Тим Ловенхопт — Книга 1: Совершенство мудрости, занятие 46

[Speaker 1]
Good afternoon. Good evening. Good morning.

Good morrow. Wonderful to see you all here for another exciting installment of Schwenzhahn's Tower. I believe Dr. Timothy is standing by. I'm eager to fly you with his homework. Is it true, Tim? Hmm, any minute now, I suppose.

Well, cool. I'll use the time to thank you for being here and to thank the live translators whose lips I see moving furiously already. I marvel at your amazing ability to not just follow the material consistently.

The rest of us get to space out every now and then and lose track of what's going on. But not you. You have to follow every word.

We're depending on you. And we're very grateful. We're grateful to everyone involved in the Goodnight Book Club.

And I really, I think it's a delightful thing to see so many people subscribing, finding ways to participate. And I'm sure you're all putting away your electronics at night. For which I am good.

I'm very impressed to hear that. Black on black. It's a good look.

Yeah, it's sort of tight these days. Yeah, like you're like Johnny Cash. Just like Johnny Cash, yes.

Yeah, I've always thought that about you. But now the black on black really brings it all home. I give you the wheel, the plane, the terrain.

All right, wonderful. You know, it's really, it's really wonderful if people turn on their cameras so we can see you. You know, I know it's sometimes some of us are shy and don't want to, but it's really helpful, especially for us as we're teaching or trying to do this, that we we can actually see you and then see your faces and then see how you're reacting.

Because that helps, helps me make sure I'm giving, going things at the right speed as well. So we've got six people with their cameras turned on. That was great.

All right, here we go. Hi, Tracy. Good to see you.

Hi, Violet. See, and you get your name called out as well. All right, so let's start with some.

All right, so our last class was about three weeks ago, three and a half weeks ago. And we were in Mexico. We had a, for those of you that miss Mexico, you miss something really, really special.

Not that I'm going to rub it in that you weren't there. But if you weren't there, you miss something really, really special. So if you have an opportunity to watch those classes again, it's really some of the finest classes I've seen maybe ever.

So including this translation class, which was a lot of fun because there were 200 people in the room who had never been to a translation class before. So we got to show them how confusing it can be and challenging and rewarding as well. So let's get started.

So we're in a section where we're trying to define what is the speech of a Buddha and what and where can the speech of the Buddha be? Like, is the speech of the Buddha something that's just the words that are spoken from the mouth of a Buddha? Or can they be elsewhere?

Like, if they're written down in the text, does that count? Or if you have it memorized in your head, does that still count as the speech of the Buddha? Or is there something different between the words in my head as a non-Buddha versus the words that are spoken out of the divine mouth of a Buddha?

Something like that. So we're figuring all that out and we're debating this. So our debater comes along and is trying to define that speech and keeps giving us different options.

And our debater claims that anything that is considered the speech of a Buddha must be in the mind of someone who has eliminated all their obstacles to Buddhahood. So why does our debater say this? That's exactly what it sounds like to me too.

So why does the debater say this? If something is the speech of the Buddha, it must be in the mind of someone who has eliminated all their obstacles to Buddhahood. Buddhists have eliminated all their obstacles to Buddhahood?

Yeah, and only them. And so therefore... They've got 64 amazing qualities of their speech.

Yeah, that's at the end of the class. So that's true, but not in this debate.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, I'm sorry.

[Speaker 1]
That's fine.

[Speaker 2]
You have the text up there, so that's what I was looking at.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. You guys aren't looking at what I'm looking at. Oh, that's awesome.

Let's try this. No, perfect. Let's try this again.

All right, now you can see the correct thing, correct? Assuming it's the homework, then yes. The quiz, yeah.

Yes. Therefore, only someone who's a Buddha can have the speech of a Buddha in their mind. Correct, right.

I'm just drawing the same. Basically said it already. Someone who has eliminated their obstacles to Buddhahood would of course have their speech would be speech of a Buddha.

That makes sense. To me, it makes sense. If you've eliminated all your obstacles to Buddhahood, then your speech would be a speech of a Buddha.

It's okay. Okay, so that sounds okay. Mm-hmm.

But question number two, is it necessarily the case that the speech of a Buddha is in the mind of someone who has eliminated all their obstacles to Buddhahood? Yes. Maybe not.

[Speaker 2]
You have to put only in there or something?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, yeah. Only. Yes, that's correct.

In the mind, speech of a Buddha in the mind.

[Speaker 2]
Otherwise, I agree with Ben.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, or you could say, right?

[Speaker 2]
Okay, that's fine.

[Speaker 1]
You're correct. You got the thank you for the correction. Only should be after Buddha, no?

The speech of the Buddha only in the mind of someone. It can be in both. Okay, who has only eliminated?

[Speaker 2]
It depends on what the distinction is. Is it the distinction between an enlightened being and a person?

[Speaker 1]
Or is it a distinction between the mind of someone? Depends on what you're modifying. It ends up being both, but we'll do it this way.

This would work, I think. Yeah, both work, Tim. Yeah.

Use only, not only is. Now we agree that we disagree. Now that we're correct in the statement on the screen.

Being incorrect, correct. So is it necessarily the case that the speech of the Buddha is only in the mind of someone who has eliminated all the obstacles to Buddhahood? Yes, it isn't.

Yes, it isn't, correct. Why? Because you can memorize something, a Buddhist said, even if you're not a Buddha.

Correct, right. I've heard that it is possible. Okay, now the only way that I'm going to get the answer to appear is to change the sentence here.

No, because someone like me can have those words in my mind, and I can say those words without necessarily being a Buddha myself. All right, cool. Great.

There we go, let's go. Even Ben can memorize the Aum Sutra. Aum.

You can even do some hand gestures as well. Yeah, but I was confused. Let's say the debater tries again to prove that the speech of the Buddha in someone's mind must make that mind a mind that has eliminated all obstacles to Buddhahood by making a comparison to the body of a Buddha.

What is this comparison and why is it flawed? Well, Tim, let's say the Buddha chose to write down his words. Then wouldn't the words of the Buddha be written on a paper, and that paper wouldn't be the enlightened mind of a Buddha, would it?

Well, that's correct, but that doesn't answer the question of having anything to do with the body of the Buddha. So he makes a specific comparison to the body of a Buddha. Well, I think it does because the paper would be analogous to the body of a Buddha.

Just because it's in someone's body doesn't mean it's an enlightened body of the Buddha. Um, that's not the comparison he makes. Okay, that's not the comparison he makes.

[Speaker 2]
Because Ben memorized the Aum Sutra.

[Speaker 1]
That's why it's not necessarily the case. Um, okay. Isn't it something like, if it is the body of a Buddha, then it has to be the body of someone who has eliminated obstacles.

So if it is the speech of a Buddha, then it has to be the speech of someone who has eliminated obstacles. Exactly. You were sitting right next to me when we did this.

So good thing you remembered. Yeah, so the comparison, the debater's trying to say that if, um, let's take the body of a Buddha, the body of a Buddha is, uh, body of a Buddha is someone who is eliminated. The person who, the being that possesses the body of a Buddha is one who has eliminated all their obstacles.

So therefore the same applies to their speech as well. Not necessarily because Ben memorized the Aum Sutra. Exactly right.

And so it's not a, it's a, it's kind of a, it's an interesting argument, but it's not correct. All right. We've got three vocabulary words here.

That's what I end up doing whenever I debate Ben. Oh, can you explain what that means?

[Speaker 2]
I turn around on myself and end up disagreeing with something that I asserted earlier.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, Ben's really good at doing that to people. I'm showing my, my fallacies. Yes.

So, yeah. So basically means that you're contradicting yourself or that you've agreed to something and agreed to something else, which contradicts what you agreed to previously. Yeah.

All right. The second one, Mijepesung. The, the, the Hrani of never forget, not forgetting.

Correct. And K'unme.

[Speaker 2]
No problem, man.

[Speaker 1]
No problem. Uh, maybe a little bit more technical translation. Um, there is no fault in my argument, something like that.

Flawless or faultless. Yes. Okay.

All right. Cool. Nice job, everybody.

So that's where we are. Let's look at some, let's go back to what you guys were looking at before. All right.

So we started this. Is it big? Is that big enough on the screen for everybody?

Huge. We'll make it larger. No.

Oh my God. That's so big. Okay.

All right. We started this at the end of the class and we didn't finish it. So we'll go back to the beginning here.

So our debater is still, we're in the section of the debate where we very politely give the kachik, the debater, an opportunity to challenge us again, very politely. So we're going to, this is the debater coming back again. So let's have, I'm looking at you Venerable Kading.

Can you read this section, please?

[Speaker 2]
Kachik.

[Speaker 1]
How about this word right here?

[Speaker 2]
Gay. Don't know if that's up or down.

[Speaker 1]
So if the debater is coming back. Oh. Was it an up or down?

Up. Maybe. Let's see.

Okay. Nice. Good job.

All right. Is Oscar translating? He's not.

Oscar, you were sitting next to me when we started this. So let's continue together on it. Okay.

I forgot everything already. Perfect. I hear you might be going back to Sarah in November.

I might, yeah. Yeah, that's exciting. All right.

So we have the kachik. They've come back. So let's do the Chochen.

The subject here. Consider. Do you want me to do there?

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So far, so good. So far, so good.

Consider an area. Sharipu or the area Shariputra. Consider the mind of the area Shariputra.

And the 100,000 verses. Right. So let's build this a little bit backwards.

In the 8,000, the words, the 8,000 verses of the Perfection of Wisdom. It's considered the speech of the Buddha. In the mind of.

Shariputra, the realized being. Correct. Okay, so we're considering the words of the Buddha in the mind of Shariputra.

I wish it was not a key. Hey, word, what do you think? Does the key make you feel weird about it being in the mind?

Wouldn't we usually use a latun particle? We've been. It's been like this for the previous sections here.

Okay, okay. Okay, there he said, knock instead of also. Right.

Yeah, because he keeps switching it. Okay. To try to make a point.

So it's somewhere as well. Where is it? They're sitting up here.

It's yeah, here we go. Here's another option of it. Yuki, sure.

Okay, and Ben Kramer, the use of the genitive is extremely flexible in Tibetan. Sure. It's used all kinds of ways.

I'm learning recently. Yeah, yeah, okay. Yeah, good question.

All right, so now we're on the second part. Let's consider the words from the 8000 verses. The words of the Buddha in the mind of.

Shariputra. All right. What's going on here, Oscar?

Are you saying that the 60? Oh, this is like this. This 60 qualities.

Of speech. Correct. Are you saying that he has the 60 qualities of a speech?

Shariputra, right? So what would that make that tile up or down? Down.

Why? Are you because you're not agreeing with you're refuting this, right? Yeah, because just.

Just because he's got 8000 verses in his head doesn't mean he's a Buddha that has the 60 qualities because only Buddhists have them. Let's finish up with what the kachig says first before we decide. Because he has the holy speech of a Buddha.

Not has. Because it is the holy speech. Right.

That is the speech of a Buddha. Yeah. Right.

So in this case, so he's saying, let's consider the 8000 verses. The speech of the Buddha, which is in the mind of Shariputra. Are you saying that Shariputra or are you saying that speech?

I'm not sure which one. Are you saying that it possesses those 60 qualities? Why would you say that?

Because then that speech is the speech of the Buddha. Because it is the speech. Because it is the speech of the Buddha.

Because you is the speech of the Buddha. You're dead. I think that's what it is.

He still doesn't like the subject. Subject. I wonder if it's like his telling of it or something, right?

Like his speaking of that sutra has these qualities. Because they are the speech of the Buddha. Kind of pushing the kit a little bit, but.

Right. I think it's saying he then must possess those qualities because it is the speech of the Buddha. Yeah.

Are those qualities that belong to a being or are those qualities that belong to speech? Right. That's the argument, right?

Okay. Right. Because it isn't the Buddha to a being, not to speech.

Right. But that's what's going on. I think that Q is like an it here, because it's Buddha speech.

What about the second Q then? I mean, the first Q. In syllogism, kit will mark what the subject is.

So kit soon is that speech. That speech. Yeah.

And so then the second kit is referring back to that first kit. Yeah. So that speech possesses the six equalities.

Are you saying it possesses the qualities? Why? Because that speech is the speech of the Buddha.

Yeah. That's how I read it. It's doing the speech of the Buddha.

I know my way was funnier, but it makes sense. Fine. Okay.

So and now our kachig is going to give us another reason why. Who would like? I believe it's the kachig.

100% certain. How about venerable coming?

[Speaker 2]
Am I starting at the second paragraph on this screen?

[Speaker 1]
Correct. Yep. Okay, so this is how I'm taking this, and I'm not 100% certain yet.

Is that if this is the case, right? It must be the case because it says in the again. That's how I'm reading it.

Does it?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
It seems that way. Yeah, that's right. Yeah.

If something is the speech of the Buddha, then it must be a thing which has the 64 qualities because they can says the following. Yeah. All right.

So this is what it says in the following. All right. They check.

Who's that? Who does? Who does?

The guy who went to happy with blissers. The blissers. I got the blissers.

Sue me in this case. That knee is throw away. Yeah.

Yeah. I mean, their speech is. And how is their speech?

Tie infinite. Yeah. So the Buddhist speech is infinite.

What does some gap mean? Inconceivable. Inconceivable.

Young, rock, drip to the 60 ish. Why is it the 60 ish word? Because there's actually 64.

But for some reason, they say 60. I have no idea. Probably because it fits better in meter because you would need to have another four.

Even if you have another syllable, maybe. They do it even out of meter. But whatever we want to say, he's fine.

He said it in the debate for some reason, too. You know, we're coming from a verse. They always say 60.

They never say 64. I mean, 60 odd, I guess we could say. 60 ish.

60 some. Yeah. So it's the Buddha.

Speech is tie a expansively infinite. And it possesses this. I didn't understand what to do with this.

Like it's inconceivably and it possesses 60 ish qualities. It's the inconceivable 60 qualities. Okay.

I see. Okay. Edward.

Inconceivable is a common phrase to describe the speech of enlightened being or term. Same with the mind and the body, I believe. So we're basically saying they're infinitely inconceivable.

And those inconceivable have 60 some qualities. Yeah. Somehow it's infinite, but it has six qualities.

I don't think that word means what they think it means. Which one? Don't tie it.

Yeah. I don't know. I think it's saying the speech itself is infinite and that the 60 qualities, while identifiable, are inconceivable in their amazingness.

Yeah. So our kachik is saying, well, look, the speech of the Buddha has to possess these 60 qualities because in the Mahayana Sutralankara, the Dode Gen, it says this. So therefore, using scriptural reference to prove that that's the case.

Yeah. So being that this is the kachik. Are we sure it's the kachik?

It is the kachik, yes. Yeah, that sounds right. Yeah, the kachik is saying.

Yeah. Yeah, if it's the Buddha's speech, look, if it's the Buddha's speech, it says right here in the Sutralankara, if it's the Buddha's speech. I'll just say it is the kachik because the next thing says serna.

Yeah. It's clear because of the kyante. It's like, yeah, he believes it.

It's true.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, it is. So is the case.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. So this is the kachik. What do we believe is wrong?

What do we think is wrong with this argument that we're going to destroy the next sentence? That there's only 60. It's quite conceivable.

I think just because the words are in your mind doesn't mean that the Buddhist speech is in your mind or something like that. Well, that your speech or the speech of Shariputra possesses the 60 qualities just because it's in it, just because the speech is in his mind doesn't necessarily mean that his speech possesses those 60 qualities. He defended the idea that if something is three, it must be two.

But he did not defend the idea that one is three. So we can still say that the 8,000 verses spoken from the mind of Shariputra are not. It doesn't say they're spoken in his mind.

They're just in his mind. Yeah, even more to the point. But he's conflating gyu with sung.

That's the whole, right? Gyu is not sung. He did say words in the mind.

Yeah. Yeah, you're right. Gyu is not sung.

Yeah, right. That's nice. Yeah.

That's the trick. Great. Yeah, that's great.

I mean, it makes really nice. Yeah, or gyuki is not sung especially, right? Right.

Let's say that just sort of so we can before we move, let's say it very clearly so the translators can get it for everybody else too. Yeah. Wait.

It is not the case that the 8,000 verses in the mind of Shariputra are the spoken word of the Buddha or the holy speech of the Buddha. Yeah. Because we're conflating the idea of speech in the mind with something that is said out loud.

Yeah. Yeah, which is well conflated by the use of the word ga, which means holy speech also sometimes. But maybe we're learning a distinction then between those as well.

All right. Let's see what he says and see how right we are. Well, something can be internal words without being external words.

Yeah, right. So are we learning that ga could be either and sung can't? I don't know.

Then we would still have to tackle the debate if Shariputra recited the sutra. Would that then be? But thankfully, he did not say that.

We'll probably get to that. Maybe Shariputra didn't bother ever doing that. Yeah.

All right. Let's grab. Let's see who would like to read.

Well, it's a problem because the Buddha probably never was the one to write it down. Yeah. Someone wrote it.

They were just a puppet. Possibly. Hey, read the next line.

Who was reading it? Mike Hoffman. Oh, it's going to be the speech of the Buddha.

If you know that line is not okay. Mike Hoffman's from Philly. Everything he says is the speech of the Buddha.

At least it's the speech of Keturp Tepetardhyay. Okay. All right.

So this is this is us coming back to destroy his argument. What does that mean? Uh, if you claim that is without flaw.

If your argument doesn't bother us. If your argument is so flawless. No.

If you say that we're not, it doesn't stress us out. It's not a problem for us. It doesn't hurt our position.

That that's a nicer way of saying it then. Yes. All right.

So what's the reason that we get? And that's based on this word here. Gongpa.

Yeah. Because the sangye bakpe gyu, the Buddha ariya's mind stream. The song, the words of it.

Because they are interpreted. Because it is the true intent. It is, I think, lines up with the true intent of the words and the mind stream of ariya Buddha.

Yeah. Right. Okay.

So this is right. So how does that, how does that destroy his argument? Indeed.

I think what he's saying is that, yeah, that speech has the qualities of a Buddha's speech. But it doesn't mean that Shariputra somehow has that quality. Or is it that the intention of the words in the mind stream of an ariya Buddha, right?

So that would be, would the intention of the words be that they are then the words in a mind of a non-Buddha and that's okay? Or that it was the intention of the 60 qualities that having those, the speech has those 60 qualities and that is, how do I say this? Well, basically we're going to get into what is the, what is the intention of the speech of the Buddha is actually what the next thing that comes up.

But the qualities imply intent? I don't think so. Well, I'm wondering if intent gongpa here means like what we mean by speech.

Like the understanding, the true meaning of the term here when we're talking about speeches is sung and not ga. It's not. That's interesting.

So what does that la mean? As? Yeah, it could be something like that.

That's an interesting take on it. I would not have thought of that. It could mean saying, because what we're saying here is that this is the sung in the mind stream, not the ga.

So it just means the real meaning, gongpa. But we're really saying it. That's interesting.

When we say ga, we mean sung and so. Yeah, or like when you're saying ga, but we just mean sung. Yeah.

So we agree with the whole thing? I don't know. That's interesting.

We don't agree and we can't agree because of the serna, I think. But the kyunme and the opposite? Serna kyunme te.

If you claim that, no problem. I think it has, I still think it has something to do with the fact that he's saying that that speech is Buddha's speech, but that doesn't mean Shariputra possesses the qualities. That's where I think it's going.

Okay. Okay. We would have to change our interpretation a little bit of that previous syllogism to be referring to Shariputra and not the speech.

Does the speech, and there's that question again. So you is was right? No, no, I was.

I'm not condensed. Yeah. No, I was thinking that's why we're saying serna kyunme, like no problem, because that speech just doesn't mean that it has 64 qualities.

Who has the 64 qualities or what has the 64 qualities? I ask that question again. Is it the speech that has 64 qualities or the Buddha that has 64 qualities?

Yeah, I understand. The Buddha has the 64 qualities of speech. The speech has 64 qualities.

Totally different qualities. I don't know. Does the Buddha have 64 qualities of speech or does the Buddha's speech have 64 qualities?

Yeah. They usually refer to it as the 60 odd qualities of the Buddha's speech. Right.

I wouldn't rule out that this is why the gongba here is the sum. Yeah, that's interesting. Well, kha comes in like the next line or so.

So let's see. Unfortunately, it looks like we're on to another debate. Yeah, it's a whole nother debate.

Yeah. So the Buddha speaks them when a Buddha speaks words. I can say the same words as an ordinary being, and those words will not have the quality of being heard in the language of each person who hears it.

The qualities are not in the speech. Which is why? Well, in the person hearing.

But the qualities are in the Buddha. That was beautiful in like 63 ways, Upala. I understood it almost.

Yes, the only way being that he didn't hear it in Sanskrit. That's awesome. Yeah, right.

I can memorize the Aum Sutra, but I'm still going to get funny looks from people when I go trying to recite it at the mall. So I would say maybe if we say there's no problem here because this is what I'm hearing you all say is that the true intent of all of that is that when you have the speech of the Buddha in your mind, that was what the Buddha was intending when he had the speech of he had his own speech in his own mind. Perhaps because the purpose of everything.

What's that? Aren't we agreeing with the whole thing? I don't understand why we that's where it's basically he's using the reason to say there's no problem because that's the case.

And there's something I'm something I'm not quite following. The law is the only real deviation. So the answer is there.

Yeah, I would guess Gomba refers to the meaning of the quotation. So this is no problem for us because the intent, I think you could probably supply of these verses is to refer to the spoken word. I don't know, in the mind of a Buddha.

Or or you don't even have to say that, right? Because we're talking about Sharipu, there's an assumption that with these words, they're talking about a Buddha, right? So, yeah, you can make this wild assertion about Shariputra, but this verse isn't talking about Shariputra because Shariputra is not a Buddha.

And the intention of this verse is to describe the words of a Buddha, not someone else speaking of Buddha's words. I think you're right, Ben. Yeah, the whole thing is about the verse, not about this.

I think so. I think he's right. Yeah, Serna, if that, yeah, you claim the thing is about that, Kyunmei, we have no problem with this verse.

It doesn't prove your point because blah, blah, blah. Yeah, because everyone knows they're talking about Buddhas here. Yeah, they say Deishak.

They did say it. I was there. Everyone who can read Tibetan knows.

Even the odd Sanskritist. All right. Well, in next class, we will get the answer from Geshe Michael.

All right, cool. All right. So the next time, so the Kachi comes back and is basically saying, oh, well, since we started talking about the intent of the Buddha's speech or the intent of the speech in the mind of the Buddha, the Kachi says, well, actually, this is what's going on.

So basically says, well, forget you. We're going to have another debate. That part we all agree on.

That's what I would do. Like, fine, whatever. It's like, you're fine, right?

Whatever. Let's move on to another. Yes.

All right. How about, let's see here. How about Kelsey?

[Speaker 2]
Hello.

[Speaker 1]
Let's just read these two lines. Okay, let's figure this out. All right.

So our Kachi comes back. Nice job. Do you want to try it out, Kelsey?

I think you can do most of it. No. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
The speech of a Buddha.

[Speaker 1]
That's not so good. Nice. Against your will.

You got this? What is the state of yourself that's going?

[Speaker 2]
Is it a negative?

[Speaker 1]
Nope.

[Speaker 2]
No, I don't know. It is.

[Speaker 1]
If something is.

[Speaker 2]
If something is the speech of a Buddha.

[Speaker 1]
Right. Excellent.

[Speaker 2]
I don't know. Dual J.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, you know. Dual J. Dual J related to dual.

Someone who needs to be tamed like a horse. Related to.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, like dual wa.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Yeah, exactly.

[Speaker 2]
Something about taming your mental afflictions.

[Speaker 1]
Right. To remove the negative emotions, afflictions of students. Okay.

With tear do. What is tear do mean? I don't know.

It means in order to. In order to. For the sake of.

So we're basically saying the speech. Yeah. The speech of a Buddha.

It's perfect. Yeah. Is to.

Is to pong. The new ones of dual J's. Yeah.

Yes, please. The Buddha speech was spoken in order to eliminate or. And the.

Negative emotions of. Disciples. Yeah.

You know. If something is the Buddha speech. Then.

It necessarily must be something that was spoken for the sake. Of eliminating negative emotions from disciples. That sounds really nice.

So far. Right. And then.

You should or. Disciples negative emotions. I guess technically.

On that subject. On that subject. So.

The cheer. Wait, did we read this part? We didn't read it.

Yeah, I'm sorry. Yes. So the cheer is what's coming up next.

Okay. The reason. That are.

That. Our country gives will be. Let's see who would like to read.

How about. Tracy. Okay.

Starting with Kong. So I was there. Okay.

You. Lama. Lee.

Kong. Shick. Don.

Then to. Down near. Drapa.

Come soon. Kuni. Young mom.

Pompeii. Pong cheer. Song.

She way. Penyon. Ton.

Par. Sipa. Kong.

Day. Knee. Drunk.

Wrong. Song. Yin.

Dokpa. Shan. Was that song?

Wrong. Yeah. It's wrong song.

Wrong. Wrong was wrong. It was.

It's song. Song. Song.

Yin. Doc. Doc.

Pa. Shan. Shay.

Soompi. Cheer. Serna.

Okay. Good. So the reason.

That our kachig is going to use to prove that if something is a speech of a Buddha. It must necessarily be the case that that speech was spoken for the purpose of removing mental afflictions or the negative emotions of students. So that quote comes from Hugh Obama.

Where's that? Tracy, do you know what that's from? It's in the Sanskrit there with a really.

Path. The higher. Really cool.

Mahayana path. Yeah. Mahayana.

What? The path. Uttaratantra.

Uttaratantra. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Uttaratantra.

[Speaker 1]
Uttaratantra. Yeah. And.

And I know if I were Christina Kasica, who suddenly turned on her. Her camera, I would be thinking about the exciting Sunday. For for new people to Sunday.

When an A touches and a U it becomes an O. So Mahayana Uttaratantra becomes Mahayana to talk Mahayana Uttaratantra. Yeah, it's really Uttaratantra.

But. It's Sunday, right? Yeah.

All right. So we could go ahead and translate this. Or.

If we or we scroll down here. Gelsubj has a commentary on these four lines. Oh, that's cool.

So we're going to it's going to help us translate these four lines. Maybe. Oh, it's not.

[Speaker 2]
Have you read Gelsubj?

[Speaker 1]
Have you met Gelsubj? I'm just saying we're working with this guy for a while. We're going to get a little bit of help.

Higher in there. All right. So let's read the first part.

First line here. How about Roxanna? Where it says Nippani.

[Speaker 2]
OK.

[Speaker 1]
Can you keep going to the next lines here? All right. Good.

Why is the shing in 16 point? It's not in the poem, is it? No.

No. I feel just as bad as I did a second ago.

[Speaker 2]
His hand slipped. That's all.

[Speaker 1]
Was it on purpose? It was to teach us something. I didn't learn.

OK. Let's see if we can translate this first line with Gelsubj's commentary. Secondly.

What's that? Secondly. Secondly.

Yes. Thank you. All right.

Whatever it is. Whatever words or whatever speech. I think Kongshik here means peoples.

Anybody. Yeah. I think when he says any old Kongshik, any old.

That it means Kebus here. Individuals. Purushas.

Anyone's speech. Yeah, I see. Yeah.

So anyone's. Yeah, he's speaking in that context. In the context of people.

Right. Anyone's speech. With Nekap, not ultimate.

I think in Nekap here means in the context of people.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
We're talking about people. In the context of this verse. Nekap on Tartuq.

Oh, yeah. Look at that. There's a Tartuq.

Temporary and ultimate. Yeah, yeah. Nekap on Tartuq.

Right. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So let's go to the end.

It'll help us get through what all that means. No, it won't. Promise.

So the speech. Thangdenpa, right? Which has, possesses.

Japa, I can't remember. Expression. Subject or speech.

Yeah. What he's talking about. What he's talking about.

Thangdenpa. Okay. Thangdenpa japa.

Okay, I think I got it. Thangshik is an individual speech. Whether anyone, whether it is temporary or ultimate.

And tun is the meaning of what is being said. Meaning the overall expression or why it's being expressed. And that's what it is.

I think he's embedding. He's like annotating. Yes.

That's for sure. Yeah, I think so. Okay.

Can we join it with the. The dun gets modified by these two, right? Oh, whether we're talking about the temporary or ultimate meaning or the goal.

[Speaker 2]
Benefit, I think it is.

[Speaker 1]
Benefit. The goal. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Totally. Short term or long term goals. The aim, the artha.

Yeah, bless you. Totally. Okay.

Yeah, great. So it's like whomever's speech possesses the subject matter of temporary or ultimate goals. Something like that.

Of people. Actually, so that's kibu. Actually, no, the gangshik is just modifying the sun.

So any speech that whose intention or is expressed with the goal of helping temporary, ultimate goals of people. That's the kibu. So whomever's speech, meaning anybody's speech.

It could be any speech. I think it's any speech. I refreshed my assertion about it being any kibu.

I was wrong, I believe. It seems. So any speech that has as a subject matter.

Yeah. The purpose or short and long term goals. As its aim.

Exactly. It's aimed to help beings with their temporary and ultimate goals. Yeah.

It's expressed for that purpose. Yeah. All right.

And we're dealing with the next part. We're not. Oh, yeah, we're kind of there.

Yeah, we haven't made it out of the first half of a line yet. Thanks for getting close. The words, what those words mean, right?

They express words. The words that are expressed by. Right.

Yeah. Yeah. Are are free of each of any problems.

Yeah. Yeah, totally. Could you gloss yourself on that word?

Sure. Human means problem. How about each and every.

But tongue trail, what means free or devoid of. So instead of saying not having each and every, you just said not having any in English. Mm hmm.

Having no problems, not having any problem. OK, so so the. So all of this.

Is being is related to. No, it's related to Dan. Yeah, that's that the speech possesses.

No problems. Any all the words it expresses are without problems. Now, now we go.

I mean, the last it could connect the den to the two. I'm not saying it doesn't do that. What's your drill?

So close to connect, connect. Sorry, Gibson, what did you say? No, I just want to say is close connect to the Dama, right?

Yeah, it's connected to the. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

So is he saying all of this is related, is defined by these words here? He's saying the speech that is being spoken to help all beings and matters, whether it be provisional or ultimate, is is not problematic. And that is the Dama, which blah, blah, blah, the Dama does do that.

I agree with Gibson, which is closely connected to something. Yeah. I don't know why there's a pot.

That makes. Isn't it why there's a what? Why there's a pot and.

Well, is it that this stuff here? Oh, narrow job. I see.

I look at the retext. Oh, yeah. So Chodan.

Now, is it related to that first line or is it related to the next line? Oh. Let's see.

I think we're going to need to connect it to something. Because it has a shing down here. Yeah, the pause a mistake.

That's what I'm saying. It should be what it should be. Yeah, it's just a typo or something.

[Speaker 2]
No, there isn't legal spelling.

[Speaker 1]
Drupal. Yeah. I thought it was drug.

Why is it a dump car? I don't know. Well, I just I mean, I don't even know.

But I just know so many times. I guess she Michaels be like, you know, in the old days, I wrote this with a pot. OK.

Yeah, we need this next bit of line. All right. So we are we have one minute.

We'll have someone read it and then we'll put it on pause till next time. Two minutes. One minute now.

I take longer than we can just pause. Ina, can you read this next line for good luck? Sure.

Yeah, we have 20 seconds left. Good job. I think we're just going to pause here, guys.

Unless anyone. I think it's just to move into our discussion. Now.

Now. Fine. Fine.

We're just moving into this area. So. All right.

That was fun. Thank you, everybody. I think I sweated a little bit during that.

All right. So what did we learn today that could be applied to our daily life? Does anyone does anyone.

Did something strike anyone before I start asking questions? The thoughts in your head are not the same as what comes out of your mouth. Well, that's that's that's true.

We shouldn't conflate those two. Thank goodness. Well, sometimes it's true for me and it's problematic.

I would have a lot fewer friends. I get a little bit like disconnected sometimes from the lists of qualities. And of course, these different teachings are for different students.

And I felt some resonance with the idea that the measure. Of an enlightened being speech is. How it helps.

And then there's this idea of an enlightened being's ability to. Emanate. They can be I mean, famously, right.

They could be a. Not even just a being, but a bridge or something. All the places and like like the moon is reflected.

Instantly, spontaneously by every body of water. And the tear in the eye of a child. And and then what makes it the Buddha's speech?

What would make it the Buddha's speech? Um. It would be if it got.

If it got rid of my afflictions. I really like this idea of defining. Enlightened qualities, not by like what color.

Outfit they're wearing. Or where in the world they're from, but like what it. What it does to change the shape of your heart.

And then who are the people in our lives that do that? And. And can we we can only figure out we can only figure out later.

Um. When we reach the goal, and maybe if everybody reaches the goal someday. Then we will have to look back and say that.

Everyone we met and everything they said. Led to our. Freedom from affliction.

And everyone around us was speaking enlightened speech. So I think it to play off that, Ben, I also think that. There's a suggestion here.

That when he did say that, well, that's the that's the intent of the. Of the speech in the mind of a Buddha. Like, is that it is this is what I was thinking while we were all debating it.

Is it the intent of the Buddha's. Speech when the Buddha had it in their mind before they spoke it. And then spoke it that then we would have their speech in our mind.

And then we would ultimately then possess the 60 some qualities. Of a Buddha speech herself by speaking the speech of a Buddha. You know, and in some ways, I kind of feel like there's a.

You know, there's a link here to our own practice, like to have a point of view that. What if what I am saying is the speech of the Buddha? You know, I'm not yet a Buddha.

But the words that are in my head. And the words that are coming out of my mouth were spoken by a Buddha. So by implication, could that be the one of the causes to create Buddhahood in myself?

Hope so. Maybe. Are you dedicated, I guess.

But I wonder what power there would be that if. If you saw them as the speech of the Buddha and they were coming out of out of you, like. Are we kind of pretending to be Buddhas by speaking the words of the Buddhas, but we're not yet Buddhas, but we're planting the seeds to be a Buddha.

Good luck, translators. So now I'm going to share. Go ahead soon.

[Speaker 2]
I was reading the resource for the 64 qualities of a Buddha. In the BCI Level 8, which Geshe-la referenced as well. And these are qualities of the speech which needs thousands and thousands and thousands of years to plant the seeds for.

Have you ever had that situation in your life? Like I say exactly the same sentence as the other person, but it has a totally different effect on other people. So I would go and Utpala referenced it also a little bit in her argument.

I repeat the words of the Buddha. Yes, I agree. I think I plant beautiful seeds by doing so.

But because I have not gathered all the seeds for the 64 qualities. My words might be misunderstood, not heard in all languages, not engage people, not help them to get to enlightenment or whatever.

[Speaker 1]
Does anybody...

[Speaker 2]
So I think the words itself and the qualities are two separate things. You can say the words, but if you don't have gathered the seeds for the qualities, I think you don't speak the words of the Buddha, because they don't have the effect.

[Speaker 1]
I just heard from someone who they worked at a movie theater. And every time at the end of an order, they would get popcorn and candy and soda. And they would say at the end of every order, will that be all for you today?

And sometimes they would get a very big order. And every now and then someone will mishear them and think they were saying, will that be all for you today? And get very offended.

You see, same exact words. Will that be all for you today?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Or will that be all for you, all for you?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, I totally agree. And I think so for me, how I want to apply it in my life is maybe not listen exactly to the words, but check the person out what quality they have, that they plant the seeds that their words have this effect on people. That would be my, you know, how do you call that here?

Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Well, I wonder, I mean, to keep going with that is if the Buddha speaks, does everyone hear the words of a Buddha?

[Speaker 2]
That's the other side. That's my karma.

[Speaker 1]
You know, so. Is the Buddha a Buddha if they're not perceived as a Buddha? Yes.

From whose side?

[Speaker 2]
By someone else.

[Speaker 1]
If they're omniscient, then they can perceive themselves as a Buddha.

[Speaker 2]
You know what I'm talking about by other, the people in the audience.

[Speaker 1]
I don't know. I mean, you have to be perceived by everyone to be a Buddha. I don't get it.

No, I just heard a little like self existentness going on. That's all. And I'm going to push it just a little bit, then, you know, with that in mind, Venerable Pala and Sunan.

Like you, you can talk about myself, me speaking the words of a Buddha. I'm not yet a Buddha, but that me is not self existent either. Right.

So is there a practice in here that could help us generate the ability to see ourselves as a Buddha? Because who sees us as a Buddha? Like, you know, like Sunan, do you, like, is it important how you perceived him?

Or is it important how Tim perceives Tim? Or is there, and is there a difference? Does Tim see Tim as a Buddha?

Or does Sunan see Tim as a Buddha or Sunan?

[Speaker 2]
Depends on your and my seeds. If I have the seeds to see you as Buddha, I see you as Buddha. If you have the seeds to see yourself as Buddha, you see yourself as Buddha.

[Speaker 1]
Right. And what I'm asking is, is there a suggestion of a practice in here that could help us plant those seeds for ourselves faster? That's what I'm suggesting.

Well, to answer that, Tim, I've, I stayed in Sarah before and they, in different places like that, they definitely constantly recite words of the Buddha. So for whatever reasons, you know, people have decided that that's a very important practice for them to do. And as Geshe-la has taught when he talks about reciting words of the Buddha, is that we, we have to understand how it is or why it is that reciting the words of the Buddha would have any effect whatsoever.

Right. What is their understanding about why things are the way they are? If we don't have a very clear understanding, they won't have the effect of creating a Buddhist speech.

Not powerful enough. Like what's our motivation and what's our understanding? They have to be big in order to create the, the, the, what was the word, word, the, the endless qualities of a Buddhist speech.

The endless inconceivable qualities. What else has come to people's minds? We have three minutes.

Nothing at all. Yeah. I mean, on this topic, I would say there's, there's that, it's that question of intention, right?

Why, why I'm speaking the way I speak. And, and that's about, that's about as much as I can control. It's very hard to, to know how someone is going to take my words.

But at least if I'm trying to help. And then there's this question that comes up nowadays a lot. And I think it's a very healthy question about the difference between intention and impact.

And, and I think intention on some level is all we have, but then you, then you are attentive to the impact. And if your intention is sincere, then you will probably adjust your behavior based on what you learn from the impact. If you want to help people, if you want to help people not be hurt.

So I don't know, we keep trying and I'm, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that all that popcorn was for you. And, and maybe I should try a different way of phrasing it next time, but my, my intentions were good and I will try better next time. I will try something different.

I will keep working on it. Right. Cause the impact of the words is a separate seed than the planting of the words, right?

The words, the impact, whatever impact comes back to you is from a prior seed, not the intention of the words in you anyway. Right. Yeah.

And an earnest person, you know, with earnest, honest intention, they, they adjust based on the impact that they see. Hard. Even if you're earnest.

And yes, it's hard. Yeah. But we try, we keep trying.

We try to do better. Changing self and others is a very challenging practice when you really do it. Very hard.

That's what I hear. Yeah. So thank you all for joining today.

Thank you, Tim. Thanks for this lively conversation. Thanks.

Thank you all for help attempt to translate this very difficult text. I, I had, I thought about making it easier on us and then go back to the bibliography or the biography, excuse me, of, of Arya Sangha. It'd be like, Hey, let's do something a little different.

Um, and Geshe-la hadn't prepped it yet. So I didn't want to attempt all that work myself. So we just went through this, but thank you all for your, your insights into the difficulty of this.

It helped me a lot. And moving on. Thank you, Tim.

Thank you. That was great. That was a really nice work and great class.

Kwan, are you ready? I am. I knew it.

I knew you would be. Are you still at the beach, dude? I'm glad.

Yes. What about you? I'm on my way in a couple of days.

What beach did you choose this time? The only beach. Oh, that's amazing.

Cool. Cool. Cool.

All right. Cool. Actually Geshe-la and Rob Hagerty Jr. Are just getting there today. Is it? Isn't it? Yes.

Yes, indeed. That's cool, Nick. You have been very, very lucky.

So many visits in the last few months. It's a funny, amazing thing. That's great.

So what's up? This is like a new Rimrock. I know, right?

We should start thinking of like real estate and investing over there. What is that thing? A lot of people using it at home.

If Mohammed doesn't go to the mountain, the mountain goes to Mohammed. I guess in this case, you are Mohammed or something like that. I better start growing my beard.

Maybe. Cool. Cool.

Cool. All right. So I'm happy to see you all.

And today we have a few sets of news and a special interview to share with you of a very, very cool project happening. It's a little bit of a surprise because it's not a surprise in the sense of a new project, but it is a surprise on the sense of new, new news about that project. So let's go a quick review of what we have around the corner.

One of the closest events that's happening is the Sky Harvest, Sky Harvest Second Reforestation Summit. And apparently I hear very good news because they already got the big group of people that they needed in order to have this successful program. So it's happening big time and people are still welcome to join if you are interested still.

By now, maybe you have already decided if you are going or not, but who knows? Maybe somebody decides last minute you can still join. They already have a big group of people going.

I think it's going to be fun and very interesting, but also very, very meaningful and helpful for the land and the overall use of Diamond Mountain, one of our very dearest worldview organizations that have been serving pretty much all of us. So thank you so much for doing this. Congratulations that this is happening and thank you for what you're doing.

Also in September, in the next new, we have this series that YSI is running these days. Mostly Errol has been in charge of producing it, but many other people involve the Inner Kingdom teachings. Teachings that are based on what Geshe Michael taught during his three-year retreat.

There is another picture to show you one of the phrases that have been becoming famous about it. And the event is going to be happening on September the 7th. Next picture, you can see the QR code.

There you go. And it's Errol going to be teaching the immersion on the Inner Kingdom two-day event from the 7th to the 8th. Also, just to remind you that every Thursday, Christina Kasica is, yes, teaching the Sanskrit classes.

Thank you very much. And I just saw a very cool video that I would like to share with all of you. So you get an idea on how it is and what it is about.

So we will be sharing the content with you. Ah, the video, it's in the, I send it to the tech table in the Telegram group. Thank you.

What's the next word? Somebody say that for me. Two minutes from Tadash.

Beautiful video. Thank you very much. And, no, I'm just kidding.

I hope we can watch it. If we cannot, then I'll move on, but we should be able to watch it. We're watching it.

Oh, cool. I'm not.

[Speaker 2]
That's great. Sorry.

[Speaker 1]
Perfect. Perfect. You see the different, it's not an accent exactly, but the rhythm of this word is So it actually has one, two, I did that wrong.

So there's nothing very interesting about this word. How many long vowels does it have? Right.

And you can hear that when we say it, right? All right. And this is a compound word that means name and form.

In Sanskrit, they often don't use and. They often don't use is. They leave things out.

So in English, we would have to say name and form, not name form, but it's a joint word.

[Speaker 2]
Okay, it's done.

[Speaker 1]
Thank you. I don't know why I'm not seeing anything. I just looking at this, but I'm glad to hear people can watch it.

That's cool.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
So just to remind you, like these classes are happening every Thursday. There is the QR code. So you can, if you're interested, be part of the Telegram chat group that shares the materials, the schedule, the links to join.

You can go there. Cool. Just to finish with the news and go move on to our interview.

I want to remind people that if you are actually doing the good night book club practice, you can send a little video on your experience about it. How do you feel about it? What benefits have you seen?

Has it helped you to focus better? Has it give you some new insights? Or is something that you recommend we cancel?

Just kidding. But you can let us know how it's going for you. And it may inspire other people to actually try if you have find benefits.

Thank you so much. That's the news for today. And we're going to move on with our interview of the day with our friend Chloe.

Is she around? And can you help me to make a spotlight with her? Hello, Chloe.

[Speaker 2]
Hello. Hi, everybody.

[Speaker 1]
Good to see you. Welcome. Thank you for being here today.

Today, well, many of you already know Chloe. She lives these days in Sedona. But she's originally from mainland China.

So I was talking to you today and we were just discussing how many, many, many things you're doing. And I want to personally thank you for the many projects that you are doing and the many help you are providing to many of our community members in Sedona. So first of all, welcome.

But also thank you so much for everything you're doing. Today, specifically, we are here to talk about, well, a few things that you already told me. But I would like to ask you just in general.

What are the things that you've been most involved in the last few weeks or months?

[Speaker 2]
Oh, yes. I have been helping with a new project, especially this new dream. It's called Innovation Retreat.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, that's awesome. Can you share a little bit of what has been going on about it?

[Speaker 2]
Yes, so Innovation Retreat. Gina, we can just talk about it first. Yes, so this is, yes, this is great, Gina.

Thank you. So we are going to have an Innovation Retreat. Geshe-la will lead, which is from September 13th to September 22nd.

It's a whole nine days program where Geshe-la Michael will be talking about how to do a circle day, how to do a circle day retreat. In this sense that we are actually going to bring people to Diamond Mountain to do deep retreats, to have innovation ideas, solve business problems, and create harmony relationships in your family life. So this is a very first one that we are going to do that will be open to both Chinese speaking students and also English speaking communities.

So if you can see that we are having a Telegram group. If you are an English speaker, you can join the English speaker Telegram group. And if you're a Chinese speaking student, so you can join the WeChat.

So this is a super exciting time to learn about retreat. So within this three days, within the nine days, there are three full days of silence. And it will be a wonderful time.

And it's a more relaxing schedule. You got to sleep in until 7 a.m. And then Geshe-la will be teaching daily and you will have wonderful food. And everybody will have their own space, no shared rooms.

And then mostly we want to create this conducive environment for meditation. And for people who haven't learned the previous two, we actually had two sessions already in Chinese that happened. But this will be the very first time that for English speakers opening to the rest of the world.

So right now, if you like, let's go to see what happened previously.

[Speaker 1]
Cool. With the media?

[Speaker 2]
Yes. So there, Stanley brought everybody to Dunhuang, which is the seed partner of Innovation Retreat. We are in the future going to create, replicate Dunhuang in the West.

So let's see what happened last month.

[Speaker 1]
It's very, very powerful to do any retreat near the place where great people did their retreat. And I think if you are able to do this retreat this weekend at the Dunhuang location, you are very, very lucky. Why are all those caves there in Dunhuang?

Because for many centuries, people went there to do their retreat. Then your mind becomes much more quiet and you can hear great, great ideas. Because great, great ideas are often whispered.

And I have to say one thing. To learn, to hear the creative voices in your mind is the biggest fun thing in your whole life. Wow.

It was so wonderful. It's an amazing production and a great inspirational video. Yeah, stunning video.

Exactly. Thank you, Chloe, so much for bringing it for us. And for the productors, Mr. Stanley and Mrs. Xiaoping.

[Speaker 2]
Yes, we have to thank Stanley and Xiaoping who hold such a high standard. I'm amazed when I see that video and how the people who actually did retreat in Dunhuang, which, you know, that's the whole point of Gacha's New Dream, to bring this lifestyle of going to retreat to San Gong, right? We need to study wisdom.

Then we meditate. Then we go to retreat. That's the three ways to study wisdom.

So I'm super happy and honored to be involved in this program and share this with all of you guys. And opening this to the whole world, where the English speakers get to join the next one in less than one month. So I'm super excited to see you guys either online or in person in Diamond Mountain.

Thank you so much for your time.

[Speaker 1]
Thank you so much, Chloe. And we'll talk again soon. And for now, we are getting ready to go to our next class with Ward Smith.

And then I can just say thank you so much for the opportunity. That's great. Also being here in Mexico and enjoying time with family at the beach.

So see you next time. And let's go back with Ward.