Ник Лашо — Книга 2: Ратнамала, занятие 38

[Говорящий 1]
I can see Marina. I can see Adam. All right.

Hi, everybody. It's almost time. Xuanzang's tower is going to happen, no matter what.

No matter what. We make, we just, we just make the efforts, you know, through rain, sleep, snow, visit, hardships, difficult words, sickness and health, difficult concepts, difficult philosophical challenging concepts, the laws of the path, gravity, excitement. So we have another exciting Xuanzang's tower episode coming up for you, starting in one minute.

We're going to start with my text and I'll lead a class with the team. Geshe Michael's not able to make it today. I think he's at an important medical appointment.

And after my class, we're going to have a surprise Q&A with Mr. Word. And then after that will be class with Word. So stick around.

If you have hard questions, if you have mind only questions, Word's your guy. Let's see. I want to extend a special thanks to all of our translators.

I mean the mixed nuts, but also right now I specifically mean our interpreters who work so hard to translate us into different languages. You guys are amazing and we appreciate you. We have Chinese, Russian, Spanish, German, Ukrainian.

I think that might be it. Vietnamese. It's amazing.

You guys are awesome. Interlocutors. Yes.

We're lucky to have you guys. Let us know what we can do for you. Like speaking slowly or clearly and using words that you can understand.

And also I want to thank the Worldview Productions team. You guys are amazing. Keep our videos fresh and ready for us.

And all of our regional coordinators for the Good Night Book Club. I almost called it the Mixed Nuts Reading Club. That's a thing.

That's over. That was a long time ago. The Good Night Book Club.

And thank you guys for helping arrange this. Thank you Lindsay especially for arranging everything for us to ensure the future of this translation program that is bringing books to your language soon and currently. Especially English, but you know we're working on all the other languages too.

Okay. Time for me to share my quiz. I just finished it.

So yeah. Here we go. That's not it.

There it is. So hopefully this quiz, it might be difficult. It might not be.

But hopefully it's going to help remind us where we are in the text. So we've been in a debate that was started by Master Nagarjuna. And he was talking about how different non-Buddhist schools like these ancient Indian schools, Hindu mostly, they have certain ideas.

And he's trying to dismiss them as Buddhist teachers are want to do. So let's see what he says. We were talking most recently about the Vaisheshikas, which I believe we've landed on the translation detailers.

Is that right, Ben? Yeah. All right.

Ben, his book mentions all of the different Hindu schools. So he's got final names for them in English. I suppose could always change.

So where we were at last class, and I'm still a fuzzy on some of this, but you guys did an amazing job of helping me shed some light on it. The detailers seem to, on one hand, agree that there's a problem with the idea that things start or stop, but they don't have a problem with the idea that there are permanent, unchanging atoms. And I think taken as a given here is that if something doesn't start or stop, that means that through its own nature.

And so therefore, if things exist, they have to depend on other things, which on some level would mean that they change. But let's see.

[Говорящий 2]
I thought it was the other way around, Nick.

[Говорящий 1]
Oh, they think things do start or stop?

[Говорящий 2]
That the idea that there are conditions that cause things to start or stop is wrong. And they have no problem with the idea that there are partless atoms with an unchanging nature.

[Говорящий 1]
They don't have a problem with the idea that there are partless atoms with the non-changing nature, but they don't have a problem. Maybe it's I have a problem with reading English today. Sorry, I'll shut up.

I think what you said agrees with what I said here, but we'll look at the text if you still feel that it doesn't, because there was a kind of a confusing line there. So anyway, they do address a contradiction. Anyone want to try to remember or take a shot at how they address the contradiction that arises if we agree that temporary things just don't exist and we accept that atoms are unchanging?

[Говорящий 2]
Is this about the Shiva?

[Говорящий 1]
Yeah. Yeah, how then a baby could grow or age, get old, all of that. Yeah, good.

So if temporary things just don't exist and everything's unchanging, then there's a contradiction in the sense that we see things like babies grow into a youth or youths grow old or anything else. So that is how that contradiction is addressed. And then there's another.

So what happened was in the end of the penultimate class, the one before the last, he said, does momentariness exist or not? Or do temporary things exist or not? And he said, if they don't, if temporary things don't exist, then we would say, how does a baby grow into a youth or how do these things happen?

And then if temporary things do exist and yet atoms are unchanging, then what contradiction arises? Adam looks like he knows. Fair enough.

Well, just what logically is the problem if if just and yet things are unchanging. Then, then atoms, I mean, well, atoms couldn't be unchanged, couldn't be unchanging. Right.

Yeah, yeah, basically. Or they couldn't be the building blocks of temporary things. Yeah, it's more like that.

Temporary, we'd be saying that temporary things must become permanent. This is how they phrased it, which would constitute a change. I like that.

Yeah. And what is another problem? This is the end of my last class, which I doubt anybody would remember.

I don't think I remember. Oh, sorry. I had some yelling in the background.

What is another problem that we address if existing things are part changing and part unchanging?

[Говорящий 2]
That's impossible.

[Говорящий 1]
Well, yeah, but I guess they give some specific reasons why that would be stupid, I guess. Gal Subj starts addressing it. If it's part changing and part unchanging, then they're unchanging?

Yeah, that sounds reasonable. He says, how would the unchanging... First, he questions how the unchanging things would go out of existence.

And then the point he makes is if it's part temporary, how does a temporary part of something coexist with a permanent part? Like, how could that be? And he starts talking about, like, what is the...

Does the temporary part go away and then the permanent part remains? All right. In eight minutes, we finished the quiz.

Certainly. Well done. But with no Tibetan vocabulary.

There was nothing interesting for you guys. Like, you knew all the vocabulary. All right.

I'm going to stop sharing that. Share something else. That's not it.

Wait. Ha. See, here's where we were looking.

Oh, so Utpala, you raised a question. So let's, just because I think it's good for all of us, maybe we can look back and see what they had a problem with. No, I was totally misreading.

Never mind. Okay. Never mind.

Well, here's where we were. We were talking about the detailers. We're questioning whether temporary things do exist or not.

And in the case where they do exist, then we couldn't say that atoms are permanent. Because if something became permanent, temporary became permanent, it would change. And I don't think he spelled out the whole reasoning there.

Here's the part where he talks about how a baby could not grow into a youth or become old if atoms were not temporary and changing. So here's where we were. That section was kind of confusing.

I think we made the most of it. And here's an equally confusing section. And now we are working on disproving the beliefs of the Vaishnavites, which is my provisional translation, which I feel almost certain will be changed to something else.

I dare say he called them the universalists. Universalists? I'm afraid so.

Yeah, not to be confused with the Unitarians. Did you say it's not English, Venerable? Vaishnavite, maybe.

[Говорящий 2]
Vaishnavite, yeah, not English.

[Говорящий 1]
No, Vaishnavite is English. Only in the academy. It was in my textbook in high school, like I said last time.

Whether or not that's correct, I don't know. It's like Shaivite, Vaishnavite. Yeah, the Shaivites and the Vaishnavites, exactly.

Correct. A major distinction between northern and southern Indians are which... Never heard of it.

Yeah, okay. That's okay, it's still English. There's many English...

Yeah, one time I was on vacation and somebody asked me what ubiquitous meant, and I didn't know. And then she got really angry at me. She was really mad.

She thought I was messing with her. And then I was really unfair of me to not share what the English word meant. I was young.

I just didn't happen to know that word. And then we finally met up with some other American dude. I was like, hey, what does ubiquitous mean?

And he was like, I don't know. I was like, ah! Now I know what it means.

But you still won't tell foreigners? Oh, no, never. So if anybody on this call is not American, I'm sorry, I will not say.

Okay, just kidding. Ubiquitous, for those of you who haven't heard the word, means there's lots of them around. Pretty much everywhere.

Yeah, you could say Starbucks is ubiquitous in the planet or something. Where I live, good coffee is ubiquitous. So nothing bad about Starbucks.

Here's the second point from above. A denial of the followers of Vishnu's belief in an unchanging person. And then there's a verse here that Geshe Michael seemed to find only half of in our version of the Tengir.

So as we've noticed before, there's a couple problems with this text in our version of the Tengir. Luckily, one of the things that we've been hard at work on is, you know, especially asking our input operators to be hard at work on, is inputting a separate Tengir. So ALL, thanks to the hard work of Sanam and her team, now has two Tengirs fully input.

So feel free, anybody who needs a second opinion on something you find in the Tengir. It isn't yet cataloged and split. They're just input in volumes.

So it would still take some work to find anything specific. But we can search it. It's searchable though, yeah.

So it was the Nartang Tengir. So now we now have the Nartang. And yeah, cool.

It looks like we found the whole verse here from the Nartang Tengir. I'll read it. ke chig yin na ril me chir ning pa ga ta ga la shik ten chir ke chig min na yang ning pa ga ta ga la shik This is my provisional translation.

I only could even attempt this after looking at the verse here. The following stanzas, I mean. And we do have some help from Geshe Michael above.

And some Sanskrit, which has always been useful in this text. Let's look at the first section of the commentary here though. I'm sorry, Nick.

Could you go back up? Because you added some Tibetan that wasn't in. Great.

I just want to make sure I got it all. I didn't add any Tibetan. Yeah, after ning pa ga ta ga la shik, that ten chir ke chig, the version that I have said.

We're missing a line in Tibetan here. Oh, that's up here. Then Geshe Michael pasted this.

Oh, you're at a different one. Okay, I'm just lost. I'm just going to shut up.

Okay, bye. Scroll down. You don't have to shut up, but just you have to scroll down though.

You do have to scroll down. So anyway, there we go. Oscar, would you do us the honors?

Yeah. That's what you get for having your camera on. Yeah.

Nice. Thank you. This is what I got, and I'd love to go through it together.

Kamjupanare, the Vaishnavite say. Nick. Yes, sir.

Should we say claim? Yeah, absolutely. I mean, I know it's a minor point, but I feel like it should be like, yeah, something like.

Yeah, exactly. And also, depending on how much you've said that recently, right? As long as you didn't say claim a bunch of times, right?

Isha Michael says it can be cloying to use the exact same terms, even if they're the best terms. Yeah, it's cool. It's an interesting point.

A lot of stuff like that, I don't really deal with on my first pass. I wait till I'm translating big sections as a whole. Like, I go back over it, and then I'm still developing my process, of course.

But at this point, I'm just struggling to make sure I get the right meaning.

[Говорящий 2]
Good idea.

[Говорящий 1]
And within that, I really appreciate what you said, Word. And I appreciate everybody's input into what's a great way you want a final translation to look, because I need all the help I can get. All right.

So, the Vaishnavites claim, our Vishnu. This is Kovachak-y, our. So, now we're back in...

And we went through this before, where it was a Kovachak with a Shena at the end. So, it looks like they're kind of quoting them and saying our. Our Vishnu is an ancient, unchanging being who neither begins nor ends.

Right? He neither begins nor ends. Oh, yeah.

Silly question. Well, you just feel the flow works better in that order. You reversed the order of the list.

And maybe that felt better on your tongue in English. I'm just curious what the process was for you. Yeah, I first phrased it the other way.

And then I just... Yeah, it's just like that. And maybe there'll be a reason to change it back.

But I think it was just that it flowed better in terms of adjectives. Yeah, sometimes the genitive is clumsy the other way in English. Yeah.

Our Vishnu is a beginningless, endless being who is unchanging and ancient. I thought to make... Instead, I made the second part of verb.

Neither begins nor ends, rather than just having four adjectives, which I thought felt clumsy. That's why. Yeah, okay.

Although technically, neither beginning nor ending is the one that's attached to being. Yeah. Oh, yeah, then that's still like that.

Well, being... Well, unchanging being. I guess your who is the genitive, right?

That's the a-g-i-p-e. Cool, okay. And for all of our translators, if you don't know by now, when we say a-g-i-p-e, we mean this.

Yeah. That's the connecting particle. So maybe you just translate it as a-g-i-p-e.

But man, there's probably 20 things like that that we need to clarify. Because we say a-g-i-p-e all the time. You guys are like, what?

Anyway, so he's an ancient, unchanging being who neither begins nor ends. I'm open if there's a reason to put it the other way. But so far, it looks good to me.

I should say that all the time. I think it's fine. He totally does.

So it looks like we're saying we don't have these. Like we don't have right here. Deidak, these.

Ngepa, problems. A-g-i-p-e, of. Investigating.

Takpa. La, whether. He has any nature of his own.

Rangshin. Or is temporary. Nekap.

I mean, I almost want to say we don't have any of these problems that would lead us to investigate. Or maybe it's something else altogether. Yeah.

And I guess. Right. Importantly, sentence one is the reason for sentence two.

Yeah. Yeah. And then you can see that by the.

Yeah, right. So it's I think it's sort of implied by your English. I don't know if you want it to be more explicit.

I mean, we think it has that feel. It's just not explicit. I would do it this way if I wanted to make it more explicit.

But I think sometimes I just think it's kinder to the reader to split sentences. Yeah, I agree. Yeah.

Yeah. Well, you can always say. You know, you can end the sentence where you did and say something like, and this is why.

Yeah, it's true, too. And end of us for this reason. Yeah.

I mean. You could even do that. Only Geisha and Michael would allow you to start a sentence that way.

But we happen to work for just such a man. But you can start sentences with and it's fine. OK, don't tell her.

But she's you're lucky she's in protest quietness right now. I don't. Is it where you can?

This is a yes or no question. It is illegal to start sentences with and. Yes.

I did not sound like a poet. Oh, yes. In the chat.

I happen to agree. I mean, it's technically illegal, but colloquially when you're not a legal. It's just not as formal.

Mrs. Butts would teach otherwise. Yeah, I guess. OK, that's your Michael straight words.

Three thousand dollar answer. My third one will arrest you. Ben, you're saying you never start a sentence with a word that joins things together.

Are you saying that I'm saying that I never drive over the speed limit? I'm going back into silence. Bye.

I think it's acceptable English. That's my we'll look it up for next. I believe it's acceptable English.

Uh, OK, so. I forgot to close the quotations. It looks unacceptable.

That's not cool. I guess you can leave quotations open if you're continuing. You could.

But only when you start with the opening one in the next line. Then I graph. Yeah, which confuses me.

But I've noticed it in books. OK, next one. Can't you?

Oh, sorry. Let's read somebody else. Who's the next person?

Oh, it's you. OK. Thanks for joining us.

It's always nice to see you here. It's been so long. So.

Thank you. All right. I don't know.

Let's see what we got here. So. This is provisional, OK?

Rishi. If Vishnu functions. He has to be momentary.

That's this part. OK. I know functions is probably not an appropriate way to say nopal.

But it felt so weird to say if Vishnu is a functioning thing. Could you just changing a changing entity or something? I thought about that.

You could say you're changing here a little bit because I noticed that the nopal up top was you were specifically using temporary. No, temporary was for NACOP. Yeah, NACOP.

NACOP was. Yeah, NACOP was temporary. And I know that NACOP can also mean other stuff.

But in this whole section, it has meant temporary over and over. You could say, you know, something as colloquial as does things or does stuff or does or performs activities or. I thought about saying performs a function and then Adam popped in my head.

It was like, no, that's. Yeah, right. Well, maybe that's exactly why it's right.

Yeah, maybe. I'm going to definitely change it to that over this because it is. It was also my functions is not illegal.

It's just because you don't like it that I'm. Yeah. Yeah, that sounds even better.

It sounds weird to say Vishnu functions. It's like it's not like a Vishnu robot. If Vishnu.

Yeah. He's got to be moment. He's got to be temporary.

So I'm right now. Provisionally, I've been using momentary for K-cheek and temporary for NACOP just because just to stick, be somewhat consistent. What about active?

I don't know. Something like that. I don't know if Vishnu is active.

It sounds like he exercises. Yeah, he does. He goes out to the gym and makes all beings come and go.

He covers the world. That's active. He always looks really good in the statues.

I mean, that's why he's always laying down. He's so active. What does he eat?

All right. Okay. I don't know.

Let's see. Because if something is momentary, it doesn't last forever. I probably just could end that sentence there.

This is a mixed note attempting to translate in motion. It must exist between two points in time. Oh, yeah, right here.

It looks like I didn't catch the wrong group. I just said exist. The wrong group could be something like inherently or spontaneously or something.

Yeah, I think one group is spontaneous. But that's right. That's right.

Yeah. It feels similar, though, doesn't it? Yeah, I know what you mean.

It itself has to exist between two moments of time. Yeah, maybe. Yeah, maybe.

What's real may pop in? Real may, I'm saying, doesn't last forever. Because real, I think real means all.

Well, I want to go ahead. Okay, thank you. Yeah, real may means it's not a whole thing.

You think of it as a whole thing, but it's not a whole thing. I think the import of the sentence is that it must exist differently at two points in time. But there's no may here.

Yeah, right. It's real may. The ra connects it.

It's real may in the context of two different points in time being established at two different points in time. So the real may, you translated as? I said it doesn't last forever.

Yeah, it doesn't. You're thinking something more like it doesn't stay the same forever. Well, yeah, but it doesn't last for two moments in time if it changes, if there's activity.

I think it means it's not the same thing for two moments in time. Yeah, that's interesting. Yeah, yeah.

Because there is no must exist, actually. Because if something is kei chikma, if something is momentary, then that means specifically that it is a thing which is established as not lasting two moments in time. Something like that.

Yeah, totally. That's it. You guys are right.

That's got to be it. Yeah, between two. Yeah.

Or you could say, yeah, between two moments in time. I mean, I'm going to say more like it doesn't last from one point of time to another or or it doesn't. You can even just say it doesn't last for two moments in time.

I don't know. The between bothers me a little. I don't think it's the last thing.

I think it's the sameness. That's what... It's not the same.

So last. Oh, yeah, it's not. Yeah, that's that.

Let's see. I want to check something real quick. Shane Michael did a provisional translation of the root text.

And there's a there's a real in the root text. There's a real real. For real.

Let's take it. Maybe even this.

[Говорящий 2]
Here it is.

[Говорящий 1]
Real may. Real may cheer. Keiichi Gin not real may cheer.

And he said. How could something be old if it were not present in every instant? He translated all of the Sanskrit.

So he did. But this is the first line. That's the first two lines of the Tibetan.

I mean, first. Oh, thank you. You're right.

Thank you. Sorry, we're not even looking at the Sanskrit. How could something be old if it were not present in every instance?

So he's saying not present in every instant. And then Gyaltsabje is glossing it to say two points in time. So some kind of like pervasive like.

Yeah. And that's going to come. I think.

So it doesn't. We're not present. Yeah.

Yeah. OK. I think that's it.

Is it present for two moments in time? Isn't present. For two.

It doesn't necessarily say it doesn't last. It's something like that. I mean, we're very close.

The last is not bad because it's starye, which from which we get the word steady, stand, stay, still, stable. Right. Obstinate.

Hey, what are you trying to say? I try. We're going to gloss something similar below.

So maybe it'll all come together even better. This kind of all goes together. So here we got a galasik, which you guys probably remember that now, right?

Mm hmm. Like, how could it be?

[Говорящий 2]
Yeah.

[Говорящий 1]
How in the world? How the heck? Those are all nicer ways of putting it than I came up with.

Yeah. I'm just speaking in science fiction novels because that's what you wrote your book. OK.

How in the world could something be a changing thing? Here we go. Wait a minute.

OK, here I called Ngopo a changing thing. Yeah. So I've been messing around with it a little bit, and I'm not totally comfortable with one meaning of Ngopo for this section yet.

Be a changing thing. OK, so it says ngadu na yipe Ngopo. Exist as a changing thing at the beginning, maybe.

Yeah. I'm saying hopefully. Yeah, yeah.

Hopefully we're about to paint out that if he'd been around since forever, Ngopo doing stuff, being active, as it were, then there's a problem. Uh huh. Yeah.

Because she do at a later time. Yeah. At the beginning and then stay.

So she do. So it's she do soon. So it's maybe this is saying it's staying at a later time.

Or or still be around at some later time with the appearance of having aged. That's how I'm taking this time. To.

Well, you know, I if I remember correctly that. That time from the color that it's usually time. OK, I mean, like they usually go together as a phrase, I think.

Oh, I like that. Like what yet? WTF?

[Говорящий 2]
Yeah.

[Говорящий 1]
OK, so that's better. Yeah, I like that. Good deal.

As we know, Kiamjuk is very active and he doesn't appear old even if he is. Uh huh. The results of a good, healthy workout.

Follow me on my Instagram for more tips for men's health after 45. Men's health after 45. Help us.

So, OK, you're changing the beginning and then stay it and then stay at some later time. I'm going to take this out because I had a feeling that there was something about that time that I wasn't getting. Yeah, it it's usually just how could there ever be.

Uh huh. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And stay.

But it does say there is this mention of old like he's getting older. And then there's a guy here which I'm having a hard time. I don't think that goes with the color.

This is like something specific to the verse. Usually means some, right? Yeah, some.

And so I just had some later time because I was just trying to work it in there. But I wasn't quite sure what the guy on is like, like a few or something. Yeah, a few guy.

OK, so looks like he looks like he's aged a few. Look at the Sanskrit. Yeah, that's a good idea.

And we didn't get it here, but it may be this kachit. La la some. Kachit, which is it's strange.

Usually, oh yeah, kachit. Kachit. Yeah, this is like how in the heck.

Yeah, OK. Yes, Geshe-la translated it there in this line. How could something be old?

How in the world could something ever be old if it didn't even last an instant? Yeah, and so maybe this ga, here's the ga in the English. I think it's, yeah, I think it's the some thing.

Yeah, probably. Yeah, I think so. I agree with it.

And it comes again here. Yeah. At least in the Sertri.

Wait, hold on. No, this says ga, but that really wouldn't. He looks happy and old.

It's kind of. We could, you could see how the, well, never mind. Yeah, it was.

Yeah, it's just a miscarving, right? I think so, yeah. I mean, this couldn't be relating to Bumgamo.

Oh, oh. The obscure Hebrew. Are you talking about the Vinayali?

Oh my God. The reason for all the bells. OK.

OK, yeah, so, so let's just, I don't have to say some later time. I think it's this something here. Yeah, something.

Yeah, let's stay at a. I'll clean it up later. But it's something like this, right?

The meaning seems right. Nick, the beginning of that second sentence. This one.

Yeah, if, if there was, if there was an earlier time. Maybe I, I took, I took it from the beginning. Yeah, I took it as a, as like a laden particle here.

You took the laden particle? Well, not as it can commonly be a laden particle as well as being if. OK.

And in this case, I took it that way because it just, I, I don't see how it's saying if there's an earlier time, you know, because it doesn't say. There's nothing else that refers to it being an if statement. It would say if, if the, if existing at an earlier time is a functional thing, then at a later time as it exists, it would, something would have to age.

How could it be that it did not? That's possible, I think. Yeah.

How in the world? I think the Galah Sheik is why I switched it. I changed it away from being an if in the first place, because I couldn't make a good statement with how in the world.

It would have, it would have split it up into multiple sentences. I don't know, you could say if blah, blah, blah, blah, then how in the world blah, blah, aging. My other reason is you could, but you have a not doing, uh, it doesn't say not do lie.

Like, it seems to me that it seems to me and maybe a row that the, if would then be over here, if, if it were an of changing thing at an earlier time. Changing thing. If earlier time like that syntax.

It's, it's definitely possible. No, I'm not a hundred percent sure if it's like, oh, if earlier time changing thing. Yeah.

Like in every case that you see not, there's usually a continued of particle, like somewhere following. Right. Is there one here?

Let's see. I didn't pick up on one, but well. He's been using gal Tay a lot.

And with, but like you would say gal Tang, you know, and then put them now later. Yeah, that's common. Usually like the, if then, you know, kind of context, it is, there is usually a continued of particle separating the two.

Okay. So let me see. I don't know if we need to do it, but if at an earlier time it was changing thing.

I'm kind of arguing for the way that you have it. No, I know you do. I know you are.

I'm just trying to be thorough here. See, here's a, now there's a lot done particle instead of not. So my tendency is to keep it how it is, but it's, let's see.

So it's like it exists as a changing there. And then it stays there. That seems to be the pattern.

Let's see, see what happens down below. Oh, they may part out. There is no such thing.

Does that sound right? I agree. Okay.

He does it again in the next sentence. So whatever. Good day may part out.

There is no, nothing exists like that. Yeah, he does it. He does it again here.

Yeah, he does. So here's our if. Oh, somebody else can read.

It was not me. Let's see. Innocently just standing there.

[Говорящий 2]
Kitchick. Oh, it's tagala. So it's God.

[Говорящий 1]
Sorry, this is a mistake. The taxa when Gershwin-Michael puts it like that. God young tagala she.

[Говорящий 2]
I just didn't know. Thank you. Okay.

[Говорящий 1]
Let's see what it means. This one's definitely an if. Uh.

Kitchick ma min na. So this to me is 100%. No question.

We got an if statement. If a stable functioning thing cannot be momentary or is not momentary. Then we got a gala young here somewhere.

Gala she. Then how in the world. Forget this.

Observe things.

[Говорящий 2]
Is that your top?

[Говорящий 1]
Yeah, yeah, yeah. But I knew that it was ridiculous. Okay.

How in the world could things. Start. Yeah, where were we?

Oh, yeah. How could things start at one time? So now I think I'm mixing things up.

Stay. And then get old at a later time. So we got to rework this.

You missed the also. I don't think it's too bad. I think you missed the also.

Where's an also? Oh, this. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Well, there's a couple. There's the on. There's a count.

And there's a young. Look at that. Skipped over all of them.

There's probably all they gave each other anyway. As avoiding that. If also even.

How in the world could things. Also start at one time or even. But actually, it looks like it's saying stay.

At the beginning, right? That's weird. It could be exist.

Exist is changing from the beginning to. Exist is functioning from the beginning. And later also.

Maybe. Also exists. And then get old later.

Yeah, but those are contradictory. So yeah, yeah. Well, the thing is, he's saying, OK, no, we're talking about stable functioning things.

Those cannot be momentary, right? He says it's a it's a thing. What does stable mean?

Yeah, I don't know. Let's see the Sanskrit. Firm.

What is firm steerer or something? Probably. Yeah, that's what I'm guessing.

Here it is. Stay. Start.

Yeah, that. Yeah, I hear the idea. Here it is.

Yeah. I guess I Michael didn't even treat it, unfortunately. But he was just doing a really, as he said here, rough.

He just didn't want to forget. Yeah, it's something to be old if it did not last an instant. What did I do?

How could a stable thing be old if it didn't last an instant? I took it like. If if momentary things are not stable because it says.

Ten cheer, Keiichi Minna. Yeah, so if so, this to me, since it's a min. It means this is not this.

Yeah, and I don't know what the cheer is doing there. If because it's stable, it can't be momentary or something like that. Yeah.

I'll say that for now. How can we observe it age? I don't know.

Since it's something firm, stable. Word, you're the temper guy you got. I'm the opposite of temper.

I mean, your book has like my book. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, every possible meaning of 10 has come up.

Oh, yeah, yeah, that's true. My video. Oh, here we go.

OK, so let's just say if. A stable. Functioning thing.

Because a functioning thing is stable. Maybe that's what the chair is doing here. If because a functioning thing is stable.

It cannot be Keiichi. Yes, a stable has to mean something like unchanging or something. Yeah, then what do you think?

I'm wondering if stable also refers to just being old. Yeah. I'm not sure.

Anyway, that's what I was thinking at the moment you asked me what I was thinking. Because then can be like an elder. Yeah, they use it and like the 16 Nathan.

Right, right, right. I didn't even think about that. Yeah, it's true.

Interesting. 16. Elders are the 16 are because this this guy's been around since ancient times.

So if he's a if he's an ancient doer, if he's an ancient, ancient agent. Yeah, he's juking the cap. Then he's got to be Denver.

Maybe, maybe. OK, I'm going to stick with stable for now. I'm not accusing you of juking the cap.

If because a functioning thing is stable, it cannot be momentary. Then Gala Sheik, how in the world could things. So I'm going to change this.

It doesn't say anything about starting. Stay maybe from the beginning. Uh, where were we?

Oh, yeah. Not do not pay. Maybe not.

So it's like a changing thing staying. It's not a from. I don't know if it's an if, but I don't think so.

I'm open on it. God. I don't know.

If it isn't, if it says this line says if, if, if also, if also. Earlier time. Yeah, probably.

I think if stay at an earlier time. Yeah, that's even better. Then it seems more contradictory.

Yeah, it has to be contradictory in some way, right? Yeah. And then get old at a later time.

Uh, where were we? While I bet you that Chiang is while. This year.

Oh, while naping by while staying old. When the world could things stay at an earlier time and that. While I think it'd be while being old.

I think you're right. For the Napa. Yeah, yeah.

It just doesn't sound right to say staying old. Yeah, it's a little heavy handed. I mean, maybe in Tibetan, it sounds okay, but.

Yeah, I mean, it makes sense, but it sounds funny. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, that's what it means, right?

Yeah. While existing. Existing as old.

Yeah, exactly. Yeah, it's getting depressing. Okay.

Seeing how gray I become. Let the things stay at an earlier time while being old at a later time. For it's certainly.

Here we go. What's this? Oh, yeah, here we go.

I said. I took that to be for. It's certainly the case.

That functioning things become old. Right. Cool.

All right. No argument there. So does that contradict?

Does that? Let's see if this makes sense, then. I don't know.

Could things stay in earlier time while being old at a later time? But doesn't that seem this coherent? Yeah, it is or isn't.

Should be contradictory, right? We're looking for more. I don't see much of a problem.

Yeah. Well, you translated. May as stay one time and then being at another time, but it's probably consistent.

So it's how could things be changing at an earlier time? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. And then we were.

[Говорящий 2]
Yeah, you're right.

[Говорящий 1]
You're right, because it's the nopal. We have to capture that changing this of this. Isn't that still not contradictory, Kramer?

Because if it looks to be old. No, OK. It's interesting because if you consider it from the standpoint of just having something exists from an earlier time to a later time, it could just be two instance.

So all you need is something to exist over two instance. So in fairness, right, we're struggling to piece together the the grammar and the the particular words, but it does seem clear the idea at the time that we're trying to is saying if from the beginning of time, if from beginningless time, in fact, you go on doing things, then you must be changing. And in fact, if you're staying from beginningless time, if you are ancient and they even use the word ancient, then.

No, I use. Yeah, but what was the word that you used as ancient? It doesn't matter anyway.

Again, we get caught up on the words, but we know. As translators at a certain point, you have to make the words mean what, you know, it's supposed to say, of course. Right.

Which is that there's a problem about about Vishnu doing stuff from beginningless time without being different over the course of what he's done. So is the thing he's doing here painted out? Is it is it aging?

And Ningbo, right, by the way, that was the word for ancient. And so he's he's ancient, but he's been here since beginningless time. And the same is stable.

Yes. By the way, if time is beginningless, then you have always been ancient if you've existed since beginningless time. Yeah, it's a really confusing idea.

Thanks. But so so maybe the contradiction is within here somewhere like that. I mean, what he's trying to disprove is that if because a functioning thing is stable, it cannot be momentary.

And how so I think this is actually supposed to be coherent, like Adam was saying, then how could things be changing at an earlier time while being old at a later time? Like because it seems like it's just trying to disprove the first part. But just because something is stable doesn't mean it can't be momentary, like just because something is a stable functioning thing.

And I don't know where that's coming from. Maybe there was an old debate where somebody was like, oh, no, but he's stable. Yeah, stable doesn't pay the bills.

You know, like, look. Yeah. Again, unless them is a glossing of.

You know, I take it from the root text. I take the stable to just me. So just over two, two, two moments, stable over two moments.

Yeah. Any functioning thing that exists over. Yeah.

We were saying like earlier in between two instance, right. For something to have a start, we keep we keep seeing the knot and then the key. Right.

And so I think what's being implied here is that anything that's stable is something that exists from that has a knot and a key. OK. Or over, excuse me, more than two instance.

Right. So if it exists for more than, you know, if you got a coffee cup and it exists for more than two instance, you could consider that thing a 10 and, you know, an object, which is Timber. As much as I'd like to believe I can solve this problem without a present.

It's probably cool to the world to not try to hatch some means of applying it to ourselves. At this point. Yeah, I think you're right.

And this is cool. I mean, I think it's actually Michael said he warned us that I haven't seen him with this book in a while, but he warned us the last time we were looking at it, that it was about to get really hard. So good.

The next at the next section, we can peek. But but just just to give you a heads up, it's not going to give you any relief at all. We're at time just.

Yeah, we're over time. But but and it just it starts to go into. It's a different section for goes into a new section about momentariness.

So it is related. Oh, well, let us let us let us see. I haven't.

I haven't wrestled with much of it.

[Говорящий 2]
Where did the third part go?

[Говорящий 1]
The third part of what?

[Говорящий 2]
Well, if that's the fourth part that we're coming up with and the part we're just in right now is the second part.

[Говорящий 1]
Oh, there's I'm sorry. It was the second part of the third part. My apologies.

You know how they roll. All right. OK, thank you so much.

Thank you, guys. Everybody's being very helpful. Thank you, my fellow nuts and everyone else participating in this.

Class. I think we've learned some things. We're also inquiring into how to stay firm from one point to the next.

I'm working on it. A lot of smoothies. The trick is to never do anything.

I thought I thought we're supposed to be active. There may be a problem. That's the contradiction.

Can you just not do stuff and then you're no longer a changing thing and then you become talked about? You just sit around. I should start trying that.

Yeah, it's just doesn't exist. No, sorry. It doesn't exist.

We're going to refute it and then we'll all be immortal. But we won't be able to think anymore. So it won't matter.

Or age. So anybody else practical applications? Oh, what do you mean else?

Obviously, my practical applications were brilliant, but not helping anybody because you guys just can't understand the depth of how I'm explaining for you to apply this. I'm not doing anything. We are talking about an unchanging soul or self.

And that I do feel is something that we feel or think about a lot or don't like to admit that we feel or think about. But I find in my interactions with people, I want people to see who I am or understand the real me. And if they get me wrong, then it hurts my feelings because they didn't see the real me or I want them to think something about me.

Maybe I present myself a certain way, the way I want them to think I really am. And then maybe I feel bad sometimes because I'm encouraging people to think that I'm something other than I really am. But then I wonder, can they see through the way I'm trying to make them think I really am to see the way I really am?

And if there isn't such a thing as that, then I probably don't have to have 70, 80, 90% of the thoughts that I'm having all day. And I could just help people instead of worrying about the real me and whether I'm living up to him or convincing you of him. Yeah, I like that.

I know what you mean. I spend a lot of my time, unfortunately, trying to either control or change what I think people think of me, which is also wrong because I have no idea what they think of me. I suspect this is the human condition.

Seems like it. Yeah. Frontin.

Yes. Yeah, right. But then changing every moment is like a river.

We have this river, the Rio Grande, that flows through Albuquerque, New Mexico. And it's made of water, I guess. But if it's made of water, there should be some particular water that the river in Albuquerque is made of.

But when you go to point at the water that the river in Albuquerque is made of, it's already gone downstream to Mexico. And so you can never see the water that the river is made of. And every time you go to point at me or your husband, boyfriend, wife, kids, children, pets, they're gone, replaced by the next seed unfolding in your heart.

And even if there's no water in the river, they still call it the river. Yeah, only in Arizona. Hey, hey, hey.

Even if it's made of concrete and it looks like a pipe or something. That's California. Yeah.

Something I think that is even going like taking what you're saying into consideration. And then where I think that what this text is actually grappling with, which I think is interesting, is this kind of universal self. Or Samkhya too, right?

I relate personally a lot to this idea of Purusha and Prakriti and this kind of more, there's like a universal self, which kind of contains all of us and then individual expressions. And this kind of way of thinking about the world is probably the main thing that attracted me to start being a spiritually minded person in the first place. I really relate with it and still.

And I think something interesting about studying this kind of philosophy, this lineage, is that it's denying that, but also kind of claiming it at the same time. And it just kind of points your mind in some direction toward truth that we can't quite put into words, maybe. Although Nagarjuna seems to have a problem with that.

But Buddhism says all day that there is no universal oneness in the way that we might think there is. But then at the same time, it's like, oh yeah, the only way to get a donut is to give word to donut. Do you like donuts?

And why is that? Oh, it's because he is you. Oh, he is me.

Okay. So that to me implies some sort of universal oneness. But then there's all these arguments of like, no, there is no enduring oneness.

And so it's like, I don't know. I think it's really, I've really enjoyed this journey for the last 20 years of trying to play with these seemingly at odds with each other ideas. But I don't know.

There's some truth in there that we maybe can't figure out exactly what's going on. At least not me. Yeah.

I guess like Christina Kasikas just said in the chat, Democritus, the Greek philosopher said, you can't step in the same river twice. It's important to say that these ideas are not just to sound mysterious. That if you see like a water fountain, right?

Makes a little shape into the sky as the water fountain comes up. But every time you try to point at what the shape is made of, the water that you're pointing at is gone. So what it's made of in the end is your idea of a little shape.

Your idea is what makes it be. And if that's true, if reality is ever changing and only contained by the shape of our ideas, then this is proof that the shape of our minds and hearts matter. It's proof that reality is changeable.

If the substance that makes reality what it is, is the mind, is ideas, is thoughts, we know that those can be very much changed and that there's a fluidity there even. Yeah, more fluid than water. Yeah.

Well said, man. That seems to be what Nagarjun keeps on trying to show us. I like it.

More fluid than fluid? No, he didn't say that. He said something like that.

He said pouring butter into butter. I don't know. Anyway.

Marsha, Marsha. I have found the greatest relief in my life at moments when I'm able to use that idea in a moment. So I believe it's possible to be able to transcend whatever maze my mind happens to be caught in and remember that I am just whatever I can dream myself, not necessarily controllably, but whatever I happen to be dreaming myself as in that moment.

And then I've personally found moments where that idea alone has been enough to offer me some freedom from whatever fear was gripping me and be able to just kind of go beyond whatever stupid argument or problem I was having and just move into a better state of mind. Yeah, but you can control it. You do control it.

It's just that you didn't know you were controlling it until... I think it's like you're in a car and your hands are taped to the steering wheel and the pedals, but you don't know and you're flailing and wild things are happening. But when you meet a teacher and you start to learn about reality and you meet friends and then suddenly you start to...

What a shame if we didn't learn how to drive a car until after we had been already driving it for countless eons, but that's sort of the state of affairs. You've always been driving and now we're finally collecting this information from a driver's ed manual that we were given only very late in the process, but we have it now. Literally.

Yeah, I'm in. Thank goodness. Well, that's a good note to end on.

And that was very... I think this was a nice talk. So thank you, fellas and ladies and everyone.

Yeah. So it's time for Juan Hasso to give us the world news and then stay tuned for 5.30 for a Q&A with Dr. Word, where you will be able to ask him the most difficult questions that you could possibly think of. He particularly loves mind only questions.

Makes him so happy. Thank you, Word. Juan, you're looking good.

Thank you, man. I know, right? It's the power of the Mexican weather.

Maybe. You guys could consider coming sometime. Maybe next year.

Maybe, maybe. Stay open to the maybe. Okay.

All right. So let me talk a little bit about what's going on this week. Yeah, as I mentioned before, I made it to Mexico.

We are all very excited because soon we're going to have a retreat here. Soon we're going to be sharing more details about that. But just first, a reminder about, yeah, last time we showed this wonderful video on the Balise.

Yes, you were right. Tech Table, aka Gina Rivera. Thank you so much, Gina Rivera, that is helping us with the online materials.

So yeah, last Saturday we were talking about this. Just for the audience to get to understand visually how all this project with the Balise works. There is a wonderful video that our friend Rosa Van Gricken, she's in charge of this project, GMR Luxury, Diamond Cutters Jewels.

And we wanted to share it with you because, you know, different days is different audience, this program. So because of the time zones. So we wanted to take the chance also to share it with our friends in Asia, mostly because of the time zones.

So there is this video. You get more clarity. What's the idea and how the gadgets on the Balise work.

So there you go. The idea, one of the ideas with this Balise project is to help us to have a fresh and good resting night. Since we detach ourselves from our electronic devices, we put them in the Balise at night, far from us, go to bed.

And if for any reason we wake up in the middle of the night, the Balise is locked with this special electronic lock. So the idea is we cannot access it. It's like a little help to don't fall for the temptations of the electronics there at night.

It's a wonderful present. You can consider it. And of course, it supports these wonderful classes, this wonderful project.

In some other news, I was talking to you about the Mexico retreat coming up this weekend. You still have a chance to register online if you haven't yet. But it's very cool because now that I'm here in Mexico, in Guadalajara, I have seen how the production team is so excited about it.

You can feel the energy. People all over the world getting ready to travel to Mexico City. And I've been talking with my friends who are producing this event and they share with me the schedule.

I want to share it with you just super quickly. We have it here in Spanish, but I'm just going to talk about the activities. It's going to be, of course, classes with Geshe Michael himself.

There is going to be one talk on Friday night time. And then two classes with Geshe Michael on Saturday, two classes on Sunday. But also there is going to be international teachers teaching during Saturday and Sunday.

And I'm just quickly going to mention what are they going to be teaching on Saturday. Aldo and Paulina from Mexico, they are going to be teaching a class, a special class called Finding My Life Purpose. Then later Saturday, Hector Marcel from Triules and Berta Velasco from Mexico City.

They are going to be teaching a class on, it's called From Broken Relationships to Lovely Relationships. That's Saturday. Then on Sunday, Tim Lowenhaupt and Rob Hagerty Jr. are going to be teaching a class called A Journey to Inner Peace. And finally, that same day, Sunday at night time, Ward Smith and Anai Luis, they're going to be teaching a class on Financial Freedom. I'm just sharing with you a little bit of what's going to be happening during this retreat. Plus, as I just say, the classes, the Angel Debates the Devil with Geshe Michael.

I think it's going to be very, very exciting. And we would like to show the QR code one more time, just in case you haven't signed up, you had a chance. Awesome.

Wonderful. OK, so now after talking about the Mexico retreat, as you know, John Brady and other friends in Asia have been traveling in different countries in Asia. Just like a few days ago, John Brady taught a few classes in Singapore.

There is just a few pictures I want to share with you about the Singapore event. Soon we will have more in-depth talks with some of our friends in future weeks. Maybe Osiris, dear friend Osiris is excited to share with us because he has been part of this tour.

So can we show the other pictures, please? But this is only one. Yeah, that's in Singapore.

This is only one of the events. Next picture, please. That have been happening in Asia.

A previous event just happened in Malaysia on July the 7th. And it was the Art of Gratitude event. Is the next picture, please.

Oh, no, that's not yet. That's friends in Singapore. Yes, that's the one.

For that, our dear friend Sugeng also helped to produce and taught in the event. We want to show a special video he shared with us and then we're going to be talking with him about the many adventures that have been happening over there. But first, let's just watch a short video he sent me a few days ago.

Okay, so there you go. And here with us is Sugeng. Hello, Sugeng.

How are you? Hi, Juan. I'm good.

Thank you. Good to see you. Thank you so much for making the time to be here with us today.

Yeah, we just arrived in Jambi. It's another city in Indonesia. This is the place where Lord Atisha came like more than slightly more than 1000 years ago.

Supposedly to learn something that was missing during his time. And then he brought it back to India. And then, yeah, then the teaching spread.

And what's the purpose of this trip, Sugeng? Why are you in Sumatra, is it? Oh, yeah, yeah.

Oh, the purpose. Well, I mean, we have, I don't know. Strangely, there are students.

The students are growing in this city. You know, not many. We have 54, but it is growing.

So I don't know. I was just when we arrived yesterday, I was just telling Cynthia, you know, hey, we seem to be coming to Indonesia much, much more frequently these the last two years. Something great is happening here because we only come when there are months, right?

When there are demands, when people want to learn, then we come. So, yeah, this is exciting. That's wonderful, Sugeng.

I think you have been traveling for the last few weeks. I don't know if it starts with this art of gratitude retreat, maybe, or you were traveling before. Yeah, since we came back from U.S. in May, we have been going around. I don't know. This is our trip number seven or eight, right, Cynthia? I mean, we have been going to airport like, I think, eight times already.

It's exciting and crazy. You may be getting closer to global services. No, no, no, no, no, no, not like Mr. Tim Lowenhaupt. So, no, they don't have global services for short trips. Can you can you share with us a little bit, Sugeng, of what was the topics and the purpose of this event, the art of gratitude? Okay, we call it Event 77, double seven, because it happened on 7th of July.

And it is, it was actually in Indonesia, not Malaysia. Okay, it's in Medan, Indonesia. Medan is another city with a growing population of students.

So, we have a few hundred students here. So, it's very, very, very cool also. So, we, since we have a growing group of students, we want to introduce the ALL, the Asian Legacy Library.

And also, we want to introduce our Democratic classics, the Mixed Nuts program, right? So, of course, since Professor JB and Connie are passing by on their way to Yogyakarta Borobudur event, we actually invited them to detour to Medan. Since I have a big group of students in Medan, I think it's the best opportunities and best chance for them to meet up in person.

And then to hear directly what all these programs all about. So, we just find an excuse to invite people. We just call it the Art of Gratitude from Ancient Wisdom because this is a topic that people love very much.

It's close to their heart. And yeah, and then, of course, skillfully during this event, we introduced all the Asian Legacy Library and the Mixed Nuts, the, what do you call, the Democratic classics. Yeah, and also YSI, the Yoga Studies Institute to them.

Yes, and just after that, after your event in Indonesia, you went to the Borobudur event, right? With YSI. Yeah, before that, right?

I think we collected close to 30,000 USD, you know, for the ALL fundraising in Medan. I think that's incredible. Within only one day.

Yeah, and then, yes. Really is. Then we flew to, we flew to Yogyakarta.

Yes. About an hour from Borobudur to support this event. It's a YSI event together with Raw Diamond on the Jewel of Sharing.

And yeah, the people, there are about 160 people there and people learn all this with the YSI team. And this is another exciting event because I met up with many, many people who I only saw in Zoom. For example, here, I can see we have what, Laia, for example.

Laia, we have been talking when I was doing the Q&A for Mixed Nuts, Laia asked questions, but I've never met her. And she was there. It's incredible, you know, when you see somebody in person.

Yeah, I can see that. Oh, Casey has legs too. Yeah, I see you guys also made a cool video for Geshe Michael during the YSI and you're there as well.

It's just very short. We're going to show it real quick. Yeah, you can tell how many people were attending and I see you there as well.

Check it out. Hey, Peachtree, it's YSI and Raw Diamonds in Indonesia. And we are learning about creating abundance by sharing.

And we were wondering if you could share some of your cinnamon rolls with us. So we have a message. Ready?

Yeah, I can see you guys were having fun. What is cool is that at the back, you don't see Sintian, right? Sintian is actually at the back.

We have a booth there. We have a table and then we are doing a fundraising too. You know, it's pretty fun.

We have a GMR Luxury. We have an Asian Legacy Library. We have even for YSI, we have fundraising for them.

And another thing that I observed here is that, you know, when COVID started, when the pandemic started, a lot of our classes actually went online and that actually broke down the country boundaries. So there is no more boundaries for countries. And Chinese speaking people in many places suddenly have many options, including people from Singapore, Malaysia.

And of course, there are groups who attend courses with existing organizers. There are groups who attend classes with China organizers. And interestingly, they don't get to know each other.

They don't get to meet each other. They don't even know each other. But in this event, they came together.

So I'm talking about Singapore, Malaysia. I'm not talking about people from China, right? So people from Singapore, Malaysia who have been taking classes from different organizers who didn't know each other, suddenly they are together in the same room.

They are sitting together. They are talking together. They are discussing together.

They did performance together. It's so beautiful. The harmony that you see, that you will see there is like, wow, this is really a very beautiful world where everybody come together.

Before that, when I asked A, hey, do you know B from who attended class with the other teacher? No, I don't. When I asked C, if you don't know D, no, I don't.

But suddenly everybody is together and talking together. And because they are from the same country, from the same place, and now they came together, it's beautiful. I can see, wow, this Borobudur event was really, can I call it unification event?

Unifying event. So that is the beautiful thing that I observed. That is so cool, Sugeng, because I think I agree with you.

It's very important for us, I would say, at least for me, my personal experience, having a community and having friends while learning and studying this ancient wisdom. It has been extremely, extremely helpful. And I think it's definitely one of the goals and dreams of Geshe Michael that we all can work together as a big family and also share and support each other with this deep appreciation and deep friendship.

And I think these kind of events, as you say, definitely, definitely take us in that direction. So I want to also thank you for organizing these events and being part of it and doing this wonderful, I will say, mission in those ancient lands across the ocean. Okay, yeah, thank you very much.

I am so honored and so glad that you give me this opportunity to share with all the friends. So all those people that I have met, I mean, I wish to see everybody that I see in Zoom that I have not met personally. I would really like to meet every one of you in person, if possible, in future, in whatever event that we have.

So thank you, Juan, for facilitating this world news so that we all can connect with each other. Thank you so much, Sugen, my pleasure. And I hope it keeps going in that direction.

Thank you so much for being here. And it's time to go. It was time before, but let's go with our next section.