Курс переводчиков ACI, курс 1 (Аризона, 2017), занятие 2

[Speaker 1]
So we're going to do a Dora text, and they take the whole Pramana-vartika, the root text, by who? Dharmakirti. Yeah, and sometimes people confuse it with Chandrakirti, so get your kirtis right.

There's Sumatikirti, Dharmakirti, and Chandrakirti. And it's a very difficult text, extremely difficult. People don't even try to memorize the whole thing.

We studied the first chapter in the intercollegiate debates for... I did four years, and we didn't finish. And it's extremely difficult.

So the Dora was designed to teach the content without the pain. And I want to show you the real word Dora, okay? So we can go like this.

Okay? So that's the real spelling of Dora, okay? What happened?

Dra became ra. Like, what's chura? Chura?

The background. It's really chudra. Dra means an enclosure.

Someone who stays in an enclosure is called a... Drabha, which is a monk. That's a Tibetan word for monk.

So, it's really like an enclosed summary. Box summary. What do you call that?

Compartmented summary. Okay? Dora.

It's really dhudra. And there's the wathar, the small triangle, to distinguish it from other drabha. What's dhudra?

What's dhudra? Abbreviated. So you can say, you know, compartmented abbreviations or something.

Okay? I call it, you can see here... What did I call it?

Topics or something? Logic primer. Okay.

Okay. So, here we go. We're studying the set dhudra.

Which set?

[Speaker 2]
Son of Tashi.

[Speaker 1]
Son of Tashi. Son of S-R-A-S, right? Like prince.

[Speaker 2]
Like Gyaltsen.

[Speaker 1]
Like Gyaltsen, yeah. Okay, here we go. Mmm.

Completely different vocabulary. Completely different school. Completely different style of writing.

So in this course, if you survive, you will learn all the major styles of Buddhist writing. Mmm. So please read the title.

Go. Temba. Temba means you'll get along.

Gulgen.

[Speaker 2]
It's ngul, yeah. King Kong, Reiwa, Kung Kong, Xie, Jawa, Xueso.

[Speaker 1]
Feel like King Kong, Kung Kong, Reiwa, Xueso. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Kung Kong, Xie, Jawa, Xueso.

[Speaker 1]
You know, I've been translating a lot of titles for people, because Dr. Wu sponsored, you know, the database. We've been translating titles for a couple of years now. Go to the end first.

The... What do you call that? Ornamental title.

It comes at the end, but in English it comes first. You know, like, the River of Wisdom, a commentary to Geltsab Je's... See what I mean?

You do this, you do the pretty title first, and then you do the descriptive title. Okay, so you start at the end. So, I'm going to start...

And this one happens to have two descriptive titles, two pretty titles, two ornamental titles. First one is... Kelsang Rewa Kung Kong.

Okay, Kelsang Rewa Kung Kong. So, let's try to translate that much. Kelsang?

Kelsangbo?

[Speaker 2]
Kelsang.

[Speaker 1]
Like, fortunate, you know? Uh-huh. What's it literally mean?

[Speaker 2]
Kelwang, and then...

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, good.

[Speaker 2]
Because, like, to have the blessing, or the karma, or the virtue to understand something, or receive something.

[Speaker 1]
It literally means, those who have enough good karma, to understand the book. Kelsang. Kelsang.

Very common Tibetan first name. Rewa?

[Speaker 2]
Rewa, I'm not sure.

[Speaker 1]
Hope. Hopes. Plural.

Kung.

[Speaker 2]
Oh.

[Speaker 1]
Good. And Kung, I don't know... Kung means to fulfill.

It's related to the word, Kung. Which means what?

[Speaker 2]
Kung?

[Speaker 1]
Uh-huh. Full. Full.

Okay? Like, and in Tibet, you don't say, give me a cup of tea, you say, give me a full of tea. Chakangchit.

Chakangchit. SK? No.

Kangakang. SG is Gangtok Sikkim. Okay.

So, fulfilling the hopes of all the fortunate ones. Okay? Now we have to do, KP Gulgyan.

Here. Here. Okay.

Uh, third line. What's KP?

[Speaker 2]
Master.

[Speaker 1]
Good. Gul means, uh, that's honorific for throat.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah. It's just a necklace, right? Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
A necklace on the throats of the, of the wives. Okay? Um, or we would just say it's a necklace for the wives.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Well, oftentimes, they'll say, Nagyan. Nagyan. Nagyan.

RNA. Yeah. Because it's, because when you hear it, it's like somebody gave you an earring.

It's something beautiful to put in your ear.

[Speaker 2]
Right?

[Speaker 1]
But, when it's something beautiful to recite, they'll say, necklace. Okay, sorry I'm eating, but I enjoy eating. Uh, okay.

Sima?

[Speaker 2]
Um, correct or valid?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, so, that's the most important subject that he's going to deal with for the rest, the rest of his life. Five years. Sima is one of the great subjects at Buddhism.

It's called Pramana. Pramana. Say Pramana.

Pramana. It means a valid perception. Okay?

What's the difference between valid and correct?

[Speaker 2]
Um, valid is not necessary, correct. Correct is...

[Speaker 1]
Nice. My God, most Americans don't know that. Okay, valid means, like my boss, he would say, buy, buy 200,000 diamonds before tomorrow.

Then I would, uh, I wouldn't buy them. I wouldn't, couldn't buy them. Then he'd say, why didn't you buy them?

You know, I'd say, well, the price was too high. And he said, that was a valid decision, but it was a wrong decision. You know, based on what you knew, you made the correct decision.

But, based on what you didn't know, it was wrong. So, it's very, very important in Buddhism, uh, correct, we'll call it correct perception. Okay, but, and the definition of existence in, in Buddhism is what?

Yeah, that which is perceived with a pramana. So, then the study of logic became known as pramana. Like your subject is Vinaya, Vinaya, your subject is Siddhanta, Abhidharma, Madhyamaka, and your subject is pramana.

Okay? gong, gongpa, gongpa? Um, uh, to the, yeah, it's like the, uh, to illuminate, yeah?

Uh, try the other half.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, sorry. True thought. Okay, it's true thought.

[Speaker 1]
Uh, I heard a gongpa, what was that? Anyway, it means what somebody really is thinking. Okay, gongpa means what someone's really thinking.

Um, gongpa? Yeah. Um, yeah?

[Speaker 2]
Um, to, well, to the true intent of the, or the true thought of the commentary, right?

[Speaker 1]
Uh, commentary on the true thought.

[Speaker 2]
On the true thought, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Um, tantra?

[Speaker 2]
It's a classical commentary.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, that's shastra. In, uh, shastra or shastra?

[Speaker 2]
Shastra. Shastra.

[Speaker 1]
Let's look it up. You wanna, which one you wanna bet on?

[Speaker 2]
It's shastra.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. A commentary you said recently in a long room.

[Speaker 2]
You've yelled at me at least twice for that.

[Speaker 1]
There it is. Long A, shastra is commentary. Okay.

That's an example of why you have to pronounce Sanskrit correctly. Long A, ah, short A, uh. Okay.

Shastra means sword. Shastra means a holy book. If you use the wrong pronunciation, you're in trouble.

It's like if you don't know tones in Chinese. So, would you like to use classical commentary for tantra? And all the yoga teachers, I used, I like to say classical commentary.

Chenpo.

[Speaker 2]
Great.

[Speaker 1]
The great one, Namdeo.

[Speaker 2]
Um, who, I mean, I'm tempted to say use commentary.

[Speaker 1]
This is Sima Namdeo.

[Speaker 2]
Ah, oh. that's the Pramana...

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, Pramana Vartika.

[Speaker 2]
Pramana Vartika.

[Speaker 1]
Of who?

[Speaker 2]
Ah, Dharmakirti.

[Speaker 1]
Dharmakirti. Okay. So, the Pramana Vartika, kama, that great classical commentary, which comments upon the true intent of the teachings on correct perception.

Okay. Read it backwards. Syntax backwards.

Okay. And the meaning of that of the meaning of that commentary, okay, the din, okay, cik tu gyur wa. Here, large.

This is gyur wa. Yeah, that's called gyur wa. Cik tu gyur wa, all combined together, wrapped up into one.

The meaning of that huge, all wrapped up into one, here, in my commentary. Okay, cik tu gyur wa. And cik gyur, in the monastery, or in a community, means unity.

You know, cik gyur means, let's do cik gyur, you know, let's, all for one, and one for all. Now, this book is stomba. This book is taught for low intellect, rab, din, and tama, all three.

Yeah, tama, tama means really lowest. So, I've designed, I would say dumba here, I would say designed. Okay?

Designed for people of high intellectual capacity, medium, and lower. All three are satisfied with this, with my book. Okay?

Okay. Lek shei chenpo.

[Speaker 2]
Is that a great explanation?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Okay? So, here's my rough translation, okay?

Sorry to eat and give it. Fulfilling the hopes of the fortunate, a necklace for the wise, the great explanation designed for both, designed for all three, for people of highest capacity, medium, and lesser, which, which, which wraps into it the meaning of the commentary on correct perception, that great classical work which itself comments on the true intent of the teachings on correct perception. Okay?

Okay? That's just the title. Now, in the monastery, it would be called something like— well, it's called sei dura.

Books get a nickname, okay? Like phantom or something. Books get a nickname in the monastery.

This happens to be called sei dura.

[Speaker 2]
Sei dura.

[Speaker 1]
If you say sei dura, it means the summary of the food.

[Speaker 2]
I was thinking though, with that TSAV, that would be incredible.

[Speaker 1]
Because we had seitan with you, right?

[Speaker 2]
I think that could also— Who's seitan?

[Speaker 1]
Siddharadana. The Buddha's father. Okay.

Now, I was going to— Now that I'm going to Jambayang, the Chakthala.

[Speaker 2]
I bow down to my protector, Jambayang, or Manjushri.

[Speaker 1]
I don't have a voice. And Lama. Oh, yeah.

And my Lama. No. No.

How do you phrase it? How do you split it? Are you bowing down to your Lama and the protector, Manjushri?

Or are you bowing down to your Lama and protector, who is Manjushri? Or are you bowing down to, you know— I'll give you a clue. Well, I'll give you— If someone asks you 20 years from now, why did you cut it that way?

Really, let's say, his Lama was— Oh, Jamyang Chodron. Yeah, so you can combine it. I bow down to my Lama and protector, Gentle Voice.

[Speaker 2]
That's right.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Rather than, I bow down to my Lama and to the protector, Gentle Voice. And if someone questions you, you can remember.

Okay. Now, this is presented in a debate format, the whole book. And there are questions and answers, there are replies that are not written down.

They're understood. My system of translating this kind of book is to supply them. Okay?

And I didn't even put them in parentheses. Because the goal of this series of books, the classics in Middle Asia, is to make books that normal people can read, as close to read as possible. Then the hypertextures would go crazy.

And who cares about hypertextures going crazy? So, Kachig Mare. Someone says.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah. Or suppose someone comes.

[Speaker 1]
I mean, I call this Suppose Someone Comes and Makes the Pollen Clean. That covers Kachig Mare and Sura at the end of the line. So Sura is a famous, famous word for claim.

They claim. He claims Trump is a good president. What's it mean?

Yeah, I don't think so. I don't think so. You don't say He says Trump is a good president.

You say If you say it this way He says Trump is a good president. It means you don't believe it. But if you use the word claim and say it's very common in Abhidhamma.

Tell me why, Stanley. Why is the word claim so common in the Abhidhamma kusha? They claim.

Because Vasubandhu doesn't really believe it.

[Speaker 2]
He does.

[Speaker 1]
He was asked by his brother to write the history of the school he didn't believe. Very funny. You'll see it all over.

It says all over the Abhidhamma. They say Sura, right? Sura And then sometimes he didn't have room for Sura so it's just like Sura Sura And the low there means I don't believe it.

Okay. So somebody So Kachi What's Kachi mean? Yeah, one mouth means Kachi means One mouth comes and says What did we learn about the opening line in a debate in like Thailand?

What's a good way to start a debate?

[Speaker 2]
Say something wrong. Nobody can tell.

[Speaker 1]
Start with something wrong. The sky is blue. Oh, sorry.

Oranges are blue. You know, you always start a debate with something wrong. And then the other guy has to prove you wrong.

So that's the didactic that's the pedagogical method of Tibet and Buddhism. You don't sit there and tell somebody here's the what's correct. You tell them what's wrong and you tell them why it's wrong and you don't tell them what's correct for a long time.

Okay. By the end of the all the wrongs they figure out what's correct. So it's a brilliant system.

You know. So they'll go for a long time. This is called one of the three great divisions of a didactic presentation.

Subject to assertion and argument. Oh.

[Speaker 2]
System. Yeah. Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Say shen lu shen lu gagpa. The first part we prove the other guy's wrong. Then we argue and trap him.

Our system. Then we present what's correct. Yeah.

Then tip it over. Yeah. He gets to come back the same way in a minute.

Okay. I didn't exactly say that. Okay.

And that's a great educational system. It's all Asia. We could have it in our university.

Okay. So here it is. Translate.

If something is a color If something is a color It's not necessarily red. It has to be red. You can say this is a stupid argument.

This is the first of the great DERA subjects. DERA has like 20 subjects. The first one is called Kharab Kharmar.

It's called White and Red. The study of white and red. And it's just to learn the format.

It's for little kids who don't know how in teaching them to debate. Okay. Okay.

If If something is a color it must be red. Okay. Now you have to decide on the format here at the beginning.

[Speaker 2]
And you have to find I don't know.

[Speaker 1]
What do you think? It must necessarily be red?

[Speaker 2]
That's too wordy.

[Speaker 1]
You want to say it must always be red?

[Speaker 2]
I mean I think it must be red kind of gets you off.

[Speaker 1]
What do you think? Yeah. What's the difference between must and necessary?

I was thinking you could kind of No. You have to say it must always. I don't know that you do.

No. I think must must always. Okay.

Must implies always. Yeah. Okay.

If something is a color it must be red. Okay. Then we come back with a counter example.

Okay. A counter example. Why?

We have to choose something which is both blah and blah. A color and not red. Good.

Okay. The counter example has to be two things. Okay.

It has to be something which has both colors. Okay. Then chudu kapo kado chudu kapo kado kado chudu chudu chudu chudu chudu chudu chudu chudu Dharma is an ancient Sanskrit word.

I guess it's dharmin or something. Dharmin. Dharmin.

Having a dharma and it refers to an object that has a quality. So chud here means kicha which means the quality. And kishi is the thing that has the quality.

So chudzen means something which possesses a quality. But in common language it means consider. Or take this example.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Chudzen. It means take. We're going to say consider, right?

Consider the kado.

[Speaker 2]
Another color.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Chudun kapo.

[Speaker 2]
A white conch shell.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. White conch shell. This is what they use in the assembly.

White conch shell. Chudun. Chud means it's I've been laid into a horn already.

Okay. Chudun. Okay.

Okay. So you might want to say a conch shell horn or something. I don't know.

But let's you guys debate it. I think conch shell is probably okay. Now tel this next sentence ends in tel.

Okay. This one here. Okay.

Now depending on in Tibetan there's no terms except rarely and sometimes they're very important. Like wu and wu. Okay.

So here if you go ma pa yin pa tel or you go ma pa yin pa tel you go higher or lower it changes the meaning. Okay. So it means it must be.

Okay. So sarcastically sarcastically oh, that must be red, right? It must be red, right?

If you believe it you say ma pa yin pa tel which means it must be red. That's the higher tone? Yeah.

Higher means I believe it. Lower means I don't believe it. That's why we cannot automate this answer.

All right. We were going to automate things. That's what I did in course 13.

I didn't write half of course 13. I automated it. I made macros.

Really? Yeah, they filled in the responses and, you know I saved, like, immense. I couldn't die down in, like, a legion.

Do you have hypertextures? Okay. So so are we going down or up is my question.

Down means I don't believe it. Up means I do believe it.

[Speaker 2]
It depends because I could say I could be sarcastic with either one of them.

[Speaker 1]
No. Down means you're being sarcastic.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, I'd say down.

[Speaker 1]
Are you telling me it's red? Are you telling me it's red? No.

The higher school of Madhubika is divided into two schools. The higher school is called Phelgir. Phelgir.

Pasangika. Pasangika. Okay.

Pasangika means a sarcastic statement. Somebody says, Oh, our cars are good. He says, like, my car is good, right?

It's sarcastic. Okay. So the higher school of Madhubika which is the basis of our tantra and the basis of all all Buddhism is called sarcastic answer.

The sarcastic answer school. Okay. And I call it the consequence school.

Consequence means according to what you said then there's a necessary ridiculous consequence. You know. You said if something is a color it must be white.

And I say, Oh, so apples are white, right? That's called Pasangika. Okay.

no, why are they called Pasangika?

[Speaker 2]
Because they're attacking someone else's presentation.

[Speaker 1]
It's deeper than that. Why is the lower school called independent? Yeah.

They think that a sarcastic statement has its own power. This way. The lower middle school says when you say, Oh, I guess apples are white.

Then they think the power of that statement is in the words. But we know that's not true. You see.

Somebody might not get it. The power is not. The power is coming from your mind.

If I say, Oh, apples are white. And if you understand I'm trying to teach you something you'll get it. But if you don't have the karma you won't get it.

So, the higher school of Buddhism says even the words you use to prove Buddhism are coming from you. And the, just below them, still middle A, they say, No, no. Can't be.

There has to be some power out there in those words. You know, there has to be some power in the words. That separates the two higher schools.

Got it? So there's five schools, right?

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
No. No. Can't do this then.

It's late. Sheer late. It's fixed at four.

[Speaker 2]
OK. Sheer late. Dutta.

Dutta.

[Speaker 1]
Sheer late. By the way, Dutta sometimes... No, we'll get there.

OK. Mata Nimbatha. Are you telling me it's red?

Are you telling me a white... Now, he's, he's more precise. He didn't say, Are you telling me a white conch shell is red?

What did he say?

[Speaker 2]
He said it, it must be red.

[Speaker 1]
He didn't say a white conch shell. What wording did he use? He's careful.

[Speaker 2]
It just says red.

[Speaker 1]
No. How did he describe the conch shell?

[Speaker 2]
Which is the, the color.

[Speaker 1]
The color of the conch shell. OK. He didn't say the conch shell is white.

He said the color of the conch shell is white. He's being more precise. He's being more precise.

OK. Can you say the cup is white? No.

The color of the cup is white. So, he's being very careful. And that's a great sign in the second line of the huge book.

It's an awesome book. It's going to take him more than a year. Chidam Kapokadasam.

Take the color of a white conch shell. I, we should use the language that I used in Course 13. I don't remember what I used, but it was good.

Are you telling me, are you saying it's red? Or, I forget. Ask the hypertexture.

It must be red, right? OK. There are two possible answers to a PAL statement.

Are you telling me it's red? What's your two choices? You can say in English.

[Speaker 2]
Yes. Red. Red.

Red. Red. Red.

[Speaker 1]
Red means red. Chiche means white cement. Why do you say that?

OK. Now, that answer is never written in a Tibetan book. And I want to supply it.

I want you to supply it. OK. So, are you telling me that's, are you telling me it's red?

And you need to supply it. Based on what the next guy says, kata in nature, if the next, if the next sentence ends in chir, you have to say, it was, he said, the answer to tau was chiche. And you said, babababa chir.

OK. So, you want to supply that. In a, what these books are written, they don't give the opponent's answers.

They are supposed to be inferred. Inferred. Yeah.

OK. So, you have to supply. I want you to supply them, because these books are going to be read by normal people.

OK. So, how's this exchange going to go? someone makes the claim, uh, if it, if something is a color, it is always red.

And then we say, well then, take the color of a white shelf. It must be red, right? And then he's going to say, why do you say that?

Chiche. Chiche. OK.

Why do you say that? In the reading 13, I put it in braces. I'm taking it out of, I'm taking off the braces.

OK. Why do you say that? And we say, color in between.

Because it's a color. OK. Got it?

You OK? If you don't get this one, you're not going to get the next 3,000. This is the first one.

This guy comes along and says, everything that's a color is red. And we say, OK, take the color of a white shelf. It must be red, right?

And the guy says, why do you say that? I said, because it's a color. OK.

Simple. OK. This gets you thinking, you know, Buddhists are supposed to think logically.

After 25 years of this, you can answer any question in Thailand for 400 people. You know, you're like, oh, OK, come on. You know, you don't have any trouble answering a question from somebody.

For 25 years, every winter, for three months, we study this. If we're Madhyamika class, Abhidharma class, Vinaya class, Dhrumta class, it doesn't matter. Every month, every year, for three months in the winter, we study this.

Because it's the spice of the whole cake. The whole thing needs this. OK.

All right. They call this the door to emptiness. This book is called The Door to Emptiness.

OK. Kata in Manchu. Now, when somebody says chu, because it's a color, the opponent has two choices.

They can say, actually, there's no answer for it. Yeah, kata machu means I agree with your answer, but it doesn't prove what you think. I agree with your answer, but it doesn't prove what you think.

OK. If you say kata machu here, it means I agree it's a color, but I don't agree it has to be red. OK.

If I say tanda bu, it's not a color. So, two choices. You can say not necessarily, or you can say not.

OK. Now, we cover both possibilities. If the guy says kata machu, we say kata ke.

This is ke limba. Ke limba green is necessarily the case. You already agreed, ke limba ke.

Your green is necessarily the case. If the color has to be red, you already agreed that. You can't go back now.

OK. What if he says tanda bu. It's not a color.

OK. So, ke limba ke, he splits it. We split.

If he says kata machu, which is not the same sign, we say ke limba ke, Which means, not necessarily. We say, you already said it was necessary. You said all colors are red.

You already said that. So Kevin K is like, you already said that. Tanmabut, if he says tanmabut, I disagree with your reason.

What is the reason? Because it's a color. It's a color.

And it is, if the guy says it's not a color. Red is not a color. Sorry, red is not a color.

Sorry, red is not a color. Anyway. We say madubna.

I mean, very patiently. By the way, I want you to cut after madubna, right? So, if you don't agree, if you don't agree that it's a color, the color of a white shell, if you don't agree that it's a color, madubna, then you very patiently go back to the beginning.

Okay. Okay, take a white shell. Just consider it a white shell.

Okay, got it, young man? White shell, got it, young man? Cut it, the color of a white shell.

Cut it, young man. Cut up or cut down? Up.

Yeah, because we believe it.

[Speaker 2]
It is so.

[Speaker 1]
It is so a color. You know. The color of a shell is...

It is so a color. Of course it's a color. No?

Because he said madub. We said it's a color. He said, no, it's not a color.

What are you talking about? Color of a white shell. He says, it's not a color.

It is, of course it's a color. Cut it, young man. Cut?

Nice. When you believe it, you go up. Cut it, young man.

Why? Because it's white. Because it's white.

Right. Okay. Of course we are not trying to prove that white shells are white.

We are just getting used to using this system. We are just trying to get used to this system. Okay?

So let's run the whole thing from the top. Okay? Here, I'm...

Sheldon, you are the... Ready? I'm the bad guy, you are the good guy.

Okay. Okay, you knew that already. If something was...

Adam, I just got to tell you seriously. If something is a color, it's always red. No.

No, no, give the answer he gave. I was having a hard time. Yeah, that's what...

Are you telling me it's red? No. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Consider it a color of a white conch shell.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Okay?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, are you telling me it's... Well, why do you say that it's red?

[Speaker 1]
Are you telling me it's red? Are you telling me it's red? Why do you say that?

Why do you keep saying it's red?

[Speaker 2]
Well, you said that if something is a color, it has to be red.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, I said that. The names say it, because it's a color.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, well, because it's a color?

[Speaker 1]
Why do you think I think it's red? Because it's a color. Yeah, because it's a color.

Oh, well, I didn't say just because the color had to be red. Yeah, obviously. Okay, you said that already.

You tell me, Kayla. You tell me if it's a color that had to be red. Now you're going back at it?

See, you're running the stuff in the top. Here you go. Ready?

[Speaker 2]
Sweet, man, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
If anything is a color, it must be red.

[Speaker 2]
I don't know. Yeah, well, take the color of a white conch shell.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. What about it?

[Speaker 2]
Well, I mean, that's it. Are you sure it's red? Good, good, perfect.

[Speaker 1]
You're perfect so far. Then I said, why do you think I said that?

[Speaker 2]
Because you already said it. You said because it's a color.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, because it's a color. No, just because it's a color doesn't mean it has to be red.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Well, if you don't agree that it's a color. Kevin K. Kevin K.

[Speaker 2]
That's, what is it?

[Speaker 1]
You already said that. Yeah, you already said it's necessarily red. And then let's back up one step.

Well, just because it's a color doesn't mean it has to be red. But you said it had to be. You just said it had to be.

You started that argument that if something was a color, it had to be red.

[Speaker 2]
You're throwing me off a boat.

[Speaker 1]
Let's start from the top. Let's start from the top. You got it in a debate round.

People that are pushy, pushy, pushy, pushy, they don't tell me a thing. Okay, you got automatic. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Okay, anytime something is a color, it has to be red.

[Speaker 2]
Well, consider it or take the color of a white conch shell.

[Speaker 1]
Okay.

[Speaker 2]
Are you telling me it's red?

[Speaker 1]
Why do you say that? Because it's a color. Oh, good.

Well, I wouldn't say it's just because something's a color, it has to be red.

[Speaker 2]
If you don't agree, then take the color of a white conch shell. No, no, Kevin K.

[Speaker 1]
It's a color. No. Sorry, yeah, you already said that.

Yeah, you already agreed that it has, if this, then that. Yeah, see, in my mind, it's red.

[Speaker 2]
You already agreed to that.

[Speaker 1]
Let's start from the top, you ready? Yeah. See how far we go.

If anything is a color, it must be red.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, well, take the color of a white conch shell.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, what do you want to say? You're telling me it's red. Why do you say that?

Well, because it's a color. Well, I don't mean just because something's a color, it has to be red. You already said that.

Good, you already said, you already agreed to that necessity. To me, the two are linked already. To say one, kind of.

Did you have a question?

[Speaker 2]
You say something like, you're the one who said it was red. Because when you say you already agreed that it's red, that means that somehow you're saying that, yeah, all colors are red, but every color sounds a little weird.

[Speaker 1]
You already said that one meant the other, literally. You already said that it's some.

[Speaker 2]
Because that's what you said.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, it's not that easy. You accepted the kema.

[Speaker 2]
Your mouth kema.

[Speaker 1]
You have to mention kema. You said it was necessarily so, you could say that. You said it was necessarily so, okay?

Oh, so I want to answer that. I say it's not a color. The white of a conch shell is not a color.

I'll change my answer. It's not a color. Color in my, in my tongue?

It is too bad that color, okay? It's that high place. This is you, right?

It is too color. Why? Why is it red?

Because it's white. Because it's white? Okay, let's do it faster.

You ready? Here we go.

[Speaker 2]
Okay, here we go. Line it up.

[Speaker 1]
All right. Anything with a color is red.

[Speaker 2]
Take the color of a white conch shell.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. You're telling me it's red. Why is it red?

[Speaker 2]
Well, because it's a color.

[Speaker 1]
Well, that's not necessary just because something's a color. It has to be red. You already said that.

Good, you said it was necessary. Yeah. All right, well, I'll change my answer, okay?

It's not a color. The white of a conch shell is not a color.

[Speaker 2]
Well, it is a color.

[Speaker 1]
No, if you not agree, no. If you say that. If you don't agree that it's a color, it can certainly be a conch shell.

Good, good, good, good. What about it? It's a color.

It is too color. Yeah. Okay, why do you say that?

[Speaker 2]
Because it's white.

[Speaker 1]
I disagree that it's white. Time to do it, time to do it. Okay, keep going.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
I disagree that it's white. Well, take the...

[Speaker 2]
Take the color of a... Consider the color of a white conch shell.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, let's consider it. What do you want to say? Copper in the...

Copper in the tail. White is a color. It is too, right?

You idiot. Okay. Why?

Because the color of a white conch shell is one chick... No, no. Okay, now listen.

The white conch shell is one?

[Speaker 2]
Now listen.

[Speaker 1]
You can't say, take the color of a white conch shell. It's white because it's the color of a white conch shell. That's not allowed in logic to repeat your elements.

That's what your partner does when you have an argument. Yes. You cannot repeat the same thing over again.

Oh, take a white conch shell. It's white because it's a white conch shell. You have to change one word.

Okay, anything. Okay. You can say, consider the color of a white conch shell.

It's white because it can be called white conch shell. You say any different, anything, but it cannot be the same because the guy already doesn't agree. You can't say, take a white conch shell.

It's white because it's a white conch shell. You can't say that. It doesn't prove anything to him.

He already disagrees. What I said is right because what I said is right. This is what your partner does.

When you get married, you'll find out. I hope not. You'll get this kind of argument all day.

That's what you miss. I'm right. I'm right.

Why? Because I'm right. You can't repeat the same, it's not legal.

Only in a marriage that's legal. They're in anyway. So, we have to change it any way we can.

Doesn't work in a marriage. So, we can say, because a red conch shell is the same as a white conch shell.

[Speaker 2]
But one of the same. You can say, you can't say a white one is a red conch shell.

[Speaker 1]
Did we change it?

[Speaker 2]
Did we change it? Slightly. Only slightly.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, don't cheat means same as. Don't cheat means same as.

[Speaker 2]
That means somehow different.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, it's not. I didn't use the same element. I didn't say, okay, go ahead.

What's that? Take a red conch shell. I'll say, take a red conch shell.

It's white because it's a red conch shell. Does that convince you? No.

Maybe we have to say something different. Take a red conch shell. It's white.

Because it's the same thing as a white conch shell.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Is that a different way to say it?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, it's not likely to be convincing.

[Speaker 1]
Right. No, no, no. Describe the only valid opponent who would accept that.

Someone who already accepts a white conch shell is white. No, no. Someone who already accepts the reason that it's white.

[Speaker 2]
And that would make it false.

[Speaker 1]
Someone who already accepts that if something is one with a white conch shell, it must be the color of a white conch shell.

[Speaker 2]
Because you're trying to convince somebody.

[Speaker 1]
If something is one with the color, if something is one and the same as the color of a white conch shell, it must be the color of a white conch shell. You gotta find somebody who understands that the color of a white conch shell, the color of anything that's the same as a white conch shell is white, but they didn't understand that the color of a white conch shell is white. Yeah.

I don't know who that would be, but yeah. No, it is hard to find. It's hard to find.

But it's possible. It's conceivable. Okay, it's possible.

So it's legal. It's a legal argument. Okay, this should have been a loan, right?

Okay, we're gonna run it one more time just to make sure everybody's got it. Oh, Adam, Adam's just thinking, man. Anything that's the color must be white.

[Speaker 2]
Well, I'll take the color of a white conch shell.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, why do you wanna do that? Are you telling me that it's red? Why do you say that?

Because it's a color. Well, just because it's a color doesn't mean it's red. You already said that.

Good, you already said that. Oh, yeah, I'm sorry, you're right. Let me change that.

The color of a white conch shell is not a color.

[Speaker 2]
If you don't agree that it's a color, consider the color of a white conch shell.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, what do you wanna say? It's a color. It is too a color.

It is too a color.

[Speaker 2]
Why? Why?

[Speaker 1]
Because it's white. I don't agree that the color of a white conch shell is white. Well, consider the color of a, no.

Good, good, good, good. Consider the color of a white conch shell. Carpe diem battle.

Carpe diem battle. Oh, yeah, it's white? It is still white.

It's still white, yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Why do you say that? Well, because the color of a white conch shell and the color of a white conch shell are the same thing.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, we can say that.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Because it's the same, because it's the same as the color of a white conch shell. I mean, that, yeah, then. Okay.

Right? But she said that because the color of a white conch shell. She filled it out.

She filled the whole thing. The color of a white conch shell is the same thing as the color of a white conch shell. That's okay, you can say it.

She stated the whole chok chu.

[Speaker 2]
Well, I just said the color of white is, and the color of a white conch shell are the same.

[Speaker 1]
Nobody said that.

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
We call chok chu, chok chu de che kya ba yi, opening lines of the Pramana Vartika. You know, the relationship between one and three. The relationship between the subject and the quality, subject and the quality accepted by everybody, which is the reason.

And the quality asserted is the second element, you know. Okay, ready? By the way, this will lead into formal logic.

One of the subjects of the Duna is formal logic. It's the forms of logic, but they don't start with that. Okay, got it?

Okay, one more time, Adam. Okay. I was thinking, Adam, you know, it's something to color the tongue, to end, you know?

Yeah, well, what about the color of a white conch shell? Oh, well, what about it? Well, are you telling me that it's red?

Oh, why would you say that? Well, because it's a color. Oh, well, I didn't say just because it's a color it had to be red.

Come on, you just got through saying it. Good. Yeah, okay.

You know what, let me go back. It's not a color. The color of a white shell is not a color.

Well, if you don't agree that it's a color, take the color of a white conch shell. All right. Kara gimbathel?

Yeah, kara gimbathel. It is still a color. No, it is still a color.

Why? Well, because it's white. It's not white.

I mean, the color of a white conch shell is not white. Well, take the color of a white conch, or consider the color of a white conch shell. Good.

[Speaker 2]
It is so.

[Speaker 1]
Good, I like the saying, I like the saying.

[Speaker 2]
It is so, right? Because? Because the color of a white conch shell is the same as the color of a white conch shell.

Bam! Yay!

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Ready? No!

No. Tzara bima. Tzara means you go back to the tel.

You go back to the original tel. Tzara means, tzara means go back to the original tel. What was the first tel?

Go back and front in the first tel.

[Speaker 2]
That's right. I guess it's right.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Are you saying it's, no, sorry, that's him. Are you saying it's red?

Okay, I'm doing that over here. Are you saying it's red? Okay.

Tzara bima means, if you go back to the beginning and say, oh, now I agree, it is red. The whole part we just finished was when I said, why do you think it's red? Now he says, okay, I changed my mind, I changed my mind.

You're right. The color of a white conch shell is red. You're right.

Dwe. Dwe means I agree. Now, dwe na.

Now, you keep coming back with the same chit-chat. You're being very patient with this idiot called Geshe Michael. Go ahead.

No, you're overly patient. In English. All right, well, let's talk about the color of a white conch shell.

Okay, let's do that.

[Speaker 2]
It must be red.

[Speaker 1]
No, careful.

[Speaker 2]
So it's red?

[Speaker 1]
Marpa mayen bar. Tell. Because that's what you really believe.

[Speaker 2]
That the color of a white conch shell is red?

[Speaker 1]
You believe it. Oh, yeah, mayen. Yeah, marpa mayen.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, I see what you're saying, mayen, sorry. So you're telling me it's not red? No, that's the sarcastic one.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, it is so not red. It can be red. In English, we say it can be red.

Why is it red?

[Speaker 2]
Well, because it's white.

[Speaker 1]
Good, good, okay. My cap. Just because something's white doesn't mean it can't be red.

My cap. My cap mayen. Cap mayen bar.

Appa dam. Tell. Good.

Of course there's a cap right here. What's the cap?

[Speaker 2]
That...

[Speaker 1]
If something is white, it cannot be...

[Speaker 2]
Red.

[Speaker 1]
Red. Okay, I said not necessarily can't.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, just because it's white doesn't mean it can't be red. And you said, come on. Cap.

If something's white, it cannot be red. It's a capa. Okay, got it?

Yatao? I was going to say my cap at the beginning of this. If you say my cap.

Oh, that's what I thought. Okay, yeah. If you answer my cap, okay?

Okay, yeah. Yeah, all right, it's not necessarily can't, instead if something is white, it can't be red. So...

And you said capa yatao? Capa yatao. It is necessary, okay?

Instead if something is white, it can't be red, because... Okay? Because...

Because why? Give me a reason. Because...

[Speaker 2]
Here's the punchline.

[Speaker 1]
Makape damape nuki shitun. Very easy.

[Speaker 2]
Because white and red are...

[Speaker 1]
Shitun. Say shitun.

[Speaker 2]
Shitun. They're separate.

[Speaker 1]
This is the same thing. No, this is a different one. This is a logic word.

That's each of you guys, it has a different vocabulary. Abhidhamma will not have this word in it. Okay?

Shitun means one thing, which is both.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Shitun means a shi, a foundation, where two qualities are tumble. They can get along with each other. What was the tun in your text?

Di di di di di di di. No. Is that where it's going?

Come on! He said any explanation of Antimus must be Oh, the four schools. Timber with one of the four schools.

It must be in accord with one of the four schools. Here, accord means those two qualities have to be able to coexist in a single object. But, when you translate this with colors, you have to say there is no one thing which is wholly white and wholly red.

You've got to use entirely. Otherwise, you're going to get in trouble. You're going to get students come up and say, well, what about the checkerboard color of a red and white picnic table cover?

Okay. Just cut it off there. Just cut it off there.

Add the word entirely. Save yourselves 20 years of stupid questions from students. One thing cannot be all red and all white at the same time.

Okay. What about a peppermint? Peppermint's thing.

Okay, so I suggest you add the word entirely to save yourself years of grief.

[Speaker 2]
Because one thing cannot be both red and white.

[Speaker 1]
I don't agree that there can't be one thing which is entirely white and entirely red at the same time. I disagree.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, my good moment.

[Speaker 1]
If you disagree, now, this next tile is going to go up or down? Is it something you believe or not? Is it something you believe or not?

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
Do you believe that there's no such thing? Do you believe that there's no such thing?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, I believe there's no such thing.

[Speaker 1]
No, you do. So you go up or down?

[Speaker 2]
No, up. Oh, I get him confused.

[Speaker 1]
No, no. In a week, you won't get him confused. By the end of your ten days, you won't get him confused.

Okay, so, he's going to say, GAR PO DANG MA PO NYID KYI SHIG TU ME BA THAL Of course there's nothing which can be— Of course there's no one thing which is entirely white and entirely red at the same time. Because GAR PO DANG MA PO NYID NGE BA NGE BA Because because white, being white and being red are contradictory qualities. NGE BA And we will study contradiction in this text.

Contradiction is one of the subjects of the Dora. It will come later. LAM GCIG MI LEN RGYAL and PHEN TZAM PANG RGYAL, two kinds of contradiction.

Okay, so the contradiction—you can't have— once this is red, it can't be white at the same time. Okay, that's called DORA. Got it?

That's the time for this class. And there's no break before the next class either. Oh, by the way, we just finished the argument because the next word is SHEN YUNG SHEN YUNG, not SHEN RUNG SHEN YUNG SHEN RUNG means the butcher also came.

SHEN YUNG means moreover. So he's changing subjects. Good luck, young man.

You got the worst one. Confusing. Please use the same vocabulary that I used in 13.

Go back and look at it. Because I don't remember what I used. That was how many years ago?

22 years ago. Okay, so don't bug me. Okay, let's do this thing.

Why are you doing this so big? Awesome. But don't you get into you go to Thailand, it's fun, and people are asking you questions and you're just like, you know, you can tell anything.

Any stupid question, you're like, and they're like, and you're like, you know, it's all in your mind, you're just debating there, you know. And it's very easy, you become a great teacher. And you're also better able to convince yourself not to do wrong things.

Because our own mind is the least logical thing in our life. Oh, but I really want to do that. Yeah, but it's against your bones.

Yeah, but I mean, it's really fun. Why? Why?

Because it's fun? No, you can't repeat that again. Okay, cool.

What's next? Junta? Is it a break?

No break, what do you mean? I don't have to leave today.

[Speaker 2]
My boss is out of town.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
My boss is out of town.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, I didn't see.

[Speaker 1]
He was just going to add it. He was splitting it up.

[Speaker 2]
Adam was splitting it up.

[Speaker 1]
No, we're going to find it now. No, his text is in the folder. He's talking about the text I'm about to do, which I don't have yet.

Oh yeah, we're going to find your text. Those aren't in the folders as Word docs. There's two that aren't in the folders yet.

Yours should be. You might be using yet another folder.

[Speaker 2]
Is there a third iteration of that? Which one are you on for your text?

[Speaker 1]
No, everyone's.

[Speaker 2]
Echo?

[Speaker 1]
In the TV? Can you turn on the volume on the television? Can you turn it lower?

[Speaker 2]
Ascot.

[Speaker 1]
Ascot. Okay. Okay.

When he's done.

[Speaker 2]
I don't know.

[Speaker 1]
Honestly, I don't know. You have to mess with it a little bit. It must be coming to your earphones.

Are you in the lounge or are you in Dr. Wu's office? You can come in the lounge and try it out. I would expect the lounge to create an echo, and I would expect his room to not create an echo.

But I'm Ascot. Okay, hold on.

[Speaker 2]
I'm going to find it for you right now. Sorry, I was just being...

[Speaker 1]
The root Dropbox folder is called SCIN Translation Program Texts, right? Or Translation Program Materials. I think that's a new one that I don't yet have.

It should totally be shared. It's SCIN Translation Program Materials. Is this one?

Go to your e-mail and search for e-mails from me. Here we go.

[Speaker 2]
I also don't have my text.

[Speaker 1]
Nick doesn't have Nick's text. Oh, yeah. I also don't have it.

Actually, I asked Adam to put the... Can you put the most updated version of your text in Dropbox?

[Speaker 2]
It didn't go in.

[Speaker 1]
The thing is, I was trying not to put .docx in there because...

[Speaker 2]
Oh, the .docx should go in. I didn't know that, so I took it out.

[Speaker 1]
That's why it's not in there. It got taken out. Got it.

When it goes back in, it'll go in. Do you mean to say the .docx in there?

[Speaker 2]
The .docx, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
The .docxs are the ones that actually work on my phone. So everybody's going to have .docxs. And two people don't have them yet, which I think are Suge and Stanley. I think I finished those.

[Speaker 2]
Should I send them to you?

[Speaker 1]
Let's see which ones I've done. You did everything except those two. Maybe I did do them.

[Speaker 2]
Let's see.

[Speaker 1]
You did. Which one? Abidama?

Yeah, Abidama. And the one, I think I called it lower middle weight. I didn't do Abidama.

We'll do it until tomorrow. What's your name called? I think I called it lower middle weight.

Yeah, I didn't do that one either. I sent them to you. Are we recording all of them?

As far as we could, yeah. Because I messed something up the first time and left the space after the combos or something. The ones I sent to you last night are correct.

By the way Adam, I put your text in the Palatino 12. So please put yours in there.

[Speaker 2]
Palatino. I want to do it with everybody.

[Speaker 1]
Well, I don't know. Something happened when I imported it. By the way, I propose that we put up online this cake last night.

Do you want a bite of it? You go Benzos. Now, in this case we've got to go find texts.

So, the first thing we're going to do is go to Gopher, which you will learn how to use it. It's a necessary tool for you guys. And, okay, so this is the collection of six texts on the rationale for the Middle Way.

Umar Iqzaltu, okay. These are six important books by Nagarjuna. These are his most important books on emptiness, okay.

Iqzaltu. So, I want a list of them, okay. So, I'm going to go to the symbol.

If I wanted to make sure I would get a list of all six, what could I do? Rather than a mention of just a group of six. I thought of that, but there's a better way.

How can I for sure get a list of all six? No, I'm searching the whole diagram. You're searching the whole diagram.

How can I design the search? Six books of Nagarjuna, proximity search, pick any one of them. No, pick any one of them.

So, like, you know, you know, Sindok, okay, there's a book called Stopping Debate, Shutting Down Debate. And I'm going to search it within five lines. Okay, ready?

There we go. Sorry, what was the second part of the search? I know one of the books.

It's called Sindok. Dhyabarthana. Wouldn't it be better to just search the Tengyur or no?

No, first we need the six names. Then we're going to find the six books. Okay, here we go.

One, two, three. Searching, how many pages? 20,000 pages.

It's about a million pages. Ready? Dr. Wu helped pay for this. Boom, we got it. Okay. So, look, look, look.

Take that, and go to a document, open a new document. Ready? There it is.

And that tells you where I got it from. Whoa, what did you just do? He copied it.

If you control X, if you command X, it tells you which book it came from.

[Speaker 2]
Command X from within the search window.

[Speaker 1]
Super sexy. X from here.

[Speaker 2]
Is that all six right now? No, let's count. Do you want to send me this document?

I want to pay attention to what I'm doing. It's hard to do it at the same time.

[Speaker 1]
I'll just whip it up right here. And I'll send it to you. Alright.

Sorry, I did not do that for me. I did something weird. Oh, Richard's telling me where I made it.

Okay, there we are. These are considered six books. Oh, Nagarjuna.

Well, I'll tell you in a second. Texts. Okay, got it.

Here's the source. Who wrote it? Yeah, my teacher's teacher.

My teacher's teacher. My teacher's teacher. Okay?

And, you know, there's a hundred other places where you could find it. Now, I want to teach you how to find a book in the Tengyur. Okay?

You're looking for a book. There's 3,700 books in the Tengyur. Tengyur means all the commentaries from India.

What's Kanyur?

[Speaker 2]
Kanyur.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, all the books by Buddha. How many of those? 990.

We finished them. It took 25 years. We finished 4,600 books.

They're all in there. Now, suppose I want one of them. How do I find it?

You've got any clue? I'm going to search the Tengyur. But what's a clever way to find it?

[Speaker 2]
You can say, you know, Phuket-do.

[Speaker 1]
Good. Every one of those 4,600 books begins with the same two lines. Here's the book's name in Sanskrit.

Here's the book's name in Tibetan. So we're going to search a few words of the title near the word, the name of the book in Tibetan. And we'll find it.

Cool? These are Tibetan. Tibetan names.

But every book in the Tengyur starts out and says the name of this book in Sanskrit is this, and the name of this book in Tibetan is this. So if I want to find a book that has the word wisdom in it, in the title, Tsawasheeram, that's Nagarjuna's first great book. It's called Wisdom.

And all emptiness teachings come from that. All emptiness teachings come from that. So of the six, Geshe Michael gets to translate that one.

[Speaker 2]
That one.

[Speaker 1]
I'm saving that for me. You get to do the other five. Okay.

They're still sexy, okay? Okay, so let's go find... I'm going to take this one because it's easier, okay?

Cool. Aren't there other five commentaries on the first one anyway? I don't know, I don't think so.

Maybe. Could be. Okay, so open up a new girlfriend window.

Yeah. Let's call it Shimmo. Shimmo.

Okay, because it might be Shimmo Nambatapa, or Shimmo Nambatapa, you know, we don't know. Near Phuketut. You could just say Po, right?

That's too much, but probably it's safer to say Phuketut. Okay, got it? This book by Nagarjuna is called Crushing Bad Ideas into Powder.

Shimmo Nambatapa. Bone powder? Crushing bad ideas into powder.

Basma? Yeah, Basma Guru. Basma Guru in Sanskrit.

So, okay? Shimmo, you ready? Now, there might be some other book among those 4,000 books that has the word powder in it.

But there will be a lot, okay? Ready? Okay, so we go to the tenure tenure and we search.

I hope so. There we go. That's not it.

Okay, that's a different book. Okay. Three, total.

Three books in the tenure have the word crushing to powder. Yeah, I don't use the one after Phil got it. I don't use that.

Okay. I used the one before that. So there it is.

Now look. How do you get that out of there? Well, we have to get to the path and we have to go to the path.

No, don't be so complicated. Control A, Control C. Go to a Word document and save it.

There you go. There you go. We got one of the six works already.

How long is it? Starts on 22? By the way, Nick and I were dying to Nick and I were dying to find commentaries on these.

They don't exist. We wrote to some scholars. We said we're not finding any commentaries.

They said because there is none. This is you. To a lot of Nagarjuna's books, there's no commentaries.

I don't know. We haven't done any yet. They're saving it for us.

Okay, so Nick, save, okay, Control. We're going to save it in your This is in the new folder. Six books of Nagarjuna, okay?

And by the way, I think they're all going to end up in one volume, probably, because they're so short. But they're difficult. It'll kick your ass.

Okay. Okay. That's the first one.

By the way, let's put it in Chijang Rinpoche's order. Which one isn't in that list? Which order?

Say that again? Oh, I think that was the second one, right? I hate to do this.

[Speaker 2]
Was it two? Okay, so two.

[Speaker 1]
Let's go see. Yeah, it was the second. Now let's go to the third one, okay?

So when I search for any book in the ten year, we can use the same search setting but change it to RTZOT, to argue. So he wrote a book called Shut Up, The People Are Arguing With You. I was thinking this morning when I was driving here, like, how's Nick going to translate that?

There have been some really bad translations of it. So, you know. So this book's been translated already?

People have tried. They don't know anything. It's a disaster.

Okay. Damn universities.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Really bad. Is that it?

No, it's not up in the title. Is that it? No.

Is that it? You gotta get good at just, you know. That's it.

Okay? That's his second book. How long is it?

It's also short. It's a couple pages. I'm thinking that you're the only person in this group that will have to write a little explanation of each idea in your book.

Okay? Because he's hard. You can't just give some hand to somebody in Nagarjuna.

It's mean. It's mean. Okay.

Okay, there we go. We saved it. How do you spell it?

R-T-Z-O-D Which book is it? R-T-Z-O-D B-Z-L-O-G Okay, we got two and three. Let's go from there.

How about Dunchupa, okay?

[Speaker 2]
Seventy verses on emptiness. Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Dunchupa. So let's go look it up. Sorry, what was it?

R-T-Z-O-D? Yeah. Dunchupa.

Dunchupa. Okay? Ready?

Si. I love Gopher. I kiss Gopher every morning.

It's a century and a million pages. We're so smart. Is this it?

Yep, that's it. That was easy. Shunyata Saptakarika.

Saptikarika. Very good.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, which number? That's number four, right? Ta-da!

How many pages? That's longer. Not really.

It's about three pages. Number four. No, twenty-seven is just one tiny verse at the top.

It's two pages. Got it? Okay.

I'm going to cut those. Number five. Rigpa Dunchupa.

Sixty verses on reasoning. Just to hear the names of his books is a blessing for your whole life. Okay?

Much less to read them with Nikolai.

[Speaker 2]
So he has seventy verses of three pages. Yeah, it is.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, that's about right. Because a verse in Sanskrit is only two lines. That's a great question.

Sorry, what was this one again? Rigpa Dunchupa. Sixty verses on reasoning.

R-I-G-S, right? How long is it? This is short.

This is all...

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, yeah, that's true. This was eleven pages.

[Speaker 1]
Now it's like four pages. Is it longer? It is slightly longer.

No, no, no, no.

[Speaker 2]
It's about the same.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, there we go. Save it. Which number of book is it?

Five? Five. Rig...

Rigpa Dunchupa. Okay, got it? How long is Wisdom, Geshe-la?

I'm just curious. It's longer. It's twenty-seven small chapters.

You got gypped. Vimshottaya is quite long, and it's been translated a lot because the Dalai Lama teaches it. And it's also the name of...

By the way, two possible spellings, so I'm just anticipating a problem. Okay, got it? Why did this...

[Speaker 2]
You're right.

[Speaker 1]
This is not it. This is a commentary on Chakrasamvara. That's a commentary.

That's another one. Is this it? Oh, it's a commentary.

Kanjo? There's a lot of them. There's ten of them.

These are all ten-gear commentaries on Nagarjuna? No, there are ten-gear books called Rinchen Tung.

[Speaker 2]
I already looked for this.

[Speaker 1]
I just put a new one. You found it? It might be called Rinpoche Tung.

It's supposedly called Ratnamala, but it's... Rinpoche... Tung.

Rinpoche... Tung. Possible misspelling.

Sipa'ali. Sipa'ali. Okay, here we go.

That's not it. Oh, that's not it. That's not it.

That's not it. That's close. But it's a tantra.

Now, okay, Ratnamala. Okay? But let's check it's by Nagarjuna.

It should be down at the bottom. Pandita Chandra Heela. It was written by Chandra Heela.

This is not our Rinchen Tung. Okay? Go find another one.

That's not it. This is it, okay? It's called the...

the string of jewels, the advice to the king. This is it, okay? This is the one you want to just confront.

It's long, okay? Lopin, Chembo, Pakpa. Lodur.

Written by Nagarjuna. Okay, got it? Control A.

Control C. This is a bit more to bite off. I didn't, I wasn't going to do it because other people had done it, but it'd be so sexy to put all his six works in the same book, you know.

So... And of course we can do it better. Since...

Sorry. Did you spell it with an L? Uh...

I didn't even catch it. Did Tujan Rinpoche spell it with an L? I don't know.

Let's see. I don't think so. No.

He didn't. Okay. Oh, it is Rinpoche, Chandra, and Lodur.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
These are his six most famous works, or he did only six? He did many of them. He did Chittim, for example, Surlekha.

But somehow these tie together into his teachings on Madhyamika. Okay. Yeah, there's fourteen famous Nagarjuna books, I think, total, right?

Fourteen books by Nagarjuna in the tenure. But we're only going to work on six because they're called the Rig-Song Truth. And there's supposed to be some logic to why they all hang together.

You want to go look at why? Yeah. I mean, if you don't have anything else to do.

I'm trying to work it out on my own. Sorry. It'd be interesting to see what's the rationale why they were all put together.

It would be interesting. There's a lot of shenanigans, okay? Yeah.

So I'm going to teach you a trick. Okay. Go down to here.

And that tells you which section of the tenure you're in. See? And we didn't translate all this, but this is the Tattvas.

These are the Tattvas. The Stavas. Stotras.

Praises. Eulogies. I'm going to skip file here.

Skip file and skip books. There's 230 books with wisdom in the title. I don't have time to look at all of them.

I'm going to skip to which section of the tenure.

[Speaker 2]
Uno?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, uno. So that's why you use this thing here. And you watch this here.

[Speaker 2]
Watch this right here. Can you move the window so that the bottom is on the screen somehow? No, I can't.

Can you make it smaller?

[Speaker 1]
Can I?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, if you just grab the corner. Why don't you start over on the search and then just search into the... No, no.

He can bring it down. Yeah, if you just drag it.

[Speaker 1]
It doesn't matter. You see everything important. Okay.

Next file, okay? I'm not stopping. Tantra, tantra, tantra.

Tantra, tantra, tantra. Yeah. I could make the search field uno.

And it would save me some time. Oh yeah. Let's do that.

Okay. So I'm going to change the search field to just include the Madhyamika books. So I add a new search field.

I'll teach you guys how to do this, okay? Okay. And I go into tenure.

Dr. Wu paid for all this, thank you. And I go to Madhyamika, okay? Then I open.

Now, I'm only searching Madhyamika. Okay, got it? Here we go.

That's it. That's wisdom. Yep.

Prajnanamamulamadhyamakakarka. And we just go see who wrote it. Here.

Here's the author. Nagarjuna wrote it. So it's the right book.

Okay. We saved ourselves some time. And I could have done this with no separate name, but I thought you guys would like to see how we do it.

So this is... When is this? Okay.

And we just call it... It's number one, right? Okay.

Ta-da! We did the six books. Okay.

Now you're a real person. Now you're as excited as Super Sexy. I mean, we're probably eight people in the room that think this is sexy.

Nick knows what I'm about to do, but I'm going to do it. So you want to just start through from the second one? Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
I already started formatting it, but you might as well do it for everybody.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, I want to teach them. So first of all, our standard is Palatino 12, because I like it, for no better reason than that. You know, you could double-justify it now, too.

[Speaker 2]
We can do that.

[Speaker 1]
What's the difference between Palatino and Palatino? I don't know. There is a small difference.

Now, check this out, okay? We're going to save ourselves, like, some time. No, this is because I've been doing these courses all these years.

I want to find any place that does space. This thing is in verses. I want it to cut itself out in verses, in poetry.

I'm going to tell the computer, make it poetry. Okay, very sexy. Before you do that, don't you want to do the returns and the double returns?

You're right. Make it messy. Make it messy.

He said Latino, huh? Double returns replace with space, right? And then single returns also replace with space.

Replace all those, okay. I'm just saving myself time. Okay, then I'm going to search for what?

Single returns. I'm looking at one. Yeah, yeah, I see.

This is the Tenger before, but I won't tell. Things were different back then. Okay, now it's getting cleaner and cleaner.

Okay, now I can now I can full justify it. And now watch this. This is the sexiest part.

[Speaker 2]
Poetry. Now it's in poetry.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Except there's an extra space there because I left it there. He's got some more stuff to do.

No, you didn't. He's got the shades there. Okay, now, this is what I'll show you how, you know Now, whenever there's an error by the typist I have to clean it up.

See what I mean? So the whole thing is poetry again? Yep.

Normally poetry is four. It's not in poetry. It's not in poetry.

There's no rhythm. It's not in poetry. Here, take it out.

Go back. I was going to show you something sexy, but I failed. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
This is not Oh, you're right. Sorry.

[Speaker 1]
This is the second book. Okay, I'm with you now. Well, some of it's in poetry, I'm afraid.

For me it seems almost easier. At least I understand how to split it up. Oh, that.

[Speaker 2]
Yes.

[Speaker 1]
Make notes what I'm doing. Oh, lordy. Really?

[Speaker 2]
That's me. I like it.

[Speaker 1]
That's brilliant. It saves a lot of time. It means I'll have forgotten this knowledge by the time I can use it again.

[Speaker 2]
It's cool.

[Speaker 1]
You have to do it in order, yeah.

[Speaker 2]
Wow. Now I'm impressed.

[Speaker 1]
I just saved so much work.

[Speaker 2]
I don't have to clean it up.

[Speaker 1]
No. No. After all, they don't.

So you get a double-shade after all. Yeah. No, I just cleaned them up.

They were there, but they were messy. Okay. Yeah.

Okay, I've never tried this book, okay? I guess we're going to want to try to find the Sanskrit scans at some point, too. If they exist.

Yeah, that's going to be the thing. Who wants to help me find them? We have a list of stuff.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, we do.

[Speaker 1]
I have them on a drive in my house, actually. Scans. Right.

I'm just doing some minor cleaning, okay? Before we start. It's really just aphorisms.

It seems to be just little sentences about, you know. Wow, I don't even know if we can translate this. I promise nobody's done a commentary.

There might be commentaries in the tenure, by the way. You want to take a shot? Up to you, Lama.

I don't think a man else can do it any better. So, what the heck. What would be your reason for saying I don't know if we can do it?

Like, it's too hard? It's like cryptic. Oh, that sounds fun.

[Speaker 2]
Like secret.

[Speaker 1]
Like coded.

[Speaker 2]
That sounds fun.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, this didn't format correctly because it was Oh, yeah. One of the steps we wanted to do before was to switch all the semicolons to commas. We should have done that first, right?

Nobody can come in. No, no, no. No, no, cannot come in.

No. Oh, he's saying something about the microphone, maybe.

[Speaker 2]
That's okay.

[Speaker 1]
He said it's not working, Mr. Oh, echo. Yeah, I don't know how to fix that. Yeah, Scott.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

I mean, Dennis can walk to the lounge and then I'll echo. He just heard me, so. Now.

Okay, let's take a shot. You want to try it? Because I don't have this now fully formatted.

Do you want to just give it to me after? I will do it now. Yeah, that's great.

Do you want to airdrop it to me? You can airdrop me the whole folder of the six texts. Tell me how to do that.

Okay, go to your finder. New finder window, control shift. The one down should be airdrop.

Yeah. And then take the folder of the six and then drop it on Nick. Drop it on Nick.

[Speaker 2]
And me too, if you want.

[Speaker 1]
Well, I'll put it in the job box once they clean them up. Although it would be nice to put it right on top.

[Speaker 2]
Did it go?

[Speaker 1]
On top of that Chinese guy. On top of this, right? He's from Hong Kong.

Anybody else want it? I'd like that, please. Thanks.

Who are you? Are you on here? Stanley's here.

Stanley, are you on here? Who's this?

[Speaker 2]
Is this Dr. Wu?

[Speaker 1]
Is this you? Who's this? This one here?

[Speaker 2]
That's Mr. Wu.

[Speaker 1]
Do you want the six?

[Speaker 2]
Dr. Wu wants... What happened to Yi Yi? She just left.

It went in the downloads. Yeah, right.

[Speaker 1]
Adam, did you get it?

[Speaker 2]
No. Okay, good.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, we're alright. Alright, let's take a shot. If there's something we don't understand, which is probably all of it, we can go to...

We can see if anyone quoted it. I'll show you, okay? If you had time, and you didn't want to do anything else today, you could see who quoted it in the symbol.

You see? And here we go. Okay, this person...

Here he describes the function of each of the six. What did Nagarjuna hope to accomplish in each of the six? And he says, the function of smashing into powder is to refute the sixteen proofs of the logicians.

Okay. So now you know something. There's supposed to be sixteen ideas in here.

And they're all going to be refuted. Okay. I'm just showing you what I would do if I was going to start this text.

When did you search it? I searched it in the symbol. Yeah, I want to see if he's going to...

Anybody going to quote it? Is there any more context? Is there any other context in the book?

This is a list of the six. Thanks doesn't help. And there's no further matches.

Nobody in... Yeah, nobody talks about this book. We can try that, right?

No. When you're desperate, go to the... Uncatalog data?

Uncatalog data is approximately 20,000 books that we are behind. We don't have enough staff. We don't have enough money.

With 20,000 books of type, they're finished. We couldn't put them in the database. They're just sitting in this huge box called uncatalog.

Let's see if there's anything in there. And this search is the only one that can take a long time because... Okay, that doesn't help.

This is thousands and thousands of books. Uncatalog. We couldn't have enough people to do it.

Anyway. I have another suggestion. There is a great catalog of the Buddhist books made in Japan just before World War II, 1937, in a university called Tohoku, which is in the middle of Japan.

I went there. They have a great collection of books, thousands and thousands of books. There are about 10,000 books there.

Actually, it was flooded during the tsunami. I don't know if the books were destroyed or not. We can look up this.

We want to see if anybody in India wrote an explanation of any of these. Yeah, it literally is. So we're going to start.

We're just going to look for Shingmo.

[Speaker 2]
No?

[Speaker 1]
Okay. And we go to the catalog of the tenure from Tohoku. And that's it, okay.

Sorry. Yeah, this is. Here it's called a sutra, which I'm not sure it was called a sutra.

So here, look. There is the Wisdom, his most famous book, which is the basis of all emptiness teachings after that, all of them, everywhere, China, Tibet, everywhere, Japan, okay. Then comes 60 verses, okay.

Then comes smashing into powder. Then comes 70 verses on emptiness. Then comes, you know, shutting down those guys who try to argue against us.

Okay. Okay. Then this is a commentary probably on his own wisdom called I'm not afraid of anybody.

Okay. Here is another version of Shingmo Mantra by Nagarjuna. Okay.

And here is a commentary to the 70 verses by where? Right here. It's an auto-commentary.

Yeah, according to this. Okay. Here is a commentary to shutting up those guys who debate against me.

Okay. And I got bad news for you. There are no other commentaries on the six, because there would be after that.

Okay. Here is the essence of dependent origination by the way. Trenching.

He did write a book called that. Maybe we should check that one out too. While you are not busy.

These are only two pages each. Here is a commentary, an auto-commentary to his own book. But what I'm trying to get to is nobody ever wrote commentaries to this.

It may be that you just can't understand it. Okay. And then you get to Buddha Palita's commentary.

And then you get him defended by Chandrakirti. Okay. So it's kind of ambitious to go after this book.

No one wrote a commentary. Ever. Maybe it's incomprehensible.

It's all so red. It's just so clear. Well, let's try it.

Everyone is supposed to stop. Two minutes? Well, since we started at one, we can go to two?

Yeah. Okay, I'm going to take a shot. I'm sure some scholars have tried.

But anyway. And there's nobody quoting it. So there's no context.

Well, luckily I'm not a scholar. Let's go see if this had anything. By the way, this huge list here, those are the catalogs to the Russian collection.

And the Mongolian collection. And there are 141,000 books. We cataloged it, 12 years.

It took 12 years. So there's a copy in Russia.

[Speaker 2]
Oh.

[Speaker 1]
You see, stuff like that. And they won't let it out. And they won't let you do it.

Use it. And Dr. E is going to get to embrace it and help us. Now I'm curious about the one I think by Dalio means to crush into dust.

How can we check that? We can check in DOS. We just want to make sure we understand the Sanskrit title.

Who's that guy with the mustache, the artist?

[Speaker 2]
Dali.

[Speaker 1]
These are the best onions from Georgia.

[Speaker 2]
That's what I was thinking about.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, Vidalia means to crush into dust. Takpa means to crush like Like a mill? Yeah, when you change a weed into flour.

That's called Takpa. Okay, Takpa. So Vidalia apparently is the whole verb.

Okay. There it is. There's the Sanskrit.

So you guys should learn some Sanskrit. Okay. It was called a sutra, but it's not a sutra.

It's not by Lord Buddha, but it's called a sutra. Because it's short. No, okay, I've been avoiding this.

Let's try. I can understand the first verse. Okay, what's this thing?

Where are we starting? I bow down to Nagarjuna. I bow down to the master Arya Nagarjuna.

Something's wrong here. He's not going to bow down. No, I'm worried.

He's not going to bow down to himself. Yeah, that would be... I'm the best.

It's got to be. Because look, it says here it was written by Nagarjuna. Here it says written by Nagarjuna.

It's got to be the translators at least. I guess. Tobe means logic.

Okay. Usually we say Rigpa, right? Or Taki Rigpa, the science of reasons.

So... But in some cases, but I'll give you the Sanskrit for toge. I forget what it is.

Tarka. Tarka. Now, Tarka can also mean stupid logic.

Okay. So toge can mean a good word for a magician, and it can mean a pseudo-logician. This is like Topa.

Yeah? Yeah, it's like Topa, yeah. Okay, so toge shepe nagyal ki.

Nagyal? Pride. How do you split it up?

I-king. The word for pride in Tibetan is I-king. I'm the king.

Nagyal. By the way, we're right here, okay? So toge shepe altogether, meaning like this?

Out of some delusion that they shepa toge. That they have correct logic? That they understand logic, okay?

That they know logic. And it's key, right? Instrumental.

Because they have some... What's a good word for pride?

[Speaker 2]
Arrogance?

[Speaker 1]
Delusions of grandeur? Yeah, like that. Because of their arrogance that they understand logic.

Kajun tsupa nundupa. Anyone who would like to debate with me. Okay, nundupa means abi-dupa, okay?

It just means anybody who would really like to debate with me, right? Tey nagyal pambuchir. To remove them of their nagyal.

To get rid of their pride. Shema nandashepa ja. I will now reveal to you.

I will now teach you. You shouldn't say explain, right? It's not a commentary.

I will now teach you. Crushing into dust. Do you want to call it crushing into dust?

Or we can talk about it later? I'm sorry? You decide.

I want sexy titles. I want short sexy titles. So how come it wasn't even presented to you?

The real name of this book is the source of all my good qualities. But it was taught to a group of lamas who were about to take a tantric initiation. So I called it preparing for tantric because it sells much better.

And this is called the Three Principal Paths. But I changed it to Three Principal Teachings of Buddhism so you can help more people. In the inside you say the real title is blah, blah, blah.

There's a guy who translated Arabic poet Rumi. And there's millions of copies in the world. Millions.

And he just kind of massaged it. Okay. You ready?

These aren't cryptic. These aren't koans. Good luck.

Pramana and enlightened speech are... No. Okay, let's translate it.

What the heck? Yeah. Okay, but it's incomprehensible.

Sera means correct perception, right? Shalja Shalja is a synonym for shalja. Oh, existing thing.

Yeah, all existing things. This word is njelwa, which means to weigh, or to consider. So that thing which is to be weighed, or that thing which is to be considered is a synonym for shalja, and you're going to get it in the Sengdura.

When we get to Shudrup Gandamshat, the outline of existence in the Sengdura, he'll say shalja, shedja, yirpa, tseme, mipa, dhunchi. So this is like pramana. Anything which you can judge.

Anything that you can perceive. Okay, but it has the sense of consider. Objects of consideration.

Nyika, both of them, drepa. Drepa. They tend to get mixed up.

Wow, that's cool. They tend to get mixed up. And that's all it says.

End of subject. Okay? You can spend the rest of your life kids who are not born yet are going to come to me, and I'm going to say, what's it mean?

And you're going to say, I've got to grow a beard. Use the first... Give me an example.

Of correct perception and existing things getting mixed up. And its object. Correct perception and its object getting mixed up.

I think he means you confuse them. You know, you mistake... You mistake things for...

It's not... Well, yeah, I guess it is Prasangika. Oh.

I thought it was as simple as he's trying to... Yeah, I think I would go with that. The luminous image, which you're going to learn about in the DCI class.

Yeah, that's what I mean. The luminous image and... And the thing that you think...

And the thing, the object, get mixed up. Then he moves on to another subject. Uh-huh.

Uh-huh. So you mistake the image in your mind, which is what upsets the karmic seed. Oh, kiptunji?

Yeah, it's a kiptunji. You mix them up. I'm going to read it that way.

You know, all you can do with this kind of text, no commentaries, nobody ever spoke about it. You've got to take what you know, and you've got to give some explanation to people. And it can also be cryptic.

It can also be sexy. Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

You can say, uh, you mix up the pen and the pen, then just go on. Really? You mix up the pen and the pen.

You think there's a pen out there, you're watching an image in your own mind. Okay. I believe that's what he's saying, but we can spend hours, and it'll be fun to spend hours.

This is easy. This one's easy. You tell me.

[Speaker 2]
... ... ...

[Speaker 1]
... ... ...

I'll add this. ... ...

[Speaker 2]
...

[Speaker 1]
... ... Good.

Good. Now, is that connected to the last line? ...

... ... I think he's just throwing out random statements to these guys.

It's like you just heard the only one microphone was working. ... ...

the brain. Listen, Adam, good morning, because things don't come from the outside. But it proves so many things.

So that because is not supposed to be connected to the one before it? No, because the last one is you know. Yeah, so it is.

Now it could be or it could not be. You can put illustrations in this book. Huh?

I was going to say put illustrations in this book. Well, it could be connected or it could not be connected. Yeah.

There's two ways to get at this, two ways. Meditate on it, sleep on it for a few weeks, or drink a lot of wine. No, no, no.

I'm just kidding. Okay, give me the next one. Both existing things and non-existing things.

Sorry, I didn't get through the whole thing. Not that, talk. Yeah, talk.

Uh, talk. That's uh, both existing things and non-existing things are talk.

[Speaker 2]
What's tupa? Tupa?

[Speaker 1]
Is this the same tupa we just had? This one means to rely. Oh, okay.

That's for the d, this is for the s. Oh, my yin. It relies neither on that which exists or that which doesn't exist.

[Speaker 2]
The self relies neither on that which exists.

[Speaker 1]
No, no, no. Subdak. He doesn't say the sentence on the subject.

Subject and sentence, sorry. What's dak mean? Pluralizer.

Oh yeah. Dualizer. Oh.

It's the dual in Sanskrit. Sanskrit has singular, plural, and a separate for twos. Twos, different spelling.

You know, dharma, dharmas, dharmani. You see, there's a singular, a double, and a plural. There's not just single plural.

Sanskrit has a separate ending for two. And Tibetans use dak. Which makes sense because there's two choices here.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Nye pa pa mey pa dak, nye ka dak ni. Tipa mayin. Tipa mayin.

It's just tipa mayin, no. They rely both on existing things and nonexisting things. It doesn't say la ni.

Uh, sorry? It doesn't say la ni. Oh, that's true.

Nyee, dak, nyee, ka, dak, nyee. Existing and nonexisting, and both existing and nonexisting, don't depend on anything. Existing and nonexisting.

And both existing and nonexisting. Oh, and both. See, there's three subjects in this sentence.

Yeah. Existing, nonexisting, and both existing and nonexisting are not things that we rely. Oh, so dak is shown plural, not dual.

[Speaker 2]
Could it be that they're not things that we rely on? And ka?

[Speaker 1]
Well, I think it's referring to nyee, ka. Nyee, ka means... Oh, because...

Nyee, ka, dak.

[Speaker 2]
You've got to read it. Nyee, ka, dak.

[Speaker 1]
But then the dak... Nyee, dak, nyee, pa, nyee, pa, and nyee, ka, dak. Okay.

You said nyee, ka. Joshua, before you were saying it's a pluralizer, not a dualizer. Oh.

Here it's a dualizer for both.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, it's just nyee, ka, dak.

[Speaker 1]
That's why I said nyee, ka, dak.

[Speaker 2]
Okay, I get it. Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah.

No, that's confusing.

[Speaker 1]
So it's... and then... Yeah, okay, good.

I mean, I don't... I get how to translate it. I don't get what he's saying.

So it doesn't say dak, nyee. Yeah, I see. It says dak, nyee.

Uh-huh. Neither existing... Yeah.

Existing, non-existing, and both existing and non-existing, don't rely. Don't rely, yeah. Yeah, and you can't say they're not relied upon, right?

I mean, an easy way to read this, which is probably not correct, is to say, in Buddhism, we don't believe in this thing that you can only know what's painful if you know what's... and you can only know what's pleasant if you know what's painful. We don't believe that.

Relativity. We don't believe that. If you have karma and experience pain, you experience pain whether there's no pleasure in the world or not.

You see, we don't believe in that they depend on each other. In that sense, that you can't feel what's a beautiful song if you don't hear a crappy song. We don't believe that.

If it's coming from karmic seeds, you can have all beautiful songs without bad songs in the world. That's quite enlightening, that it's possible.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, yeah. Okay?

[Speaker 1]
And you're saying a potentially incorrect way to interpret this phrase is... one way to interpret this phrase is... I would take it interdependent, because, of course, Nagarjuna's not going to say existence is not something that depends.

That's his whole life's work, is to tell people everything is dependent origination. Okay? I bet he's talking about relativity.

Can you have happiness without pain? He would say, yes. It's not that you need pain to know what happiness is.

That's a psychologist's view. I mean, you can spend a couple of years thinking about what to write here.

[Speaker 2]
Good one.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. And it may be a whole line of logic. They may all be interconnected.

No one's ever discussed it. All the lines of the text may all be interconnected? They could well be, because this next one feels...

they are not, because if they were, there would have to be an infinite regression. There would have to be an infinite regression. Which came first, chicken or egg?

Pleasure or pain? You know, you'd have to have pain to have pleasure, but to have pleasure you'd have to have pain, and to have pleasure you'd have to have pain. I'm sorry, I thought you were talking about the lines of the poem.

No, mayimte means... This mayimte may well be connected to the mayim that just came. Otherwise it's impossible to understand.

It's just, it's not, because it would be infinite regression. That's what this is saying, this line? Taila means it would necessarily have to be tupa mepa.

Tupa means to reach to an end. Stop talking about the noodles. It's finally remaining.

[Speaker 2]
It's finally remaining.

[Speaker 1]
Tupa mepa is tupa. You okay? No.

That seemed to be related to the last one. Yeah, it has to be that... They cannot be because if they were they would have to be infinite regression.

Hold on.

[Speaker 2]
Doesn't it seem to be the opposite of what you think?

[Speaker 1]
Let me just get it in writing. You guys can argue for the next 20 years. Okay, here we go.

These may or may not be related. Okay, there's a double colon between the names. Oh, I see.

I'm sorry.

[Speaker 2]
Okay, they may not be related. I think they are.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, okay. I'll try to translate them each and then see what happens. Tsuname me ma nishin.

so, you know, valid perceptions are like, yeah, like butter and butter lamps?

[Speaker 2]
No, no, no.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, valid perceptions are like lamps. Like lamps, yeah, yeah. Flames?

[Speaker 2]
Did you say flames?

[Speaker 1]
They establish Mars. themselves and others.

[Speaker 2]
Whoa.

[Speaker 1]
Now, I don't know if it's relevant, but there's a debate about whether a light can can illuminate itself. There's a light bulb. There's a light bulb.

Light up the light bulb. Buddhism says no. Okay.

I wonder if, There's a Shantideva debate.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, I've got something for you.

[Speaker 1]
What if the first sentence is always the other guy and the second one is him? I'm open to that. Do you mean like the rong dang chen gyur pa je pa yin?

No, no, I'm going back to the other one. Oh. Maybe the other guy said existence, nonexistence, and both are not things that depend.

[Speaker 2]
The other guy.

[Speaker 1]
And then, Nagarjuna said, no, you're wrong, because then they'd have to be endless. It could be going back and forth. And I bet if you add these up, there's thirty-two.

Uh-huh, I was just thinking that. Shouldn't. Because there's supposed to be sixteen bad arguments here.

You want to do it when you count the lines? One, two, three, four. Count the Os.

Here. We can do it like this. Nick.

Look. Let me do something. Oh, yeah.

How many Os? No, watch. You know how to find out.

Did I ever teach you this? Yeah, I already know it. I know what you're saying.

You just search it and it'll tell you right away. No, replace what are seventy-eight notches. Seventy-eight, yeah.

Sixteen divided by... Yeah, two.

[Speaker 2]
It's like four point something.

[Speaker 1]
Sixteen and two. Well, seventy-six is... Quite sure.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, you've got to find them then. I know that beginning bits aren't in the debate, so there could be some lines that just aren't part of the debate.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, good luck. But this is going to be fun, right? It's hard.

It's hard. By the way, I'll show you something. You could look up...

Sema. And you could say Rang Drupal. Okay?

Okay? And you could see if anyone in India ever used his logic in the tenure, in the whole tenure. Malfunction.

[Speaker 2]
Nobody.

[Speaker 1]
Nobody. Yeah, I don't have a bad idea. No, nobody used it.

Who is this? Gumtang Navigata. Only one person ever mentioned it.

I think we'll just let it go. Okay. How come Nick didn't notice that?

I'm going to give you one more because it's understandable. And I think we should take a shot at it. As you wish.

Maybe we can find that 16 listed somewhere. Okay. Because someone thought it...

Somebody decided there were 16 things in here. They must have known more about it than we do. Okay.

You cannot have a correct perception about correct perception because it's not the case that the light of a lamp removes darkness either by touching it or by not touching it. Is the chair to touch? Chair means to make contact with, yeah.

I'll say it again. There cannot be a correct perception about correct perceptions. Oh, that's what that polarizer is there.

Because when a lamp... When the light of a lamp removes darkness, it does so neither by touching that darkness nor by not touching that darkness. That was easier, right?

[Speaker 2]
In what way? Either by touching that darkness nor by not touching that darkness.

[Speaker 1]
That's okay. That one's easy. That one's not so hard to translate.

I was so excited because in the other text I had translated some verses and I was going to show off. This is awesome, but now I'm just totally confused. Krishna, how is this easy?

Do you want to know the next one? Can you tell us the meaning of this one? Well, I'll just tell you another one.

They're kind of sexy. Fair enough. A lamp cannot illuminate itself because it is not darkness.

That's a little easier. A lamp cannot illuminate itself because it's not... well, it doesn't have darkness.

That's the next one? No, it's too down. I'm going backwards.

You want the letter A beforehand? Oh, that's the textual element. No, just for sexiness.

Okay, because I can't stop. Okay, here's the next one. The classical text says that the actions of those of the world and a lion are the same.

That's the Tantra logic, yeah. Can you say that again? No idea what text, no idea what...

Tantra logic, in the classic, it says that the person who acts in the world and a lion and other things are exactly the same. It could be acting on a human or something, like an animal, I don't know. Asleep for 20 hours a day.

What, lions? That's it. That's why no one touched this text.

Nobody. Unless you can find 16-somethings in there. Why are there only 16 what?

[Speaker 2]
Reputations?

[Speaker 1]
Oh, yeah, there's 16 reputations. But we don't know what the original arguments were.

[Speaker 2]
And we don't know if this text is offering... If he's got a couple of quotes in here, you could go back to the Tantra and see if there's anything in there.

[Speaker 1]
You can. Probably there are criticisms posed by people whose criticisms are no longer existing. You could have some fun and just...

You could say, look, we don't know, we will never know, but maybe they said this.

[Speaker 2]
Would that just be one giant footnote on the whole?

[Speaker 1]
It's funny, I'll tell you something funny. Lama after lama after lama has said that this is one of the great works in the Gajanet and no one ever read it. That is funny.

They just agreed. They just agreed that it's one of the great ones.

[Speaker 2]
So it's an example of one of the physical things remaining in the Gajanet.

[Speaker 1]
Rinchen Taro's probably... It's easier. That's just the...

Like a labyrinth. It's easier. But I think it would be fun to throw this in.

Do you think I'd be able to make a whole book even of this size out of these? If you add the Rinchen Taro. Because Rinchen Taro has commentaries.

And you could add a commentary on Rinchen Taro. But that's been covered by so many people, the Rinchen Taro, because it's been taught so much recently by the big Lama. We could add his Dependent Origination, Essence of Dependent Origination.

Yeah, you're going to have to wing it. You're going to have to create something. Or try to...

I wouldn't translate just the Rinchen Taro. It's overdone. It's valuable.

Maybe there's a commentary that would be worthwhile doing. But the reason I didn't choose that in the first place was because it's so common. I wanted something special.

You can keep searching. That combination of Sun Lekha, Letter to the King, and Randhawa's commentary is brilliant. But I don't know if there's any other commentaries on Nagarjuna.

I asked Art, for example. And he said no, he couldn't think of any. So...

I don't know. I think we could make a whole book if that other book is a few pages, the actual root text of Essence of Dependent Origination. We could just take a look at it.

Do you think there's anybody at Saha that would do a... No Lama in Tibetan history or Indian history has treated this text.

[Speaker 2]
I mean, not necessarily in text, but...

[Speaker 1]
Who could... I mean, Vishnu Tarunachan would take a shot at it. He's not afraid to take a shot at anything.

But I don't think it would be better than what we can do. We'll work on it. We'll work on it.

I mean, if anybody has dumb confidence, it's me. I'll write my own commentary. People will love it.

Well, the great thing is people will love it. No, the safe thing is people will criticize it. They'll take a shot.

We've been doing everything, you know. Nobody can do anything different. Right, right.

I found a Chinese work, Chinese translation and commentary. And that Lama is like 100 years old. He's a main disciple of Khamsar Rinpoche.

Khamsar? Khamsar. Well, that'd be interesting.

What's he say? Oh, he didn't try to explain it? Oh, okay.

Would be worth to look at it. Let's take a look at it. About 100 years ago?

About 100 years, yeah. Previous life? Previous life.

Yeah. But he wrote it in Chinese? Yeah, he translated and then he wrote the commentary.

Wow. So he's a student of Lama Lama Rinpoche? There's another...

Let me search that. He translated Lama Rinpoche.

[Speaker 2]
Lama Rinpoche, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Oh my gosh.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah. Well, maybe it'd be cool to...

[Speaker 1]
Maybe it'd be cool to put that in. My Chinese is terrible. Well, you got study.

[Speaker 2]
He's called the modern Xuanzang.

[Speaker 1]
Because he is one of the best translator in the... Is he Chinese? He's Chinese.

But he stayed in Tibet for like 10 years. Oh.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
And studied with who? Zhubang Monastery.

[Speaker 2]
Zhubang?

[Speaker 1]
Zhubang. Zhubang, yeah. And he's the director of the Buddhist college at that time in China.

Like the highest one. He has a lot of courage to write a commentary. Yeah.

Well, it'd be interesting to see what he says. And it's hard. I have a feeling if we sit with it for a while, we might be able to figure out something.

You know, my experience is you go through four lines and you find something you do understand, and then you go back, and see, you know, if there's something you can understand. It is not something which could be direct perception. It's like having a microphone in a discussion.

Yeah, but... Yeah, it's red. Of course.

You said it last time. It's not something which could be direct perception and the rest. That one?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Because it gave up the... Let's do it on your own time. We could look through the six and see, you know, which are easy to translate.

Let's see. Yeah. Tsendok is pretty easy.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
And I always wanted to do Shimon Lamtok, because I like the word Vidalya. Yeah. But it's not that long.

I mean, we could just do it. We might want to start with some stuff that's more... If you do all of Nagarjuna's works, and maybe inside of there, these arguments come someplace, sometimes.

And we don't know. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. They'll make more sense either way after doing one.

I would string them together. Yeah. In one document.

[Speaker 2]
Uh-huh.

[Speaker 1]
And then when the refutation comes up, when the answer comes up without the question, he searches the rest of his works for the answer. And that's the beauty of having a computer. Yeah.

So, I would suggest we get all the works he ever wrote out of the tenure, and we string them in one long document. Because there's nothing before him. And what's after him is only dependent on him.

So, you know, let's take all the works he ever wrote, glue them into one huge document, and then when he has an argument like this one, we can, you know, see if he ever treated it somewhere else. You see what I mean? Because he's also got auto-commentaries here, a couple of auto-commentaries.

So you would look, next time we meet, we'll go to the native catalog to the tenure, and we'll see, we'll take a lot of books by Nagarjuna, and we'll glue them all together. And then we'll see, when we have a piece of an argument, but we don't have a whole argument, we can check all his books to see if the argument's somewhere else. See what I mean?

Yeah. Okay. Great.

[Speaker 2]
All right. Could you glue them together, or could you just... You could have them in the same folder.

[Speaker 1]
You can have them in the same folder. With Gopher, you can have them in the same folder, which is probably wiser.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, ready?