Тим Ловенхопт — Книга 1: Совершенство мудрости, занятие 29

[Speaker 1]
There you are. Teacher is here. Hi Aldo, how are you?

Good to see you. Is your ear better? Okay.

Wait, this weird thing that happened in Diamond Mountain where everyone kept hearing the same low hum through the valley. This is really weird. It was a weird thing.

Probably AI probing your brains.

[Speaker 2]
Possibly.

[Speaker 1]
AI is going to do its own in my room. Really? I had that very loudly for three years.

Yeah, it was there. Wow. Like the mantra.

That's pretty interesting, yeah. Yeah, so I thought it was tinnitus at first and then I thought it was reflecting off the... I thought I was going crazy.

It was just bizarre. Me too. Oh, well.

Yeah, I went... I like turned off... I like unplugged the batteries from my photovoltaic system.

I went through like a lot of pretty interesting steps to try and isolate it and then I noticed eventually that it was roughly the same no matter where I was in the valley and then came to the conclusion that it was probably me. Yes. Same thing.

And I came to a teacher who gave me some very helpful advice that it's okay, it's natural. It happens sometimes when we get very quiet and there's a sound under that sound but then there's also a sound under that sound that's under that sound and maybe you could go take a look at that and see if you find a sound under that sound as well and that was very helpful for my integration of that sound into my meditation practice. Nice.

Thanks, Ben. Thanks for sharing that because a lot of us were like, what? That was cool.

It ended up being an upgrade instead of an obstacle. It took it deeper. It's great.

Good advice. Thank you, Ben. When Nick called me yesterday about this, I tried to be calm about it and I was like, I'm not ready for this, Nick.

And then I took a nap and then I was like, right, anytime you have an inflection, just take a nap or eat some food and then I woke back up and I was like, I was really excited because I think this is how we're going to grow together, just working and helping each other when we have challenges because I can imagine in 56 years when I'm 95 years old and I'm like, Nick, I don't know what this means. You know, or Upala, just to be able to call on each other and use each other as resources and to develop that relationship and trust with each other. I feel like a baby amongst all of you guys, so I'm kind of excited to be the baby and just learn from you.

So I turned the affliction into an opportunity, I guess. So thanks, Nick, for the talk. Um, so here we go.

Um, here's my quiz. There's, there's Arya Sanga with his cute dog. Um, Mike Triad, that is.

Actual footage. It's actual footage from the moment I went back. That's actually, that's live, that's a live feed, Nick.

I wasn't able to see Lord Maitreya, all I could see was a husky, so. That's pretty darn good. Yeah, all right, here we go.

So I want to, just to go back to remind us what we're doing, because I got a couple questions earlier yesterday. Um, just to remind us, what is Master Haribhadra's role in the commentary we're translating, which Kedrubh Tempodargyi is translating as a commentary to the Abhisamaya Alankara. So what's, how does Master Haribhadra fit into the equation?

Lineage holder? He did a Tantra. He did a Tantra of what?

Of the Sutra of the Abhisamaya Alankara. True. So what's the relationship of his Tantra, his classical commentary to Kedrubh Tempodargyi's commentary?

It helps inform Kedrubh Tempodargyi's commentary. That's true, but a little bit more specifically. It came before Kedrubh Tempodargyi's commentary.

Kedrubh Tempodargyi commenting on Haribhadra? Correct, right. Kedrubh Tempodargyi commenting on Master Haribhadra's commentary.

So it helps us, yeah, that's the relationship, just so we know what's going on. Amalie's meeting Shishuna via Zoom for the first time. Where is Shishuna?

Sorry, sorry, Tim. No, no, I'm not sorry. In the room, I'm going to be looking.

Well, I mean, we all should be looking for the Shishuna, right? Oh, yes. I have the right pointer if you think it will attract your cat.

And any non-mixed nuts, please don't hesitate to turn on your microphone and yell out any answer, even if it's completely wrong. Yeah, or other mixed nuts besides me and Morgan and Ben and Utpala. That's how I, that's what I did.

I just started saying stuff that came to my head, and it was embarrassing when I was completely wrong, which was most of the time. But somehow, saying the wrong thing helps you say the right thing. Anyway, so question number two.

Our Kachik in this section, what we did in the last class, seems to be mixing up two important aspects. I should say that begins, that begins every, it begins every book. Oh, offering the praise and the commitment to finish the book.

Nice. Nice. Yeah.

And. So let me change my question. I messed it up.

What are three aspects that are in the beginning of the book? And what is the title and the subject of the four aspects of a Buddhist book? So we have the, we have the verses of praise, right?

And what was the other one you guys said? The commitment to finish. The commitment is the book.

And what is the Tibetan for that? Sampradam Chawa. Right.

I'm sorry, I did it quick and didn't. Those are the two that I was looking for. I knew you were making this during my class.

Actually, I did it. I did it right beforehand. And then I was editing it.

All right. So this is where I mess it up. It's not the verses of where we go.

The verses of praise. What confusion does our Pachink make about the verses of praise and the promise to compose the text? So in Master Haribhadra's commentary, he does it one way.

And then in the jewel of realizations, it may be different. What is the confusion that he makes? So Master Haribhadra promises to finish his book.

And our dear fellow here is thinking that that's actually Maitreya's promise. I'd like that, but that's not it. Isn't it integrated?

Like they're like smashed together. Right. In Master Haribhadra's commentary, the verses of praise and the promise to compose the text are smashed together.

Smashed together sounds really weird. They're included in the same verse. I mean, they're clumped.

Integrated. Oh, integrated. Clumped is still.

Interspersed. They're mixed up. Oh, no.

They're not mixed up. They're in the same verse. They're in the same verse.

Okay, thank you. They're clumped together in the same verse, right? They're smashed together in the same verse.

And then in the jewel of realizations, they're actually in separate verses. That's the confusion that the Pachink has. Um, okay.

Four. Yep. I made four questions because I think it's important.

In the verses of praise, in the jewel of realization and his promise to compose the text, there are 10 great practices that are mentioned, which are said to be the essence of the jewel of realizations. And we learned about what they are from Jason Kappa and what are the 10 perfections. And what are the 10 perfections next for anybody?

Giving and the rest, of course. This is not Gilligan's Island. Anyone remembers that?

So not Nick, what's giving and the rest? Giving, morality, patience, joyful effort, concentration, wisdom. Right.

Let's get somebody else for the last four. Okay. What are the last four?

And normally we call it the six perfections, but why are they... What are the, what's the additional four? Great.

Exactly. And what are those four things that we should do to attract students? Give them stuff.

Generous. Right. Laugh at their jokes.

Ooh, and that's kind of a, that's a form of praise. Encourage them. Right.

Encouragement. Right. What's the third thing?

Dude, isn't it do it yourself so they can... Yeah. No, that's the fourth one.

[Speaker 2]
That's the last one, I think.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, I thought we were...

[Speaker 2]
Isn't this like teach to their level or something like that?

[Speaker 1]
Right, exactly. So you teach to the capacity of the student. Teach to their personal capacity, which you have to figure out.

And then what's the fourth one? Do it. Get to walk the walk.

Yes, I'm a teacher. Do what you say. That's the worst part about being a teacher.

You say stuff in class and you're like, oh shit, I don't do any of that. All right, cool. Good job, guys.

Thank you. Good job, you. All right.

You just did it. You did it. Number four.

He clumped together. He smashed it. You'd like to unshare your screen, Tim.

Did I unshare my screen? You did. You did, but we'd like you to take it back again and...

Yeah, because we want to now go through your text. From where we are in the text. Yeah, here we go.

All right. Give us some book. Because Shoshona is just waiting for us to start work here.

Yeah, she's getting anxious. So, just so we have a clarity of what's happening in the text right now. So, let's see.

Does anyone know this? So, in a classical Buddhist dialectical analysis text, a debate format, what are the three, typically the three parts that we find in any debate? What are the three parts?

I'm not talking about... In a debate text or in a logical statement? Not in a syllogism, but the actual format of the debate.

All right. But then... First, the other guy says some stuff that you say is wrong.

Then you say some stuff, which is right. And then they come back and say more wrong stuff, which you say is wrong. Shamu, Ranglu, Shakpa, Zappa...

Geshe Michael described it once as the last one is the Terminator thing, which he stopped saying. But I always loved that because... Right, right.

First, the Terminator comes and he's really scary and you got to fight him. And then you beat him up real good. And it comes, you know, and then you're winning.

But then in the final scene, you think you've got him beat. And the Terminator is lying there. And then suddenly, like, his red eyes light up again.

You have to fight him one last time. He gets one last shot at you before you put him down. So I always think of it as the Terminator thing.

I know it's very helpful to a broad, young audience. You could be mine stuck in my head. I was thinking of it...

Of a certain age. Like someone comes up to you in a bar and starts talking to you, and you're not interested. And they're trying to sell themselves to you.

And you're just like kind of rolling your eyes at them. And then that last part is you're like, well, they're still kind of cute. Maybe I'll give them one more chance.

And then you're like, forget it. Like at the end, you're just like, no, no, no, go away. But I like Ben's answer a lot.

But it's like, you think the movie's over, you know. And the bad guy comes out one more time. There's always that one last scene.

And you're just like, come on. I've seen this a million times. So that's where we are right now.

We're in the red eyes that just popped back up. And there's one last ditch effort in this very first debate of the book. So that's where we are.

And we're going to go back a little bit so we know where we are, so we understand what's going on. But here we go. Just to explain.

So we did, what we were mainly doing is what we said in the homework is that there is this confusion between the verses of praise and the promise to compose the text. And the Tajik was saying, well, look, just because Mansur Hayyavardhan did it, he was saying that it was the same thing that was happening in the Julbin Realizations. And our author was like, no, forget it.

That's dumb. Just because one thing's one way doesn't mean it's the other way. So he comes back, and this is where he is.

Who would like to read? How about Chloe and Oscar? Can you check her?

Yes. Oscar.

[Speaker 2]
Pure, hot, tall.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, Chloe, we're gonna hold on a second here. We're in a debate and the tall is, are we going up or are we going down? And just so you know, it's the other person who is coming at us again in their last-ditch effort.

So do you think they're saying something they believe or are they saying something you don't believe? Where'd you go, Chloe?

[Speaker 2]
Oh, me.

[Speaker 1]
You got a 50-50 chance. And then there's an additional 60% chance that when we tell you which one it really is, we're wrong. Keeps it quiet.

So the Terminator just woke up and is now coming back at us. Do you think what they say they believe or do you think they're telling us something that's incorrect from their point of view?

[Speaker 2]
Nien-to-shi-wa-to-nam-she-sok-gi.

[Speaker 1]
Good answer.

[Speaker 2]
Sto-le-lak-su-mong-tok-yam-gi-tok-pa-tam-ten-shuk-chik-yuk-pay-chur.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, thank you, Chloe. All right, so let's go back to the question. Did you think that the Tao here, is this something that they believe or we're trying to be sarcastic about it?

Anyone can answer. It's probably not that they're being sarcastic here. It's probably- They believe it.

They're asserting a position. Right, they're asserting the position. So just because I always forget, if you're asserting the position, is it, do you go up in tone or do you go down in tone?

You go up. Correct. If you, yeah.

Okay, cool. All right. So here's their last dish effort.

Okay. What does ona mean? Well then.

[Speaker 2]
It is so.

[Speaker 1]
No, it means well then. Mm-hmm. Yeah.

The Sharaparochimbala, what's that mean? The perfection of wisdom says. So specifically, this is a line, this from, where is it?

It's from Master Haribot's commentary. It's somewhere. Basically like- Yeah, the lines that say Sharaparochimbala.

Right, and Geshe-la wanted to include, I bow down to the perfection of wisdom because that's at the end of the verses. So in those lines. And he says so.

Right, and et cetera, right. Lhoksu, Lhoksu-drava, then so. What does Lhoksu mean?

Wrong. We actually said something different. It's separated.

It's like it's separate from. Yeah. So in the drava, don't so is Master Haribot's commentary.

What's the sampadamche? Is sampadamche. Promise to compose.

Promise to compose the work. Promise to compose. Right, so what's this whole thing saying together?

Oh, it is so in one. In one part, the pledge to compose the work. But that's, I think that's in the text.

Oh, in one. Chumchik, you have a question here? It's one text.

Yeah, I thought it had to be part, but yeah, I mean, literally. This is actually where I got really confused because it seems like he's coming back and saying, well, okay, fine. Maybe they are separate.

Okay, fine, I agree with you. But so they are separate, but then we have the chumchik which seems like they're one in the same. So this is where I got confused and I didn't know what to do.

So maybe someone can help out here.

[Speaker 2]
That chumchik.

[Speaker 1]
I thought it would be chumchik, like they are in one text or in one section. That's what probably makes it wrong. Mm-hmm, that's what makes it a chumchik.

It's true in a text, the Damparta Jawa is separate in the commentary by Haribhadra. Let's finish it and that may help us. This is right, Geshe Michael calls it the sending paratroopers behind enemy lines.

Let's finish the paragraph and see if his reason gives us clarity about his assertion. All right, so the next part, the nentoshivasunam shesok, what's that from? It's saying, it says those who seek freedom and that's a line from Master Haribhadra, right?

Oh, those listeners who seek for freedom. Later on, look to the next line. I think it just means disciples in this case, but go on, sorry.

Oh, this is from, it's from Muntuken. Right, so- These lines from Arya Sangha's text on behalf of Maitreya say. Right, and what are those lines?

The sampadantra? Yeah. That's the promise to compose the work.

Right, so he's saying here that they are the, those are the lines that are the promise to compose the work. And then we have another chikyu at the end. So he's saying here that this is how I interpret it, is that, okay, fine.

Then the lines, the verses of praise and the promise to compose the work in Haribhadra's commentary are distinct from each other because they're distinct from each other or they're separated in the jewel of realization. He's taking the opposite, because earlier he had said, in the earlier part of the debate, he had said, well, they're the same in Masaharibhadra's commentary. So then therefore they're going to be the same in the jewel of realizations.

So the kachi comes back and says, okay, fine, fine, you're right. And then takes the opposite point of views. Okay, fine.

They are separated in Masaharibhadra's commentary, which is kind of ridiculous to say because we already showed that they were separate. So that's why they're separate in the jewel of realizations. I see, yeah.

He seems to want, for some reason, this kachi wants to, because he can't get over the fact that one person did it together, clumped it together and one person separated it for some reason. Right, yeah. They are separate in one text and they're separate in the other one too, like that.

Right, exactly, yeah. And then our author says, korsum. What does that mean in a debate?

What do those words literally mean, korsum? Three circles. You're a crazy guy.

Maybe it's like you're chasing your tail. It just means, it literally means- That's crazy. Yeah.

Incorrect. Yeah, generally it means that you, we already got you to agree with this and you're circling back to something that you already agreed to earlier. We had you cornered and you're going around in the same circle that we already covered, trying to escape.

Right, and you're, basically it's like, this is the end of this debate, goodbye. Yeah. So I thought maybe we could start translating with emojis.

Here's someone rolling their eyes. Oh, good. That's what your editor would be doing, that's for sure.

It's coming, it'll happen. Imagine, Apollo, I just put that there as a translation and what you would do at the editor. You would fix the font, probably.

That emoji is clearly in italics. Can you make an emoji in italicized? Yes, you can.

Wow. Oh my God. We all really learned something here today.

Anyway, so basically saying, you're just running around in circles. I'm done with you, it's goodbye. Yes.

That's the end of that debate. Getchella included. Just checked out to make sure, where is it?

Why were we making such a big deal of them being, because I had it in my notes, I couldn't remember what Getchella said, why they are together. It is not, there's no big deal other than we're just learning that there's a difference in Master Hari Baja's commentary to what's in the Abhisamana Ankara. It doesn't seem like it's a really big Dharma point other than, I don't know.

I have a theory that the perfection of wisdom literature is a little bit more pedantic than other literature and especially other middle way literature. And that if you think about the difference between Svatantrika and Prasangika, one of the key differences is that Svatantrika believes that words and especially debates have their own power to convince people. So they believe that they can give reasoning definitions with such perfect clarity if they just make the book long enough that they can convince you and no one could ever be talked out of it.

Whereas a Prasangika knows that words could still be contradicted later. You could be a little more terse because you're gonna use your opponent's position but a Svatantrika is trying to add more lines to the definition so that no one on the debate ground can prove them wrong. So is the offering and that promise kind of the seed like the karma, do you think?

Since you just kind of said that in a way, I don't know, you implied it. I interpret what Ben's saying as they're just debating these ridiculous points to make the book even longer and to make sure they don't miss anything. They're trying to be very careful.

They're trying to be as precise as they can. This is a school that believes that there is maybe such a thing as perfect precision in description is what I suspect. And so they wanna be very clear when they say what is the pledge to compose versus what is the offering of praise?

They don't wanna get caught later on the debate ground being wrong about that. There's also a thing that in Master Hari Bajra's commentary that it's, I guess I had mentioned earlier on that there's a debate about, is it legal to bow down to the perfection of wisdom itself? Because most people, you're bowing down to a person or a teacher that in this way, he's bowing down to the perfection of wisdom.

And there's a debate about that too. I don't know. I think those seem from my side, I've only been doing this for like a year.

Like just working with these debates has cleared up my own thinking too. Like the precision and thinking, it teaches you how to think too. So I think there's a great value to it as well.

I mean, not that you were suggesting there wasn't a value to it, but it feels like there's a high value to studying it. Cool. Yeah, entering the middle way, right?

Master Chandrakirti, for example, bows down to compassion itself in the beginning. I wonder if that's part of the debate around this as well. I wonder if that comes up.

We'll have to ask. So the next debate starts here. Are the next lines from Master Hari Bajra's commentary?

So let's translate those. Who would like to read? How about Venerable Gyalse?

I'm not sure if you want to read, but I'm asking you to read. And hey, go on, please. Jo la chakpa kun chakze, chakpa tokme kyokni ki.

Mi chak, mi, pam, nun la sen na ni, ten chu chenpoi nam she tse. Nice, thank you. All right.

This was my assignment to translate and I didn't know what to do, so I just left it. I'm gonna have you guys help. So, droa, that one's pretty easy.

Goers. Peoples. Transmigrators.

Beings. Yes, they say that. Transmigrators.

I didn't know what to do with this line, so anything you guys have for it, because it's chakpa is desire, and then I didn't know what to do. All beings, no, beings desire all there is to desire. Okay.

Beings all. Their desire does something, right? The.

Beings desire.

[Speaker 2]
Desire.

[Speaker 1]
Desire all things. Yeah, right. Their desire desires all.

Their desire desires all. Beings is desire. Yeah, but even though it's a lot, you could still say beings desire, because, yeah, it's so weird.

Totally. I think it's possessive, yeah. Beings desire desires.

There you go. That's the one. Desires all.

What's the verb? What's the verb?

[Speaker 2]
Say.

[Speaker 1]
Means the. Who knows? Desire is all.

Or do. All desires. I think it's chakze, which just makes chak into.

Chakze. Yeah. Yeah, it could be.

Okay. Yeah, great. Yeah.

All right. The rest of it's a little bit easier. So chakme tokme.

Who's that? Or what is that? Yeah, sanga.

Right, sanga. Nope. Protection.

Protect. Yeah. I'm sorry.

That all is not. That all is not modifying that first part of the sentence. You see that the saw at the end of pa after chola chakpa, that's indicating what the subject is.

And then kun chakze is gonna be some sort of phrase. Yeah, desires everything. I don't think it's all beings, in other words.

Oh, just beings. Yeah, it's not all beings. It's not all beings.

It's just beings. Good point. Beings desire all that there is to desire.

Yeah. Yeah. So then we have.

We'll take off that possessive mark. Yeah, but that's probably right. But chola.

And when we get to the end, we might change that first line there. It is interesting though. Like why is that chola chakpe?

Like somehow their desire seems to be doing something. Here we're making beings the subject of the sentence, but actually it's chola chak, which is the subject of the sentence. Right, which was what Ben was saying.

Right. I know. And that's why we had phrased it the other way, which I think seemed more like what the Tibetan is saying, but I didn't make a ton of sense in English.

Yeah, exactly. That's why I changed it to this in my head. So we might get clarity if we get through the whole thing.

Maybe. Might. Might, yeah.

So Arya Sangha protects, right? Kopni protects like. Yeah.

He does nothing but protect. Kopni. Or the protection of Arya Sangha, and then it goes.

Are we taking the key as instrumental or are we taking it as the other part, the but? It can't be but with the S. It's instrumental here.

Yeah. Okay. All right, so he protects.

The next line, what is Mipham Gun? The unconquerable protector. Unconquerable protector.

Who do we think that is? Maitreya. Usually it's Lord Maitreya.

Mipham, yeah. Ajita? Ajit or something?

Yeah, Ajita. I believe that because we're talking about Arya Sangha and there's a, all right, I'm cheating, okay? Which is, and I can't show you this, all right?

Because I found something in the tantric course theories where Geshe Michael translated this first line, which is how a good cheater cheats. He's talking in general about some other practice that I'm not going to reference, but he says it's like that line that says, Drola chakpe kun chakze. And that our teacher, or in this case, a Sangha, is wrapped up in their attachment to other beings, like wrapped up in his attachment to other beings.

Yeah, there you go. Meaning Arya Sangha loves us so much. Yes, so it's not that Arya Sangha's wrapped up in the attachment, he's so- It is, it is, it is.

Arya Sangha exactly is attached to us. Chakpa in, Drola in beings, he's attached to beings, loves us. Yeah, yeah, well, that makes a lot more sense too.

Loves us so much, right? It's like- Yeah, yeah. It's a taking a negative emotion and transforming it into something positive.

Out of attachment for all, he desires all. Out of attachment for beings, he- I think here, I think I can paste this much safely into the chat here. And which course- Except you're now our Tantric Lama.

Just take that into account. No, hang on. And then which- When we say it, this is the 10th Tantric course.

He's wrapped in attachment for living beings. Yeah. That's really- It's pretty.

He's wrapped in attachment for living beings. Well, it's probably saying like he does some, like being that he's, I'm not trying to tell you how to translate it, but being wrapped in attachment for living beings, he something, right? Right, he's, I mean, in a way he's protecting us, right?

Like part of that- Arya Sangha. Yeah. That protector.

Yeah, it's like, let's do something like that. Something like that. Yeah.

Okay. Wait. Arya Sangha isn't the protector here.

I think that he is the, oh, okay. He said, he listened to the protector. He listened to the protector and that protects.

But he has the key after him. So I think that he's the protector who's doing that. Yeah.

Yeah, the agent here, right, is Khyo Nhi, right? That one, that protector is whoever's gonna do what's gonna happen. What's gonna happen in the second part of this verse.

So maybe we just need to use a different word because it is a different word in the Tibetan. Right, so maybe we can just find a different word here. I think, no, I think it says Arya Sangha strictly protects by listening to the undefeatable protector.

Did you say strictly protects? Yeah, Nhi, strictly. Nhi, here.

Yeah. I'm not sure it is. There may be a more elegant way to say it in English, but yeah.

Right, and then- There is not a more elegant impossible. Yeah. I don't know where things have been the first five seconds, it's obvious.

Perfect.

[Speaker 2]
He staunchly protects, how about that?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, something like that. It's stronger than staunchly. It just means exclusively.

That's the only thing he does. That's what, whatever. Yeah, that's all.

Or maybe only. Yeah, only, yeah. It's between only and staunchly.

Because protecting strictly sounds like a disciplinarian. Okay, yeah, I know what you mean. Only, yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Only is a literal word.

[Speaker 1]
Wholeheartedly.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, I like wholeheartedly.

[Speaker 1]
I like it too, but it's wrong. I know. I like that.

Yes. The unconquerer, oh, oh, oh. Uh-oh.

There's no oh over there. Unquencherable.

[Speaker 2]
Unconquerable.

[Speaker 1]
They're having way too much fun. Uh-oh. Yeah.

Okay, so then, just as a quick question, what should we tell learners of Tibetan about this word, sen? That it's an honorific. And what's the less honorific version of sen?

Nian. There's another one too, isn't there? Te.

Yes. What did you say? Did you say something, another word that I don't know?

Nian. I said nian means to listen. Right, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Okay. Isn't nian higher than te? It might be.

It's like somehow in between. There's three levels, actually.

[Speaker 2]
There's higher.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, I think sen is the honorific. So why are we using the honorific in this case? Because he's hanging out with the Buddha.

Because it's master, it's master Asanga, who's pretty cool. Pretty cool, right, yeah.

[Speaker 2]
He's an aria. He's an aria.

[Speaker 1]
Extremely cool. Pretty darn cool, dude. Okay.

And the last line is pretty easy. Tensha chenpoi namshe se. By listening to the big explanation, or wait, the explanation of the large tenshas, the large commentaries.

I mean, I think he wrote this big old commentary by listening to Maitreya. Yeah, exactly. That's something nicer.

He composed. What do you mean? It says explain, though.

Yeah, explain. Well, he wrote this explanation. Right.

He doesn't say wrote. It doesn't say wrote at all, though. It's explained.

Oh, right, he explained, okay. Se, I mean, he composed.

[Speaker 2]
That's what I mean by wrote.

[Speaker 1]
Se is just a verb maker. It's a se. Namshe se, he made this, he did this explanation, or gave this explanation.

It's just for meter, I would assume. Probably, yeah. What are you doing with my tie?

Oh, sorry. That's not right. Okay, cool.

Great, thanks, guys. Is that nam there just for meter, or? Namshe?

Namshe. Oh, namshe. Namshe.

That's the full word. Yeah, namshe. Yeah, sorry.

But yeah, but usually it's se, so probably also. Yeah. And just to remind everybody, why when Lord Maitreya spoke the Abhisamaya Ankara over cinnamon rolls and coffee to Arya Santa, why are we calling it a tencha and not a sutra?

Because it's a sutra. It's a Buddha. You can't say he's a Buddha in sutra.

That would be tantra. Although. In which case, you still probably wouldn't call it a sutra.

Right. I'm just gonna cut in pieces. Call it a tantra.

Hey, so we just did your homework for you. Just saying, if one of us needs our homework done. Yeah, pretty smart.

Thanks, guys. I appreciate that. There we go.

I just wanna put that in from then. Where are you going? Cool.

All right, cool. Thank you. And then the next thing here is just a, it's just showing us the next four lines from Haribhaja's text that Keshla pulled out of the database to make sure that Kedra Tantra Dargha was correct.

And he was. All right. All right, cool.

Now we're moving on to the next section. And thanks, guys, for, this is fun. This is, I'm having fun, anyway.

I don't know if you're having fun, but I am. I certainly am. Okay, so we have about 10 minutes.

Let's see if we can get through this next section here. Roxana, can you read? And Rob, can you correct?

Sure. All right. Excellent.

Roxana, I think you can, you might be able to translate this. Look at your face. You're like, no.

She can do it. She looked determined to me. What's chepa, Roxana?

Chepa, same as chepa. Activities. Chepa.

Chepa, chepa, Z-H, yes. It's like shejawa. It is said.

Yeah. Yeah, in this cup. In these words.

In this context. Exactly. Context, right.

So, yeah, so, yeah. So what's a jewa dupa?

[Speaker 2]
I've never seen gupa before.

[Speaker 1]
Gupa is B-K-O-D. It's a tense of B-K-O-D. I think it's the past tense, right?

I think so. No, no. The past tense is with a B.

Anyway. Just means what presentation set forth or something. I'm guessing that's what that means.

I don't really know anything else. But I know, but isn't a jewa also a syllogism? I think in this case- It can be.

It can be the carrying out of the thing, the doing it, the application, the practice, the activity of. Exactly. I thought it was usually the beginning, like the preliminary or the introduction, the setting forth, like the georgia.

Yeah, so it could be the setting forth, like we're going to explain something, which it looks like he might be explaining something. Yeah, because then it's with the dialectical analysis. It looks like there's two parts, right?

So I'm going to explain something, and then the tache, which is a form of tache. I think in this case, it's like an introduction. Yeah.

And it looks like we have a, and you said two, so it looks like the first part. Tamponi, there's the first part, I guess. Yeah.

So let's see here. Yes, there isn't. Marina, can you read?

And Luta, can you correct her, please? Oh, I'll try. Tamponi.

[Speaker 2]
Tamponi. Tamponi. Peh.

Nge.

[Speaker 1]
Nge.

[Speaker 2]
Peh. Peh. Peh.

Peh. Men.

[Speaker 1]
Nice Marina, getting really good. All right, here we go. Let's see here.

Here's the first, the first part, I guess. Is that the Jorwe Grupa? I'm guessing.

Yeah, I believe so. He's setting it up, right? Setting the scene, as Geshe Michael says.

Okay. Awesome. Loponsenge San...

Oh, who's that? What is that? Master Hari Bhadra says, good lion.

Good lion. Okay. Good lion.

Okay. Right. And so, where's the verb here?

It is. Okay. What's that?

Master Hari Bhadra says in his ornament, in his commentary to the ornament. Correct. We got, we got, we got Pakpa Tokme, who's that?

That one. All right. And Menak?

Personal advice. Advices. Yeah.

So, putting it all together, I guess he's saying, Master Hari Bhadra. I think he's saying that he composed this commentary to the ornament as personal advices from, you know, or for us to get personal advices from Arya Asanga. Huh.

Or his composition. It has them, right? Menak Thangkhapa.

It has them, right, right, right, right. Yeah. So, that's how I kind of took it to, that it was, he composed it so we, because it has the personal advices of Arya Asanga in it.

Maybe. Because the commentary, the ornament, which is a commentary written by Master Hari Bhadra is a, yeah, is, it is a commentary which has the advices of Arya Asanga. Yeah.

I was gonna say. Yeah, because laya would be has, gin is one thing is another. I mean, this is important for everybody.

Yeah. And then what's that la doing there between the two major phrases. After Drupad Zipa and before Prakrit Dhapne.

Um, I think it's, I think it's separating the two. What do you call it in English grammar, the two subjects. I think it's in.

I think it's in. In. We have the personal advices of Arya Asanga that's in Hari Bhadra's commentary.

And then he gives a reason. Thank you. To prove that.

So we have something, and Geshe-la didn't say anything to me about this, but there's something, so the Mithri, it's something like the 20,000, is it 20,000? Is that what that is? Yeah, 20,000 verses.

Yeah, which is actually 20,000 lines. 20,000 lines. And maybe there's a separate text that Hari Bhadra's reading of Arya Asanga, that are his personal advices that contain the personal advices of Arya Asanga, and then Hari Bhadra used those for his commentary.

That's kind of what I took from that, from this line here, to give us a little bit of background of where Hari Bhadra got his commentary from. Does that make sense to everyone? I don't know.

That's what I took from this, but I'm not sure if I'm off on that. Yeah, it seems like he's saying here that, I mean, it feels like he's referring to a book, but Geshe-la pointed out also that maybe it looks like Geshe-la thought it was referring to a book, but he didn't find it, right? Right.

Called the, right, you know, Arya Asanga's Wacky 20,000, right? That one, the 20,000 by Arya Asanga. And that it, what, exactly that?

That means like a definitive treatment, like a specific, that's a kind of specific kind of work, I think. Right. Yeah.

Or it can mean like definitively or something. We're over time, guys, so maybe we should finish this one. Yes, for sure.

It seems like Geshe-la couldn't find a separate text, so maybe, and he's like, maybe that's just what it is. Right. So, so he's, Geshe-la is saying it does mean something like a definitive treatment as opposed to the definitive, you know what I'm saying?

The text called a definitive treatment. Yeah. Mm hmm.

Yeah. So the, so, it is because it is the definitive work on the, possessing the advices on the 20,000 by Arya Asanga. Yeah.

Mm hmm. Yeah, that's right. That seems right to me.

Yeah. And just to move the last line here, we talked earlier about the three parts of the Tathagata, the three parts of the, they come in, like the Terminator shows up, we destroy him and that, or just destroy them, the Terminator comes back the third time. Mm hmm.

Last-ditch effort, and the Dangpola means, and here we go with the first part. Great. We'll start in the next class.

Of which this was the second part of the two parts of this explanation. Yeah. This part.

Right. Wait a minute. Hold on.

Of the four, isn't there a four in there somewhere too? That was mixed text. Oh, right, right, right.

Well, all right, let's wrap it up. Thank you guys. Yay.

Thank you so much. I'm always asking me a lot of deep questions about what white sugar does to your internal organs. Destroys them.

Happiness. It gives them extra power. Yes, yes, yes.

I'm listening to Robert, Ben. They're the bad uncles. No, you don't have to get a shot if you eat candy.

Oh, yeah. It's a valid concern though. And suppose, I guess if you eat enough candy, then you'd get diabetes and then you have to get a shot every day.

Yeah. The answer is yes, you would have to get a shot if you eat too much candy. You have to get old.

[Speaker 2]
I will eat one.

[Speaker 1]
Just one candy. One green of sugar. I'd use a foot too, but don't tell her that.

It'll scare her. We'll talk about it. We'll discuss this in more detail.

We're going to ta chepa. Thanks, guys. That was really fun, actually.

I'm glad we had the opportunity to do it. I'm glad it's over. And more soon when we're more ready.

I mean, we'll be ready. We have to do this. All right.

Well, thank you all. There's a yoga class with Connie. If you want to just stick around here.

She's a great yoga teacher and runs the Yoga Studies Institute and a very kind person and then a great cook and doesn't use much sugar. And an excellent meditator. And an excellent meditator.

She probably knows about the low hum, too. If you had that problem, maybe stick around for class. So thank you, guys.

And we'll see you. I'll see you later in the evening, our evening, in your morning. Take it easy, y'all.

If you're going to bed. And thanks, Nick, for the opportunity and twisting my arm. You didn't twist too hard.

Not really. Hey, thanks for being willing to do it. You know, I chose you because you just have a good attitude.

And I think we all will be happy at this point. Thanks. That was not in my InGoc, by the way.

I chose you. It was. But and thanks, everyone, for helping out, too.

It's a lot of fun to see how each of you are thinking about the text. And I actually I learned a lot from listening to how you guys were thinking. So thanks for offering your thoughts and helping out.

Cool. All right, you guys. See you in a bit.

Thank you. Bye. Thanks, everybody.

Bye.