Вступление на срединный путь (текущий курс, Аризона), занятие 27

[Speaker 1]
A little technical difficulties, but here we go. So he's saying, you talked about how Buddhas produce self-made Buddhas and listeners, and you talked about how they come from bodhisattvas, and you talked about how bodhisattvas come from these three causes, but you didn't say that bodhisattvas come from Buddhas. So, that's where we are.

Okay? Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
In the translation that you did, the last paragraph yesterday, you said, why is it then that you explain how some of these are born directly from words of the able? I couldn't find some of these in...

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, I don't know why I said that. Let me see. Well, I guess because there's no kind of bridge.

There's no way to bridge it, really.

[Speaker 2]
So is it sort of like taking the place of this cup deer?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. No, cup deer is... I didn't translate.

Let me see. I think I have to change it. Hang on.

Okay, is that better? Cup deer would be here. Ah, yeah.

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

Okay, good. Okay. Why is that?

I don't know. But that's what it says. They only describe two people coming from Buddhas and not three.

Listeners and self-made Buddhas do come from Buddhas. They directly state that in the opening lines of the text. They never say directly that bodhisattvas come from Buddhas.

Now, why does directly stating that listeners and self-made Buddhas come from Buddhas help us realize how compassion is the root of all good qualities? I don't know. Let's see what else.

I think he's going to back that up.

[Speaker 2]
Is shepe there? Is that to help us realize?

[Speaker 1]
Shepe chedu means, yeah, to help us realize. For the purpose of helping us know. Literally, yeah.

Why would it? What do you think?

[Speaker 2]
Apparent, necessarily, that listeners and self-made Buddhas would have some connection with community. We don't really think that of bodhisattvas. We think compassion right away.

[Speaker 1]
I don't know.

[Speaker 2]
Bodhisattvas have to, I mean, they have to, remember we were talking about the old lady at the store?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
And how you should bow down to her.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
And the bodhisattvas' activities are, like, you know, those kindnesses are towards, like, sentient beings in that sense. You know, that's, is that?

[Speaker 1]
But if I told you, certain people come from Buddhas. You say, who? I say lower track people come from Buddhas.

I say, okay. Now, do you somehow get an idea that love is the root of all high spiritual qualities from that exchange?

[Speaker 2]
You know, I don't know.

[Speaker 1]
Is it because, you know, where the Buddhas come from are the ones who are really loving the bodhisattvas? Maybe. Yeah, maybe.

I don't know. Let's see if it comes. I think it might come.

Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, this has to be recast. Let me see.

Well, we'll throw this in and you tell me if it helps. I don't know. One, two, three.

Chang sem, gyu sum le, tum pa, wog ne, che par, gyur wey chu. Looking forward to it. How much later?

I don't know. Does those three things make any sense to you?

[Speaker 2]
No. I don't know.

[Speaker 1]
No, no, no. I mean these three elements. We're describing how lower track people take birth from Buddhas.

That will help you realize that love is the root of everything, because we're going to talk about it later. I don't know. Let's check the text.

Seriously, I don't know. Unless you see something I don't see.

[Speaker 2]
I don't know.

[Speaker 1]
I don't think so. What we might do is go to the Je Tsongkhapa and see. Let's do that.

That sets me up for something else I wanted to do with you anyway. Tam che kye. Oh, let's just say yin ten.

No. Gyur sum. Yeah, I think this might...

Okay. I'll just read you some of Je Tsongkhapa. And the reason I brought this up is that...

Don't forget that the text we've been working on this term is a commentary to a different text that we're supposed to be working on also. And it pretty much follows that text almost word for word in some places. And what I thought might be fun for some of you people...

Like, where's Alistair? I don't know. ...is over the break to try to translate some of Je Tsongkhapa from where we left off. Because it will follow Kedruthen Bodhagyu pretty closely. Like, 75% of it will be the same. And you could take a shot at trying to translate Je Tsongkhapa.

But here's what Je Tsongkhapa says when he gets to this part. What's that? He says Je Tsongkhapa's really hard.

He's a little harder. So he says, other people bow down usually to... You know, other people bow down to listeners, self-made Buddhas, Buddhas and Bodhisattvas.

But they are not bowed down to directly here. The reason is that they wanted to point out... the cause of those four things.

And those four are in successive stages, causes of each other. Which is what? I don't know.

Compassion turns into Bodhisattvas, turns into Buddhas, turns into self-made Buddhas and listeners. Like that. So, if we do it that way, then the two lines of the root text that talk about listeners and self-made Buddhas are trying to point out the root cause of self-made Buddhas and listeners.

So to go backwards, self-made Buddhas and listeners come from Buddhas, come from great compassion and the other two causes. Does that help us? Yeah, it does.

Now it makes sense, right? I guess. But it's clear that when he talks about self-made Buddhas and listeners, we're supposed to understand that they come from Buddhas, they come from Bodhisattvas, they come from love.

So love is the root of all things. That's okay. But why does leaving out Bodhisattvas at the end of the chain help us understand that?

And there's no end here. It's just another because. Sadhana.

Let's leave it for a while and see what happens. I was wondering if it was misspelled or some piece is missing. Let me see.

No, I think it's all right. I'm going to put an end. He didn't put an end.

But anyway, the whole book talks about how Bodhisattvas take their holy breath. So we don't have to go into that here. He's saying that, all right?

Nod.

[Speaker 2]
One, two, three.

[Speaker 1]
Chang sem. Kang re. Chung pe.

Tsu yu de. Tse wa. Ning je.

Chan bo dang. Nyi sum. Me pe.

Sherab dang. Chang chu. Ki sem.

Sung lo. Chung pe. Okay.

You're getting good on the cheering part. Okay. Nyi sum me pe sherab.

Wisdom. No, it means wisdom which is not two. Wisdom which is not two.

What did we use before in this thing? What did we use? What did we use?

[Speaker 2]
Loving. Yeah, the mind that transcends duality.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, that's what he said.

[Speaker 1]
Oh, here it is. Yeah, the mind that transcends duality. Okay.

Yeah, you're right. Love and great compassion are, what do you call it? A positive thing.

Yeah, it's just the same thing. Okay. So it's not four things.

It's just still three. The second one. Sorry, this one here?

[Speaker 2]
Love and great compassion, semicolon. The wisdom which transcends duality, semicolon. And wishful thinking.

Because otherwise it looks like four things.

[Speaker 1]
Well, I want to separate them as three elements, you see. It makes these two fall together as one element. But there are ends between the three.

Okay. It's all right. Okay, here we go.

Now, I want to separate the three. I started separating the three by ends, on purpose. Because the first two might be taken as separate elements.

Okay. Nisum Kundalini.

[Speaker 2]
Can I sit up for just a second longer?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. But then it looks like the love, great compassion, and the wisdom which transcends duality are the three. And then you have that other thing, semicolon.

Uh-huh.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

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

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. That's a little hard, maybe. Or is it not hard?

You okay? Because what's the word protect imply? I'll take responsibility.

Okay. That's the big... Everything's in that word.

You can have a nice debate about this. Master Chandrakirti doesn't believe in compassion. Why?

Because it's stated in Kedrup Dhammadhargya's text, Kishan Drupadnepe, you know, they call him the great one, you know, the one who K and Drup, the one who's wise and also accomplished meditator, Kedrup Dhammadhargya. Sumbhyeja. He said that.

Why? He said Master Chandrakirti is not referring to compassion. What do you mean he's not referring to compassion?

He's not referring to trying to save beings from pain. Wanting people to get free from pain. Dhammadhara.

No he's not. He's not referring to that. He's referring to protecting them from pain.

Oh yeah, right. He's referring to protecting them from pain. So when you protect people from pain, you don't want to save them from pain, right?

You know? You can have a good debate with this. Right?

None. Okay. All right.

All right. What is today? Oh, it's the day after the full moon.

Okay, no problem. When did the fire end last night? Was it a lens-oak or a kam-tar?

I was going to ask. Yeah, good.

[Speaker 2]
You have to wait till the end though.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, yeah. I almost would have stayed for that. But anyway.

Lens-oak means a wet meaning. Kam-tar means a dry meaning. So before you go to a meeting in the temple at Sarah, a board of directors meeting, like a six-hour board of directors meeting, you say, is this a lens-oak or a kam-tar?

Do I get Tibetan tea or not? One, two, three. DE DA YIN TE RANG DRE LE SEM CHEN KHO WE TSUN RA DAM PA GYOP ME PHA PHAG TU ME PHA MA RYU PHA YONG SU GYOP PE SE NI CHEN LA TÖP PHA ÖP PA NYID DU TEN PEI CHI SHESUN PEI CHI Okay.

I'll draw your attention to some finities of pronunciation. This is... How do you pronounce this?

Linguistic compensation. The da drops off, you shorten it, the vowel. Okay.

Here's linguistic compensation in the opposite way. There's... WÖ WÖ Okay.

The S drops off, but in compensation it gets longer, so that your listener always knows what it was. If I cut it short, it was a... If I lengthen it, it was a...

Okay. So, a Tibetan, in Ladakh, they would say, VAS TÖD PAR OAS PA Okay. And then in Hasa, it's just TÖT PAR WÖ PA Okay.

So your listener knows what used to be there. Okay. What's this one?

NYID NYID NYID Yeah. Okay. NYID means a trap.

NYID means just that one. NYID means two. NYID means to sleep.

You see what I mean? So... Okay.

You gotta do it right, or nobody will know what you're saying. You'll be in a debate and they'll say, Two? Sleep?

Very? Or trap? Which was it?

You'll have to sit there and explain it to them. You see people in... Chinese people, they have so many homonyms that they're always going like this.

They draw... In Japan, they draw... They draw the character...

When they're talking to somebody on the street, you'll see them like this, you know, because there's so many homonyms. But in Tibetan, it's not... They're all different, if you hear it.

And you have to teach yourself. Okay. Because the Rangda...

Autocommentary says... I'm going to break down and make a macro. Let's see.

Tools. Let's see if it works. I don't know.

Where is that?

[Speaker 2]
There was a style. What happened?

[Speaker 1]
Well, I changed the... No, he didn't. What did I do here?

I just say... Oh, I got to give it a key. Let's see.

Indent. Okay. Control-I.

Oh, I don't want to use that.

[Speaker 2]
Alt-I.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, Control-I is... Yeah, okay. Alt-I.

The same. Close. Format.

Format. Okay. Okay, let's test it.

Control-I. Control-I.

[Speaker 2]
Alt-I.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Yeah, okay. Okay.

He's just backing up with the Autocommentary. How do I undo? Oh, I just keep going.

Yeah. Okay. What's it going to be?

Let's see. Okay, let's go look for it. Unique piece of it?

That's pretty good. Callaway. 10.

Do another piece. I'll set it to a proper... Okay.

Which part of the 10 year?

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
And that. I'm skipping all these because I know that the Autocommentary starts with a U. That's not the Autocommentary.

This is the Autocommentary. Okay. Here it is.

Let's just see how it compares. It's the same. That's refreshing.

Okay. 220A. I don't know if we quite caught the 2.

Let's see. Perfectly appropriate. Okay.

That's that 2 there, okay? Right here. Okay.

The next one's a little bit of a can of worms. Let's see. Here we go.

1, 2, 3.

[Speaker 2]
A, C, R, I, T.

[Speaker 1]
This is going to be interesting. The wisdom that goes beyond duality? Transcendence.

The transcendence. We're going to stop, don't we? Let's go back over this.

When we say the wisdom that transcends duality here, we're not talking about the wisdom which realizes that the two of form, meaning this room, and what perceives this form, meaning your mind, are no two things. Is there any kind of wisdom that ever perceives that? There is no perceiver.

There is no perceiving. There is no perceived thing. And that's non-duality.

Do we believe that my mind and Becky are two different things? No. Yeah.

Is there a kind of wisdom that realizes that we are not two separate things? It's one of the Mahamudras. Yeah.

The perceiver and the perceived thing are not of separate substances. Meaning what? Yeah.

They don't come from different seeds. So, I was reading it today. I was reading my Chinese medical book.

I'm going to plug in for myself. But it was like, it's this thing where the correlation between the outside weather conditions and the inner climate, you know, so that heat on the outside is, climatic heat, is related to inner heat, although they're not the same thing. You know, and in Buddha, I was thinking in Buddha's terms, the way you would have written this book, and I was thinking to write an article about it, would have been, it's much easier.

It's that the climate and the inner conditions of heat were created by the same cause. They come from the, it's not, we don't so much talk about their relationship to each other. They're both symptomatic of an earlier cause.

One earlier cause that created both the inner condition of heat and the outer hotness of the climate. You know, so, it may be interesting to throw that into the Chinese medical community. I don't know.

But anyway, so, isn't to perceive that truth, or isn't it true that to perceive that the inner heat and the outer heat are both, are not something which doesn't come from the same cause? Isn't that to perceive some kind of emptiness? It is.

It seems to me, and by the way, that's what it means here, that they're not two things. It's obviously, nobody thinks that I'm back here or something like that. But, you know, that we're not, we're not separate things in the sense that we don't come from separate seeds.

I did one karma in the past which allows me to see a person who's helpful to me and allows me to see me being helped. So, I don't know. I bet you could debate this in the debate ground, you know.

What does he almost have to be referring to if he's saying that's not the wisdom we're talking about? Then how do you have to read this? You could, I think you could read it as well, Mahamudra number three, is it?

Yeah. Who believes in Mahamudra number three? Yeah, but who teaches it mostly?

I mean, lower Madhyamika teaches it. But, but that's not accepted in our school, in this higher Madhyamika text. You see what I mean?

So they, they wouldn't even accept the idea that, well, they would say that's not a kind of emptiness. Would the lower Madhyamika school say that's not a kind of emptiness? They would say it's not emptiness.

They'd say it's dakme. It's a kind of selflessness, but it's not emptiness. You see what I mean?

So, anyway, you could have lots of debates from this one. You could really have a lot of debates from this one. This is, no, no, it's not the wisdom that perceives that Becky and me are not separate things.

Okay? It's not that one. It's the one that's free of two extremes, which means that it's the one that sees emptiness.

So now you've got three distinctions. To see that me and Becky don't come from separate seeds is not emptiness. It's not seeing emptiness.

To somehow not have my mind fall into two extremes at this moment would be seeing emptiness. And the one that's presented in this text is the second one. So, so then you could debate all night in the debate ground, what's the difference, you know?

What's the difference between non-duality mind in the sense of me and Becky? And what's the, what's the sense, what's the difference between that and non-duality in the sense of not falling into two extremes? What are the two extremes?

Well, basically everything is as I thought it was. And if it's not as I thought it was, nothing matters. What the hell, I can do anything.

You know? If samsara and nirvana are the same, I can, I don't have to be moral anymore. Like that.

Those are two extremes. How does the second one differ from the thing about me and Becky? You see what I mean?

And you could debate that in the mona, in the debate ground. It'd make a nice, like it's a whole night's worth of debate. Okay?

I just thought, you know why? I bet there's another that down here somewhere. You see, because of this that, I try to, it's just a thing of composition that you try to avoid that that.

You know, but anyway. Now next time you'll probably find one that I did do that, but anyway.

[Speaker 2]
In the sense of not staying in the two extremes.

[Speaker 1]
Which is middle way. Is that a problem? We're getting there.

He's getting there. It's coming. Maybe tonight, I think it's coming.

Let's read together. One, two, three. This sentence didn't make any sense with a genitive here.

So I checked. You know, I just ran a gopher. And it's instrumental in most references.

Not all. But it makes a lot more sense if it's instrumental. So I'm going to change it.

Je Tsongkapa uses the instrumental. I'll go with Je Tsongkapa. What do I have to do?

I have to go down and find out if it was ser or shena. Right? Is he claiming or is he saying?

Okay. Just a translator's trick. Okay?

So let's go down. Blah, blah. Serna.

Serna. Okay, way down there. Serna.

Okay. Okay. Someone may come and make the following claim.

I get to do my macro. Oops. That wasn't it.

By the way, here we're getting into some really nice debate about what is bodhichitta. Okay? So here we go.

How do you like that as a definition of bodhichitta? Interesting. That's what people say when you cook for them and it's your favorite thing.

You know, like South Indian, what do we make? Masala sambar. And we say, how do you like it?

They say, interesting. You're too polite to say no. Yeah.

Yeah, Becky said it kind of fits the idea that we talked about that what distinguishes mayana from hinayana is the desire for deeper teachings and emptiness. Yeah. I think that's where it's going.

Let's see. Okay, here we go. One, two, three.

DAL PAH NDO TRANG PAH LENG RANG KYI CHU KYI DE KHO NA NI TOG NE CHU NI DI SEM CHEN THAM CHE KYI KHONG TU CHOD PAH CHA'O NYAM ME SEM GANG KYE PAH DE NI CHANG CHU KYI SEM CHE CHA'O CHE SU MYI Stand up.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Stand up.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. So, Karthik is being nasty. Why?

He's saying, you know, the bodhicitta that's indicated here in the root text by Master Chandrakirti is talking about where you say to yourself in your mind, I'll go and perceive emptiness and teach it to other people, to all living beings. Then he says, then we in between there, we said, tamadrup or something like that. We don't believe that.

And he said, well, I mean, the commentary itself says, and he uses the same wording, you know, exact same wording. So, he's like God us, you see. Does he have us?

You see, because he's God us halfway. I mean, we object, you know. We said, no, it's not.

Then he says, you know, I was just quoting the auto commentary that was quoting a sutra. I guess the sutra is not right or the auto commentary is not right. What's your problem?

Okay. All right, got it? So, in between there, we rightly said, I don't think so.

Then he came back and said, no, that's not. The commentary itself, the ancient Indian commentary, says that. And he quotes a sutra to that effect.

And he uses the same words. You do that when you're like fighting Jebung Monastery. You go home the night before, you read their their textbook on this thing, you know.

You find one controversial line, you know. You bring it up in debate and the guy says, I don't think so. And you say, oh, I guess your own textbook doesn't say blah, blah, blah, you know.

And then you got him, you know. Do you got him? Because you're misquoting or you're misconstruing his textbook.

You see what I mean? Okay? Yeah, or out of context, or it's not complete, or he was just indicating something, it wasn't definitive, you know.

Let's see where he goes. Yeah, you're right. Sometimes I like to put it here just to get it.

But that's illegal, right? Okay. What do we have to do right here?

I guess it's on the ground. What do we have to do here? What do we have to do here?

Yeah, which commentary? He said the commentary. Thanks a lot, the commentary.

I don't know what commentary. Let's find out. I mean, that's what's cool about the database.

You don't have to remember anything. Okay. Let's try those two.

Where are we going to search? Thank you, Uma. Okay.

And we're going for, I'll just bring it up. We're going for the section where it starts with a U, okay? Wow, you had a long night.

It's a hot room. All the Hanchi Chekyens for sleepiness. Okay.

Here it is. Dittabo di Semchen Tamche Ki, please. Ki, please.

Okay? It's a big difference. Okay.

Let's look it up again. Chupachal Nyamne. Whoa.

Nyamne. Chanchu Sembale la Semkhankyepa Dini. Completely different, right?

Or a big difference. He just left out Chanchu Sembala Sem. Can you tell me?

Dini Chanchu Sembe Chanchu Ki Sem. It's a completely different. I mean, there's a big difference, right?

I'll tell you the difference in English, okay? If you look down here, what is the wish for enlightenment of a bodhisattva? You know, it's where a bodhisattva says, blah, blah, blah.

Okay. I don't know. We'll just say it's different.

I'm not in the mood to... You should just abbreviate it. Well, there's...

No, because there's other wishes for enlightenment, right? Technically, there's listener wishes for enlightenment, there's self-made Buddha wishes for enlightenment. Technically, you need it.

Technically, it's cleaner to say it that way. But I'm not in the mood. I don't know.

It's this fire offering thing. Oh, what was that? It's the auto-commentary.

So, the commentary was the auto-commentary. What folio was it? 222A.

Oh, good. That's good. Just start it around.

Quick. How's that? Okay, that gets me out of...

Didn't they know I'm smart but I don't have to write the whole thing?

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Alright. Like, if they want to go find it, they can find it. No, he doesn't.

You could debate that too. You could debate that too. There's a reason why he left it out, right?

So, where are we so far? What do you say at this point? I think the bodhisattva referred to here refers to the wish to go see emptiness and teach it to other people.

Then you say, Dhammadup. Then I say, I mean, that's exactly what the auto-commentary says. Dhammadup.

Yes, it does, because it quotes a sutra to that effect. Dummy. You know?

Then what are you going to say? You're going to say Dhammadup or something else? It's time for Kalamadhyam.

It's time for Kalamadhyam. The guys beat you three times, you know, already. Like, obviously, if somebody said that, somebody authoritative has said that this is what the bodhicitta here refers to.

It's time to say, that's true, but it doesn't prove what you're trying to prove. Okay? It's true, but that's not what the bodhicitta here refers to.

Okay, that maybe in some sutra they said that was bodhicitta. But that may not be a definitive statement. That may be an interpretative...

whatever it is. What do you call it? I hate that word.

Figurative. It may be figurative. It may be just a general statement.

You don't know. Bamshe. Bamshe means like, you know, he was giving a talk at the Rotary Club, so he didn't...

you know. No, so he didn't specify all the definition of... You know, you know that.

Anybody who was on the yoga tour. Four hundred talks without specifically saying anything. No, I mean, and then someone's going to quote you.

Get your Michael Sand. You know. No, no.

I was talking at, you know, the Yoga Club of... What's that? Asheville.

You know. Okay. Okay.

I think Asheville's going to be a big deal. But anyway. Anyway.

Demi-tempa-tan. Some day. Okay.

One, two, three. Demi- tempa- tan. Fifty-fifty.

Fifty-fifty. We going up or down? I don't know.

Is it us now? Maitreya Bata. Are you telling me that's incorrect?

Maitreya Bata? That's so goddamn incorrect.

[Speaker 2]
I think it's probably us.

[Speaker 1]
Which one? The second one. The second one, yeah, I guess.

Maitreya Bata? Not Maitreya Bata. You're telling me that's incorrect?

You wouldn't be saying that, right? You'd be saying, come on, that's gotta be incorrect. Maitreya Bata?

One more time, do it right. One, two, three. Maitreya Bata.

That is chok chik. There's shendun. There's a shendun.

Shendun means what other people need. The needs of others. Parartha in Sanskrit.

Then he's gonna say, that state of mind isn't bodhichitta because it's only, mikpa means focused upon, chok chik, one aspect is good, I guess. Literally it means one direction of the total focus of bodhichitta. You see what I mean?

Aspect? One part? Isn't there a better word that implies partialness?

Division? Element? Facet.

Element, you like element? It's got, whatever we use has to imply that there's other parts. You see what I mean?

[Speaker 2]
Facet. Facet, yeah. Well, we'll see.

[Speaker 1]
It says side, but we don't normally say that in English. It's not only two.

[Speaker 2]
It's not gonna be only two.

[Speaker 1]
One element, I think. Is element okay? I can see we're not gonna get a consensus here.

It's only focused upon one element. Becky got it. To fill the needs of others.

Okay. Can we change all to both? I'm afraid to say both.

You tell me why. Because the wish for enlightenment is really... What are they though?

What are the two? Wanting to become fully enlightened... Samkhepani, Shinranji.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Samkhepani, Shinranji.

[Speaker 2]
Okay, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
It's focused on Buddhahood and me achieving Buddhahood, right? But what's the element we already got? Seeing emptiness and teaching it to them.

That's only part of the reaching enlightenment one. So if I here anticipate the traditional two, I'm gonna end up with three. You see?

Because he's already named seeing emptiness as one of the elements. So we can't say two. You see?

Then you get into four or five, I don't know. You see? So you can't do it that way.

Okay. Although it's a nice place to go and he's gonna go there. It's a smart place to go and he's going there.

Now somebody's gonna come up and yankati. Let's do it together first. One, two, three.

Yankati. What's the verb? Oh.

You're just guessing. We gotta go down and find it. Yeah, there you are.

All the way down there. Okay? So, Eric, don't blame me on the hypertexting.

You gotta go to the next paragraph. Okay? This drives the hypertexters crazy because they're looking in this paragraph for claims.

Okay. It makes a different claim. Oops.

I need a verb. Dön. Dön means...

Dön means to come out of a room, for example. Like a java that's a dönsha. The monks are exiting from the temple or from the assembly.

Right? Dönsha. This is the verb, active verb.

Dön. I'm gonna dön them out of samsara. It's extract.

It's exactly extract. But, come on, you don't say it.

[Speaker 2]
You know.

[Speaker 1]
It's the idea of, you know, going like this.

[Speaker 2]
You see, it's not rescue. It is to pull. It's like to...

[Speaker 1]
It's what you do with somebody in quicksand. In quicksand.

[Speaker 2]
Somebody in quicksand. Yank them out. Yank them out.

[Speaker 1]
Pull them out. Pull.

[Speaker 2]
Bring is too passive.

[Speaker 1]
This is like...

[Speaker 2]
This is like... Pull. Extricate.

Extricate.

[Speaker 1]
Extricate is totally accurate. Now, whether it's not too wordy here. Excise.

Excise.

[Speaker 2]
Extricate. Extricate. It is extricate.

[Speaker 1]
It's exactly extricate, but it's a little too...

[Speaker 2]
Pull.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Pull. Extricate.

[Speaker 2]
Extricate. It's all right. It is.

Extract. Extract.

[Speaker 1]
What did you give him at the lens part?

[Speaker 2]
It was all sugar, right? It was all sugar, right?

[Speaker 1]
It's the jelly beans that just went in. Huh? It's not like rescue.

It's specifically someone's in this quicksand and you're like... And it's what you do with the tooth also. It is pulling.

[Speaker 2]
It is pulling.

[Speaker 1]
Then extricate. No. Pull is extract.

I'll ask you next class when you're a little calmer. This is getting a little subtle, okay, and here you start to get the real feel of a monastic textbook. I mean, because other people would have been left a long time ago, like, what, you know, just leave it.

I mean, it's okay to see emptiness and teach that to people. What's wrong with that? That's enough for me, you know.

What's wrong with this one? Why is it a claim? Why is the guy wrong?

Sounds pretty good to me. Now it's time for you guys to give me, time to do your thing. It's got to be those two things, like, what's the two?

I will achieve enlightenment, and then I'll, you know, he never said that, technically he never said that, technically, okay, got it, got it? Yeah, so let's see. And we say tamadrup or something, and read it with me, one, two, three, pranayama at the beginning.

Another pranayama. One, two, three, pranayama, one, two, three, pranayama, one, two, three, pranayama, one, two, three, pranayama, one, two, three, pranayama, one, two, three, pranayama, one, two, three, pranayama. Not this one.

Who is this? Who is doing this here? It's the guy.

It's Chetan Benki. Yeah, you can't credit him with this war thing. He says, Chetan Benki.

[Speaker 2]
Okay. Okay. Uh.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Oh. Hmm.

He did it again, okay. We'll just save ourselves some time. I'm gonna put entire room.

Yeah. Yeah. Oh.

[Speaker 2]
Hmm.

[Speaker 1]
He just pretty much quoted it, but he changed it. You know, he changed it a little bit. Okay.

Okay, so he got us, right? He's quoting a sutra.

[Speaker 2]
Whoa.

[Speaker 1]
You got some agama other than the sutras? Yeah. Okay.

Agama. Hang on a sec. Stay there.

Sorry? That's interesting. You can debate that.

Where's this quote from? Where do you guess? He says the commentary.

It's probably the auto-commentary, right? We have to go confirm, right? Le Tön is unique.

Here we go. Oh, wow. It's different.

This says Dönme Saur. Actually, he cut this off. He started in the middle of a sentence.

Dönme Saur means without doubt. What do they call it in a lot of yoga text? They say Dönme Saur means without doubt.

It keeps saying in the Hatha Yoga Pradipika, they say it all the time, without a doubt. It's very common in the yoga text. The rest is the same.

Okay, so we'll let him go. He started in the middle of a sentence, but that's okay. Page 222B.

Hang on a sec before I forget the number. Yeah. Yeah, you can debate that.

You can debate that. He didn't say in the universe or something like that. Yeah.

I don't know. Jigten is always this planet. Okay, so.

I was wondering that myself when I was working on it. We'll finish this. Then we'll start.

One, two, three. Deyamite partha. Wimpy.

Wimpy. You're like wimpy. You went in between.

Mite means that's not correct. So how is it going? Yeah, let's try it again.

Deyamite partha. Deyam dun du dzok pe. Chan chub la ma mik pe.

Chan chub gyi son dzong we. Mik na yong sum ni dzok pe. I'm just going to steal some phrasing from up here.

Okay. You know shen dun and rang dun, okay? Working for others' goals and working for your own goals.

So you can, can you have a debate here? Is to become enlightened is focusing on your own goals? I think you have to say kapdir in this context.

When you're juxtaposing these two things, what are the two things that you're juxtaposing? Shen dun chir, for the sake of others. Shen dun, other people's goals.

Do it for your own goals. But is that really a fair juxtaposition? I don't know.

You could debate that in my mind. He does say shen dun, sem kyi pa ni shen dun chir, for the sake of others. Yangdra Dzogpi Chandra du, to want to achieve in total enlightenment, right?

So there is this, there is an other's purpose and then there's enlightenment, but does that necessarily mean this is only for your purposes? I don't know. But that's what he says.

Rang dun du, right here, for your sake, okay? For your goals. Hang on one sec.

I'm just setting you up for next week so you come back because it's so hot, and you're also tired, and you're probably bored to death. Ah, dun dam sem kyi la chey pa yang mi te te. Say, dun dam sem kyi la chey pa yang mi te te.

Dun dam sem kyi, in the dak kyi, in the Vajrayogini, I offer you dun dam sem kyi. I offer dun dam sem kyi, which is what? Ultimate form of bodhichitta, which is what?

Say emptiness directly. Mi te. That ain't what he's talking about here.

So a third guy came up and said what? He didn't even bother to say the other guy's argument. He just said...

It would also be incorrect to say that the bodhichitta being talked about here, which is the main cause of bodhisattvas is ultimate bodhichitta. Why not? Dun dam sem kyi, in the dak kyi.

Say, dun dam sem kyi, in the dak kyi. There would be the classical fault of repeating yourself.

[Speaker 2]
Why?

[Speaker 1]
No? There's three causes for enlightenment. Yeah, we finished that with Nisa Melo.

We finished that. We said the mind of non-duality, the state that transcends duality is one of the three causes. So you're going to come up and say the second cause is the same goddamn thing.

What's the matter with you? Okay? Got it?

How can you say that bodhichitta here refers to the perception of emptiness when we already covered the perception of emptiness? Come on. Is Chandrakirti going to give us...

Well, there's three causes for bodhisattvas. Perception of emptiness. Perception of emptiness.

And love. You know, and... You know, come on.

Come on. It can't be ultimate bodhichitta. You know, these guys are just getting desperate now.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
Alright? Wording from last time. Hang on.

Yeah. Now, this is like a translation from Sanskrit. This part here.

And it's very, very obscure. You would never ever see this. No.

Yeah, you'd never translate that way. Nekab kepar la. You see, you wouldn't have the key.

Okay? Nekab kepar. Let's just see how many times Nekab kepar occurs in the whole sambam.

300,000 pages? Oops. Oops.

Same guy.

[Speaker 2]
Another same guy. Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Four, five. Six. I guess it's pretty common.

Seven. Eight. Nine.

Ten. Eleven. Twelve.

Thirteen. That's probably 20 and 300,000 pages. That's...

But it's still... Yeah, it does mean that here. It means what I said it means.

And how do I know that? No, no, but how do I know that? Because I know what he's trying to prove.

If you took that by itself, you'd never know. Something like that. That would be kepar ke nekab.

You see, you just have to know syntax. You see? Nekab ke kepar is not the same as kepar ke nekab.

It'd be nekab kepar chen. An extraordinary occasion. On a special occasion.

So sometimes to translate it properly, you have to know what he didn't use. You have to know Tibetan so well that you have to know he could have said it three other ways that he didn't say. You know, and that's just...

You just get to that after a while. Okay. You're free.

Yeah. Well, it's just that this... We didn't accept it as describing accurately the bodhicitta being referred to here.

Which is one of the three causes of a bodhisattva. Why not? Don't bodhisattvas think that?

I'd like to see emptiness and teach other people. But that's not... That's not complete.

That's not all... That doesn't describe the totality of their focus. It just describes a portion of their focus.

Portion would have been a good word. Anyway. Yeah.

You would get that. I'm going to put portion here for next time. Okay.

Okay? Got it? It's a noble and they all do think that.

But it's not complete enough. He's going to talk about it. It's coming.

It's coming in the next few pages. There'll be a debate about do you get bodhicitta after you see emptiness or before? And, you know, that's a debate that people get into.

Okay? Okay. I'm going to stop there.

Thank you. I like it when you're silly. That's good.

You should stay up late every night.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Okay. Okay. Okay.