Тим Ловенхопт — Книга 1: Совершенство мудрости, занятие 10

[Speaker 1]
Good morning, everybody. Morning. Morning.

Morning. Morning. Where's Tim?

Good morning. Hi, Steve. Hi.

Good morning. Tim, did you do a homework? Aha.

Yeah. Everyone's so quiet this morning.

[Speaker 2]
Hi, Tim. How are you post everything. You know what.

[Speaker 1]
I'm good. Mostly. I'm doing well.

How are you doing.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, it's a little challenging, I think. Hello, so good to see you from way too far. I'm coming back, though.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, good.

[Speaker 2]
Yes.

[Speaker 1]
Congratulations on your retreat. Tim, don't look so confused. We didn't even start yet.

I know. Okay, are you ready? Let's do it.

All right, here we go. Quiz two. All right, let's have a little bit of a review first.

And basically, who are the four in a supposed innovators that were that were presented to us by our country. Okay. My chair.

Incorrect. Yes. How about more honorific Lee.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Who was nervous. Is it RSS on good or no.

That's correct. Yes. Master did not get who was the third one.

Or fourth one excuse me. Yes, and what does his name mean. Elephant plus warrior.

Elephant plus warrior Yes. Cool. So let's keep that in mind that we're debating we're trying to decide who's the innovator and who's not and what makes for an innovator.

All right, so our first question. In our first debate regarding Lord my track and attempt to target refutes our opponent with three what reasons why he should not be considered an innovator. And what are those three reasons have to teach in this world.

That's correct. Yes, he has to teach in as well. What am I teach.

He was out of his world man. Out of this world. Perfect.

He wasn't in the world that that's a perfectly acceptable answer. What are the other two. He wasn't.

All right, there we go. Okay. What were the other two words baby.

Some Chinese baby. Oh, so the first one is not following other innovators. Right.

And so what does that mean third one is commenting on scriptures in an independent way. Right. So if we're saying that he didn't follow other innovators.

What is how. What does that mean. I mean literally the original not commenting.

Right. It was the original teacher. And we'll talk about that in a second.

And then we'll probably get the third one, which is did he did not comment on the scriptures in an independent way. All right. Good job guys.

It's 6am I know Stanley looks. All right, question two. In our explanation of the definition of an innovator Kendra 10 of the Dargate makes a retort that even a Buddha cannot be an innovator.

Because someone who started the teachings isn't someone who presented them in a fresh and new way. So let's think a little more deeply about this like why, why are we not considering enlightened beings, even Lord my tray of the coming Buddha to be innovators, or break this into two questions. First, why are we not considering enlightened beings to be innovators.

Yes, they, they started the teachings but doesn't that sound like an innovation.

[Speaker 2]
No, an innovator expands on an idea that which is already presented. That's what innovation means.

[Speaker 1]
Otherwise, yes, yes, yes. But I'm looking for an answer. Like, like, Kendra Tempo Dargat gives us a kind of an absurd consequence.

If Lord Buddha to be an innovator. What's the consequence of that. And anybody could I don't know.

He was talking about the experience of somebody else experience and teachings of somebody else. Not exactly. So if one Buddha can be an innovator.

What's the consequence of saying that innovator of his own teachings. Yep. Heard the word from Rob.

All of them. Right. All of them will be innovators and then we'd have to consider all Buddhist innovators.

Okay, that's cool. So we still need to think about that I think. Okay, then.

But wait, Lord my tray wasn't in these teachings. Okay, so why wouldn't we consider him an innovator we actually talked about it already.

[Speaker 2]
He wasn't teaching in this world wasn't teaching in this world.

[Speaker 1]
Correct. Right. Definition.

All right, third question. So, up until this point we have yet to see a single word from the root text. And this is more of an open ended question so why do we think, why do you think our author is starting out with a discussion on innovators in our first chapter, whose topic is actually omniscience.

And then the second part of the question would be, how might the topic of omniscience be a rationale why on enlightened beings are not considered innovators. Let's start with the first one. Why are we starting on a topic of innovation and haven't seen the root text yet.

This is an open ended question. Well, the author of the root text is, is one of the great innovators, so knowing why we're so excited to read his work is pretty important. We like to get worked up about an author before a work, and we always do.

And in the rare cases where an author of a commentary doesn't do that for us, our trustee leader sends us to other commentaries to learn about the authors beforehand. For just the same reason. Great.

Okay. Thank you, Ben. That was what I was thinking as well.

What is, what is, what's the implication of that about our author of the commentary, Kittu Tempadarge. If we're saying that Arya Sangha is an innovator, and we're getting all hyped up about it, what do you think about our author of the commentary, what do you think he's saying about himself.

[Speaker 2]
I think he's saying he's not an innovator. I think what Geshe-la said earlier about innovators being very rare, and how important it is to transmit the teachings, and actually not do something new is important to consider here as well, because there are only a couple of innovators, and that the, you know, diligent transmission of the actual teachings is the most important thing.

[Speaker 1]
Cool. I was thinking something very similar like he's. I'm sorry.

Maybe it's a Khenpo Khun. Khenpo Khun. Khenpo Khun.

What does that mean? Or he's being humble. Yes.

Yeah. That's, that he's humbly, that humbly he himself is a marketer. Right, that he's saying I'm just telling you guys I'm just reporting on something I'm not somebody special, but this guy Arya Sangha he's pretty cool.

And the other question is, why, why, how might this topic of omniscience be a rationale, why would lighten beings are not innovators. Like we're talking about everything they can't think of anything. Yeah, yeah.

There's nothing more to know. Okay, that's, I'm just like it. Okay, some STWs.

First one, a duckbow. The Lord, the boss. And in what context are we understanding it.

Who's the Lord innovator. Lord of innovate who I like that. That's good.

The Lord of the owner right that person who the owner of the idea referring to Shakyamuni Buddha. Right, who's not an innovator. A vast stable of innovators.

That's very poetic. All right. And I had to look this up in this specifically in a debate context.

Split reason. Split reason. Yes, exactly.

So means a split reason meaning that both parts, the first part, and the second part consists of that reason. So we're actually going to see that in the upcoming transition. All right, cool.

Good job guys. Oh, great homework. Yeah, you guys are outdoing each other.

Healthy competition, right Geshe-la? No, just a bunch of brilliant people in the same room. That's my motivation.

And Geshe-la, I did a practice translation of that next paragraph there, or next sentence. Now there is no competition here because I believe that I butchered this, but it was a lot of fun attempting. No, because nobody else would even try.

I broke this paragraph or the sentence into two sections so we could look at each one and also so they fit on one page as well. Yeah, okay, cool. Okay.

I'm worried about the yang. Shenyang. This yang right here?

Yeah, I think that yang means, of course, for another reason, rather than they were also innovators. You see what I mean? Oh, okay.

Okay. Because if it meant as well, it would be yang. CHE BA'I DE NI ZHING DE GZOD BYAS YANG DUG PA You see what I mean?

It's a syntax thing, order of the words. Okay, so if the yang were before the dugpa, we would consider it as well, but because it's after. Yeah, and having said that, I would check the last sentence and make sure it was also a reason why they couldn't be.

Here's the last sentence. But we weren't talking about them in the last sentence, we were talking about the Chakravarti Buddha. How about before that?

Chakravarti Buddha. Then we were talking about, the previous one we were talking about, Maitreya. Keep going.

And then. Keep going, keep going. Yeah, okay, so then your yang is okay.

Then your yang is okay. This is not a second reason why those two guys are not. This is the first time.

Yeah, that's okay. But if it were the second time, we'd have to... Okay, I see, got it, okay.

And when you say it, more of it would be, how do you explain them? Either, I think, innovators either. You see what I mean with the negative?

The negative, right, right, right. Okay, good. Why would you say that?

LOP PA CHOG PYI RANG PO, LTA BA'I BRTAN MA, LTA BA'I BRTAN MA, LTA BA'I BRTAN MA, It doesn't say anything about lived after. Oh, Je Tsongkapa means following. Following the lead.

What does this say mean then? Oh, at that time, at that time. Okay, all right, all right.

Yeah, when Dignaga was setting forth his, setting forth correct view, the correct views, correct views, I would say. When Master Dignaga was setting forth correct views, he was following, he set forth the correct views following Arya Sangha. Following, okay.

All right, and then that's going to be the same structure for the next sentence, for the next part. Ah, yeah, yeah. But I think there's a major problem with this paragraph that I just noticed this morning.

And I'll give a hundred bucks if somebody can figure it out. The second half of the reason to me has problems. After the conchique.

Okay. I think it has problems. Anybody?

Anybody? After the conchique, I think there's a problem. Is it the jokpa?

No, that's the only thing that's not a problem. I guess I should get money for pointing out the not problem. Yeah.

SHING DE'I SO BYED, DE'I LTA BU'I SGO NA'I CHOG PA'I PHYIR And that's how we establish that somebody is a, is an innovator. It should be taboo, not ta-way. Is that what you're saying, Geshe-la?

No. Yeah, but that's not necessarily the case, because there could be people who followed somebody else. Because we haven't established who they are.

No. Now, look at this. This is kind of sexy.

I think it should have said, SHING DE'I SON ZIN, DE'I LTA BU'I SGO NA'I CHOG PA'I PHYIR This is how we establish the marketer. Yeah, he's describing two marketers. He's not trying to, the purpose of this logical statement is not to establish that Sangha and, Master Sangha and Arya Nagarjuna were SHING DE'I SO BYEDs.

It's to establish that the guys who followed them, Dignaga and Dhanstra Sena, were followers. That's the purpose of this logical statement here. Because it doesn't really establish that Arya Nagarjuna and Arya Sangha are innovators yet.

We haven't established that. That's not the purpose of this statement. It's to prove that these two guys are not innovators.

You see what I mean? Either he should have said, SHING DE'I SON ZIN, DE'I LTA BU'I SGO NA'I CHOG PA'I PHYIR or he should have said, SHING DE'I SON ZIN, DE'I LTA BU'I SGO NA'I CHOG PA'I PHYIR or MAN CHOG PA'I PHYIR. You see what I mean?

I think it's a mistake. In my opinion, he's not proving that anybody was an innovator. He's proving that two guys are not innovators or he's proving that two guys are marketers.

You see what I mean? The reason doesn't fit his statement, what he's trying to prove. At least the second part of the reason.

It's not logical. He should have said ZIN or SGO NA'I MAN CHOG or MIN DOG. By the way, MI, just MI, because of the prenasal.

Yeah. So anyway, maybe a footnote or something. If we can find the great carved copy sitting in...

St. Petersburg. Yeah. We could resolve a lot of these things.

Okay. That was a good homework. Okay.

Thank you for that. Okay. Cool.

Oh, yeah. Okay. Good.

Okay. I see Ben's comment. It's a good comment.

All right. Back to work here. Share the screen.

Yeah. Okay. All right.

Timothy. Go ahead. Nick, can you check?

Yeah. All right. Okay.

And by the way, this is this game in the dialectical presentations where they leave out pieces of the definition, you know, and it doesn't quite work, and then we try again, and we leave out other pieces. Okay. So, please, hang on.

Let me give you a good cursor. Okay. Shinde Siljay.

Tim. Other innovators. Yeah.

Jason Magdang. Magdang Bar. Did not follow.

After. Yeah. There could be a problem there, but I don't think it is.

Did not follow instead of do not follow. But, okay. I don't think that's the problem.

Do, du, rang, wang, thuk, do, or ched pay. They commented on the meaning of the sutras. Yeah.

Do, du, rang, wang, thuk. Very well. Yeah.

And now here's something added, okay. They are dzin me kye bu. They're, they're...

Hold on, give me a second here. They're, they can't lie, they're... Yeah, good.

They're perfect valid perceptions or something like that. And by the way, I don't think these guys would lie per se, but this implies they are perfectly accurate all the time. Okay.

In an enlightened being way, can I give you that hint? Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
That's the definition of she, they, so, they. That's the definition of the innovator. You and Nick, you and Nick go through the next two lines, and grandpa will drink coffee.

Wait, wait, wait. I'm, I'm, I'm, wait. We just said the Buddha is not an innovator.

Well, that's why.

[Speaker 2]
This is Kachi.

[Speaker 1]
Kachi. Oh, Kachi. Oh, I'm sorry.

All right. Okay, thank you. Phew.

Nick, help him, help him read two and three, and then help him translate two and three. I will do my best. All right.

Okay. O Na. TokSung Nipa Chöchen.

Sundar. Yeah. I'm just, I'm trying to decide.

Sundar Dertao. Sunny Day Chir. When you go up, it means you believe it.

When you go down, you're, when you go down, you believe it. Yeah, good. and by the way the first the first comment after a car cheek is almost invariably a counterexample and and so that would be down that we go down there because it'd be sarcastic are you saying there in the invaders okay and then this third one is gonna go up because that's gonna be what we believe right there now we don't know he's just saying it must be like that it's still being okay yeah no it no the third line does go up yeah okay we believe that yeah so this is a very normal pattern you could probably get used to it yeah Chucky Pong Pong ship a ten to town Mo Mo go give you duck a ten to six a major okay good okay so I can help but what you know what jokes and do you know what the choke soon meepo he's referring to is now I don't know what's so means I think it means held but here he's talking about two specific people no song means like some joke oh they're like a pair a pair and the Supreme Pair good yeah so so let's take the Supreme there I guess we're talking about the Nagarjuna in the sangha no he just mentioned him in the paragraph below oh thank you sharp and Mao Galiana and I guess they're the Tsunja because that's the same because that's the Taney they are the people who are being considered innovators defined by that definition yeah okay because yeah innovators saying that that definition fits them because they were innovators I'm sorry are you saying there were innovators because your definition fits them or something like that because that's the definition that you just gave they fit that definition you escape and did we read the next paragraph already yeah so we just had this exact phrasing in the previous paragraph right so so they didn't follow after other innovators yeah yeah yeah yeah because they he splits them into one and then the other because Shariputra did because he said this in the or he composed the classical commentary which discussed yeah zip what do you call it distributes to both of you yeah which discussed the heaps of the Dharma the body I don't know good okay because Shariputra wrote a famous book called the heap of the teachings right okay and then not only on a composed a commentary of this is kind of like the commentary on terms or something like that okay okay dr.

Kramer you want to take him to this next piece right and guess so what did that comment say you want me to look in a ten year for something um I thought you could check if these two books are still in the if they ever made it into the tenure these are some of the books that the Abhidharma kosha is supposedly based upon okay so the kosha was written eight eight hundred years later at the end of the accountants and these guys were some of the first two accounts I'm having a hard time with this discussion because the first that when we the cut she came in and talked about seven cables and how are we making reference to okay okay it's gotta be coming cuz that parts not in the traditional definition okay but now his first job is to prove what he said about them writing those two books yes and here's the quotation then they're tough good they did to write those two books yeah I think you can translate this it is they did they did write those commentaries because that's what that quote says it's a sharp we wrote that one and Magaliana wrote the denture say who's saying that because I see a problem with this quotation do you see a problem with this could be yeah there's no bird there's no what verb verb well that's okay that's okay but it doesn't say what book it comes from poetry doesn't mind no it's not the two lines are not parallel oh yeah Oh

[Speaker 2]
and mood God oh no Jackie Pomposa I get eight on both.

[Speaker 1]
No, no, no.

[Speaker 2]
You guys are going the wrong way.

[Speaker 1]
You guys are going the wrong way. It's the first line in the instrumental. Right.

Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, that would be ideal.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, I think it's a mistake. Let's go look. Yeah.

Hey, that's cheating already. So we got to put the. Okay.

Was written by. Okay, of course. Yeah.

Okay. Yeah. All right.

And And we have these lines. There are seven books of Abhidharma, which were assembled by the Darchambas after the Lord Buddha passed. And here's the list.

And they give the name of the book, and then they say, by so and so. Right. So, and this is only identified as DOM.

Okay, versus, which is a verse summary. Okay, a verse summary. And I pulled this out of, I think Stanley's book.

Yeah. Stanley. Oh, and here's the.

Here's the footnote. Okay. All right.

Please read this with Tim. Dr. Ben. Dona.

Johnson. There's a donor means. If this were the case.

Oh, right. Yeah. Yeah.

If you agree to our little definition here. Okay. Oh, sorry.

If you agree that this definition fits. The, these two guys. Okay, if you agree that your definition fits these two guys.

Then. All right. Those two guys must be.

YIN PA'I PHYIR. So those two guys must be Arya Bodhisattvas. Yeah, and by the way, we don't believe it, so are we going up or down on the Tao?

Down, YIN PA'I PHYIR. Yeah, are you telling me, if these two guys are innovators, are you telling me they are Aryas who are also Bodhisattvas? But we don't think that apparently.

Well, let's read the last line here. Let's. DER MI NUS TE.

I guess not. NYAN THON DGRA BCOM PA YIN PA'I PHYIR. Good.

You can't agree because they are. Arhats on the listener track. Yeah.

On the listener track, they're not on the, they never reached the Bodhisattva track. Okay, they reached Nirvana on the lower track. Traditionally, people say that.

Okay. Now, I have a problem with this argument because... Who mentioned BYANG SEMS PHAG PA in this definition?

Nobody. Nobody says DER MED SKYE BU. Yeah, that's the only way it can go, Nick.

That's the only way it can go. And I'm not sure I've ever seen those two things equated. That to be a totally honest person, a truthful person, you'd have to be an Arya who's also a Bodhisattva.

I'm not sure. But it's a little greasy.

[Speaker 2]
I always thought it was only a Buddha could be, but...

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, I would also have said that, Venerable Upala. I would also have said that. And that's where I would have gone with my defense.

I would have said, well, they're not enlightened. They could still be enlightened and be BYANG SEMS PHAG PA. But they could also not be DER MED SKYE BU and be BYANG SEMS PHAG PA.

Anyway, something to think about, which is the whole purpose. I guess the first Shariputra didn't understand the Heart Sutra that was spoken to him. Now, now, now.

Well, that's the implication of this. I otherwise think he did. I know.

Okay, Venerable Upala, do you want to lead Tim to the next kachig?

[Speaker 2]
Oh, yay.

[Speaker 1]
All right, kachig. SHIN TE SUM CHE. There's a misspelling there.

There should be an L before CHE, right? Yeah, absolutely right. Yay.

Good, Tim. I didn't catch that word. Wow.

SHIN TE SUM CHE. SHIN TE CHEN. Yeah, you want to translate it to me?

Sure. Someone comes along. Okay.

They did not follow after an innovator. Good, another, yeah, another innovator. DREL BA, is that the...

So, the verb DREL BA, which is how the definition usually goes, eventually, which means to comment on, does come from the root DREL, which means to unravel something, right? To untie a knot, to untie a knot. So, he might be being cute here, because he does it twice.

So, he untied the... Go ahead. Untied the meaning of the sutra in an independent way.

Good. And he's, or he or she is... And he's an arya who's a bodhisattva, and that's the definition of an innovator.

Great, great. And here comes our counterexample. Venerable Upada, stay with him.

Okay. What does that tell? Is that down or up?

Yeah, this is a counterexample, so we're going down. Yeah. Yeah, don't go back up.

Dare tell. I think I do both. It's a sunny day cheer.

Okay. All right. So, what are we saying here?

Are you saying he fits the definition? Are you saying he's the object of this definition? Because that's how you gave the definition.

So, are you saying that this definition fits him? Are you saying that the definition fits Lord Maitreya?

[Speaker 2]
I'm sorry.

[Speaker 1]
Are you saying he's what this definition defines? Are you saying... Okay.

In other words...

[Speaker 2]
We want to say, what is our subject?

[Speaker 1]
Are you saying he's a shinde-sojay? Are you saying that Lord Maitreya? Good.

All right. He is a shinde-sojay. Okay.

All right. But then he modifies Lord Maitreya. Right.

Which is the... I don't know the... The author of this work?

Yeah, the author of the Alankara. Okay. I see.

Uh-huh. Okay. Okay, let's take the author of the Alankara, Lord Maitreya.

Are you saying he's an innovator? Why? Because that was your definition.

Okay. Because he fits your definition. Okay.

Right, because he's a... In this case, he's a jang-sam-pa-pa. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, good.

[Speaker 1]
I think I was commenting on... Yeah. Okay, keep going, you two guys.

And by the way, this one, this Tao goes... Up. Yeah, because we're trying to defend ourselves.

He did too. Okay. The definition does too fit him.

There Tao. Geez. Is Maria on the call?

We need to go to St. Petersburg. Yeah, I know. No, it would be a major contribution to Tibetan studies if we could liberate a skin.

Well, I mean, is this just... Is this because this is the first text that was entered in, did we not have enough quality control? No, the original was bad because the original was handwritten on a piece of stone.

No. Okay. All right.

Okay. Oh, by the way, let me add that there's some... I would say there's a fairly strong possibility that this carving exists in the Mongolian collections.

It may already be catalogued, I don't know. It's not yet, unless it has been in the last couple of weeks. Oh, you checked?

We did find a couple copies from the Library of Congress, which we can order. Those are this corrupt one. They are the same, okay.

Yeah, those are this one. Most likely, yeah. Yeah.

Okay. All right, this is pretty much it. The definition does too fit him because he fit...

And then he just repeats the definition. Right. He composed the Ornament of Realization.

Yeah. And, well, which is an independent comment to parry on the meaning of the sutra, and he followed another innovator. Good.

So your definition fits him. So I guess he's an innovator, right? And here we go.

Keep going, Venerable Upala. Venerable Upala.

[Speaker 2]
Think of it like a song.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, you guys thrash out the translation together. Sure.

[Speaker 2]
So the guy before said something to our last statement, which was...

[Speaker 1]
Can we scroll up just a little bit, Geshe-la, to remind myself what we just said?

[Speaker 2]
We just showed him how it fit his definition of an innovator, and then he responds.

[Speaker 1]
What does he say? If that were the case.

[Speaker 2]
Now he says, oh gosh, you're right. Yeah, it does. And now we say...

[Speaker 1]
Oh, sorry. If you agree that he is... If you agree that this definition fits...

If you agree that he was what you meant to define, then... Do you want to follow me and take me through this, Venerable Upala? Yeah.

Okay.

[Speaker 2]
I always go to the end. So, good part. Then it must be.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, good part. So it must be.

[Speaker 1]
He must be. He must be. Okay.

He must be.

[Speaker 2]
You know these words better than I.

[Speaker 1]
He must be an umape, Shingdra Sanjay. He must be.

[Speaker 2]
So what's an umape?

[Speaker 1]
An innovator of the Middle Way. Good. He must be an innovator who was a member of the Middle Way school.

Okay. Who's he? The author of the...

The author of the Ornament of Realization who is... Yeah. He must have been a Middle Way dude.

Because the... If the nguntul gen, if the Abhisamalankara is the work of a... Innovator of the Middle Way.

Of an innovator... Now you got to be careful with umape. It means who was a Middle Way person.

It may not mean he was like a leader of the Middle Way school. Okay. In other words, a follower of the Middle Way views.

Is this making a distinction between lower and higher Middle Way or just saying Middle Way in general? No, it's not. It's just saying...

But the distinction is... You could read it as a person who espouses Middle Way views without calling him a member of a school. Can't we say that all Buddhists are...

Umapa. Umapa. Good.

And they are not necessarily like Umeluk or something like that. They're not necessarily guys who run around and write Madhyamika scriptures. That are sold as part of the Madhyamika school.

For example, all of Tantra is umapa. So is he... Are you saying that he's...

Are you saying that the person who wrote the Abhisamalankara, our root text here, is an innovator who was a Middle Way thinker? A thinker of Middle Way ideas or something like that. Okay.

Good? All right. Keep going, you guys.

You're on a roll. All right. That's a lower tone, yes.

Okay. If you agree, then isn't it the case that the person who wrote Abhisamalankara, Umapeshinde Sujayan? Is a member...

Is an innovator who is a Middle Way-er? Yeah. And here they want you to get confused.

He wants ambiguity here.

[Speaker 2]
Don't we have to compare it to what we were agreeing to before? Because they look very close. What are the different words?

[Speaker 1]
His game here is to play between the guy who's in charge of formulating the Madhyamika school in this world and the guy who's a Middle Way-er. An innovator who happens to follow the Middle Way rather than an innovator who invented the Middle Way school. Because can't we say that, Tim, that all innovators are Umapeshinde?

Sure. Because they're all chunks and papa. Well, in this case, because they're all Arya Bodhisattvas.

Yeah, if you're an Arya at all, if you're any kind of Arya, you have to be a what? An innovator of the Middle Way. Middle Way.

Yeah, you have to be a Middle Way dude. You have to be a Middle Way guy. You can't see emptiness directly and not be Middle Way.

In your heart, but maybe not in your school. Okay, all right. That's the distinction he's trying to draw out here.

We can in fact say that Arya Sangdha... Is an Umapa. Yeah, he's an Umapa doing the same thing as his half-brother.

Right, he's reporting on the Lower Middle Way. Yeah, he's posing as someone of another school, who invents another school. According to this theory.

And by the way, it's true. All Aryas are Middle Way. Even if they don't realize it.

[Speaker 2]
We got one minute. We can do it, right?

[Speaker 1]
No, you can't do it. Yeah, we're pretty much out of time.

[Speaker 2]
Let's go. I've never seen us give up a minute.

[Speaker 1]
I'll give you the next one for free. If you do agree. So I guess he was the innovator of the Middle Way.

MTHO RGYEN DU MA PA'I ZHING PA'I TSUL BYED KYI RTEN CI YIN PA'I PHYIR Because the book is a book by a Middle Way innovator. If the book that he wrote is a book by a Middle Way innovator, then Maitreya has to be a Middle Way innovator. Okay, cool?

Yeah. Yeah, and Tim, you can translate the rest of it for your assignment here. Okay, cool.

Thank you. All right. It's sexy.

And it makes you think, especially this thing about, wow, anyone who sees emptiness directly gets kicked into the Middle Way.

[Speaker 2]
Thank you, Keshav.

[Speaker 1]
You're welcome. Okay, how long, Nicholas? We have nine minutes.

Have a nice relaxing break. Wow. I could have breakfast.

You could write a book. Almost. Become innovators.

We could turn correct. Thank you, Keshav. See you guys soon.

Thanks, everybody. Thank you.