Нагарджуна, курс 1 — Мудрость Арьи Нагарджуны, курс 1: Восемь невидимых (2018, Аризона), занятие 5

[Speaker 1]
He's made his famous opening lines, eight invisibles, then the next verse he gave you four choices about where things come from. So, where is he gonna go? And then he gives you the different kinds of causes.

What's the connection, by the way, between the second verse and the third verse? The second verse gives you four choices. Things come from themselves, things come from something else, and then the fourth verse, Buddha suddenly jumps in and presents four kinds of conditions.

Why did Buddha interrupt the show? Yeah, good, yeah, but Buddha taught those four kinds of conditions to demonstrate how things come from something else, okay? So, that's the connection between the two verses, okay?

So, oftentimes, be careful, these Nagarjuna verses. Many of the verses are false, because they are the other guy. So, people quote Nagarjuna, and Nagarjuna said, bla bla, no, you forgot to read the first ...

it says, the other guy said ... you see what I mean? It's very common.

People quote Nagarjuna to prove something, but it's actually Nagarjuna quoting the wrong guy, okay? So, be careful, alright? So, really that third verse is kind of ...

the other guy is presenting the four kinds of conditions that Lord Buddha taught, and he said, Lord Buddha said things come from something else. He said it four times, four different ways, okay? That's maybe why they seem to overlap a little bit, like number one and number four, condition number one and condition number four, they're the same thing, just said it in a different way, okay?

Alright, so I ... Choney Lama gives you a structure for the first chapter. By the way, I know many many people tried to translate this book, and just forget it.

It's ridiculous, it's not wrong, it's ... it's like ... I don't know, somebody very drunk translating or something.

It's all wrong. They don't understand that he has a plan. There's a reason why ...

like he quotes the Buddha suddenly, with those four kinds of conditions, there's a reason. He's trying to explain the third verse, the last verse, okay? So, you have to see the structure, and for that you need a commentary, and there are great commentaries.

There are ... for ... for a thousand ...

two thousand years, more than two thousand years, okay? Alright, and we're going to talk about some of them, alright? MANG DU MTHONG NAS MA SUNG ...

MANG DU MTHONG NAS THOG PA ... no, no, that's THOG PA, I'm talking THOG PA. THOG PA means ...

that's MTHOG PA. THOG PA means, I fear my explanation would get too long if I teach you all the other commentaries. THOG, MANG DU THOG, very famous excuse in scripture.

Okay, not really. So, I want to tell you a little bit about the strategy from the third verse to the end, okay? He has a strategy, and the reason I wrote a homework question is because Choney Lama explained it, but I couldn't figure it out.

I was nervous about getting the homework done, and I couldn't think straight. So, I said slow down Geshe Michael. Whenever you can't understand, slow down.

I'm like, slow down, figure out his structure. He has a structure, he tells you the structure, so slow down and read it. That's why he put it there, okay?

So, he has five steps for the rest of the chapter, okay? And it's actually six, because number three has two parts, okay? So, here we go.

Step number one, he quotes the four kinds of conditions from Buddha, okay? He quotes the other guy quoting the Buddha. This is the structure for the chapter, okay?

For the rest of the chapter. If you don't have enough homework questions, go to the structure, okay? Number two, he puts all of them together and shows that they have no nature of their own, and we're going to talk about nature I think tomorrow.

What's it mean to have a nature of your own, okay? He puts them all together, and he shows they don't have any nature, okay? Number three, he wants to discuss the process of the sprout coming out, okay?

So, the process, the coming out of the sprout, in English it's a ING word, gerun, the coming of the sprout, okay? He wants to see how the sprout is coming from the seed. So, the emphasis, when you say coming, is not on the starting of the coming, and not on the ending of the coming, it's on the middle of the coming, okay?

And that's going to be important in the next chapter, where we discuss coming and going, okay? So, there's three parts to a sprout that you can think about. One is when it first pops out, one is while it's growing, and one is when the tree finish growing, right?

Then it starts to die, right? Okay, so, when he's looking at the process of growing, okay, that's the middle part, right? The growing part, before the tree is ten feet higher, you know, while it's growing, he wants to look at that, and he looks at that in two parts, okay?

This is 3A and 3B, right? 3A and 3B. Number 3A, what is the process of growing, you know, which is ...

the tree is involved with, okay? The tree has some relationship with the growing time, with the growing time, not the planting time, not the finish time, but during the growing time, something's happening between the tree and the growing. He's gonna look at that, 3A, okay?

3B, how does that middle period while the tree is growing lead into the final period, you see? So, it's kind of like, how does the growing lead into the final tree, okay? So, he's gonna concentrate on the end of the growing, before ...

the end of the growing part, before the grown part, got it? You okay? Everyone confused?

It took me like two hours, okay? Alright, number four, from the seed's point of view, he's gonna talk about how does it first start the result, how does it first start the growing, okay? So, he's going to the front of the growing time, how does the front of the growing time start, how does the seed first crack open, before anything comes out, you know?

What happens at that moment, okay? From the seed's point of view, why does he ... okay, for $50, everybody wakes up, why does he say from the seed's point of view, ah, I saved my money.

The first verse talked about the result's point of view, right? Or the second verse? Second verse.

The second verse talked about things from the result's point of view, okay? We finished that already. Now we're talking about results from the seed's point of view, okay?

Got it? Okay, so from the seed's point of view, how does the thing start, okay? And then, we're on number five, right?

This is cool. He says, I'll show you why each one of those four causes aren't really causes. He goes through them one by one, okay?

So, one, two, three, four, are all general about all four. Then he says, now let me show you why each one is not real seed, and then he talks about cause condition, and then he talks about object condition, and then he talks about just-after-it condition, and then he talks about a self-sufficient condition, okay? So, he's gonna wipe them out one by one, and that's where your homework question ends.

There's also a dessert, okay? At the end of the chapter, he goes back to the four, he does a cute little wrap-up, it's not that different from the beginning of the four, okay? You good?

[Speaker 2]
Alright, let's keep going.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, mm-hmm, homework question two. I'll just read the question, okay? Alright.

With all four kinds of conditions, with all four, Arya Nagarjuna has a problem, and he says, I don't like it. I have a problem when you say the tree is growing from the seed. It's uncomfortable for me.

There's a very common expression in the monastery when a teacher is teaching, they'll say, DE PO RANG MI MTHU, they go like this with their hand, DE PO RANG MI MTHU, you know, this author says that, but I'm not so comfortable with it, okay? I have a problem when you say the tree is growing from the seed, okay? And then he goes to DMIGS RKYEN, he goes to object factor, and he repeats it, okay?

Because the first thing he said kind of relates more to the first cause. I have a problem when you say the tree is growing from the seed. Then he says, I also have a problem when you say that the awareness of blue is growing from your eye, okay?

Your eye just detect color and shape, it doesn't think, the eye cannot think. The eye just called a ... called a mind, you see?

Hey, we got something out here. What? It's kind of like, you know, sky.

It's the same as the sky. Oh, you mean it's big? No, no, I'm talking about color.

Oh, it's blue. So, the mind makes those decisions. The eye just calls the mind and says, we got something out here, okay?

We got something out here. So, he says I have a problem with saying that when you look at blue, you get ... it triggers an awareness in your mind, okay?

I have a problem with saying the awareness of blue comes from seeing blue. I have a problem with that, and I have a problem with saying that the tree is growing from the seed. It's growing, because now we're focusing on the process, okay?

I have a trouble with that. I have a problem when you say the tree is growing from the seed, or the awareness of blue is growing from the blue. I have trouble with that, it's ...

it's not so comfortable for me. I feel uncomfortable when you talk like that, okay? Then he quotes a very, very thing in Buddhism, very famous thing in Buddhism, okay?

And I just threw it in there to the question, okay? It says explain what he means when he says ... okay, and what he's gonna say next is connected to the answer to the question, okay?

Ready? Very, very famous thing. Ready?

It's hard, hehe. As the result approaches growing, as the result, as the tree approaches growing, the seed approaches ending, okay? As this tree approaches growing, the seed approaches ending, and in fact those two must be simultaneous.

They must be simultaneous, they must happen at the same time. It's a little bit ... your question ...

you know, where do they overlap, okay? As the result, as the tree approaches growing, the seed of the tree approaches ending. The ending of the seed, and the growing of the tree, first growing of the tree, final ending of the seed, must be simultaneous, if there's to be contact.

If there's no contact, then you know, apple seeds can make pigs, or anything, there's no contact, okay? Got it? You alright?

Okay. So, two things are simultaneous. As the result, as the tree approaches growing, and the seed is approaching ending, right?

Over time, like if it takes two weeks for the tree to come out, those processes happen at the same time, okay? The process of the seed ending, and the process of the tree coming out, are happening at the same time, okay? That's over two weeks, or three weeks, or one month, okay?

Got it? And at the end of the process, at the end of both process, the growth of the result, and the completion of the stopping of the cause, happen at the same time, okay? The last moment of each happens ...

sorry, the last moment of the ending of the cause, and the first moment of the finished tree, happen at the same time, okay? Those two things happen at the same time, okay? Okay.

These two things are happening at the same time, and these two things are happening at the same time. These two things are single instance. These two things are going on for a couple weeks or something, okay?

This one is the first one I mentioned. The whole ending of the seed, which takes time, and the whole coming out of the tree, which takes time, those happen during the same period, okay? And, the end of the processes happen at the same time.

When the seed finally dies, the tree has grown. Then you have a tree. Then you have a full tree, okay?

At that moment, you have a real tree, okay? Got it? Now, here's the homework answer, okay?

Just turn on your iPhone. If we think carefully, and I always put that at the front of the answer because it means ... you know, if you don't think carefully, everything's fine.

The tree grew through from the seed Geshe-la, what's the problem? You know, I have a problem. Melissa's baby is growing from some seed.

What's the problem, okay? It's normal. Don't get all freaked out, you know?

But, if we think more carefully, we can see that it's not really correct to say the tree is growing up, because during the growing, there's no tree yet. It doesn't have leaves, it doesn't have fruits, it doesn't have branches. How can you say the tree is growing when there's no tree yet?

Got it? You know, we say the baby is growing, but it's not a baby yet, Michael. You'll know when it's a baby.

They'll be all night in the hospital. I went to Aura's birth, it was me and Bea, and we stopped after 48 hours, we went home. But, it's not a ...

you can't say the baby's growing, it's not a baby yet. It's a baby when it comes out, you see what I mean? So, we all say the baby's growing, we all say the tree is growing, but it's wrong.

We're all making some big mistake, got it? Okay? If it's true that the end of the cause and the growing of the tree take the same time period, or happening in ...

because when you say the growing of a tree, what you mean is, it's not a tree until it finishes growing. It has fruits and stuff, okay? You alright?

Okay. We cannot be seeing what we think we see, and the tree must actually be coming from a different place than the seed, okay? The book must be coming from a different place than the pen, okay?

It looks like the book comes from the pen, it looks like the movie comes from a Hollywood studio, but really it's coming from your seeds, okay? It's coming from your seeds. What you think you see, the tree is growing from the seed, is impossible, not possible.

There is no tree, okay? And once there's a tree, there's no ... seed!

What do you mean the tree is growing from the seed? They didn't happen ... there's no overlap at all, okay?

By the time you have a tree, there's no seed. While you have a seed, there's no tree. How can you say the seed is growing from the tree?

What's wrong with you? Oh, Geshe-la I'm writing it on my homework. Are you?

Then, you know, the natural thing is ... so Geshe-la, I mean by the way, when you talk to your friends about this stuff, they're like, oh that's very interesting, okay? If you don't ...

if someone offers, like Jerome offers to cook you something, which he always does and you should take it, they say, you want me ... you want to try this new dish? I'm like, yeah, this new Sicilian dish, right?

And I'm like, yeah, I want to taste that. And then he ... afterwards he says, how'd you like it Geshe-la?

And you say, that was interesting! What? What's the question interesting?

Yeah, there's ... there's 27 ways to do it, and ... and ...

the reason there's 27 is that different ones are attractive to different students. So, you ... if you're lower Hinayana, you just take one and you say, that's more attractive, I don't need the others.

If you're a Bodhisattva, you say, teach me the 27, because maybe I can help weird people, okay? Like, number 26 fits like three people in the world. Teach it to me, I might be on a plane with them someday, you know?

Okay? Yeah, perfect, perfect. In fact, it's going to be hard for me to keep them separate, that's part of my job.

I shouldn't tell you the chapter on time while I'm teaching you the chapter on conditions, but it's hard ... the temptation is very strong to go there. Okay, alright, next homework question ...

you guys okay? I'll give you a pee-pee break, a juice break after this one, okay? Deal?

Deal, okay. The growing of the understanding, and the ending of the class happened. So, that was talking about the process of growing, that was talking about the process of growing, right?

And now we're talking about how it leads into the result, right? We're talking about ... I forget what number it was ...

how it leads into the result, at the end of the growing, before you hit the result. How does it ... how does the process lead into the result, okay?

Here's the question on the homework. Someone responds to this train of thought by saying, why talk so much Arya Nagarjuna? We know that when we see an apple, there must be an eyeball working as a cause which helps create the perception of the apple.

If I see an apple, it proves I have a eyeball, okay? Then, when you see the result, you know the cause must have been causing the result to grow, that's all. Why blah blah?

Stop blah blah. For some reason, I think they blame this on the Sutra school. Now, maybe Nick can give us a report tomorrow, I don't know.

Anyway, I don't know why. You ready? Nagarjuna says ...

what's he saying? You can't talk about a thing growing until it's finished, okay? Like it's ...

you can't say the tree is growing, or the baby is growing, before the baby comes ... before the baby's a baby. You see what I mean?

Got it? It's weird to talk about the tree growing. By the way, what if the ...

what if there's no water and the thing dies? Will you say the tree died? Will you say the tree died?

Before the tree came ... grew. You can't say the tree died, there was no tree yet.

You can say the future tree died, or the tree that was ... you know, the thing that was going to become a tree, that's okay, maybe that's okay. Darn, you can say that, but really it's wrong to say the tree died before the tree grew.

Okay, got it? After it grew, it can die. That's what happens to trees in Arizona.

Okay, alright. I remember when I went to Princeton, it wasn't the school that impressed me, it was the trees. Okay.

Okay, that is, we can say a tree is growing. The reason we say a tree is growing, what we really mean is, at the end of the growing, there's a tree. Okay?

When we say ... the translators must have a headache, I don't know. You're doing okay?

You're amazing, we should give them a hand again. Wow. Okay, when we say, I'll repeat, for me and for you, when we say a tree is growing, we can say that, because at the end of the process, there's a finished tree.

Okay? You should only be able to say a tree is growing after the growing. I'll say it again.

I'll say it again. Yeah, I know. You should only be able to say a tree is growing after it finished growing, because there's no tree yet before that.

Okay? There's ... by the way, I mean, I don't know if he's going to go into it, there's something wrong with human language.

There's something wrong with human language. The word me and you is already a mistake. Every language has tenses, conjugations, plural, singular, it's all wrong.

People say, God never talks. I say, yeah, you ... because you can't ...

none of his vocabulary is in your vocabulary. You know, I never heard Vajrayogini talk to me. They don't know how to talk to you.

Tree grows ... what do you mean? What do you mean tree grows?

They're like, you can't say that. Okay? Anyway ...

maybe the reason they don't talk to us more often is that our languages are so completely different. Okay. Now, it's not so bad with a direct cause.

Okay, don't forget there's two kind of causes traditionally, direct cause and indirect cause. If you're not sure about it, ask Adam. He spent like six months on it.

We were all so fed up with direct causes and indirect causes. We're like, what's the next subject? We were going to skip a couple pages translation and see if anybody noticed.

Okay. Direct cause, seed. Indirect cause, the guy who came and planted the seed.

Okay? Direct cause, the seed. Okay?

Indirect cause, the guy ... I don't know, a couple weeks before, who came and planted the seed. Okay?

It's ... now, question. If you say Geshe-la, if you ...

you know, if you say Nagarjuna, give me a break. You know, we can say the tree's growing. It's ...

technically it's not correct. Okay? We can say the tree is growing from the tree's seed.

Okay? Don't hassle us. Okay, technically, there's no tree until the end.

So, we understand that. But, you know, somebody has to water the tree, even though there's no tree. Got it?

So, we just say stuff like that. We know it's not exact, but otherwise who's gonna water the tree? You know?

You're gonna say, can you go out and water the potential? They're like, what? It's hard enough to hire people at Diamond Mountain.

Can you go out and water the potential? So, give us a break, you know? It's gonna be here soon.

You know? There's a stick coming up, it's gonna have leaves very soon. We can talk about a tree growing.

Then Nagarjuna says, no you can't. What about indirect causes? You're gonna say the guy planted a tree?

Is that what you're gonna say? Like, a year before? Is that what you want me to do?

You want me to say the guy planted a tree? Are you ... is that what you want me to do?

Okay? Like, six months before the tree starts out of the seed, you want me to call the guy a tree planter? You ...

you have a problem. You can't wait till the end of the process to call the seed a tree seed, right? What about ...

what about the guy who ... who brought ... who ...

what about the guy who picked the seed out of the apple last year? Okay? Is it a tree seed then?

Okay? Is that guy a tree planter? Okay?

The indirect cause of the tree, that's not there yet. Okay? Direct cause, I can see it, you know?

We can wait a week, you can say something wrong for a week, until some leaves come out, you know? We could call ... we could say the tree grew, okay?

Go water the tree, you know? That's okay, but what about the guy who planted the tree seed? You know?

What about the tree planter?

[Speaker 2]
You know?

[Speaker 1]
They say, right? They say, go plant trees today, like in China you have like ... holiday, Nicholas likes this part.

He's so handsome, I'm gonna get in trouble. Yeah, you can say ... okay, got it?

You alright? Did you hear enough about this question? Okay.

Alright. So, Nagarjuna's conclusion is, it's not really acceptable to talk about a thing growing that isn't there yet. There's something wrong.

That's a sign that things aren't coming from where we thought they're coming from. Maybe the tree doesn't come from the tree seed, which cannot be a tree seed anyway. Got it?

Maybe you plant a little piece of carbon, and then, you know, a couple of months later, a stick comes out, and maybe they're not connected at all, and maybe they're both coming from you. Got it? Nagarjuna, okay, I understand, that's really cute, but what's the use of it?

You know, why ... why are you spending two weeks in Arizona? You realize how you're gonna talk to your family when you go home?

What'd you learn in Arizona? There's no tree seeds. What else did you learn?

You can't plant a tree. Then they're like, oh, are you gonna go again? Oh yeah!

The point is, you can change the husband yelling in the kitchen without talking to him, okay? No direct contact between your voice and your husband, okay? You can make your ...

if you're smart, if you're a true follower of Nagarjuna, you can make your husband to wash the dishes for the rest of your life, without discussing it. Now all the women are like, what? Say that one again.

The men have to listen too, or else you're gonna be stuck washing dishes. Got it? Easier way to get what you want, okay?

Easier way to get happiness, okay? The idea that talking to your husband will make him stop calling you phantom is mistaken, okay? And you can try it for the rest of your life, and it will just give you gray hair, or no hair, okay?

Don't ... give up this old system. Use a new system.

Oh, it's coming from how I treat other people, okay? I should stop yelling at my kids, okay? Got it?

Stop coming to Geshe Michael and say, can you solve our problems with this person, you know? Look at my shirt, it says, shut up and do the four steps. Let me translate my book, okay?

Alright, take a break, pee-pee break. We'll do questions when we get back, okay? You're first, okay?

Alright, pee-pee break. Juice break, juice break. By the way, I remind you that we're gonna have a traditional, incomprehensible Sojong ceremony afterwards, if you'd like to watch it.

It's all in Tibetan, you don't understand anything, we don't either, but we will look very good. Let's do tomorrow. I'm afraid we cannot finish, yeah.

So, two things I promised you tomorrow, the technical meditation information and the question, okay? Mingtian. Okay, homework question number four.

Nagarjuna is focusing on the idea of a cause at the beginning of the seed, of the spout coming out, okay? We talked about the process, the tree is growing, the problem with the tree is growing, okay? But what's the problem with saying that the spout first came out of the cause, okay?

What's the problem there? And by the way, I'm not reading you the verses, but this is how the verses go, okay? And when I have time, when people give me time to translate it, you can see the verses, alright?

And I can do a nice job. Okay, what's the problem at the beginning of the process when you say the seed kicked off the growing, the seed triggered the growing, then what's the problem with that? And I'm going to read you, you okay?

Exactly, so here we go. I'm going to read you the answer, if you can write fast enough, but I'm going to say it fast. The Arya points out that if the result were absent at the time of the seed, if the result, if the tree is not there when the seed is planted, okay?

If this tree is not there when the seed begins to do its thing, then you could never call the seed a cause, okay? If there's no tree, there's no tree cause, okay? Because it didn't do anything yet.

Right now it's just a piece of stuff, okay? Yeah, he's gonna have such cool seeds, you got to bring him every nāgārjuna course. There's four more, this is number one, every fall, okay?

We need an airplane, that's all we need. Okay, if the result were present at the time of the seed, then the seed would have nothing to do, okay? If the tree is there when the seed starts doing its thing, then why should the seed do anything?

Let the seed retire, okay? Let the seed have a break. But, if there's no tree when the seed starts doing its thing, well how can you call it a cause?

There's no result, okay? That one is not very fun. I just put it in there because I needed a couple homework questions, okay?

But that is the next verse, that is the next verse. That's an easy one, I don't like easy ones. Okay, let's go to the next homework question.

Now he's gonna go and cancel each one of the four kinds of causes one by one. He's gonna pick on them one by one, and I thought we would have some fun, okay? So, maybe we don't finish the homework, but that would be a pity.

But, I'm gonna read you something from Wordsmith's text, okay? He's one of our translators, he's a member of our translator team. He lives in Guadalajara where all the cool people live.

He's translating a famous book by Tsongkapa about the Mind-Only School. Tsongkapa explains all the Mind-Only School, okay? Ooh, I agree.

Because, when Tony Lama explains Nagarjuna attacking these four kinds of causes, okay? And maybe we don't finish the homework today, okay? Maybe we do some of it tomorrow, okay?

Sorry, I don't know how we're gonna manage that. They get it back, and I don't know, Tim will figure it out. His hair is getting more and more like this.

I'm just jealous. So, when Tony Lama attacks the four, he doesn't say the four are wrong, he says the definition of the four is wrong, okay? The definition of the four is wrong, okay?

So, this class, I'm just hopelessly going deeper, okay? And I know I will lose some of you by next time we meet. I'm okay with that.

I'm okay with that. But I'll tell you, if you can stay, if you can come back next time, it's deep, okay? If you want something fluffy, come to DCI number two, or something like that.

I can do that, but it's kind of frustrating for me. I would like to have a group of tough people who want to go deeper, okay? Because my Lama said, when you go to the dollar store, take a hundred dollars.

It means, when you go to teach a one-hour class, have a hundred hour classes in your head, okay? Alright? So, I'm going deeper.

If some of you want to go to the dollar store with a dollar, that's okay. Okay, so, he attacks the definition, and he doesn't have a chapter that I know about yet about definitions, but if it was me I would have 28 chapters, and I would put a chapter about definition. So, I want to talk about the definition of definition, and the emptiness of definition, okay?

Because he doesn't attack the four causes, he attacks their definition, okay? And I think it's significant, I think there's a reason, okay? So, I think if you understand a little bit more about how we say a thing is a thing, then it's another emptiness, it's another pariksha, it's another examination you can do, okay?

Alright? So, we're gonna slide over to the definition of definition, alright? Because he attacks their definition, and in English, I don't know about Chinese, or Spanish, or German, but we say he's an idiot by definition, you see what I mean?

We say by definition, and then what's that mean by definition? It means if you go look up idiot in the dictionary, what it says there fits this guy perfectly, he's over there right? Fits perfect, okay?

Then we say, you know, nobody made him an idiot, he's just an idiot by his nature, by nature, okay? So, we have by nature, which we're gonna study tomorrow, and we have by definition, which we're gonna study today, okay? By definition, in English means, if you go to the dictionary and you look up what is idiot, you know, that stupid thing, then it fits perfect, okay?

Then we can say by definition he's idiot, okay? Alright, I can only use these words until tomorrow, because my partner's coming, and she doesn't allow me to use these words, so I'm trying to use all of them today. Okay, so what's the ...

and this is in Adam's text, Adam is translating an unbelievable text, it's all the stuff you need to know for emptiness. His book is called The Key to Emptiness, okay? Say, BDAG YOD CHOS GSUM TSANGS BDAG YOD CHOS GSUM TSANGS, TSE NYID KYI TSE NYID.

Definition of definition, okay? What is the definition? What is the definition?

It's anything that has ... I'm sorry ... yeah, no.

BDAG YOD, say BDAG YOD, CHOS GSUM TSANGS, I'm sorry, TSE NYID KYI TSE NYID. The definition of a definition is that three substantial things, three real things, three concrete things, must be true. Three concrete things must be true, okay?

Then it's a definition, okay? Alright? Then the definition of what you define ...

there's a definition of what you define, okay? There's a definition in Buddhism of what you define. In English, in logic, it's called definiendum, the thing that you are defining, okay?

Like fire, we can say it's the thing we want to define, okay? And then we can say hot and burning is the definition of fire. In Buddhism, the element of fire is defined as ...

in Tibetan, Nick? Sekpa. Yeah, sashing sekpa.

Yeah, like jinsek, right? Fire offering. So, the thing we're defining is fire.

The thing we're using it to define it is ... that thing which is hot and burning. And in English, you usually put quotation marks around that, I don't know why.

Okay, I'll tell you the three qualities of a definition, okay? But I'm more interested in the substantial part, okay? What does that mean?

Because that relates to the first chapter of Nagarjuna, okay? You okay? Stay with me.

By the way, tomorrow we reach the second chapter, which is cool. All right, dzeyo chosim sama. So, definition of ...

of a definition. Let's go to that one first. By the way, I'm using ...

yeah, I'm using one of Choney Lama's teachers, which is Jamyang Shepa, okay? Okay, here's the three substantial things that have to be there if a thing is a definition. These are ...

here are the three substantial things that have to be there if a thing is a definition. Number one, generally it should be phrased as a definition. It should sound like a definition, you know?

Like, that thing which is ... okay, in English you have to say, when you define something, you have to say, that thing which is hot and burning. So, it should sound like a definition.

So, number one, it should be a definition. In English you have to put quotation marks around that thing which is hot and burning. So, A, it should be ...

it should look like a definition, okay? Number two, you must be able to confirm it in the thing you're defining. You must be able to confirm that it's there in the thing you're defining.

So, if hot and burning, you choose it as the definition of fire, then when you go stick your hand in the thing called fire, you should go, ouch. Okay? Then that confirms, yeah, yeah, that definition is for this thing, got it?

That definition fits this thing. This thing that burned me. That definition fits this thing.

A, it's a definition. Sounds like a definition. B, it does fit this thing.

This thing burned me, I checked it. Is it a good definition? Let's put my finger in there.

Ah, hmm, yeah, good definition, okay? It fits. That's quality number two.

Third quality, that definition shouldn't fit other things. That definition shouldn't fit other things, like water, okay? Like, if you stick your finger in water, it shouldn't burn you.

You see what I mean? Got it? It shouldn't fit other things, okay?

Generally, I mean there's probably some exceptions we can come up with. Joe's already got three, but make a song. Are you gonna play this time?

We're hoping you'll get something together. Okay, but what I want to talk about is the ZE YOD part. Why does it have to be substantial?

Now, here's where I have a problem. When we were discussing it in the translator course a couple weeks ago, seems like a hundred years ago, okay listen, it seems to me that the words hot and burning in quotation marks, right? I'm sorry, it seems to me that the definition is words, and the thing is a solid thing, you see?

Fire is a real thing, you see what I mean? To me it feels like that, and then the definition is just some words in the dictionary, you see what I mean? It feels like that to me, the definition is words in a dictionary, it's not gonna burn your hand if you touch the definition in the paper, you know?

Hot and burning, touch hot, nope, burning, nope, you know? So, I always felt like the definition is more an idea, you know? And then the thing is the thing, it's fire, you know?

It does those things, okay? But in Buddhism, the fire is the idea, and the definition is the reality. Hot is hot, burning burns.

Fire is just a word, so it's reversed, it's reversed, it's the opposite, okay? I want you to struggle with that, okay? It's like causes and effects.

I think he should have had a chapter called definitions, an examination of definitions, but if you think about it, in the definition, Buddhist definition of definition, they say the definition is the real thing, and the other thing is just a word, fire is just a word, okay? Got it? The substantial thing is the hot, and the burning, okay?

That's the definition, right? Yeah, then the other is just a word, fire, you know? You could call it ...

og-nya ... og-nya ... og-nya ...

og-nya ... og-n ... og-n ...

Agoyn. Yeah, poni-mayu. Pajar?

Tsak! One is a big fire, one's a little fire, am I right? In Russian.

Agon is a tichni, pajarta, grok, major thing. Okay anyway, got it? And the point is, ready?

It's the hot and the burning in the fire. It's the hot and the burning in the fire. I didn't ask that.

It's the wet and flowing in the water. Which means, okay get this, this is where I'm going. Is it possible to walk on water?

You see? Is it possible to walk on water? If the definition of water is the thing that goes whoop, and you fall down, and you know, if that's the definition of water, okay?

Is it possible to walk on water? And I see these pujaris, these priests, Hindu priests in India, they will pick up red hot steel. I've seen it, and they go like this, you know, and everybody's like, how you do that?

It's because the hot and the burning is not in the fire by definition, or is it? And the wet and the bloop is not in the water by definition. Got it?

So, where I'm going is, when Nagarjuna attacks the four causes, which he's about to do, and that's why we won't have time to finish in the class. When Nagarjuna attacks the four causes, the way he says it is, I'm attacking their definition. I'm attacking their definition.

Which to me means, I'm attacking that they could have causeness inside of them. They don't have causeness inside of them. They are not causes by definition.

They are not causes ... being a cause is not inside them, okay? It's coming from you.

If the pen can write a book, that's coming from you. It's not in the pen. The book is not in the pen, okay?

The ability to write a book, which is kind of the definition of pen maybe, it's not in a pen. The ability to write, an instrument for writing, it's not in the pen, okay? Then again, you know, you're gonna say, what's the use of that Geshe-la?

Why do we have to know that? Why we pay to come here from China, you know, all that airfare, or Berlin or Munich, you know, to hear that? I keep telling you, if you want your husband to wash the dishes, forever, if you're from Ukraine or Kazakhstan, it's up to you.

If you want to wash the dishes, I don't mind. You don't have to study Nagarjuna, okay? The weird thing is, I enjoy washing dishes, and I'm the dishwasher in our family.

I was the dishwasher for eight years in a monastery. Those are pops. Three guys get on a ladder to get in the pot, and you wash it like this, because it has to 3,000 cups of tea, right?

Okay, anyway, that's dishwasher. Now, just briefly, the definition of the thing to be defined, which is fire, is the three qualities of the thing which is not ... Nick, help me out, which is not concrete, okay?

Opposite of concrete. Concrete is the definition. Fire, sorry.

Hot and burning is something you can touch. The word fire is not something you can touch. Fire is a concept.

All things being defined are concepts. They have no big reality, they just have a small reality. That's terrible.

I should say different. They're not concrete, okay? They're not substantial, that's what he said, okay?

They exist nominally, okay? Fire is a name. Hot and burning, you can touch it, okay?

The definition is touchable. The thing you're defining is not, okay? But, does the definition exist in the fire?

That's the question. Or did you make it hot? Who made fire hot?

Yeah, I did. Who's going to make your husband wash the dishes? I am.

Same thing, same question, okay? Second one is more useful, okay? Got it?

So, LTA YOD CHOS GSUM TZAM BA is the definition ... three qualities of the thing which is not substantial, not concrete, is the definition ... Conceptuals, okay?

Conceptuals great. Three conceptual qualities is the definition of the thing we define, like fire, like fire, okay? Now, if you want to know the three, number one, generally speaking, it's something we want to define.

Generally speaking, so it's just the opposite of the other three. It is something we want to define. Fire, okay?

Generally speaking, it is something we want to define. Number two, it fits its definition. We're not something that any other definition is going to define.

It's not something which any other definition is going to define. Now, this is not on your homework, okay? I wish I had put it on your homework, but I thought of it today, so it's not on your homework.

I'm so sorry. But it all came from that word in the explanation, Nagarjuna is attacking the definition of the four, okay? Alright?

That's how he attacks the four. Now let's go back. We have seven minutes, maybe we can do one more homework question.

Generally speaking, it is something to be defined, okay? Yeah? Oh, it doesn't fit any other definition?

Okay, that's nice. Okay. Okay, I'm gonna give you homework question number five, and we won't get to six, seven, eight, so I don't know how you're gonna deal with that Tim.

Just give them a hundred on their homework. Just kidding. I repeat, those people who have the most homeworks done, get certain perks at Nagarjuna number two.

Like, I think you should get ... we call the Israeli Palace, that's the nicest house in the whole valley. It has two toilets.

Right? Am I right? Yeah, it's like ...

it's better than the Trump Tower. Better than the Ping An building. Okay?

Anyway, and you get extra points if you do all of them, okay Tim? Like 20% extra. So, you can get six points for five homeworks, got it?

Okay. So, you're definitely gonna beat those people who didn't come to all their classes, but they should still try, because if I have more than a hundred and ten next fall, I will choose the ones who did their homework first, okay? Who have the most points, and the other one says bye-bye.

You go to Bui and study Nagarjuna. Okay. Alright, good luck.

Okay. Causal condition is defined basically as anything that has a result, okay? The first of the four conditions is defined as anything that has a result, okay?

Then Arya Nagarjuna says, I don't like it. This definition has a problem, okay? Anything that has a result, I don't like it.

Anybody want to guess what he's gonna say? Guess what's the answer. The question is, why doesn't Nagarjuna like the definition of the first cause as anything which has a result?

He doesn't ... Nick doesn't like in it. Peter, what do you not like?

Okay, that's one opinion. Wait, say it again, you're closer. You're closer than these guys.

You're not to Beijing yet, but you're close. Say again. Yeah, good.

You're very close. Now, someone tie it up with the verb for me. Someone tie it to the verb for me.

Anything ... anything she said, the result is a future thing, okay? And she's very close to the answer.

Nagarjuna has a problem with the word has. The cause has a result. Huh?

Yeah, don't exist yet! It don't exist yet, you know? I also have a big bank account, okay?

Understand? Future. I'm waiting for all my donations to Diamond Mountain to come back.

They're so slow. Got it? Okay.

The cause is donating to Diamond Mountain. The result is, you know, I'm super rich guy, you know? Understand?

Can I say I have money? Can I say I have money from my donations to Diamond Mountain? Can I say ...

no! It's a future thing. It didn't come yet.

Okay? All the people that I owe money, you know. Okay?

Right? Okay? It's a future thing.

You cannot use the word have for a cause and a result. They cannot exist at the same time. Well, a result has a cause?

The cause is gone man! It was going while the result was coming out. We just said that.

That was simultaneous time periods. When it finally came out, the cause finally died. In that moment, one of them is gone.

How can you say you have something if it doesn't exist yet? Okay? Got it?

You alright? When you use the word has, I have a book, you have to exist and book has to exist in the present moment. You cannot say I have a book if you're getting the book next week.

Okay? It's not correct. After you get the book, you can't say I'm ordering a book.

I have an order in for a book. The book's already there, the order's finished. Okay?

Amazon took it off their thing, except they're tracking everything you do. Okay? Got it?

You can't use the word have if one thing isn't there yet, or if the other thing stopped already. Got it? The result can't have a cause and a cause cannot have a result.

There's a problem with your English language. There's a problem with all human languages. They are mistaken.

The languages reflect the mistake of the human mind. Okay? The word we, I and me, is a mistake.

It's we. It's we. Okay?

I give Aldo a bite of my ... I don't know ... last night all I had was a strawberry.

I give Aldo a bite of my strawberry. But no, Aldo was giving me strawberries. We were eating strawberries.

Right? When I put in his mouth, I put in my mouth. Right?

If I give him strawberry, I get strawberry. Right? So, Aldo ...

Macaldo ... Macaldo eat strawberries. Macaldo give Macaldo strawberry.

Okay? And Macaldo get strawberry. More.

Because Macaldo ... happy Macaldo give Macaldo strawberry. No, that's how God talks.

That's why he doesn't talk to you. I'm not kidding. You won't understand it.

You'll say God is crazy. Alright. We finished homework question five.

We did not finish six. And we did not ... is there a seven?

Seven or eight. Oh my gosh. Okay.

So, six, seven, eight we start to do. So, I mean Tim, I guess they just do their homework anyway. I'll let you guys decide.

I think it's cruel to leave them with nothing to do today. You talk to Tim, he's the boss. I'm just the teacher.

Okay. Jenny Wong, you ready? Loud.

Pretend you're singing in Vietnam. I have a suggestion Tim. I like what you said.

Like, if you just