Нагарджуна, курс 4 — Мудрость Арьи Нагарджуны, курс 4: Тайна глав (2022, Аризона), занятие 10

[Speaker 1]
Hi, welcome back to Nagarjuna, Arya Nagarjuna. And we stopped at this point here. We were talking about how do causes create their results?

And we reached a part called YUN DROD BU SKYE BA'I BYA BA SBYOR BA BYED PA How is it exactly that a cause triggers a result? And then we're going to discuss whether or not a cause can exist in and of itself. And this is all part of an idea, of a discussion about the possibility that causes and their results are not one and the same thing, that they are separate things.

Which would we normally say? Is the cause the result, or are the cause and result separate? What would we normally say?

Yeah, separate. If the cause was the result, then I wouldn't have to be here today because I already prepared the class. That would be the class.

So now we're going to discuss the possibility that the cause and the result are discrete entities, are separate from one another. Can they be separate things? And that's a little trickier because that's what we normally think.

Okay? And there are places in this book where Choney Lama, in my opinion, is scrambling to make an outline. He's trying to make a logical sense out of Nagarjuna's poetry, especially the whole flow.

So he has sort of a very interesting move here, like a basketball move. He says, the way I see it, you can impose an outline on this section called The Seven Reasons Why Causes and Their Results Cannot Be Separate. Seven Reasons Why Causes and Their Results Cannot Be Separate.

So he's going to go through seven sections now. And he's going to point out seven problems with the idea that causes and their results are separate. And personally, I can remember when I reached this section, it felt like he was repeating himself.

It felt like ideas were coming up that had already been treated before. And I checked and I checked, and what I believe is, what we had discussed before was mainly in the context of the convening of the causes and conditions. When the causes and conditions come together, what's their relationship to the result?

And now he's taking the causes out of the convening of the causes and conditions. And he's saying, what's the specific relationship between the cause in isolation and its result, the cause independent of the convening of the causes and conditions? But you're going to hear the same arguments.

Then you're going to get confused because you're going to think we covered them already. All right, so seven different possibilities here. And there's a major mistake in the Tibetan carving, which took a while to figure out.

And we'll discuss it. So here's the seven. I'll say them quickly and we'll talk about it.

Possibility number one, the result is triggered by a cause which has already stopped but is somehow still present. Number two, the result is triggered, and in Tibetan and in Sanskrit, they say insight of the cause, meaning the cause can somehow look ahead and see a result coming. I like to call it anticipation.

He calls it insight, insight of the cause. The result is insight of the cause, meaning the cause is like this and he can see the cause. He can see the result coming.

That's another possibility, right? And in that case, would the cause and the result be separate? And like that, there's a discussion.

Third possibility, that the result is triggered. We're going to discuss whether the result is triggered by contact with the cause or not. Can there be contact between cause and result?

And that's a difficult question because by the time the result comes out, the contact is, yeah, the cause is gone, so how can they ever make contact? If they don't make contact, why couldn't that same cause cause a pizza that you're going to buy me tonight? I'm just an example.

Number four, is the cause void of the result in the time of the cause or not? Is the result somehow present in the time of the cause, within the cause, as potential, say, for example? All right, fifth possibility.

And this is where the Tibetan carving went off. Does the fact of the result being triggered have an inherent cause and result contained within it? That's where the Tibetan goes off.

It's difficult, we'll talk about it. Possibility number six, is the result triggered by a cause? When the result is triggered by a cause, is the cause the same as the result or separate from the result?

We already said they were separate, so I think it's going to go there. Number seven, is the result which is triggered by a cause, does it have its own nature or not? What's the status of the result?

So let's go through them one by one and you'll see. To say all seven of those in a row is too much. Okay, sorry.

Here's number, possibility number one. Mm, to repeat, option number one of the seven, or mini-examination, mini-investigation, was is it possible that a result is triggered by a cause that has to stop first, and then the result? Okay, got it?

That's how we normally think of things. Like the seed stops and the tree starts, something like that. Okay, so he's going to examine, is it possible that the result is triggered by a cause where that cause has already stopped technically because it became the cause?

It became the result, that's another question. And here, if you're reading the Tibetan, Nagarjuna uses the word nupa for stopped, for the cause. And nupa means for the sun to go down or for the dharma to disappear in the world.

These are the verb, this is the verb. And he's used that verb for the cause. Does the cause disappear behind the horizon before the result comes out?

That's the way he wants to say it, I think. BDE BU SKYES PA CI LTAR GYIS Well, how could that be? DE BU DAG NI BDE BA RGYUD GNAS PA'I KYANG NI JI LTAR BSKYED So how could the cause stop and then produce the result because there wouldn't be any relationship between cause and effect because it's a principle of Buddhist logic that for two things to have a relationship, they both have to be existing.

Duh, okay. What are the two possible kinds of relationships? That's another story.

But, well, I'll tell you. No, that's another story. Long story.

Okay, anyway, for two things to have a relationship, they both have to be in the room, basically. And if one of them has already disappeared, then there's no discussion of relationship, okay? DE BU DAG NI BDE BA RGYUD GNAS PA'I KYANG NI JI LTAR BSKYED But if you're saying that the cause is somehow still around by the time the result comes out, then there's a problem there also, right?

Then there would be a piece of the result that was existing in the time of the cause before the result had occurred. You see what I mean? If they touch anywhere, there's a problem.

If the cause happened in 2011 and the result happened in 2012, and somehow they touch each other, then what was it, midnight on the 31st of December and they shared a 10-minute wrist stretch somehow, okay? And if they never make contact, then anything could cause anything because there's no necessary contact between the cause and the result. Then any result could come out of any cause, okay?

All right, CI STE RGYUN RJE'I MANG BRAL NA BYE BU GANG ZHIG BSKYED PA'I RJE'I And that's the whole argument. So you see a picture here of a rabbit coming out of a hat. I was trying to find something where you had a result without a cause, with no visible cause around.

So that's kind of the feeling here. We don't know where the rabbit came from. The rabbit wasn't in the hat the moment before.

There was no rabbit of the moment before. Somehow he just popped out, right? It's almost an effect without a cause, okay?

A result without a cause. That's what the picture is supposed to indicate, okay? So this first option is that the cause has stopped and then the result comes.

That's kind of how we feel instinctively about how cause and effect works. I agree the cause and effect can't exist at the same time. That gets messy.

But how about if the cause just goes up to a certain place and stops, and then the result starts? Can we say that? And he says, well, then you've got a result without a cause.

Which is not possible. Which is like a rabbit coming out of a hat. I got very uncomfortable at this point and I had a deep realization, which I've been thinking about for a couple of days.

[Speaker 2]
Nowhere in this book does he tell you an option.

[Speaker 1]
Nowhere in this, he only, it's like only complaining about your wife and never making a positive suggestion. You know what I mean? It's like he, the whole book is what things are not.

Even the opening verse is SKYE BA MED PA BYED MED PA, you know, like this, MED PA, MED PA, MED PA, MED PA, with no YOD PA. He doesn't say, he doesn't describe the option to nothing, which is dependent origination. He never goes there.

Nobody in this book goes to a real explanation of mental seeds and projections and things created by, there's no explanation in this root text or commentary, specific explanation of how we create things, like the pen explanation is missing here. And it gets scary here. It gets uncomfortable for the audience because now he's saying it's not possible that the cause could stop and then a result come out of it.

And it's also not possible that the cause could not stop and a result come out. So, and then, and he keeps saying by nature, okay? These things cannot happen by nature.

These things don't happen from their own side. These things don't happen self-existently. But he never tells you what's the option.

He never tells you what it would be like for something to start through mental seeds or through dependence. He never tells you. He just tells you what they're not.

The whole book is a not book. It's like a bad day with your partner or something. They just keep telling you.

They don't say, I like this. They just say, I don't like this, I don't like this. And you get to the end of the book and he didn't say he liked anything.

And so I thought, here, let's look at the ice cream, which is very important to me. And this is a very, extremely important picture for the rest of your life. So this is how causes really are creating effects.

This is how it really happens. Because nobody in the whole book tells you. He just keeps saying what's not true.

And he wants us to struggle. He wants us to think, well, what's really going on? And he never tells us.

He just keeps saying, it's not this, it's not this, it's not this. And you'll see, he just keeps saying that. There's no chapter called the chocolate sauce.

So here we go. The white ice cream represents the parts of a thing, like the parts of a car, or the parts of a pen. You guys got a pen?

I got a pen. Pens are tight jeans, don't go in there. I can't get it out, I just want people to see it.

Okay, so I don't know. The pen of yesterday didn't cause the pen of today. Or the factory, the pen factory, which is the cause, didn't make this pen.

This pen was not a result of a pen factory in Japan, or something like that. Well, so what's really going on? Well, either the factory closed and the pen came out, right, the cause stopped and then the pen came out.

They stopped that day's production, and then tomorrow the pen came out, or something like that. Or the pen came out at the end of the day, and then they all went home. And the factory, that's it.

The factory that made this pen is no longer there. Maybe tomorrow's factory is there. And then the other possibility is that the exact factory that made this pen is still doing the same thing it made this pen with on this pen, while the pen's already there.

The factory's still making this pen after Geshe-la's writing with this pen. That's the other possibility. So what's really happening?

And so yesterday we went out for Seichu, we had ice cream. There was gelato, two kinds of gelato. Strawberry and vanilla, say.

And then they say, and then they think of those as the parts of the pen. So here's the strawberry, there's the ball of strawberry gelato. Here's the balls.

You get issues. Here's the ball of vanilla gelato. And then you put them both in a bowl and then you pour chocolate sauce over them.

And that's kind of how we create things. There's the bottom half of the pen, there's the upper half of the pen. They are there.

They are there when we enter the room. And then our mind perceives these two pieces and then a seed opens in my mind and a picture comes out. I like to call it a luminous picture because on the day that you see pictures coming out of your mind, they will look like neon pictures, neon.

They are bright. They are luminous. They are artificially bright.

The picture of a pen doesn't look like this. When a mental seed opens for pen, what comes out of your mind is an impossibly well-defined neon picture of a pen. And then that flies, there's even a physical sensation of that seed, that image, luminous image, flying out of your mind, somewhere in your forehead, which is weird, but that's the way it is.

And it lands on the objects. It lands on the pieces and it unifies them. And then the dog has a different picture coming out of their karmic seeds.

And that's a picture of a chew toy and it lands on the same two balls of ice cream and coats them. And then it becomes a, what do you call it? Fudge.

Fudge sundae or something. And it is kind of coat. That's why I chose this picture.

I used to use a different picture that had kind of skinny streams of chocolate and I wasn't satisfied with it. When you really see it happen, it'll be almost a complete coating, but not quite. So it will look like chocolate sauce poured on ice cream.

When you finally see it yourself, which is within a few hours of seeing emptiness directly, you'll see your mind making these pictures. So that's what's really happening. There's a cause, which is a seed.

There's a result, which is a tree. And the relationship between them is an artificial creation of your mental seed. And that cause and effect relationship is the chocolate sauce.

And the two balls of ice cream are the seed and the tree. And what bothers Nagarjuna is that without this chocolate sauce, there is no, there cannot be a relationship. Because if they touch somewhere, then that part is vanilla and strawberry.

And that's not possible. So either they touch or they don't touch. If they do touch, there's a third thing going on.

If they don't touch, then how can they be cause and effect? Because they never meet each other. Then the punchline is that your mental seeds are throwing out like a parachute shape and that covers the two balls of ice cream, the cause and effect, and your mind creates the cause and effect relationship.

They're an illusion of a cause and effect relationship. So that's what's really going on. I don't believe they're ever going to say it in the book.

So I thought it would be nice to say it here because it's frustrating. The punchline is almost always the same. The cause cannot touch the result because then there would be a point of contact that where the result existed in the past.

And they can't not touch because then that particular seed could cause a pizza or, I don't know, inflation. You know, just weird stuff that's not connected to it. But they can't be connected because then they have to exist in the same time.

If they do, if they are connected in any way, relationship, then a piece of one has to be in the past or a piece of the other has to be in the future and that's not possible either. So it gets frustrating. Nobody tells you, and then it just goes on.

It gets frustrating. So yeah, the answer is, your mind is creating the connection between cause and effect. Your mind is seeing a connection where someone else's mind might not see a connection.

And for them, the connection might be different. And that's a cool thing. The punchline, but the super punchline, is that that's proof that you have to be nice to other people.

And by the way, if someone explains to you the emptiness of cause and effect and doesn't talk about being nice to other people, I don't believe they understand it. I don't believe they understand it. If they're not talking about morality within three minutes, then they don't really understand it.

Because the natural question of any human being would be, I like a two balls of ice cream with a chocolate sauce. How do I get it? How do I make it happen?

If their cause and effect ice cream sauce theory is correct, and you understand it, the next question you should be asking me is how do I make the right sauce to get a million dollars or something and stop working so hard? I mean, how can I just take care of that? And if you don't ask that question, then I'm suspicious that you don't understand the point, which is if my karmic seeds are creating the sauce that combines cause and effect, how can I create more sauce for money, or for love, or for good health, or for mental peace, all the other good stuff, better world?

So I'm going to come back to the chocolate sauce from time to time during the next few classes, just to remind you how it's really happening. Because when we discuss seven bad options for how cause and effect really happens, we have to remember to forget the chocolate sauce. We have to remember to forget the chocolate sauce.

We can't talk about karma. We can't talk about things coming from me. When we say self-existent, we're talking about independent of my luminous image.

Got it? And you've got to remember that. When all these seven options are all self-existent, RANG BZHIN GYIS YOD PA He keeps saying that over and over again.

And you start to not see it anymore because he keeps repeating it. But you've got to say that. You've got to say that.

These are seven bad options because they all involve cause and effect, which is coming from its own side, which is coming this way. All right, so don't forget the chocolate sauce. I don't.

Okay, I'm going to throw in some Sanskrit words here that I think are helpful. And I'm trying to limit these words. I'm trying to stick to about 20 words or something because I don't want to overwhelm you.

And I also don't want to give you a word that you're never going to use or that you're never going to see. I want to give you the really important words that are kind of like tools that you have to have. So one word that I'd like to talk about now is called SANGS RGYAS TI.

Okay, the Tibetan is LHAN GCIG PHRAD PA. LHAN GCIG PHRAD PA means to make contact. LHAN GCIG means same place and same time.

So then I call it that crucial moment when cause and result supposedly make contact. Like the seed and the tree, there's a special tiny point of contact, which a mathematician would say is a point, a point with no width, a theoretical point, point of contact. So that's called LHAN GCIG PHRAD PA.

They touch each other. Somewhere, the seed touches the tree. And the RGYAS TI you know from Heart Sutra, right?

What's that? RGYAS TI RGYAS TI BAR RGYAS TI BAR SA RGYAS TI Yeah, go, go, go, go, go, go, go, go, go, go. Really, go, super go, right?

So RGYAS TI, and then that comes into the word go in English. So that's easy. GAM is the full root and KAM comes from that also, which are interesting.

Okay, the other word I'd like you to learn is DUR ZHIG PA and that means seen or a seeing. Okay, and we're going to discuss it as I mentioned in the sense of anticipation or the potential for a result in a cause. Because if you don't feel comfortable with results stopping and then the cause starting, would you feel more comfortable with saying the cause anticipates the result?

Would you feel more comfortable that way, that somehow the result is anticipated by the cause? Does that make you more comfortable? He's going to discuss that possibility.

He doesn't say the word anticipate. He says within sight of. Is the result within sight of the cause?

Is the cause somehow anticipating the result? And the result's a little farther away than touching, but it's still there, okay? Not yet, but it's there, okay?

It's kind of like potential, all right? And I like this root, the Indo-European is DURG. It's not DORG, okay?

And DURG means to see in Indo-European. And the word dragon comes from that because a dragon, it means the one with the evil eye. The word dragon means the one with the evil eye.

It means the one with the eye, okay? I did my three-year retreat in the Dragoon Mounds, and I was curious whether that was related to dragon, and it is. Somehow, I don't remember why, but you can look at it.

It just means a special kind of soldier, okay? Yep, a sentry in a sense. Maybe the one with the eyes, okay?

The last word I'd like to discuss here in the Sanskrit is ZHUN YANG. Say ZHUN YANG, long U, right? ZHUN YANG, which means DONG, which means devoid of, and it requires the instrumental.

So in English, you say this fresh tissue is devoid of boogers. Now it's not devoid of boogers. So devoid means, I was trying to get some excuse to use it.

So in English, you say devoid of. It means it's a fresh tissue, and it doesn't have any other things inside. Okay, but in the Asian languages, Tibetan and Sanskrit, you have to use the instrumental, devoid by.

So just remember that, because it's going to come in handy. You don't say devoid of. You say devoid by.

So, I don't know, like NA BU'I PHYI MA'I STONG BA means devoid by boogers. Okay, and not devoid of boogers. Okay, I knew you wanted to know that.

But the problem is here, he's going to use STONG in two different senses. He's going to, I looked up the word today because I couldn't remember. Equivocate.

He's going to use the word empty in two different meanings. And he kind of cheats. Okay, he says, and we'll see why.

One thing he says, cause can't be empty of the result, because an empty result would be like empty, would be like SNAM KHAS MED TOB, a flower sprouting in mid-air with no roots, no water, no soil, nothing, just boop. Okay, so he uses it in the sense of devoid as a space. Then he's going to switch between two kinds of void.

So just be aware. When you say STONG BA or STONG BA GNYIS, you mean the void or emptiness of self-existence. But when you just say STONG GZHON GNYEN, here GZHON GNYEN, not GZHON GNYEN LTAR, not emptiness, but just empty, then it's not clear what you're talking about.

Could be empty mind. It could be an empty cup. It could be empty of self-existence.

We don't know yet. I'm just saying be aware. GZHON GNYEN by itself is ambiguous.

You need someone to tell you which GZHON GNYEN. It has a long U, which often changes to A U. So all Sanskrit vowels have three degrees of strength, short U, long U, and then A U.

And then the L becomes L. And the A U often changes to A V. A U as a combination in ancient Sanskrit, Greek, Latin often changes to A V.

So you get GZHON becomes CAVE as a cavity. Because the U changed to A U, changed to A V. And the C changed, became a hard K from a soft S, and it became CAVE, CAVE or cavity.

Cool? VALB comes from that. SWEL comes from that.

And HOL, HOL comes from that, because H's come from cause and like that. All right, excavate cumulus clouds. Church comes from that, because the churches were originally perceived as mighty things with might inside.

Empty inside, like the power, just grow, grow, grow. Churches were seen as places of hot air expanding. Something like that, I'm kidding.

No, power expanding, not hot air. Okay, those words are going to come in handy. I'll say them again.

SANGS RGYA'I, which means, is there ever a meeting of the two? BRDUR SPA, which means, can we see or anticipate a result coming, even in the time of the cause? And then GZHON NYA, when we say the cause or the result is empty, what do we mean?

So here we go. Remember that we're going through seven combinations of possibilities. And here's the second one.

The result is triggered, and a lot of the possibilities are questions. Is it this or is it this? So possibility number two is, is the result triggered within sight of the cause or not?

Is the result triggered inside of the cause, in view of the cause, which kind of means presence of the cause. Is the cause still standing around by the time the result came out? And okay, is the cause able to see the result?

Can the result, in a sense, be anticipated by the cause? And here's his argument. RGYUD NI MTHONG DANG MA MTHONG BAR BRDRAD PA'I KHYAD PAR MI BYAS DO He says, both wrong.

Neither is the result seen by the cause, nor is it not seen by the cause. RGYUD RANG GI BRDRAD PA'I MTHONG NAS SAM MA MTHONG BAR MTHONG NAS MI KHYAD PAS It's not that the cause can anticipate the result because MTHONG NAS GRUB BZIN PAS When you talk about seeing something, the thing you see should have come into existence already. When you talk about seeing something, if you see something, it should have come into existence already.

Even as a potential, it should have come into existence as a potential result. And there wouldn't be any purpose to the thing happening again. If a thing could be anticipated, if you could see a result in the future that's likely or probable, then in a way you've already made contact with that result and there wouldn't be any reason for it to grow again.

For there to be another result happen, just that one. If the result didn't happen, there's no way you could anticipate, you couldn't see it. If it didn't have any existential status, then you couldn't see it.

If you could see it, then it had existential status and there's no reason for it to happen again.

[Speaker 2]
A second time.

[Speaker 1]
Now, if you said I saw a potential result, that's different. But if you say I saw the result, that has that, insider. All right, and he says, if the result is that solid, upcoming result is that solid, then there's no reason for the cause to work so hard to create it.

And then he says, the job, the cause would have to apply for unemployment benefits, next picture. Like it wouldn't have, its job would be done already and it would have to, it would get fired because the job was already filled. Okay, all right.

,RGYUD BRDRAS BU MA THONG BAR, ,RANG BZHIN GYIS BSKYED PA MI BYED PAS, But if you say the cause cannot anticipate the result and cannot see the result coming, ,SKYE NAS RGYUD GCIG GIS KYANG BRDRAS BU THAMS CAD GCIG GYIS, If it's not necessary to be able to see a potential result in the time of the cause, and if it's not possible, then it makes sense that all possible results would be possible from a single cause because there's no reason why one would be more likely than another.

If one result were not more likely than another, then it would make sense that a single cause could trigger any result. If there's no more likelihood of a similar result than a non-similar result, because you can't anticipate it, because you can't see it, because it doesn't have an existential status in the present yet. Again, we got a picture for that.

I forget what the picture is. Oh, yeah. He says all possible results would be triggered by a single cause.

If a cause could, if you could not anticipate a particular result from a particular cause, then all possible results would result from a single cause. If there was no more likelihood that one result would happen than another result, then one cause would create, one wheat seed would create a whole field of wheat, because there's no more likelihood that it would create one stalk of wheat than any other stalk of wheat. There wouldn't be any more likelihood.

Odds would be canceled. If there was no amount of the result present in the time of the cause, then the probability of all things happening is 100%. And the probability of one thing happening is 0%, because you can't anticipate it, because it doesn't have any kind of existence yet, not even as a potential.

Because there's no relationship. They're totally separate. They don't share any kind, they're not holding hands anywhere.

Okay, you all right? All right. By the way, here's a tiny rang luk.

Tim, what's a rang luk?

[Speaker 2]
Sorry, I have allergies, I'm sorry. Say again?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, rang luk is luck. I mean, here's a rare occurrence where he says, well, what do we think? You see, and I complained that he didn't bring up ice cream, and he has a lame rang luk here.

RANG LOD LA'I NYID RGYUD BYED BU MA'I MTHONG BAR BSKYED KYANG Our position, if you want to know, is that the cause does not create a result which is anticipated. But still, that doesn't contradict saying it couldn't create a cause in and of itself. Can you anticipate a result?

No. Does that mean it has to create a cause, that the cause has to create a result in and of itself? Not either.

It's not contradictory to say a cause has no self-nature if it does not anticipate its result. I'll say it again. If us, if our side says that there is no anticipation of a particular result by a particular cause, that doesn't contradict us also saying that the cause doesn't automatically lead to a particular result.

And then he doesn't help us. He goes on. And that's only Choney Lama being nice.

There's nothing in the Garden of God. Okay. All right.

Listen to the recording three times. All right. Option number three of seven.

Good. Yay. The result is triggered by contact with the cause.

Let's examine. BTAGS PA, BRTAGS PA Let's examine whether or not the result is triggered through contact with the cause. Is there contact between the cause and the result?

Or not? That's what we're going to look at. And this is long.

This is four verses in the Sanskrit, which is unusually long. And there's a lot of options here. We're going to start them.

And by the way, one of the lines of the Tibetan is missing, which makes it more interesting. And I went and recovered it from the tenure due to the fact that we have ALL, which typed in the entire tenure, which recovered the only tenure outside of Tibet, the only one in India, that ALL was the first, ALL brought the first tenure out of Tibet in modern times. And that was quite an adventure story.

We should tell it someday. Okay, I'll tell you. We have a tenure.

There's a printery called Derge in East Tibet. And I can talk about the Red Guards. During the Cultural Revolution, the Red Guards came to burn that library.

And there was a monk who was trying to protect the library. So he said, I'll take an army facing a single monk. And he had this inspiration.

He took all his clothes off. And he went and got an axe. And he danced around the door of the library with his axe.

And he said, anyone who comes in here will lose their head. And they called the general of the army. This is the story I heard.

And he came up, he said, what's going on? They said, we want to burn this library. But there's this crazy monk standing there.

He's threatening to cut off anyone's head who comes in. And he's got, his penis is hanging out. It's weird.

What should we do? Should we just shoot him in the head? And he said, no, no, leave it.

We'll do it later. We'll burn it later. And then they forgot to burn it.

They never got back to it. And so those blocks from the 1700s survived. 210 volumes, which times 1,000.

210,000 times two, because you have to do the front side and the back side. Now you're talking half a million blocks. Because there's a separate block for the front side and a separate block for the back side.

Sometimes they don't get it right. They put the back of page three on the front of page seven. And the backs don't have page numbers.

But that makes life interesting. Anyway, half a million blocks survived. And no copy was printed for about 30 years from the blocks from the 1700s.

And then ALL made it happen, okay, through various means. And we paid a huge amount of money through an unspecified account. And we waited for two years.

And the books showed up, 210 volumes. And it's priceless. They're priceless.

And then JB's crew proceeded to type in the 410,000 pages. And they finished. 420,000 pages.

They finished. Okay, and that's why we have it. And that's why I can replace a line that was left out of this commentary, okay?

Yay, JB, let's give him a hand. Good story. Anyway, we're going to continue in the next class.

Which option are we on, you guys? We're option number three. Yeah, we still got a ways to go.

By the way, these options are long. And we're going to, when you get impatient with a text, slow down. Okay, when you get impatient with a text, and when you're thinking you wish it would go faster, that's the time, if you really want to be a yogi, you purposely slow yourself down, and you digest it with pleasure.

The shamatha?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, okay. All right, see you guys in the next class.