Вордсмит — Книга 2: Трудные места школы «Ум только», занятие 28

[Speaker 1]
Hey sleepy, let's go with the homework. Okay, I'm just a review of class, try to keep it pretty simple. And this is how it was worded in class that's why the wording is as it is.

Um, when the foundation consciousness, creates the world for you. What do we call that part of the foundation consciousness.

[Speaker 3]
Right and foundation consciousness. Thought of Bachar. Yeah.

Yeah, it's a seed.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, sorry this screen is full of zoom.

[Speaker 1]
All right. Yeah, that's a seat. Okay.

Um, and then we had three arguments from to Chicago, about why can the seeds not be the foundation consciousness, or to be one is not to be the other the foundation consciousness. Um, maybe you remember, because they can't think proceed things.

[Speaker 2]
That's one Yeah, there's three. And I'm just going to give the answer. Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Um, because they would have to have objects, meaning that they would have their own ability to perceive the seats for realmers drawer would would no longer be exclusive, which we had from Jason copper as well. And the realms themselves would no longer be exclusive, which I don't think Jason coppers gotten to yet, but is also a logical implication. Okay.

And then, General Paula explain the first of these reasons.

[Speaker 3]
I don't know what to say other than they can't perceive anything. They don't have that capability, their potential.

[Speaker 2]
They don't. Yeah, I'm sorry, I don't know what to say. Okay.

[Speaker 3]
Anybody else. I guess if they were foundation consciousness and they would be social hip hop, they would have to be that which perceives meaning they would have to hold an object.

[Speaker 2]
But they are foundation consciousness, but they don't perceive.

[Speaker 1]
Right. Don't mean. Don't young men.

[Speaker 3]
You'd be. Yeah, but you're asking us to explain a reason why they're not. And you're refuting it by saying yes they are.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, I am. Yeah.

[Speaker 3]
You're in. You're in good company then at least.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, because it's, it's a, it's a third option right because it's like delicate. Is it because they'd be perceiving themselves, or something like that, like, it would be a perception. Um, I mean basically I mean everything everyone's saying is right it's just the specifics of it, let's, let's look at it.

Um, seeds have to be separate because if they weren't. They'd have to be aware, like the foundation consciousness, I guess that's all I put, um, there's another part where I'm choosing on Pelton is like, then you would have more than one foundation consciousness, because every seed would be its own foundation consciousness essentially. Um, because all those seeds would be aware as well.

So that's the only addendum I put on that. Yeah. Okay.

I'm looking apart. Yeah. I'm McNam object.

Yeah, but in the language. Yeah, I mean literally this object. Um, but what's the nom here and why literally what's the nom I translated object, object aspect.

Yeah, literally what it is. Um, and it refers to having your own objects right having like the seeds.

[Speaker 2]
That's the languaging Jason copper uses to describe FC to have their own object.

[Speaker 1]
Cheerio non returner.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Perfect. Okay, good. And here are those next two verses.

Are you ready. Yeah. I'm just waking up.

It's like an old car engine starting ducks. So it's the reasons given is correct. In terms of non returners.

Technically it's the sword means what parts or something pieces. Yeah, each component of the reason you see them in. Each, each section of the reason, you see, I mean, so they're not technically.

It's one reason with different sections is the idea. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. So men are your nature. So question for you, if you're in the formless realm.

Do you still have a country.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, good. So it would exist even in the formless realm. Yeah.

Okay. First one.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, this is an even okay.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, even in the formless realm. Yeah. And again there's a big debate about it.

Yeah. So there's three parts to this reason right. Hmm.

Secondly, it would be substantial. Okay, it would exist in as in in a substantial way. Here and not to be one is to be the other.

Yeah, that's the problem. That's the. Okay.

And what it means here by substantial is you keep you got to keep going back to where he said. Does the. We are now impelled and said, does the country sovereign country exists separately as as as its own substantial entity.

You see what I mean. So, he did say something like that you know is it. Is it just that it's a aspect of the den crunchy of the refrigerator, or doesn't have its own separate existence, you see what I mean.

So hold on. This is the, this is what, because that in class, that's why I said, because so single, single substance, even though it is wrong in some cases. Yeah.

Yeah, still substantial and other cases within this argument about a chick, which means we want to see the other. Yeah, that's true. Yeah.

All right. You got you got me. And then, so, what is something.

The collection of the seven consciousnesses. Yeah, good. Which one is excluded.

Good. Which, which unexpected one is, is included. Well there's only one unexpected one.

[Speaker 2]
Manas Krishna.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, good.

[Speaker 2]
Negative consciousness.

[Speaker 1]
Good, good. Okay. Oh, this.

This say here means. At that time. Yeah, even when, even when.

Yeah, I was, I was like either life or time and I wasn't, I couldn't tell by the context which one. Yeah, it's interesting. So, does this guy in the formless realm.

Does he. Does he somehow not have any of the seven.

[Speaker 3]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. But wouldn't he always have a mental consciousness. I don't know.

Yeah, I don't know. Yeah, in substantial. Okay.

Anyway, it did a good job on the translation. Yeah. Okay.

Um, what's the second line. Yeah. Now the doc has three parts to it right.

And this part of the doc was that it was it's a, they drew for something. Yeah, Jason drew. So here, this says the second, this means the second part of the argument.

Yeah. Which means this group. If you do agree that the, I guess he's talking about crunchy as a sovereign right, I guess.

I'm sorry. No, he's talking about the regular country in a in a formless realm person, right. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. So if you say he has a separate. If you say, the his country exists substantially.

Then, they give you a cushion and she knew about her. Then he must have two countries.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, in his, in his mind. Yeah, there must be two crunches. Yeah.

His, his mind stream, right. Because we're still talking about the formless realm guy, I think.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah. Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, this. This. Depa day cheer means you agreed to that previously.

It doesn't dip a lot. It doesn't. It doesn't say in the desire room.

It just says because of your previous position. You see what I mean. Yeah, that's what I meant.

That's what he said earlier concerning desire room. What we said earlier. Yeah, no, the dope I hear is.

Oh, no, it means because first he said do you agree dinner. If you agree. Yeah, blah blah blah.

Yeah, agree blah blah blah. Why, because you agreed. So this isn't desire.

No, no, I don't think so. Otherwise it would be dip a lot or dip. Oh, yeah.

This stuff I read first it back to his dinner. Oh, okay. And it's a common, if you if you look up they're not near the bar.

I bet you'll hit 10 of them or something. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, we just had dip us like I got, I got slipped up with it.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, if there's no. If there's no common and no R on it and no L on it. It's probably, you know, an agreement.

Okay. Okay. But you did a good job.

It's a difficult section. Okay, let's go. You ready.

I got a treat for you from Adam. You guys are so lucky. We can't go on without spending five minutes on this.

Okay. This is Adam's old Dura text by who Adam. Sengawang Tashi.

Sengawang Tashi, good. Sengawang Tashi. That's why it's called, the book's nickname is?

[Speaker 2]
Say Dura.

[Speaker 1]
Say Dura. Yeah, and if you say, and by the way in Ben's text this morning, we're going to find out how the Dura started. Which is to me very exciting.

Very exciting. So there's certain language that people use word when they're talking about the question of Tsechik. Okay, there are certain idioms that people use, not idiots.

Okay. And I want you to just review those words because they're going to be prominent in today's reading. Okay.

So we're going to go real quick to Adam's. I have not checked his translation, but it's probably pretty good. Okay.

So please read this pink one. And Nick's going to check you. Okay.

Okay, cool. So we've been talking about Tsechik, right? Which means if to be one is to be the other.

And we're going to get a very interesting quotation from the Sakya Pandita. Which is also kind of significant, even in terms of the traditions in Tibet. So you're going to have the founder of the Gelugpa tradition is going to be working on a Sakya text because he likes it.

Okay, so that's a very, we're going to be in an interesting territory today. So Ranggilukla, who's Ranggilukla, by the way, for the Dura? What school?

[Speaker 2]
The logic school.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, and there's a strong crossover between the second school and the third school. There's even people who are called, you know, Sutras who tend towards the Mainomi and stuff like that. Okay, so a lot of what they believe in the second school is believed in the third school.

Okay, Ranggilukla, what's chi tsen you mean? Here it's the definition of a chi. Yeah, which is basically the definition of what for your text, for your discussion?

Tsechik. Tsechik. You see what I mean?

Got it? Yeah, like you mean like Rangtsen and chi tsen? In a way, but what I'm saying is to be one is to be the other.

Oh, because of chi tsen and Rangtsen, right? Kind of, yeah, but more here in the idea of set and subset, okay? The member of a set is Tsechik with the head of the set.

You see what I mean?

[Speaker 2]
Oh, so chi chedak.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, that's what we're in. We're chi chedak, yeah. The relationship between chedak and chi is what he's proposing, or someone's proposing, as the relationship between the seed part of the kunshi and the foundation part of the kunshi, okay?

Well, they're going to use, what I'm saying is they're going to use this language. Okay. You're going to get very confused if you don't remember these particular words, okay?

Okay, no problem. Okay, so chi tsen, here's the definition of chi as opposed to chedak. What do we, and I like to call it quality, right?

So the important word here is selwa, which normally means what? It normally means clear, but here it refers to the reason, something? No, oh, by the way, that's sometimes true of the Drupche chair, quality to be proven, and that's another unique usage of the word selwa.

Oh, it's a different one, okay. Yeah, this is another unique usage, which means member of a set. Oh.

Okay, so here, because the discussion you're having with Ngawang Pelman is going to get into selwas, and I don't want you to be confused, okay? So rang gi selwa la, and then the verb jesudroa, you're going to need it for Ngawang Pelman, okay? So selwa means member of the set, and jesudroa means what?

Yes, you're talking about the chi jesudroa.

[Speaker 3]
Yeah, the chi's follow after.

[Speaker 1]
No, that's what it doesn't mean, and that's why I brought you over here. Right. That's what it doesn't mean.

It should, how do you say that? It should be like the, it should, how do you say that? What does car do over Toyotas and Hondas and Fords?

Okay, yes, even when I was saying it, I was thinking like, jesudroa does mean literally follow after, but it's the opposite. It's exactly, exactly, exactly. And when I first read your Ngawang Pelman section, I got confused myself, which is why I'm helping you.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
So what's jesudroa mean now? It means that Christina Casco put subsumes in the. Yeah, subsumes is good, and that's what Adam used, okay?

So kind of, you just have to picture it as being the boss over its members, okay? Yeah. It lords over its members, okay?

So jesudroa means not jesudroa. Yeah, that's what I'm saying, and Ngawang Pelman's going to use both of these idioms, and if you don't remember, you're going to get confused, okay? I think that's enough of this.

I don't remember anything else. Ishla, can I ask a question about the use of subsume? Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Because usually subsume means it takes in other things, but isn't it the case that the chedraks are expressions of?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, you could say that. That's fine. You could say that.

So both are correct? Yeah, it just means, I don't know, lords over keeps coming up in my mind, you know? Kind of lords over them.

Okay, that's all the language I wanted you to remember. Now we can go back to Ngawang Pelman. I didn't remember that.

I never knew it. Oh, we did translate that part, I think. Oh, yeah.

I sat there in class. Okay. All right, so you translated these two pieces, and let me get my big cursor up here.

I'm so proud that I figured this out. I like to show everybody. Okay.

We got this. We got this. And then he says, What do you think the chepar means?

Already explained? The opposite. Oh, in order to indicate these truths, okay, it means it's leading into the next verse.

Oh, we're going to explain. No, it means in order to express what I just said, here's what Tsongkhapa said. You see what I mean?

[Speaker 2]
Oh, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, so that's what the chepar means. We had a tough one yesterday like that. It ended in a lot then.

Okay. And then he says, what? This you already translated.

This is verse 26 in your root text. Okay. Okay.

And then you go backwards. Okay. Why aren't the seeds and the refrigerator separate?

Why aren't they separate? And he says, Tsongkhapa says, and this den means one person. Yeah, within, in the context of one person, that would mean there was two kunshis.

Nice, there would be two kunshis, yeah. So he's now impelled in saying, what I've just taught you about the formless realm, dude, is expressed by Tsongkhapa here, where he says, if they were substantially separate, then there would be two kunshis. Okay.

All right. Keep going. Okay.

And I'm going to make a note here. It's really, okay, it kind of should have been kyurpe, all right. Bena, what's tempa when you spell it with a B?

Oh, the seeds before the refrigerator. Yeah, the seeds. The seeds in the refrigerator.

The kunshi, which is represented by the seeds in the refrigerator, okay. Or the kunshi, which is the seeds in the refrigerator. Good.

Yeah. Which is this, no, I'm sorry. The seeds as part of the refrigerator, the seeds as part of the kunshi, and then the refrigerator itself without the B, right.

And then make a kunshi, and misspelled badly, you know, bad misspelling here, le. Therefore, this le is van, T-H-A-N, okay. Then what does he say?

Therefore, you can't say... It's, therefore, it is, it cannot be expressed, like, he doesn't say this directly, but in either direction, that the kunshi is, the seeds are the kunshi, or that it's often the kunshi. Beautiful, beautiful, yeah.

You cannot describe the seeds as being either the refrigerator or different from the refrigerator, okay. And that's why we're spending so many pages on one idea, you know. He's saying the seeds cannot be called the refrigerator, and they can't be called something separate from the refrigerator either, okay.

For different reasons, right. All right. Please read, and Dr. Kramer wants to check you. NAM SHI DE'I NGRE BU, DBYIN PA'I NUS PA TZAM YIN PA'I, PHAG LA NEL GYI NUR BAR, THAG YOD TZAM THUG GNAS PA'I PHYIR TE Yeah, and this is really, really, really Ngawang Pelden's big contribution to the discussion, okay. This is why we took the time to go to Ngawang Pelden. Some of what he says, we already knew.

But this position of his is especially helpful in my mind, okay. The NUS PA TZAM, what's that mean? The ability of, or the reason why they can do things, or something.

He's describing bok chok as NUS PA TZAM.

[Speaker 2]
Like potency?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, it's just a potential. I like the word potential, okay. Wait, so here you're saying, you think it just means potential?

Earlier, he used the same phraseology, and we translated it slightly different. Yeah, well, I like the word potential, but you don't have to use it. You could say they are the simple ability.

You could call it ability, okay. Okay, he's defining seeds, okay. The seed is nothing more than the ability to GYIN GYIN GYIN.

Yeah, the seed is nothing more than the ability of the foundation consciousness to give results. Yeah, good, to squeeze out results. Okay, nice, nice, nice.

You start with the foundation consciousness, when you start with the refrigerator, and how do you define a seed? A seed is nothing more than the possibility, or the ability of the refrigerator to give a result. When the refrigerator gives a result, we call it a seed.

Okay, boy, you Romanian, Kristen, you got a lot of courage to translate this. Okay, wait, finish the sentence and then pick on me. Therefore, So, the essence of the sleeping potential?

Yeah, it's just a sleeping, it's just sleeping in potential. Yeah, and there's the first word of BAC CHAGS. So, he's kind of describing the word BAC CHAGS.

It's just sleeping in a dormant potential state. And that's all it consists of, more. That's what a seed is.

A seed is potential sleeping. A seed is sleeping potential. Okay, just like you guys an hour ago.

[Speaker 2]
No, I don't have potential then. Just sleeping.

[Speaker 1]
And then he says a beautiful word. And Norman Peldin loves to call seeds BDAG YOD. Yeah, just merely labels, just...

Yeah, good, good. How do you say that in the three qualities of the Mind-Only School? BDAG Yeah, it's just BDAG.

It's just a concept, really. It's just an idea. That's awesome.

Karmic seeds in your mind, which are creating your whole reality, they are just kind of made up things in themselves. Is it BISTOK, though, or is it BRTOK? The other one should have been BDAG.

Okay. And by the way, you see both spellings everywhere. I know, I'm messing with you.

BDAG YOD TZAM... Wait, finish the TZAM TU NE, and then give me your comment. YOD TZAM TU NE They exist as nothing more than BDAG YOD.

Yeah, because they are nothing more, in essence, than labels. Good. Great.

I mean, you guys should be falling on the floor. To me, this is one of the greatest sentences in Buddhism. All your karmic seeds are just kind of an idea that could do something in your mind if they felt like it.

Something like that. It's very interesting. And then he gives a beautiful example, which helps a lot.

Okay, here we go. I was going to get to pick on you first. Go ahead, pick on me.

I just realized, because when I translated JINPA last class, you said it was gives, and I said it was extract. But I think the reason is it extract, because it is gives. Because JINPA is gives with the AWO.

I mean, it is extract, like to extract tea from herbs or something. That's what that is. But when JINPA is used in medicine, when this herb is used in medicine, it almost always means to boil a herb until you extract its essence, right?

That's true. But if you read this as extract of the result, that would imply that the result already exists, and then it's pulling it out in the way that boiling extracts the essence of an herb. You see what I mean?

And I'm uncomfortable with that.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
So here it means spit out, okay?

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, okay. By the way, it's obviously related to the word to give, which has an SB, right? Okay.

I love this example. And maybe as a mind-only master for the rest of your life and teaching it to hundreds of thousands of people, hundreds or thousands of people, maybe hundreds. No, I mean, you are essentially going to spend the rest of your life explaining the mind-only school to people, and as you all will with your own texts.

So this sentence is really important for you, so I want you to translate it. Let's see how it goes. Okay.

So, for example, a barley seed. Nice. You didn't get trapped by the ne.

[Speaker 2]
No, there's a genitive after it.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, it's an apostrophe S. Yeah, great. God bless you.

A barley seed, which is... Oh, yeah, okay, here we go. For example, just like a barley seed that has the potential to put forth a sprout.

Yeah, or he wants to say it this way. Just like the potential to put forth a sprout, which exists on top of a barley seed. Yeah, yeah, nice.

Okay, yeah. So I don't know. I see it as kind of a sheen on the outside skin of a barley seed, and that's its ability to create a sprout, right?

And so the whole seed is not the nupa, right? The nupa is somehow in the seed, right? And that's how he wants us to think about the seed part of the foundation consciousness.

He desperately wants you to think of the seeds in the foundation consciousness. He wants you to think of the seeds in the refrigerator in the same way as the potential to grow barley in a barley seed. But isn't that just seeds?

No, I mean, I guess it is. No, it's not, because... Now listen, the potential is stuck here.

[Speaker 2]
Merely labeled?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, it's just a label. And I would say the seed is zedru. It's kind of more substantial.

You can hold a seed in your hand. You can look at a seed. You cannot see the nupa on a seed.

But it's there. If it's viable. If the seed is viable, yeah.

[Speaker 3]
He did say in the last sentence, though, that that is what the seed is. That the seed is the potential.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, but... Oh yeah, that's kind of a bad example. I'm calling the barley seed that you hold in your hand, I guess I'm calling it the whole kunchi with the ten and the tenba.

[Speaker 3]
I mean, it also feels like you or we're trying to reconcile this with the definition that we got in words last class, which is that the seed is what happens when the result comes out, as opposed to that the seed is something about the ability for the result to come out.

[Speaker 1]
Well, I think it's the latter. I think he wants to say it's the latter.

[Speaker 3]
He does. But Je Tsongkapa, what last class said, this seed is what we call it when.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, that's true. You can't call it a seed until it does that. That's true.

Yeah, which means it couldn't be takyo before. I got that. By the way, by the time we finish this page, you should be able to clearly say the paradox.

Why the seed part of the kunchi is not... To be it is not to be the seed, and to be it is to be the seed. You see what I mean?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
The goal of this discussion is... Yeah, keep that in mind. All right.

And by the way, in here, in his lower middle way text, it's like a Tathagata for Parchin, right? Noam Peldin is going through Tsongkapa's root text on kunshi verse by verse. He throws them in verse by verse, and he says, that's what Tsongkapa was talking about when he said the next verse.

You see what I mean? So if you look at the verse, he's following the root text. He's almost giving a verse by verse commentary on this section of your book, which is weird, right?

It's like he couldn't help himself. Okay. So please read verse 27 from Tsongkapa, which he says backs up what he just said.

Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, and I would just help you with the lay.

[Speaker 1]
I would say what its relationship would have been. Okay. Relative to the ten, okay, ten lay here.

Relative to kunshi as the refrigerator, okay, the seeds are neither denyi nor shen. Yeah, it cannot be described. Nice, nice, nice.

Yeah, it's impossible to express the fact either that the seeds are themselves the ten or other than the ten. Good, good, good. Yeah, we cannot, no one could ever say, therefore, whether the seeds are the foundation, are the refrigerator itself, or they are something different than the refrigerator, other than the refrigerator, okay?

By the way, let's just say the punchline now. This is true only if you think of the seeds as zesudrupa. Yeah, substantial.

Yeah, and if they were substantial, you couldn't say they were the kunshi, the refrigerator, and you couldn't say they were something different from the refrigerator, because they wouldn't exist. See, that's the punchline, okay? If they had some substantial existence, they couldn't be the refrigerator, and they couldn't be other than the refrigerator, because to be other than the refrigerator, you have to exist.

So the problem really is the definition in people's minds of the seeds, because this whole section is basically like, the seeds you're thinking about are impossible to exist, but the seeds we're talking about can be part of the kunshi while not being part of the kunshi, because they're not substantial in the way you're thinking of seeds. Exactly, and that's what the third line says. Yeah, they're only, they're name only.

Yeah, they're just made up in your mind, okay? You can't describe them as being stuff, which is in the kunshi, or which is out of the kunshi. I'm sorry, you can't describe them as being stuff, which is the kunshi, or which is separate from the kunshi, because they're not stuff, okay?

And by the way, that had to be the punchline all along, right? Because generally, you either have to be the same or different, right? Every existing thing in the universe is either the same as every other existing thing or different from it, okay?

So if you say, I'm thinking of something, word, which is neither the same as or different from an existing thing, then what I'm talking about has to be what? It has to be non-existing, got it? I'll say it again.

Every object in the universe is either the same as or different from every other existing object, okay? If I say to word, I'm thinking of something which is neither the same as or different from a certain existing object in the universe, then the thing I'm thinking of cannot exist. Right.

Boy, that was a slow write. Because I don't... yeah, I feel like there's an exception in there somewhere, but I can't think of it, so I'm just...

Okay. Let me know next week. Therefore, this whole seed thing is just made up.

They don't have any substantial existence. It's very interesting. Okay.

A seed... well, first of all, he was very against thinking of seeds as something physical, right? That was easy.

In your mind, right? And now he's got the seeds being just something, just an idea in your mind, okay? All right.

Here comes a complainer. Okay. Yeah, here's our jesudro, okay?

Aren't you happy I reviewed it with you? Okay. Somebody says...

By the way, I'm going to erase this comment. I'm not even sure it's right anymore. Right.

Okay. If something... Here, you see, because he has used the language of jesudro, we have to be talking about sets and subsets.

Jesudro is never used in a case where they are dunjik. One and the same? Yeah, it's always referring to different hierarchical levels.

Okay? You never say, we talk about jesudros over duje.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
They can be zejing.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
To be one is to be the other. So, to be one is to be the other relationship. When it goes only one way, we call it jesudro.

Like car and Toyota.

[Speaker 2]
Right, what we discussed earlier.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, good. Okay, so he says... Now, some other guy comes up and says, if something were such that to be it was to be suk, we don't know which suk yet, okay?

Then there's no way it could subsume sounds, smells, tastes, etc. Yeah, I think it's...

[Speaker 2]
There's a caliper here, right?

[Speaker 1]
Well, given that he's talking about smells, tastes, he's got to be talking about visual form, you see what I mean? Yeah, because he's going through the list and... Yeah.

Okay, let's provisionally say he's talking about, okay? Why do you say suk when there's only one left? Yeah, that's pretty lazy, isn't it?

Yeah, that's pretty lazy. That's a cute, cute comment, Warren. Yeah.

Suk dan zejing yina. So, what's that say? Suk dan zejing yina.

What's that mean? He's saying, okay, we're saying it's visual form, seems like it's the case. Visual form...

Oh, I think the ze here is substantial or... No, okay, here. If to be something is to be visible form.

If to be something is to be visible form, okay? Like blue, okay? Blue is suk dan zejing, okay?

Blue. And round is suk dan zejing, okay? But there's another possibility here.

What's that? Can you guess? You can say the members of visible form, right?

Red, round, square. But when you use the word zejing, and you don't use the word jesudro, what's another possibility? To be one is to be the other.

Yeah, both ways. Suk surungwa. Suk surungwa.

What's that? Suk surungwa. Something that is appropriate to be called form.

Good, visible form. Visible form. I should say visible form, right?

[Speaker 2]
Okay, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, okay. Because we want to make sure we're not talking about suk in terms of the first of the five heaps, right? Okay.

So, if you're saying that... So, kachig nare. Some guy comes along and says, if to be something is to be visible...

So, you're saying ze here is just something? Zejing. Sorry, no.

Cheek. I'm talking about the... Well, I'm just...

No, it's just understood. It's not stated here, okay? If anything were such that to be it was to be visible form, okay?

Then it could never be the set which has as its members sounds, smells, tastes, okay? Is that a true statement?

[Speaker 3]
That is a true statement, which makes me think...

[Speaker 1]
I think it is a true statement, yeah.

[Speaker 3]
Which makes me think that this is not visible form.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, that's a good point. Yeah. Well, it has to be if it's right, right?

Because it's kachig. So, yeah, I think... Let's see where we go.

I think you're right, Ben. I think you're right. Because the whole discussion is about physicality.

Physicalness, physical. Let's see where it goes. We'll put here, or physical stuff in general.

Okay? Right? Yeah.

Okay, good. So, but you got the feeling about Zajcik and Jezebel, right? Yeah, but I have a technical question.

Wait, let me say one more thing. When the relationship is on the same hierarchical level as it is between impermanent and produced state, then we never use the language Jezebel.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
But we do use the language Zajcik. Understood. Okay?

And when the relationship is Jezebel, we also use the language Zajcik. Okay? Going upwards, but not going downwards.

[Speaker 2]
Right, physicality.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, okay, good. What were you going to say? Okay, the double shea here, right?

Oh, that's just going from the front side of the page to the back side of the page. Yeah, just ignore it. Okay, because it's a list.

When you see it after a page number, just ignore it. The asterisk comma space comma is the standard first character on the first line. Okay, that's what I was wondering.

Yeah, good question. Okay. Okay.

And by the way, we taught Gopher to ignore it. Yeah, the comma thing. Yeah, the whole ornament here.

Okay, maybe we should have stripped it out. I don't know. Okay.

You know why I left that stuff in? It's because my Sanskrit teacher and Dwight Whitney were statisticians, and they would do studies visually, manually, of how many ornaments are in a text and stuff like that. To them it was important, but I don't know.

Okay. There you go. Khandele.

Good. What's that, Khandele?

[Speaker 2]
The book we're...

[Speaker 1]
The book we're translating. Translating. Yeah, the commentary on difficult points, right?

It's his auto-commentary, okay? I think. I believe that's what he's talking about.

Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Could be something next?

[Speaker 1]
No, because then it would be in poetry, right? But here we go. The auto-commentary, Tsongkapa's auto-commentary, which we're trying to crack.

Kha Chi. Some dude comes and says, DOR NA'I SA BON NAM, PEN GZAN YIN MI DGOS TE Oh yeah, this was the guy who said, It's not correct what you said, that if the seed part of the... If to be the seeds was to be the refrigerator, then those seeds for all five realms would be mixed up.

You see what I mean? And somebody comes along and says, No, they would not be mixed up. And we say, Why?

And he says, Because they resemble the relationship between functioning things, and I don't know, you could say here physical things, right? Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
If the relationship between two things is hierarchical, right, as Chi and Chid are, does that mean you could still have five discrete seeds for the five realms in a seed, right? And don't forget that if this guy describes the relationship as hierarchical, between what and what? He's not talking about the five seeds.

[Speaker 2]
He's talking about physicality and...

[Speaker 1]
No, that's his example. That's his parallel example.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, he's talking about the kunshi and the seeds, right?

[Speaker 1]
Nice, nice, nice, nice, nice, nice, nice. Yeah. He's talking about the refrigerator and the seeds, okay?

He says the relationship between the refrigerator and the seeds is the relationship of a Chi to a Chid.

[Speaker 2]
Right, so...

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, which means if you are kunshi as a seed, you are just a subset of kunshi as the refrigerator.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Nice. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
That's a kachik, right?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, yeah. I wish it wasn't, right? Therefore, the five seeds, the five potentials to create the five realms which exist in all of our minds, which is a frightening idea already, right?

It's kind of uncomfortable that somebody points out that right now we have potentials for all five realms already in our mind. We prefer to think if we didn't kill somebody, we wouldn't have them. But it's too late.

Yeah, okay. All right. That's time, Geshe-la.

Okay, okay. And then, actually, we get into the questions that necessitated us going to Ngawang Pelden, okay? Then we get into the tough questions.

We haven't even gotten into them yet, okay? And in the middle of those tough questions... Hang on.

In the middle of those tough questions comes this beautiful verse from Rikte, which is the masterpiece on logic written by... Sakya? The Sakya Pandita, who's very important for our lineage.

And he's going to talk about sets and subsets and stuff. He's going to take that discussion to dopas, which means when you reverse all that is not a tree, what do you end up with? When you reverse all which is not a tree, what do you end up...

Christian, I can't believe you're doing this. Okay, got it, you guys? Somehow, the discussion of what happens when you reverse all that is not a tree is relevant to kunshi, okay?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
And we're going to get there next time. Yay! Sashi!

[Speaker 2]
Jigpas.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, awesome word. I guess words text got the award as the most difficult text this time. Utpalas is close.

What kind of person would make Geshe-la do both of them in the same morning? I don't know. I don't know who did that.

It must be we each projected it from something we did to torture others. It must have been the nominal seeds in my kunshi. Okay, Nick, what's happening?

Thank you, Geshe-la. Thank you, word. Take a five-minute break, and we will come back and get to Utpala's text.

[Speaker 2]
Yay! Yay, Utpala!

[Speaker 1]
And then she'll do a Q&A after that.