Вступление на срединный путь (текущий курс, Аризона), занятие 16

[Speaker 1]
Okay, so Umla-Jupa doesn't enter Tsao-Shi-Rim. Entering the Middle Way doesn't enter the... Weird text I'm using.

So, Umla-Jupa-Tsao-Shi-Rim-La-Juba-Tao. So, Umla-Jupa doesn't enter into Tsao-Shi-Rim. Why?

How? In two ways. Juk-Su-Nyi-Yos.

Karin, what are the two ways? Yeah, profound side of the teachings and the far-reaching side of the teachings. No, it doesn't, because it doesn't enter into the...

Sab-Mu-To-Ne. Ma-Ju-Be-I-Chen. Doesn't.

It does? How many ways? Huh?

Eight or two? Yeah, Shakyamuni. Juk-Su-Nyi-Shok.

Sab-Mu-To-Ne. Juk-Su-Nyi. Two ways.

What are they? First one?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Difference from Rangyupa and Menche. Yeah. And then secondly?

From the mind only. Okay. So, Umla-Jupa, entering the Middle Way, doesn't enter the root text on wisdom of Arya Nagarjuna in the far-reaching side of the teachings.

[Speaker 2]
Doesn't.

[Speaker 1]
It does enter. Shok. How?

We got one way so far. Umla-Jupa, Tsawa-Sherab, The root text on wisdom is not a Mahayana text. Tsawa-Sherab, So, it is.

You're saying it is. Yinde? Why?

Huh? Yeah, because it gives infinite arguments about emptiness. And that qualifies it as Mahayana already.

We don't have to talk about bodhichitta. We don't have to talk about level emptiness, anything like that. That's where we are here, okay?

That's where we are so far. Is that high enough for everybody? It's okay?

Okay, we're going to read together. You ready? On the count of three, slow.

One, two, three. TAR-PA-DANG, TAM-CHE, KHYEN-PA, GANG-RUNG, THO-PA-LA, DONG-NI, CHA-MO, NGON, SUM-DU, DOG-GO-PA, SUM-KYANG. Okay, good.

Uh... You tell me what's TAR-PA. Yeah, like Nirvana, okay?

As opposed to Buddhahood, okay? And then TAM-CHE, KHYEN-PA? TAM-CHE, KHYEN-PA means omniscience.

Like Rinpoche, Gang's nephew's name is Thubten Khun-khen, right? Khun-khen. TAM-CHE, KHYEN-PA.

Sometimes they call monks Mr. Omniscient, you know? I mean, just their monk's name, okay? So TAM-CHE, KHYEN-PA.

DONG-NI? Emptiness. Okay.

Okay, so like you can't have any kind of debate in the Prasangika school, in the Thangyawa. You can't have any kind of debate that says, oh, people of Hinayana only see sort of a lower emptiness, and people of Mahayana see a higher emptiness. In Prasangika you can't say that.

In Rangyupa you do say that, okay? That there are degrees of emptiness. But in the higher school, you either see it or you don't see it.

I mean, either you see there are things not coming from your mind, or you don't see that. And there's no in-between. Is there a 17-foot, three-headed purple elephant in this room?

No. I mean, no, you didn't have to look around because it would have squashed somebody already. You would have heard it.

So, it's not like they could be here to some degree. You see what I mean? And then people have said to me, oh, what if they stick their nose in the door, you know, or something like that.

But the idea is, look, they couldn't have been here in the first place because there's no such thing. You see what I mean? Now, if you said a normal elephant, the absence of a normal elephant in this room, you could say maybe you could have degrees of that, like if they had their nose halfway in the room or something.

But a thing that could never exist, to what degree is it not in this room? You see what I mean? You can't say it's more or less not here.

It's just not here. And never could, never would, never will. Okay, that's all.

So, like that. But there's this kyang here. What's kyang?

Butt. Butt. Okay.

Here we get a butt coming here. This is long. Let's cut it here.

You ready? You did pretty good. I think Geshe-la...

Okay, let's get going. Okay, here we go. One, two, three.

Okay, good. Accustomed. How do you say it?

Accustomed. Getting habituated. Getting...

Accustoming themselves? This is very touchy. This is very touchy.

The wording is very touchy. He's going to say something like, if all you want to do is achieve nirvana, of course you have to see emptiness directly and you see it fully, but in sort of an abbreviated way. Now, well, what it means is you don't need to keep going back to it thousands of times and you don't need to swim in it.

If you perceive emptiness once directly, then go through the path of habituation, even if you have no bodhicitta, you can get to nirvana. You will get to nirvana. And you don't have to work as hard on emptiness as someone who wants to get to Buddhahood.

That's what he's saying. The emptiness they perceive is the same. You'll never get away with saying anything else.

But the degree to which they accustom themselves, accustom themselves to that emptiness is much different. Somebody who's shooting for the big time has to swim in it much longer and more deeply than someone who's just trying to get to nirvana. Okay?

Okay. I don't like it. Okay.

Let's try the second one. Oh, too emptiness. Okay.

I think it's both. Okay. I think it's both.

Okay. Okay, so that's a little delicate. That makes a good debate for the debate ground.

Do Hinayana and Mahayana people see a different emptiness? But do they familiarize themselves or swim in it to a different degree? Yeah.

You don't have to do so much if all you want to do is achieve nirvana. If you're shooting for Buddhahood, you're going to have to go much deeper into the idea of emptiness. Thousands of different presentations.

Yeah, you can debate. That'd make a good debate. I mean, I'm not...

I just work here, okay? But I was thinking of a debate, right? I'll give you a debate.

Umla-Jupa doesn't enter Tsawa-Shiram. Majjhimika-Avatar doesn't enter the root text on wisdom in two different ways. So it does enter it in two different ways.

Does it enter it in the profound way? Because it talks about emptiness, right? So does it enter it in the bodhisattva side of the teachings, the far-reaching way?

Yeah, why?

[Speaker 2]
Same thing.

[Speaker 1]
Same thing. Why are you calling it in two different ways? Isn't that emptiness side?

You're saying, oh, because those people like to hear about emptiness in a thousand different ways. Sounds like the first one. Repeat it to me.

It just sounds like the profound side all over again. You know, I think you could have a good debate on that in the debate ground. Think about it.

Isn't he just saying the same thing? Like, isn't he just going at it one way, the emptiness? See?

I say he's not going at it two different ways. Because this guy, because he just said the second way he gets at it is through emptiness. Many infinite kinds of emptiness.

Okay, sounds like the first one to me. You know? He still didn't enter it in the bodhisattva way.

Okay? Think about it. Kind of tricky.

Okay. You ready? Here we go.

Slow. One, two, three. One, two, three.

Du, pei, shiro. Okay? And this is true.

That's the chiro, right? And this is true because... And this is true because...

What's rangjo? Auto commentary. To what?

Which auto commentary would he be quoting? To entering the middle way. Master Chandrakirti's own commentary on entering the middle way.

And this is true because the auto commentary says... Now, how do I do this thing? I go over here?

What's it called? I found out these are in alphabetical order.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah? Oh, okay. Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, okay. The auto commentary is proving something else. We don't know what.

So we just get the second half. He probably said something like this book was made for bodhisattvas or something like that. Whereas...

You ready? One, two, three. Nian, te, ki, tekpa, le, ni, shi, ki, dak, me, pa, dor, tsun, pa, tsam, shi, du, se, do, she, su, pe, she.

Okay. Good.

[Speaker 2]
Where is that?

[Speaker 1]
Would I do type I? Oh, good. Okay.

Okay. So he's quoting who? No.

Kedrup Dhammadharge, Kesham Drupadnyaype, Dhammadharge. Like in the monastery you call him... You don't call him Kedrup, you call him Kesham Drupadnyaype, which is like...

Kedrup means wise and accomplished. But when you say his name in a debate in the monastery... He wrote our textbooks, right?

So we say, the wise, the accomplished. You know, you don't just say Kedrup. Okay.

So he's backing himself up by saying, look, even Master Chandrakirti said that, bodhisattvas need an extended presentation and people of the Hinayana just get an abbreviated presentation. Okay? Of emptiness.

She's like ready to debate me. I don't know. I'm just...

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Chögyi dhagme. Winston had this a lot, right?

Chö and... What's the other dhagme? Gangsak.

Yeah, Chö and Gangsak dhagme. Say Chögyi dhagme. Chögyi dhagme.

Gangsak dhagme. Gangsak dhagme. Which sounds like the difference between the emptiness of things and the emptiness of people.

But more technically it's the emptiness of people and the emptiness of their parts. So it's like, is the pen empty? That would be like Gangsak dhagme.

And then, is the color of the pen empty? Or is the shape of the pen empty? That would be like the emptiness of things.

Alright. This is a monster sentence. I'm going to try to break it up.

Okay? Here we go. Are you ready?

I'll get it up to the top. Just this little piece. One, two, three.

Rang, lug, la, gya, che, we, go, ne, jug, su, yu, de. Okay? He's like, de.

What did we say, rang lug? Yeah. According to our own...

This is an impossible sentence. I don't know how to... That's the second half of the sentence.

Right there. I'm going to see if we can break it up. Let me see.

We'll do it here. It's kind of artificial.

[Speaker 2]
Oops.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, ready? Here we go. One, two, three.

Rang, lug, go, ne, la, gya, che, go, la, we, go, su, ze, pa, chin, le, dang, che, pa, dang, sa, nga, pa, dang, jug, pe, go, rim, la, de, ne. Only half a sentence. Here we go.

Question for you. Say, so-so, so-so, kye-wo, kye-wo, as opposed to pakpa. See, here's pakpa here.

Okay? And here's so-so kye-wo. How do you want to translate it?

This is a person who has seen emptiness. He's a pakpa. Arya.

And a person who hasn't seen emptiness, he's called a so-so kye-wo. Regular Joe. You see?

Regular person. Sometimes they say common person. Ordinary person.

What do you want to...

[Speaker 2]
Ordinary person.

[Speaker 1]
Ordinary person. Yeah, okay. It does help by bringing in, if you call yourself an ordinary person.

The ten levels. I like to call them realized person. Yeah.

Well, that's a tricky question. There are also ten listener bhumis, right? So you can say yes.

But anyway, that's another story. Actually, a big subject of the Umla Jupa is the Bodhisattva Bhumis. So, on top of being a great book about emptiness, it has a great presentation on patience, it has a great presentation on morality, on, you know, effort, on giving.

It's a great book for that too, in that sense. So it covers all ten of the bhumis in a very detailed way. But when you get to the sixth chapter, it's half the book.

Because that's the chapter on wisdom, on the perfection of wisdom. So anyway, so everybody's in the monastery, they don't show up at class until you hit the sixth chapter. You see, Geshe Thubten Rinchen and I went through the first five and practically alone.

Nobody wanted to spend much time on that. Then we got to the sixth chapter, people started leaking in, you know. Okay.

The Ten Levels of a Realized Person. Here's where he's going. I think you can smell it if you think about it.

Does Umla Jupa talk about emptiness? So it covers the profound side of the teachings. We already had one argument for why it covered the far-reaching side of the teachings, the bodhisattva side of the teachings, and that was, to put it simply, bodhisattvas need infinite arguments in favor of emptiness.

This book gives infinite arguments in favor of emptiness. Therefore it must have been written for bodhisattvas. But that's sort of a weak argument because then you're covering the profound side again.

You see? Aren't you? So now he's like, I feel like he's sort of aware of that and he's like saying, well I better go a little bit further here.

It's true that the root text on wisdom speaks about the direct perception of emptiness. That's its main shtig. But when Master Chandrakirti makes his commentary on that book, he brings in the ten levels.

That's his basic shtig here. He brings in the ten levels. Ten levels of what?

Bodhisattva. Okay? So now he's covering himself more.

Okay, even if you don't buy that thing about bodhisattvas need infinite arguments for emptiness shtig, even if you don't buy that, well actually when Master Chandrakirti explains this book about emptiness, he does so by presenting the ten bodhisattva bhumis. So he must be talking about bodhisattvas. Okay?

That's what he's going to say. All right? That's what he's saying.

Yeah, yeah. Where was the but? Anyway, yeah, okay.

It also covers the transitioning. What do you want to call it? Vipasyana and Samatha.

She's been selling Samatha, stillness, right? I kind of like stillness. It gives you the sense of a very great level of concentration or meditation.

What do you want to call Vipasyana? What have you been calling it in your class? I like extraordinary vision if you don't mind.

The vi is extraordinary. Pasya means to see. Heart Sutra says, panca skandhas tasya svarupa svabhava shunyam sampasyanti sa pasyanti, to see.

Okay. So, and also of, what did you call it? Extraordinary?

I like to call it the extraordinary vision of emptiness the first time I talk about it. It presents the various levels of stillness and also, how about the various levels of the extraordinary vision of emptiness? Which investigates the nature of, which investigates the true nature of the two different forms.

True nature of the two different types. I'm going to write something and then you tell me a better way. Can you say it that way?

Or is that too translationese? It's saying that Vipasyana's job is to investigate the true nature of the lack of self to people and the lack of self to their parts. Is there a better way to say it?

Is that okay? Huh? Oh, we can't.

I don't feel like I can add them though. He didn't say it that way in the Tibetan. Yeah.

Maybe. It's too many obs, right? How many obs I got here?

Three in a row, right? Is this okay? Which investigates the true nature of the two different ways in which things lack any nature at the root.

Can we get rid of one of the natures? True nature. By the way, true nature, the first true nature is is dekona nyi.

It's suchness, really. Which investigates the suchness of the two different ways. Is that too much?

True essence. He didn't do that. He said dagme nyi ki dekona nyi.

Right here. The suchness of the two lacks of a self nature. Let me see.

I wish I could do that. We're trying to avoid the word nature, though. There's a way to say that and he didn't say that.

It's suchness, really. It's dekona nyi.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
She already got her head up there. I'll leave it. You come back to me later.

In Siddhartha, it presents the various levels to most of the various levels of the external vision of emptiness which investigates the nature of nature. What's that? And it does so.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
But then you got to How about any self of them?

[Speaker 2]
But that's Is that all right?

[Speaker 1]
It is what it says in the That one says dagme. I'm going to say nature. And it does so.

[Speaker 2]
It's still nature.

[Speaker 1]
I'm trying to get rid of one that's nature. Huh? Inequality of their own?

How's that?

[Speaker 2]
How's that?

[Speaker 1]
Let's do that. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
And it does so by What?

[Speaker 1]
No, it's It's It's the true nature of those two different kinds of emptiness. Yeah. Yeah, it is.

It is the emptiness of the emptiness. It's the emptiness of those two emptinesses. Sorry.

Equality is okay.

[Speaker 2]
And it does so And that's different.

[Speaker 1]
And it does so by drawing additional material from What do we call Rincon Tewa? String of Jewels? Just get this, okay?

Here's his argument. I kind of like it. You ready?

Does Umla Jupa enter into Tsawa Sheru? Yes. How many ways?

Two. What's the first one? Emptiness side of things.

What's the second one? Far-reaching side of things. How?

Then he's kind of conceding it. He's saying, look, I know the root text on wisdom doesn't present much about bodhisattva behavior or about the ten levels. But Master Chandrakirti adds that information.

Kakong means he appends or he supplements from other works presentations of the ten bodhisattva levels. And then in that way he's covering himself on the bodhisattva side of things. So he's kind of giving up the idea.

He's saying, look, I know Master Arya Nagarjuna didn't directly talk about bodhisattva levels. He's mainly talking about emptiness. But when Master Chandrakirti comments on him, he brings in all this other stuff including material from the other five books on emptiness by Arya Nagarjuna.

And he supplements it with bodhisattva ideals. All in the context of the emptiness of those ideals. So, you know, it's very beautiful.

Did he throw in bodhisattva level stuff? Yes. In that way does he cover the bodhisattva side of the teachings?

Yes. Why does he throw them in? He just wants to prove their emptiness.

You see? It's so cool. He's still on the emptiness thing.

So what's the ngö-ten-ten-jey-tso? This is a big thing in the monastery, ngö-ten-ten-jey-tso, kamsa. What's the main thing he's presenting?

Emptiness. Now people got confused there. They said, what's the main thing Master Chandrakirti wants to talk about?

Emptiness. What's the main thing he's presenting? Emptiness.

Does that mean he doesn't present bodhisattva stuff? No, but when you say main and explicit, these are the two words in the monastery. Ngö-ten means explicit.

Ten-jey-tso means main thing. What's the main thing he wants to talk about? What's the explicit thing he talks about?

Emptiness. Emptiness. Does that mean he doesn't talk about bodhisattva stuff?

No, he brings up bodhisattva stuff, but just to talk more about emptiness. Be generous. Be patient.

Be moral. Why? Because things are empty.

You see, it's really cool how he brings in the bodhisattva stuff.

[Speaker 2]
Is what he, whatever he's bringing in, is it directly from Arya Nagarjuna or is it from other...

[Speaker 1]
Much of it. Much of it. Large quantities of it.

What percent? I don't know. Seventy percent?

Yeah. Okay. Let's see if he'll let this dead dog...

No, he's not going to let it go. Okay. This is an easier debate.

You ready? One, two, three. ka, chi, ki, sa, wa, she, ram, ki, gya, che, we, chok, ma, ten, to, se, na.

Okay. What's ka, chik mean? Yeah, one mouth meaning some guy says.

Did he say or did he stare? Claims. Okay.

Somebody claims. He's already shot down, right? What did he say?

Sa, wa, she, ram means what? The text on wisdom. Ma, ten doesn't teach gya, che, we, chok the far-reaching side of things.

Now why would some guy come and say it again? I don't know. But we got another fool who's coming up with the same...

He's just repeating the same argument. Okay. Now suppose someone comes again and makes the claim the root text on wisdom doesn't present the far-reaching side of the teachings.

Okay, ready? One, two, three, de, gya, che, we, chok, ten, ba, stop. If you say ten ba ta it means...

Do you think it presents that? Are you telling me it presents that? But if you say ten ba ta it means it does so say that.

It does so talk about the far-reaching side of things. Which one do you think is... Are we going to go up or down?

This is us talking. I'll say it again. I'll say it again.

That guy came up and said basically Arya Nagarjuna's work doesn't talk about Bodhisattva stuff. So this sentence says it does talk about Bodhisattva stuff. So does he go ten ba ta or goes ten ba ta?

Yeah, he believes it. It's like you got to believe me, man. Ten ba ta.

Okay. Of course it talks about it. Okay.

Got it? So it's all contextual. You can't translate it right unless you hear it in your ear in the debate ground.

Somebody's going ten ba ta. Okay. It does too present it.

Let's keep going. We'll start with shi. Ready?

Shi ngo bu ne tsu lam ru pe rim pa re bu san ge ki sa dang che pa ngo den den che tsu wo che ne den pe che Okay. Good. Say shi lam rebu sum shi lam rebu sum shi rebu sum People translate this as foundation, path, and result.

It's very famous. In the tantra it's very important, for example, in what distinguishes the Anuttara Tantra is how you talk about death. And there's the shi and the lam and the rebu of death.

Shi ngo bu ne tsu means the original condition of death, meaning as a bad experience that's going to lead to your rebirth. That's called shi ngo bu ne tsu, the original condition. Then lam, ku sum lam kyer, means take it, use it as a path to the three Dharma bodies, to the three bodies of an enlightened being.

And then rebu, the result of that practice is that you reach those three bodies. So there's that shi, lam, rebu. Shi means the original condition of things, which is often bad.

Lam means your practice. And then rebu means where you're going to go with that practice. So here he says shi ngo bu ne tsu means is the foundation, meaning the basic nature of all things.

So here in Madhyamaka, the foundation, and some schools call this kunshi. What's kunshi? Storehouse consciousness.

Literally though, what's it mean? The foundation of all things. So in some schools, emptiness itself is called kunshi because isn't that the underlying reality that allows all other things to happen?

Isn't this room happening because of emptiness? Doesn't emptiness underlie every brick that Winston laid up on these walls? Isn't that the foundation or the basic nature of all things?

So his book, Arya Nagarjuna's book, it presents that foundation. It presents the steps of the path and it presents the goal that you're headed for. Therefore, it presents the bodhisattva side of teachings.

That's our position. Again, he's talking mainly about the bhumis, bodhisattva bhumis, which can never be isolated from emptiness. At every step along the path.

When do you reach the first bodhisattva bhumi? When you see emptiness directly with bodhicitta in your mind, as a bodhisattva. So it's understood that if you write a book about the bodhisattva bhumis, everything is in the context of emptiness.

That's okay. He does say lam rim. Right here.

Lam rim. Okay. This is the knockout punch right here.

Okay, here we go. Ready? One, two, three.

Chik nyi sum. Okay. Chik nyi sum.

Okay. Okay. So, this is a big deal in the monastery.

What's the main subject of Arya Nagarjuna's work? Emptiness. The profound side of the teachings.

What's the explicit subject matter? Emptiness. What's the implicit subject matter?

Yeah, the bodhisattva levels and the far-reaching side of the teachings. Okay, that's all. So there's always this thing in the ancient books.

Which of those two sides does it present directly and which of those two sides does it present implicitly? Okay. So, in talking about emptiness, are you implicitly talking about the bodhisattva levels?

Yeah. It's so cool. It's so cool.

Why? Because you can't talk about bodhisattva levels unless you're talking about emptiness. And in fact, the minute you start talking about bodhisattva levels, which you only get to once you see emptiness directly, you've got to start talking about the emptiness of those levels.

That's really cool. What's the emptiness of giving, for example? Khorasum, right?

The giver, the gift, and the person you give to are all empty. You can't understand the perfection of giving. It's not a perfection until you're doing it with emptiness understanding.

So if you write a book that even mentions the bodhisattva levels, it's already mentioning them in the context of emptiness. So he never departs from his main theme, his explicit theme, which is emptiness. That's all.

Got it? But he has to talk about the levels you go through and that's bodhisattva stuff. And that's beautiful.

You see, he doesn't even leave it as they don't have any nature of their own. They still work. They still exist.

Tanya du-yut. They still exist. Ready?

He's not going to let it go. Okay. One.

One, two, three. Good. Got it?

It's got to be that way because he's not saying, are you telling me it's that way? He's not going to say that. He's presenting our own side, right?

So he's like, it's got to be that way. Got it? He goes up.

It is so that way because, one, two, three. Okay. All right.

Whose book are we talking about? Oh, root text. Arya Nagarjuna's book.

That too is true because, let's put it in here because in English you have to repeat it every couple of pages. And that's true because the root text. Sorry?

Oh, sorry. Okay. That's all.

Arya Nagarjuna goes through talking about the path, the result, and the foundation nature of things by explaining how they work even though they don't have any nature of their own. Okay? So, therefore, it treats the far-reaching side entities.

Wow. Okay. Just because it talks about the path mainly.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
Sorry? Yeah, okay. You think he should give up this thing now?

Nah, let's do one more argument. Here we go. It's a tell at the end.

We're still talking. Does the tell go up or down? Tell?

It is so true. And, and, and, and it's furthermore true. Okay?

He keeps saying, and, you know, he's got one more reason why it's true. What? That Arya Nagarjuna's work talks about the bodhisattva side of things.

Okay? Why? Okay, here we go.

One, two, three. Shen yang sa wa she ram ki gya che we lam ki rim pa tem ba ta Okay. This will be our last argument, and it's an important one.

Let's read it, and then I'll teach you an important word here. Say. One, two, three.

de che du cha we du cha de do dang gong de shen la ma tem ba de ni la te ne gya che we lam ki rim pa tok nu pe si de Okay? And this is true because now there's a word you should learn, and you should debate it in the debate ground. Say.

du cha we du cha It's right here. See it in the first line? che du cha we du cha This is a very nasty idiom, and it means the disciple for whom this book was designed, specifically.

You see? So, every time a great Buddhist pundit writes a book, they have some audience. We talked about it at the beginning of this class.

You have your audience in mind. Like, who's the perfect student I'd like to have read this book? You know?

Then other people will pick it up, buy it, you know. There'll be some fallout sales, peripheral sales. But, who's the main person?

When I'm writing this book, who am I thinking is going to open it up in Barnes and Nobles and look at page 10 and go, Bam! Wow! I get it, you know?

It's like, who's the one person you have in mind when you wrote this book? It's called chedu. Chedu.

Jawe. Jawe. Dulja.

Dulja. Chedu means for the purpose of them, for the sake of them. Jawe means who you have in mind.

Dul means what? What's dulwa? Yeah.

What is it in Sanskrit? Dulwa. She's teaching dulwa.

Vinaya. Vinaya. Okay.

Vinaya means to tame somebody. Okay. So, dulja means that which is to be tamed or disciplined, which is what?

A wild horse. No. Dulja means disciple.

So, cheduja or dulja literally means the person you have in mind to be tamed specifically by the book you're writing. And dulja means disciple. We have the word in English.

That which is to be disciplined is a disciple. Okay. So, de cheduja or dulja.

And this is true because the disciple for whom this particular text was designed. Especially designed? Oh, specifically designed.

I like that. Okay. Pretty heavy statement.

Okay. Which is this. If you're the person for whom what book?

The root text on wisdom was designed. Then, if you read it and study it and practice it, you don't need any other books. And you'll get both sides of the teachings.

You'll accomplish both of the lamrims. The bodhisattva lamrims and the emptiness lamrims. Just from this one book.

Therefore, that must be in that book. Okay. Alright.

Now, is there any precedent for that idea? That it would be enough to study one book. That you could tailor a book to a certain disciple.

That you could tailor a teaching to a certain disciple. Is there a precedent for such an idea? Would Chandrakirti write this book?

Would Chandrakirti write this? Write this? Who?

No. This is Arya Nagarjuna's book.

[Speaker 2]
Right. But Chandrakirti is writing a claim about Arya Nagarjuna.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, no. You could say that. But right now, it's Kedrath Dambhadagya.

It's the monastic textbook writer. is the precedent He's saying, look.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, we're going to have it right here.

[Speaker 1]
Temporary with Chandrakirti. I'm just setting you up. It's right here.

And then we'll stop. Dine sa. Here we go.

Ready? That's the last sentence. One.

Two. Three. ngun to gen kyi kye du cha way du ja de do dang gong dra gen la ma ten pa DE NYID LA DE NE SAB PA DANG RGYA CHE WEY CHO NYID KYI NANG NE SAB MU CHO DE YANG TOG NU BE'E PHYIR And this is true.

What's that in Tibetan? BE'E PHYIR Is that at the end? And this is true because that particular disciple for whom was specifically designed used that book to achieve.

Okay? Now, to appreciate this, you have to understand that the concept of CHERUJA VE DULJA someone for whom a book was specifically designed is introduced with the ornament of realizations. Say it again.

Abhisamankara, first twelve years in the monastery. The whole concept that a book could be designed for a particular person is introduced in that book written by... Yeah, dictated by Maitreya to Arya Sangha.

Okay? And in that book they present the idea that there's a student that you could design a book for. Now, what's the NGOD TEN TEN JE TSO'O of NGOD DOG DEN?

What's the explicit subject matter, which is the main subject matter from the bodhisattva teachings or the emptiness teachings in the Abhisamankara? It's the bodhisattva side of the teachings. And you see?

It's the bodhisattva side of the teachings even though it's a book on emptiness also. Okay? But the main thing in there is the bodhisattva side of the teachings.

That's the NGOD TEN TEN JE TSO'O. That's the explicit subject matter of the ornament of realizations. So, everybody knows that the ornament of realizations is targeted at a certain kind of individual who just by reading that one book which is about the bodhisattva levels will automatically understand the emptiness side of things without having to look at any other book.

Now, why did he bring that up? He's trying to prove the opposite. He's trying to prove that the opposite can happen with this book which is what?

Yeah, there must be this student that Arya Nagarjuna had in mind that just by teaching them explicitly and mainly what? Emptiness. They will automatically get the bodhisattva side of things without having to look at any other book at all.

Okay? So that's a pretty good argument because everybody in the monastery will accept that because that's a very famous truth about the ornament of realizations. Its main subject matter is the bodhisattva's way of life.

It implicitly talks about emptiness. If you're a cetija or dulja, if you're one of those special people who has enough good karma to be in this class and be targeted, have this book targeted at you specifically, then you're going to have enough good karma that it'll trigger the understanding of emptiness. Just a presentation of bodhisattva stuff.

Okay? So, by the same, what do you call it, token, if you have the karma to be in this class and to be hearing about Arya Nagarjuna's book and Master Chandrakirti's book, then you either are or you're very close to being the disciple for which this was targeted 2,000 years ago. Oh, Arya Nagarjuna's going to write a book 1,800 years ago targeted at Venerable Phil?

Yeah, exactly. That's the kind of thing they do. A couple thousand years, nothing to these guys.

They're aiming this at Anatole. They targeted you. Like, this book was targeted at you.

This book was launched into the universe 2,000 years ago to get here, to Diamond Mountain, to bang into your brain. And he says, look, we talk about emptiness, Anatole's obviously going to get it that we're talking about bodhisattva stuff. Come on.

He was targeted for this. This book was targeted at these guys. It doesn't have to be presented explicitly.

If you just talk a little bit about it, by the way, they're going to get it. There's no reason to learn about emptiness unless you use this to help everybody. They'll get it.

They're targeted. They're targeted people. Got it?

That's a nice argument. I like that one. You're targeted people.

You were targeted a long time ago. Really. It's kind of cool to think of somebody sending you a bottle in the ocean.

This is for Anatole. 2,000 years later, comes up down the Hudson River, hits Manhattan, and he picks up this bottle. What's in here?

Anyone who's lucky enough to get the bottle, look, they're going to get the other side of teachings. We had it in the debate ground the other night. How are you going to see emptiness if you don't want to use it to help people?

These are the kind of people who are already talking about that in the debate ground. So, no problem. You can't say you didn't present both sides of the teachings.

By the way, I couldn't teach any of this. I wouldn't know any of this. I couldn't speak a single word of Tibetan if it wasn't for Geshe Lothar.

I swear to God. So, you know, in the next few days you have to keep that in mind and really honor him. Nothing would be happening.

There wouldn't be anything here. There'd just be rocks and lizards here. Geshe Lothar is going to retire to the kitchen.

Please give him peace, except for the cooks. And you have to fill him up as much as possible. And this venerable Phil has prepared this grammar text.

So, we'll start it next time. Can I hand it out now? Can we hand it out?

Okay. Thank you. If there's not enough...

This is what we started in Saramé. I don't know if we finished it. I don't remember, but we're going to go through it.

And then we'll start Kristi Lahr's class at 8.

[Speaker 2]
Okay. That's all.

[Speaker 1]
Geshe Lothar says you could do a certain custom that they do in the monastery that the students get up and leave first. Because then it's auspicious that your teacher will stay with you. You see what I mean?

The teacher will hang out until everyone else is gone.

[Speaker 2]
You see what I mean?

[Speaker 1]
So, the custom of the students getting up and doing all their stuff first and the lama stays until the end is auspicious for their long life. Thank you.