? What is the wrong school?

Wrong school. Yeah. Good question.

What do you tell us, Mr. Gibson? Your your book. I have the box for my legs.

I remember they are two pumpkin, right? I'm against. Yeah.

Guess I refer to a pumpkin on the twin tower. Twin tower. I don't know.

Yeah. The only thing I I'm. Yeah.

He said it instead of purple elephant. He said pumpkin on the twin tower. I actually don't remember.

Yeah. He said there's a two gunda. One is the real one and one is the imaginary, the false one in your head.

Right. Concept.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
And in the mind only school, this is not not real. The other two is real from my understanding. Some of them are real and some of them are not real in the mind only school.

Oh, yeah. Yes, yes. Yeah.

You could have someone's name like Kramer could have been Valentino. Or you could talk, which is like most famously the something that could never have existed, would never exist, can never exist. Oh, guess I use the Joshi, right?

In that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Exactly.

Yeah. OK. Uh, last one.

OK, so what is it? You may ask, why is it like that? Or why is that?

Yeah, I mean, why? Why the first attribute of being imagined? Most likely, that's what the Tay is referring to.

Mm hmm. OK, and did that day. It's this.

It's data. It's data. Hey, me.

Yeah. OK, this is how it is, right? Yeah.

And in the manner which we were just talking about, it is. And now it's going to explain it. OK, and this is very famous.

But it's only mean they shock. No, John. Yeah.

So what is a mean town? They number shopping to me. It's it's it's defined as being a.

Names and terms that you that are put forward or presented or something like that. It's a characteristic characteristic. It's very for me to pronounce that one attribute.

And shop shop is present, right? Or established. Yeah.

Yeah. That's established. So display.

Yeah, display. That's a good. The meantime, they what is the usual.

Translation for the meantime, because these two is very similar thing, right? They label mental image. Yeah.

And then name. Mental image. OK, so there is a mental image.

Yeah, I think image in every translation usually says terms and it means mental image, right? Yeah, I usually I think what he used to say a lot was name image. Label meaning word and mental image.

Word and mental image. OK. He usually translates his label.

So what does that mean? I can. When somebody say a word, then you have the word in the mental image in your mind.

Yeah. Word and thought. Yeah.

He's saying that's how things are established. OK. Yeah.

That is by definitively things are established. Definitively. Through names and labels.

Yeah. Means and label. OK.

And. Or they have that quality. I don't know if you would say definitively.

Yeah. But they have the quality of being established through name and label, which, of course, you have to point out here, Gibson, is how things exist in the middle way school. OK.

It's it's the same exact phrase. Ming day shock. Some only.

But just because it's the same phrase doesn't mean it's how things exist in the middle way school. Right. That may be true, but I think it is true.

But he didn't use a melody, right? He didn't say some here. And he didn't say by or through.

He said non-par. No. That's one that is by or through.

It's that. Mean on that. It's not mean on day.

It's mean it's the size instrumental. Right. Yes.

Yeah. Or with. So then then the non-par then is completely or thoroughly.

Yeah, it's probably just the Sanskrit prefix. It just means it still just means it's just a strengthener like the re and remember. I agree with word here.

There's a million times where it's this word appears as non-par shock, but just saying the same thing. It's just OK. Yeah.

We are still in the quotation. I don't think so. Oh, that's a good question.

Yeah. Yeah. If if we are still in the quotation, then we are quoting the Sanskrit.

And so non-par shock is certainly a Sanskrit prefix. V or something. OK, like a non-par talk, right?

Yeah. Yeah. OK.

So in here, Rankee technique, non-par never. Here you also use the number. But he said my mind.

Yeah. It doesn't stay through any of its own or any definition of its own. But my input is after the knee.

It's a little different. Yeah, it is. As far as staying through its own nature, it's not saying that.

Exactly. It does not. It's not in that way.

It doesn't exist in that way or something like that. Doesn't exist in the way that he stayed or by through the nature. Yeah, it doesn't exist.

It doesn't exist through any definitive nature of its own. Something like that. OK.

And. Yeah, we should just go to the. Oh, I guess.

Go to the old. Yeah. OK, so that's why.

Yes, we say it is. Characteristic that exists by having no nature of its own. Having no nature.

I have no nature of it. So the reason is here. Yeah.

Yeah. Right. So can we can we explain again the reason?

No, no, no. In this case. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.

I see. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Gibson, do you want to take a shot, Gibson? Because the thing have the quality that present.

Established by the name and mental image. And therefore. They are.

It's just in a way that they. Stay or buy in the definitive of its own. They don't exist in a way in which they stay through or they exist through.

They stay through. OK, well, what does that mean doing this? Here in between the Napa and the Miami.

That. It's it's summing up the run. He said, Nikki.

Nom bar Nipa. It's just that S is the same. It matches with the key.

It doesn't exist like that. I think it goes all the way back to the guitar, actually. All of that.

So you mean the mind also including they are not established through the mean and. Meantime, that number shopper is that what you mean? There's a yin there, so I think it is saying that thing that these things which are established their names and terms.

So the yingyi, so those things which are but the key is a but. Yes, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. My yin is only for what's after the key.

The first part says yes, second part says no. That's why. The first part is what it is.

The second part is what it's not. Yeah, that's why I'm here. I have a yin and a my yeah or whatever.

Yeah, exactly. Nick. Yeah, it is that way.

And it's the law. That's not how it is. So things are dependent upon, have the attribute or the quality of depending on name and label rather than existing through their own definitive nature.

And since it's like that, how about it in me, no exist existing, existing by a definitive nature, rather than by existing, being around, by dwelling, living by some definitive nature of their own, rather than that. Mayimbe, since they ain't like that, they cheer on account of them not being that way. We say they lack a definitive nature.

That's why we say they lack a definitive nature. Or they have the characteristic of lacking any nature of their own. Okay.

I think you probably have to include the definitive nature in what they lack because I think this definitive nature is going to be allowed later for Shenlong, or lost things for things under the influence of other things. He'll include, I think that ending all for those definitive nature. I think we can talk about this after the class about how to bring this to our daily life.

Oh, good. No problem. Okay.

Now go to the next one. Let me see. And yeah, right.

You're right, Gibson. That's where we close the quotation. That's where, after that is where we'll.

Yeah. The quote. Oscar.

Yeah. Yeah, thanks. Thank you.

Thank you. Yeah, here is really hard. So I stopped translation here.

[Speaker 2]
All right.

[Speaker 1]
Let's go through this one. Okay. Thank you.

Two of the first words in the question and answer. The discussion. Take as a word, we can say sentence or verse.

Usually it is an S if it's verse. On the end. Okay.

Two lines. I think in the Chinese translation that says these two lines, these first two lines. Yeah, I think I've had it as a line in my text as well.

All right. Okay. So the first of the two.

The first of the two lines. The first two. The first two.

Yeah. The first two. But how can we say the first of the two?

Okay. Oh, I don't think you. If you wanted to say the first of the two, you'd have to be like.

Okay. You would say you would say. Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. So the question and answer the first two sentence.

That's where explains the. The definition or the definitive lack of a self or nature to imagine things. Yeah.

[Speaker 3]
I've been explained that shit.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Nays is the transition to the next part. Yeah.

Having explained that. So. Yeah.

Explain that.

[Speaker 2]
Therefore.

[Speaker 1]
After that. So we spend a lot. Sending only.

Is the. Yeah. And therefore.

Yeah. Then. You can even be like.

Yeah. Right. Why did they do that?

Why did they do that? Shit. Shit.

It's a quote. Yeah. From.

Yeah. The first one. Okay.

Yeah. Take you 10. You change the reason.

The reason for that. The reason for that. And that is.

Same as. I don't know.

[Speaker 2]
The response.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Yeah. It seems like.

To say that the way we have to read the whole sentence. I think. But it seems like he's going to say that the reason is given in the answer to the question.

Yeah. That makes sense. Oh.

I remember. Saying that they teach a nice year. Yeah.

He said. Yeah. Going to explain this world.

Why do we say so?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Let's give the reason. For Europe. For your answer.

For your question. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Totally. Nice.

Yeah. Because it's. A teacher.

She asked why. The answer is. Here is the response.

Yeah. Hmm. And they have a two side.

One is the. That got show and one is to show. Yeah.

The one is the refuting side and one is the proving side. Yeah. So the first one is the refuting side.

Yeah. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
So the refuting side. He said. Right.

Yeah. Yeah. This is what we were.

This is. Yeah. He's explaining what we were just trying to.

Explain. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
They're not. Yeah. Go ahead.

That's it. Yeah. Yeah.

First, he explains how it doesn't exist. And then he explains how it does exist. Oh, yeah.

Much. Much. What.

He said. Yeah. First.

First. First. He does a refutation from the side of refuting.

He says, well, it doesn't exist through any definition of its own. And then after that, he says how it does exist through a proof. And he says how it does exist is.

As. Yeah. As.

Being established through. Names and terms or. Labels.

Yeah. That's why.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Okay. So.

[Speaker 3]
I'm not. Sure.

[Speaker 1]
He did. Do it in that order. No.

Sort of. Kind of. Sort of.

He said. Things don't have a definitive nature of their own. That's what.

That's the thing we're trying. That's the thing that the person is asking the question about. What does it mean when you say that things don't have a definitive nature of their own?

And and then the first thing he says is we're actually referring to the quality of being an imaginary thing. And why do we say that? Because those things have the quality of being established through names and terms.

They don't exist. By definition. Therefore, we say they don't have a definitive.

They don't have a quality of. Existing from their own side. Yeah.

Well, so here. Here we have the meantime day number shopping. He established one.

And he's a learner. Existing by the definition, right? Or the state of buying.

Yeah. Yeah. Just in the other order, he says his cocktail is the.

Is the. Is. Is the second part.

The second part is cocktail. And the first and the first part is true. True.

OK. Yeah. All right.

Cool. Oh, you can say that he explains the way things don't exist and the way they do exist. All right.

And I think Uppala was clarifying very eloquently that Gyutsen is referring to. That's that's the reason why we say that they are. No one.

What was the full.

[Speaker 2]
Yes.

[Speaker 1]
Anyone. Or the reasoning behind his response to the question is giving a refutation first, blah, blah, blah, and then giving a proof of yada, yada, yada. That's the reasoning.

Yeah. Right. Yeah.

Right. With the words. Hey, why would you say that you are.

Right. You're being asked. You're asking for the reason.

You see those. Those words are asking for the reason. The answer to the question.

Yeah. The answer to the question. The reason.

Yeah. OK. Yeah.

OK. Let's go to the next one.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Any any question here.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah. How do you.

[Speaker 1]
Practical life. And that's my only question. Yeah.

This is our only question. We will discuss later. He gets to think about it for 17 minutes.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. We have a free packing. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Being able to eat as much fries as you want.

[Speaker 1]
And then. Oh, sure. Do you make a body.

I do. So what. OK.

Interesting. OK. This is the territory.

Where? Drupah Ong Neba. Drupah Ong Neba.

Oh here. Yeah. Yeah, existing or establishing or existing.

It's in a positive, right? Yeah. So we can translate the Ne as existing.

Definitely. Yeah, right. And he just made it clear to you in case you weren't clear.

Drupah meaning Neba. Ah. Or Neba means Drupah.

Yeah. He's equating them for us. So at least Ong is or or can be.

It's a or but it's in a positive in English. I'll tell you what Drupah means. I'll tell you what Neba means.

It just means same as Drupah. Oh, cool. The commentators use or a lot when they're trying to clarify a word.

Yeah. Drupah or Neba. Oh, thank you.

Okay. Last time from the beginning. Can anyone help me?

I would love to. Ong means Neba. Yeah, now we're at the latter of the two parts.

On the last, right? You should understand. We should know.

Yeah, you should know. You should also understand the two the last two parts of the lines. The last.

Because he said the first two and the last two lines. Yeah, the latter two. So Omani is the last two lines?

The latter two. The latter two, yeah. The opposite of Sikdangponi.

Okay. So they have a full take. I guess so.

That would be convenient for us. That wasn't clear to me, but it seems to be spoken that way. Well, we could just go back and divide it up if you want to really quickly.

I think we have a whole version. Here? No.

That and what's above. That and go back. This is the quote.

Yeah. From Tela. Let's see.

It's prose.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
I don't. Sandeer Mochai is not in verse that way. But the Tibetans do have a way of describing it as verse, which is not to say that it's verse as in poetry, but they do describe a number of lines.

So like when we say the perfection of wisdom in 8,000 verses, it doesn't mean it's poetry. It's just a way of counting verses, and my guess is that that's being applied here. Yeah, there's four lines.

All right, the second one here. No, it has to be the quote, right? So the last two lines of the quote.

So what is the issue focused on? Eye opener. That's not eye.

That's object. Object opener, the objectifier. If you were to make distinctions about the objects in the sutra.

Okay. By making these distinctions about the objects in the sutra. You should understand the later two verses, the later two sentences.

Yeah, you should also understand the latter two of the verse quoted or the lines quoted. And the Gunta Gunta Guntaks don't exist. What is the la here mean?

You need a la with me and you. It's a convention. Oh, okay.

Here means if Gunta does not exist. If you retain it in your knee, then the cause will have the definitive nature of its own. I think the like definitive nature of being cause does it not exist in Guntaks?

The formation is a little weird, but but I would have put the me at the end, so I'm a little bit confused about that. It could be saying what's not existent in the Guntak is the nature of being caused. Yeah, because we wouldn't say that Guntaks don't exist, but we would say that they don't have a definitive nature in them.

And we could even say that the definitive nature of being caused doesn't exist in them. Yeah, it's something like that. I think that's why the la comes right before me.

I think so. The thing that doesn't exist about Guntaks is a cause which gives it a definitive nature. Yeah.

Something like that. Can me go with you? The reason that it doesn't exist?

I don't know. I don't think so. I think it's what Guntaks are missing.

Guntak Lame. And I think the caused nature is so important to the way that Xianwang exists that probably this will be seen to be set up in opposition to that. So we'll see.

But I would bet that Gu-causedness is a quality that you do find in the other sort of nature we're going to talk about, which is caused things. Xianwang. I think that, again, it's a weird place to put them there, to my taste.

But he didn't consult with me. Okay. We'll say here if there's no Gunta, no construction or imaginary things, then it's a reason.

It's a cause to the definitive nature of its own. It's not Gu-ceng. It seems like it's saying the Gui-ceng is the definitive nature of a cause.

It's confusing because we just had Gu-ceng. But this is not Gu-ceng. This is the ceng of being a Gu.

This is the nature of being caused or being a cause. Right. Probably being caused, I think.

Okay. I'm just guessing that's what the Gun-tak is missing. The definitive of being caused by definition.

Yeah, that could be in a positive, especially because this is a commentary on the verse. So if that's in a positive, that would work well, right? Which is what Word said, right?

What is lacking in Gun-tak's kama, right? The essence of being caused by definition or something. Ni is.

After the ni, he just confirms it. He says the thing that the way Gun-tak's don't exist is being caused by some definitive nature of their own. Because if they Ni, because if that was the case, then they would have to exist through some nature of their own.

Mm-hmm. That's how I'm interpreting that Ni. Because the La-ja is similar to the La-me.

Uh-huh.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
It would have to be, yeah. It would have to be the case that they would be established or exist through some nature of their own. Mm-hmm.

Weird. I think he's rewording it. He's just rewording it so people understand why they say what they say.

Why the Buddha said what he said about Gun-tak. He's like, let me put it another way for you. Mm-hmm.

Like, let's make like Mik and Je-pa, let's let's make some fine distinctions about the Ok-ma-ni might be the same lines that we've discussed. Those last two lines might actually be the same lines, actually. I don't know.

Mm-hmm. Or the the definitive nature of its own that's without the Gun-tak is is the is the definition of thing, of any definition of its own. Because we have to think about, we have to think about what they are talking about.

So the sentence is what's the Ok-ma-ni of the Gun-tak-la-mi-gyu-tsen tsen-ni. It is rang-gi-tsen-ni-gi-ju-pa. Right?

Because basically it is ngo-wa-ni rang-gi-tsen-ni-gi-ju-pa. If you condense the sentence. So what's the ngo-wa-ni of Gun-tak-la-mi-gyu-tsen-ni?

Mm-mm. It's gyu-i, not gyu. It's gyu-i-tsen-ni, right?

But, yeah. Gyu-i-tsen-ni-gi-ngo-wa-ni all goes together as one. Yeah.

He's saying it's not shen-wangs. Okay. So basically this one is this one.

Yes, that's ni. Ni means like equivalent or equal or is or I'll explain it like this or something. Okay, so anything have any definitive nature of its own without the Gun-tak.

It is the rang-gi-tsen-ni-gi-ju-pa or the What the Gun-tak is not is something that by cause lacks some has some definitive nature of its own. That would mean it would have to exist through some nature of its own. Sorry, Utpala, you were saying?

Oh, I was just gonna say that Gun-taks There is there is no quality of having an essential nature of being a cause in Kuntox. And that, when we say that, or something like that, that sounds a hell of a lot better, what that means is that they don't exist by definition, they're not established by definition, or they don't exist by definition. Yeah, that's right.

Okay. Or, by the way, the jao, which is mirroring the qibar jao, right? So I'm not used to this construction, jao usually means like should or must, or ought to be so, but it's possible in this case that it's just referring to, this is what it is you should know.

Jao could also be object. The O is just a- No, I know, but just because it's mirroring what came right above it, you see these latter two lines in the sutra explain what you should know. And then here's what that is that you should know.

Sure. Seems likely that it's still a qibar jao, it's still referring to the qibar.

[Speaker 2]
Mm-hmm.

[Speaker 1]
Here's the jao, here's the thing that you ought to know, which is what it is that kuntaks lack, which is having a definitive nature of being caused, and which is to say, existing through their own definitive nature, or being established in that way. Yeah. And that would explain the me being there.

I mean, it'd be nice if there was a she after the me, that would be helpful.

[Speaker 3]
Yeah, right.

[Speaker 1]
But yeah. Yeah, it's like a colon or something after the me. So we can imagine he had a she.

Or a ni. Or a ni. Yeah, that's a thing with a positive is a lot of the time in direct commentary to verse is that it's often awkward.

Or an am, like you have the drupam nepa. You say the thing you mean, and then the way it appears in the verse, or the thing in the verse, and then what it means. And you say them next to each other, sometimes right next to each other, without explaining their connection, because you are glossing, we say in English, meaning offering an alternative phrasing or term for the preceding term.

Yeah. It's hard to understand if there's, don't have a verb in front of a chow. Then you- Agreed.

It's very confusing. That's why it seems to be implying something. Yeah, you should, what?

Yeah, implying something. Yeah, because it's like a phrase. Like in quotes almost or something.

Mm-hmm. Yeah, that's what it seems like. Or palisades.

That's what it should be. Yeah, bye-bye. Well, we made it.

Class. Very good, very nice. Oh, I think I found something.

Chi belen, maybe it's a name of a sutra or a commentary or something.

[Speaker 3]
What is?

[Speaker 1]
The highlighted one, chi belen. It is a quotation. It might be, might be.

Oh, oh, chi belen. Well, it's a very, it's not super uncommon. Like it just means a response to a question.

Yeah. Yeah, the response to the question of why, de chi che shen na. Yeah.

Yeah, but this is what I saw in the Chinese translation. It's a quotation, it's. Interesting.

The name of the sutra is, has a answer in it. The name of the, maybe not sutra, but the name of the book that he's quoting from has an answer to it. So, de chi belen du, in that, you can translate it in that specific book.

Wait, does he mention which book? We should check chi belen. I think, I think it can be.

It's Gongzhou. They just, they named the book right before this. Yeah.

It's Gongzhou. It's a Sandy Nemo Chai Sutra. Yeah, here.

Okay. One of our favorites. It has a different, it has a different name in the, in the Chinese translation.

I'll put it, I'll put it down for Gibson. I mean, this one. Use Roman characters, please.

Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, no, I mean.

[Speaker 1]
The Chinese is helpful. This is Chinese. This is Chinese.

Oh, Chinese. It's the Chinese. I'm sorry.

Yeah, it's good. It's helpful. It's great.

And no need to transliterate to the Roman characters. Thank you. Gibson, it's your big moment to, to now enlighten all or enlighten each other.

I try to summarize what's going on in this class first. Then. That's cheating.

Yeah. We are going to the next section. And the next section is based on the Dode Gongzhou.

Okay. Dode Gongzhou is on the viewpoint of the Mayan school to explain in Buddha 329 of the wheel, which one is the truth and which one is literal, which one is figurative. And the Buddha mentioned here, he summarized everything in the world that have three lacking.

Okay. The first one is the lacking of the definitive, the definitive nature of visual. The second one is the lacking of the growing.

The third one is the lacking of the nature of the ultimate. And today we are talking about the first one, the lacking of the, any definitive nature of its own. And he say two things.

One is, the one is everything is established through the meantime, they, through the name and the term. And they are not existing through any nature of its own, definitive nature of its own. Tinnicky neighbor.

Yeah. So, anyone have any application, how can they use in their daily life about the first lacking? Well, one thing, like in the country in which I live, things are going to hell in a hand basket and appearing to me to be quite, quite real in that the way my life has been for these 65 years of my life so far is drastically changing.

And it's going to be, it's going to be horrible and people are being picked up off the street and sent to other countries. And it just, oh, oh, it's so bad. But, oh, wait, no, this is, things, they have the quality of lacking any definitive nature.

So, golly, if they exist through names and mental images, how about I create a different kind of reality and not just sit here being freaked out about the end of the world as I know it? Yeah. I think this is what- I think everyone is experiencing the similar situation in the global wise, not only in the United States.

I know. Yeah. And we think that this will last for a while, but in this one we just discussed, they don't have any definitive nature of it, and it's all coming from our meantime day.

And from my understanding, meantime day is our mental image and the primordial sea, right? And so we can change it. Yeah.

Right? Yeah. So we still have the hope.

Yeah. Yeah. And the other thing is, I think one of the things I learned recently is when you are successful in the past and you use some kind of method to reach success, then you will grasp to that method and you think that is real, that have some definitive nature.

And next time when you use the same method and you fail, and you'll feel very frustrated and sad and angry, even angry. So I think this allowed us to thinking that they are lacking of any definitive nature. And we have to thinking about, we can be success because that is coming from our meantime day, our name and the mental image.

Yeah. And try to plan to see other method coming up. I think that's cool, Gibson.

I can see that in my own life really clearly with meditation. Because sometimes I'll follow a certain approach or pathway to have a decent meditation. And because it worked well last time, I'll try to do the same thing and it never works the same.

It's like, you always have to kind of like come into the present moment and find a slightly new. Yeah. It's never gonna be the exact same thing.

So I can see that really clearly with success in meditation. Yeah. That's a cool point.

I think Manvol Sarani also mentioned about, some people may say, if everything is coming from our name in turn, does that mean they don't exist? Don't exist definitively. What does that mean?

By definition. There's nothing about them that is that way. They are that way because I think of them that way and I tell them what I do.

Forced by how I was with other people. Man, I was a jerk. Question.

It's a mix, a jerk and a goofy person. Yeah. It seems like this is the way that, it's close in a way to the way that people normally think that you have some ideas in your head that you're stuck in, as if there's a real world out there and your habits and your past tendencies are putting some trip on the world and you're lost in your own trip and not seeing the real world.

Now, what we find later is if you go and try to find what you're laying the trip on, what you're laying your label on, of course you find another name, another idea and another label. And then what is that label upon? Well, it's on another name, another idea.

It's on another label. So two people walk into a room and one person is happy with the room and the other person is sad with the room. And is the room good or bad?

Or is that because of what was going on in the one person's head or the other person's head? Well, that's just their trip. That's just their head trip.

That's just what's going on for them. The room isn't really that way. And then some people wanna go and find the way the room really is, but you won't find it.

You won't find the way the room really is. So your head trip can make the room quite lovely. If you spread loveliness, if you surround yourself in kindness by acting in kindness, if you love people around you, if you immerse yourself and those around you in love to the best of your ability, then you're gonna have this love head trip and that will be your reality.

But it's not really real, people will say. But it is real for you. It is the reality that you live in.

You'll never find some really real that doesn't move, that gets stuck, thank goodness. And so Ming Day, right, your name and your label, it's your reality, your words and your thoughts. It's your world.

And oh, thank goodness, that's why things are so fluid. Things can change so much. Anything is possible because it's MingDay.com.

It's just name and label. And so everything is possible. Yeah.

Good. In emptiness, all things are possible. I think about the other thing is that we all grow up, I don't know, I don't have children, but maybe I can ask Nick and Ben, when you grow up in the family and you learn something positive and negative, but maybe you see your parent working so hard and they don't have a good, healthy body, then you will tell yourself, or you'll tell yourself, you don't force your kids to be, I don't know.

You will have some inherent environment from your family. Then you will say, I won't do this to my children, or I will try to do the opposite way or something. Then I think in that time, when we observe our family, our family, our parents, our siblings, we also thinking they have some definite nature of their own and say, we will never do that.

We will never do that thing. And we kind of misunderstanding how everything is going. And for example, for me, I see my parent working so hard from morning to midnight, and I say, well, I will definitely be a laid back person because they work so hard and they got a very not healthy body and I connect these two together.

Yeah, they're working so hard and unhealthy body connect together. So I've become a person that was, my motto is don't need to work so hard because otherwise you will become like your father and mother. Yeah, I think this is one of the thing that can apply to what we see today, the lacking of the definitive nature.

What do you think? I think that's a good reason not to work too hard. Yes.

I'm going to keep that in mind, I appreciate that. Yeah. But isn't there a difference between, like, that sounds like story to me.

That sounds like the kind of Kun Talk that may not exist. Oh yeah, you can also interpret it in that way. Yeah.

Okay. Yeah, are they happy or not happy? Is your parent happy or not happy?

They are definitely happy and they have two grandchildren and right now they don't know I exist. I'm not existing in this family. If you try to take the cause and you say that it applies to this result, but you could see the result either way.

You can say, oh, I can focus on the reasons they're happy or I can focus on the reasons they're struggling. So they're not really happy or they're not really struggling. And then you're going to take that same cause and it could lead to either one.

You're connecting them by your own story and it is true for you. That is, it's not wrong for you, this story, but it's not coming from them. And that story can be very powerful and useful, but it didn't come from them.

You wrote the cause and you wrote the result. Yeah. So yeah, like Connie said, maybe you can see your parent working so hard and at the same time, very healthy.

But I put a story in that case so I make a wrong connection. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah, maybe they're just pretending to be your parent and they're just in this world trying to teach you some lesson about when to work hard and not to work hard. I think you're right. I think that is also the one reason I tried to find the answer.

Why we should work so hard and go to hospital after that. Yeah. So I think they are trying to show me some story and setting me up to find the answer.

Yeah. And the kind of being that just came to teach you that lesson and is only here to teach you that lesson, that sort of being doesn't feel pain. Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Nick.

And thank you, Ben. Thank you, everyone. Gibson, thank you so much.

That was a really nice, fun class. Yes. I see Mr. Juan Aso is patiently standing by waiting to deliver us with the latest. So hook it up. Thank you very much, guys. Actually, for those of you who may not know, Gibson is actually in Japan these days, along with Emily Chang and many more people.

But yeah, I just saw them yesterday and I hope I'm gonna see them today as well. Today for us in Asia is Tuesday, April 1st. It's like nine and something in the morning.

It's much easier to do it at this time than at 1 a.m., but I'm not complaining. Thank you for doing that. Yes, no, it's great.

It has been a lot of adventures, learning, and we hope good things keep happening. So yeah, today, you know, I wanna talk about something that's happening or just happened in Vietnam, actually. Grace from Vietnam, one of the organizers and producers of the BCI events just contacted me.

I didn't know about it, so I'm very grateful. She reached out and let me know about this. Very cool news.

So I'll give you quick, quick context. It's a few days ago, a big team of teachers and students were also in Japan, but not quite in Kyoto. There was many events in Kyoto like CSP.

Now, DSCU is happening. Amazing, amazing classes. We talked about it a few days ago in the previous virtual news with Geshe-la presenting, for example, this new project.

It's called Eight Libraries. Wonderful project. Hopefully soon we can have someone talking more in depth about it.

But all that was happening. And then some other teachers, J.B. Laconi, Lasu Gang, many more teachers were producing and having an event in Awaji Island in Japan.

[Speaker 3]
And then from there, they flew to Vietnam.

[Speaker 1]
I didn't know anything about this, but they flew to Vietnam. And then I want to share some of the pictures of the event that Mr. Bean helped to produce there in Vietnam. It was like a DCI event where many principals were shared, like the four steps, the four ways in which seats open, the two husbands in the kitchen, the pen, how to give with joy will bring us the results we want.

So I'm gonna be sharing quickly some pictures about it. Let me find the presentation. Share.

Can you see the pictures? Thumbs up. I hope yes.

It says it's coming. Okay, I see. It may be coming then.

It's going around the world in a really slow way. Yeah. Now I understand Gina Rivera when she has to wait nervously like I am now.

Maybe if it doesn't work, I'm gonna ask her to share. I was trying to share myself, but maybe my internet is not the best for this right now. So I'm gonna stop my share and I'll check if you, Gina, could instead, because mine is not working very well.

Now we see something. But the pictures you mean?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, we see this.

[Speaker 1]
There's Connie O'Brien and John Brady. Oh yeah, I know. So don't she.

It's kind of a power picture of the three of them. Power, yeah. Can you see it?

Yeah. I see it. Yes.

[Speaker 3]
So that's the event. It was happening.

[Speaker 1]
Very beautiful. You can see many of the producers and participants there. Mr. Bean, one of the big producers in the middle. Then we have JB La Connilla with amazing translator. Super happy with Su Geng Shi and many more people. Xin Tian, Ella, many more people.

And let me see. Yes. Just sharing pictures, right, of what happened.

And then they made a special video for us to invite the international audience, especially the Vietnamese audience, but really the international audience to the next event they are producing in July. For that, I would like Gina, if you can help me to share the video, please.

[Speaker 2]
People from Vietnam who attended the DCI event on March 31st, thank you so much for coming. Thank you for your hospitality. Thank you for learning the DCI seed system to give what you want first.

It was like a reunion of old friends coming together after maybe four or five years. And the feeling in the room was just love for each other. Whatever you do when you give to others first, give with joy.

You remember this one thing, give with joy, you're set. We can tell you every part of how to fix your life, how to be financially abundant. But if we don't do it ourselves, if we don't try a four-step program, like an experiment to see if it really works, you'll never know.

So do the four steps. There's another program coming in the future in July, and this organization called Yoga Studies Institute is coming. And this woman, who happens to be my wife, is going to be bringing some of her top staff to give a very beautiful four-day intensive.

When you use your body to embody the wisdom, when you serve others, you do yoga. When you go out and you help people, you do yoga. And this thing is called the jewel of sharing because you will make all your results come back much faster.

It's done with diamond wisdom. The biggest benefit of yoga is happiness, is mindfulness. It means that you know all day long how your world is working, how to make everything, all your dreams come true.

You can use yoga for this. So this jewel of sharing program, it's teaching people how to walk in the world like a master, like the biggest master of all of these techniques, how they actually give, how they share. It's actually called, the result is called true happiness.

True happiness, the ancient texts tell you this. So that is the result, true happiness. Doesn't matter if you are trying to create abundance just financially, abundance in relationships, abundance in your peace, the peace of your mind, anything, or abundance in health, because yoga is about your health.

The secret of yoga is not in the asana, is not in the posture. It's what you do for others. So we will teach you basics.

Please come. We're working, very interestingly enough, yoga opens up what we call the subtle body. And the subtle body is not this body.

It actually makes this body function or not function. So when you're working with energies that are not in the gross body, occupying in the gross body, but if you begin to use those energies, the healing process of your mind and body can really be actual. When you have yoga in your life, you're purifying your mind.

[Speaker 3]
That's great, that's great. Congratulations. And the final word to Vietnamese audience.

[Speaker 2]
We can't wait to see you again. Thank you for joining us yesterday for a wonderful event put on by DCI. I love Vietnam.

I wanna come back again and again. Your hearts are wide open to the world. I think it's an example of love that we need to share in the world right now, especially.

Okay. Thank you.

[Speaker 1]
Cool. I hope you were able to watch the video well. My internet was a little frozen.

So I sometimes got pixel, but great, glad to hear. Okay, so that was happening in Vietnam.

[Speaker 3]
And hopefully soon I will have the QR code for people interested in that event.

[Speaker 1]
It's in July. We will keep reporting about it. For now we go with Chloe because she has also very cool news to share with us.

Could you help me to spotlight Chloe, Ma, please?

[Speaker 3]
Hello, Juan. Good to see you again. I'm joining you from the planet, matching your background.

[Speaker 1]
I know, cool. You just need the logo there as well. No, just kidding.

So tell us what's cooking over there in Arizona?

[Speaker 3]
Yes, so today in our office in Sedona, we have a big truck coming. Gina, if you could share the picture. Everybody in the room, please join me to guess what is coming to our office today.

What's in the truck? Could you, Gina, share the photos? So take it, next one, please.

Take a guess what's in the truck.

[Speaker 1]
Emptiness.

[Speaker 3]
Oh, nice, emptiness. Thank you, Venerable Vopala. So that's what it is, a big 10 boxes of something.

So actually Gibson guessed it. Yes, this is his new book. With Geshe Michael and Gibson Chen.

They arrived today fresh out of the oven and they are nine lucky people who got the first copy in the mail. They're gonna receive it soon. So I just wanna share this with you guys.

Congratulations to all the translators and editors and whoever worked on this. So if you want to get your copy, join the first batch of freshly made The Song of My Spiritual Life so that you will get a physical copy directly from Sedona. And if it's too far for you, you can also get an e-book.

So that was it. Thank you so much. I know you have a next guest, so I'll make my short.

Thank you, everyone.

[Speaker 1]
Very welcome. So wait, you wanna say anything else about the AR or we still waiting on news about it later?

[Speaker 3]
Well, I have two minutes, so I'll give it to next guest.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, we go with our next guest, Tim Lovenhoff. He has very amazing news. Can you help me spot?

Yeah, sorry, my internet is running slow. We have big promises for this news, Tim. It's big.

I didn't know how big it was until Juan just told us. Well, you know, size can be relative. So what do you wanna ask me, Juan?

That helps tee it up for me better. This is the thing. We've been hearing that there is like upcoming series of four very important events that will help us as an audience, will help us to prepare for the Diamond Way Series Getschel is about to teach in 2026.

[Speaker 3]
The most upcoming one is in April, in 17th of April at Diamond Mountain.

[Speaker 1]
So the idea is to just maybe coming from you that you are basically one of the main organizers and producers of these events. Although, of course, with your, so say, collaboration part in this case, Diamond Mountain. But if you could give the audience a little bit of the whole plan and relevance of this particular upcoming event in April, and why is this unique chance of start getting ready for the Diamond Way Series on 2026?

Cool, all right. So thank you, Juan. That's helpful.

I wanted to know what people wanted to know. You. Yeah, so really the, for the last 15 years, I've watched people ask Getschel Michael for Diamond Way teachings, right?

And I've seen it over and over again. And he's always has said, no, I'm not going to teach it again. I already did.

That's what the 18 courses are for, right? And then he recommends other good teachers to learn those 18 courses from. And I guess somehow no turned into a yes, right?

And I think, so what's happening is with Gibson's book, which just arrived in Sedona, thank you, Chloe. That was a nice entry point to enter the Diamond Way. There are, there is preparation, right?

There is some necessary preparation. So over the next year-ish, I'm going to say, I'm not going to commit to four. It might be longer than that, but the next year-ish, Getschel Michael's offering a course through the five houses for that preparation.

And that preparation is Gibson's book. Everything you need to know and be prepared. And so we're having that first course starting in April, April 17th at Diamond Mountain.

And it's also online as well. So if you, we are essentially sold out in person. We are oversold.

People are still trying to get in, in person. And you can come online, no problem. And we also, so before we talk a little bit more about what's coming up, is that if, let's say you're in a country where you can't come to a five houses event, right?

So, and I think this is really important. Those of you who do want to come and these courses are required, you have to come online to be able to enter next year in 2026. But if you're in a country where you can't come online, we have an option from Jasmine Yao.

She's offering three courses this year in Malaysia. And Gina is gonna put that up right now. And you can come in person in Malaysia and she'll be offering the same course as well.

So we're trying to figure out how to make this available worldwide for everybody. There's a little error here where it says Tokyo, Japan in December, that's actually supposed to be Kyoto. But starting in April, Jasmine will be offering these courses live.

And we're sending, in April, we're sending Hector Marcel and Supriya from the Three Jewels as representatives of the five houses to teach in more in-depth. So it's not just a standard OMO course where we broadcast everything and you just watch things on the screen. We're actually sending teachers there as well.

So you can get your questions answered. And then if you wanna learn a little bit more about it, next week, I'm giving a class on the personalities of the five houses. So it's an hour seminar, how to get ready for the Diamond Way.

And we're gonna be talking about the personalities of the five houses and which house are you gonna belong to, right? So this is just an incredibly fun class. And this is gonna be a leader into our event at Diamond Mountain.

Because at Diamond Mountain, you will have to choose which house you're going to enter. And then all of our activities and additional classes are gonna be house-based. So you choose one and then you go on running that way.

So that's what's coming up, Juan. It's super exciting. We have over a thousand people registered so far and we're hoping for a lot more, not because we're looking for numbers, but we think it's important that everyone have an opportunity to join and get these deeper teachings starting in 2026.

And you have to be ready. It's not, you just can't jump in. So please join us and we will take you through that journey over the next year.

And then we hope to see everyone again in 2026. Awesome, Tim, thank you so much. Hope to see you a little later today.

And let's move on to watch the wonderful recording that Tim and I and Gibson and a few other people went yesterday. Let's go and see you next time. These make me nervous, Juan, when you say something that-