Вступление на срединный путь (текущий курс, Аризона), занятие 35

[Speaker 1]
I'm sorry, the javelinas kidnapped us.

[Speaker 2]
Can I ask a question about the last class of translation?

[Speaker 1]
I left a word out, he found another word out.

[Speaker 2]
Just after the quotation from our steps of meditation.

[Speaker 1]
By the way, I plugged it in. Where is it? She made me plug it in.

Alright, there you go.

[Speaker 2]
In the next dependent mind, how can we tell when it's dependent? So, sentient realm, non-realm, means wishing that living being to be free from suffering. And when is a name where we hope to free that?

[Speaker 1]
Ah, that's a good point. Because in the second one, maybe you wouldn't, right? I mean, in the first one, you might not, right?

Let's change it. You don't, you can't tell. We'll do it, we'll change it though, because I like that.

Do you get what he's saying? It's one thing to hope that you will free them, it's another thing to hope that they will be freed. And the first kind of compassion was not the one where you take, what?

Personal responsibility. Personal responsibility, so it would kind of suggest strongly that you should translate it passively, right? So, we're in.

[Speaker 2]
We used it subsequently. Yeah, okay.

[Speaker 1]
I like it. I like the, I think it's a nice point, subtle point. Did we use it again?

[Speaker 2]
Dependence on calamities, somewhat. Yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Ian, no playing with your toys in class. I told you a hundred times. It'll, it'll.

Is that the only one? I think so. Okay, here we go.

I think it's a good point. Okay, one, two, three. sumbo de mikpe gone jog kyang mikpa sem chen mikpa sumba yin te Is this mikpa or mikpa?

Mikpa, okay, it's a noun. The thing that you're focused on. Mikpa, say mikpa.

And this is mikpa. So say mikpa, la, mikpa. Mikpa, la, mikpa.

Okay, again, that's the noun and the verb. Objective focus or the way they focus? What did we stay before?

Objective focus? We'll stick with that, but we may have to change it. To their objective focus.

Okay? It's going to get tricky, so, so, you know, like, screw your head on, okay? Why are these three compassions different from each other?

What makes them different from each other? Huh? Their objective focus.

But, but their objective focus is equivalent. They're all looking upon all living beings. Each one of them is looking upon all living beings.

Yeah, it's the way in which they look upon all living beings, right? So are they established through what they're focused on? Is the difference established through what they're focused on?

But aren't they looking at different characteristics of what they're focused on? Huh? Different object?

Get that in your mind, because he's going to argue that all night. That's what he's talking about all night.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
Are they looking at different objects? And if not, how can you, how can you distinguish them from one another? Okay?

Are they all compassion? Yes. Are they all focused on every living being?

Yes. How do you divide them from each other? By how they focus on every living being.

Okay? Got it? So can you say through their focus?

And what does focus mean then? How they focus or what they focus on? Yeah, struggle with that, okay?

Yeah. Okay, here we go. One, two, three.

What's Nyingje? In Sanskrit? Karuna.

Okay. Drowa? We had two of them last time, remember?

And here's the Daini grammar case, for those of you who care, okay? Which is compassion, okay? In Tibet you have to say which is as compassion, okay?

So, and this is true. Okay? So do all three compassions, are they looking at the same thing?

Yeah, all living beings. Prove it. He said, even with the last two, he said, I bow down to that compassion which is directed towards all living beings.

Okay? Got it? Now, we should go look it up.

Who said that? Who do you guess said that? It's probably Master Chandrakirti.

Would you guess it's his, the root text or commentary? Autocommentary. Let's see.

I don't even know who this is. Nying chero kyur kang. Notice with the black box, you don't have to finish the word, you know?

You could do half the word and it's faster.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
If you do 400 searches a day or something, it saves your fingers. Okay, here we go. Kangyur, Tengyur or Sumbum?

Tengyur. Tengyur. Nice.

Okay. Any more detail? Umayya.

Umayya. No use to look through all the tantra. How much of the Tengyur is tantra?

There's three and a half thousand, three thousand books in the Tengyur. And about half, over half are tantra. And they all read exactly the same as the last class we had.

Once you read it well, I mean, it's amazing what an emphasis it was. Okay. Here we go.

Nying chero kyur kang dey la du. Okay? What book?

What's jukpa? Yeah, in the monastery they don't call it, if you go in the monastery and say, what are you studying? Gompa damsel.

Oh, you're doing the root text? Yeah. We're doing umayya la jukpa.

They say, huh? You just say jukpa. Say jukpa.

Jukpa. I'm studying jukpa. I memorized jukpa.

Ooh, you memorized jukpa. Did you do dzu? Okay?

Got it? Okay. Did you do gyen?

Gyen. Yeah, ngun do gyen. Abhisamankara.

That's just a call, because everybody has to memorize those three at least. Right? So jukpa, dzu, or gyen.

Okay? Ngun do gyen. Okay.

So it's there. Let's give them a footnote. Root text 201B.

What was it? 201B. 201B?

We said it. Okay. I don't think we've been doing our footnotes.

And again, it used to, we used to go in the temple, unwrap two wrappers off of the tengyur, which we didn't have a tengyur, kongyur, and we would just go page by page and look through it and try this. And sometimes you'd go through a thousand pages and you'd miss it. And then you'd go back the next day and start again, you know.

And it's a lot easier now. Okay. But there's still a long way to go.

There's still a lot of work to do. And, you know, if people are interested, John needs help scanning over the break especially. So there's a lot to scan.

Sanskrit and Chinese. Okay. Here we go.

Let me cut this. One, two, three. Nying je chenpo yin na Nying je la sum tu che pe Sem chen la mik pe Nying je yin pe ma kya Kyang.

Oops. That's good. Nice point.

Okay. We're going to try to maintain that line. We'll see.

It's called a simsam. Say simsam. Simsam.

Simsam. It's a very useful word. Krishna uses it a lot.

Simsam means hold the line, but often with your worldview. You see, like, when will it break down, you know. How irritating does the other person have to be before you decide it's coming from them.

You see. You know, and it stretches during the day depending on how much sleep you had, and et cetera, you know. No, no, definitely coming from them, you know.

Okay. Also, tantric simsam is very difficult.

[Speaker 2]
You know.

[Speaker 1]
Oh yeah, they're a lot. No, they're not a lot. You know.

How hard do things have to get before you start to break down and say, no, maybe they're not, you know. Okay. All right.

You can't really appreciate this sentence until I get to the next one, so let's get to the next one. In fact, I think we better stick it up with the other one. Let's read that last part, okay.

Right, starting right here. One, two, three. Sem chen la mik pe, nying je yin pe, kya de.

Now, it's not the case that if something's got compassion, it is necessary that that one of the three kinds of compassion we focus on living beings. But it is the case. He...

Get it? If something is compassion, is it necessarily a kind of compassion that's focused on all living beings? Yes or no?

He just said it. They just said they were equivalent in focusing on all living beings. So, I'll ask it again.

If something is a kind of compassion, if something is great compassion... Sorry, you got me. If something is great compassion, is it necessarily a kind of compassion which is focused upon all living beings?

Yes. But it's not necessarily that one of the three which is called the great compassion which is focused on all living beings. Got it?

Got it? So, I'll give you an example. You've got to learn this if you're going to debate.

It's called Naṃsāṃtikīrpa. Say, Naṃsāṃtikīrpa. Naṃsāṃtikīrpa.

Does the word cire cover all existing things? Dharma. All things are dharmas, right?

But when it's cire as used in the context of the lack of self-existence to a person and the lack of self-existence to things, which is cires, does that cire cover all existing things? So, you've got to learn this tool in the debate ground. Somebody will say, does cire cover all existing things?

And you see, you have to be able to come back with, do you mean general cire or do you mean cire as used in the context of lack of self-existence to people and things? Because in that case, it's something different. And this is the same thing.

Are all three kinds of compassion focused on all living beings? Yes. Are all three kinds of compassion, that one of the three, which is called, quote, focused on all living beings?

No. Because there's the other two. Got it?

Just nod. Okay. Here we go.

Oh, is it? Oh my gosh. Okay.

I'm not sure I can hold this in time to the whole book. It's good you're all here. Okay.

One, two, three. TE YI NA RANG GI MIG YUL TU GYUR PAS SEM CHEN LA MIG NE NAM PA DUNG YAL DANG CHA WANG DUR PAS NYING RJE YIN GYUR PAS Sure. Dung.

I need these down here. Let's see what I take away.

[Speaker 2]
Oh.

[Speaker 1]
All right, all right. Give me some candy or something. I mean, probably that would help.

[Speaker 2]
TE YI NA RANG GI MIG YUL TU GYUR PAS Yeah, you make her, distract her, you know. I'll give you half later.

[Speaker 1]
TE YI NA SEM CHEN LA This is true because if something is great compassion, then it must be a compassion in which we focus upon a particular object of focus, all living beings, and wish that they could be freed from pain. Wasn't that description of the first kind? What are the two kinds of great compassion?

Jeomdu and Gyeomdu. One that wants to see them freed, and one that wants to take care of them, protect them. And the first one was said to be common to Hinayana practitioners, and the second one was supposed to be unique.

But then he just said that all forms of great compassion are Jeomdu. They want to see people freed from suffering. Is that a problem?

I don't think so. You could say the second one assumes the first one. In any case, they have to be focused on all living beings.

What he's doing is he's getting into the name of the three kinds of compassion. Let's go over the name. One is called samchen la mikpe nyingje.

Say samchen. Samla mikpe nyingje. The compassion wherein you simply focus on people.

Then there's chö la mikpe nyingje. Say chö la mikpe nyingje. You focus on them but with a certain aspect, which we're going to learn, so I'm not going to spoil the fun.

If we don't get to it tonight, I'll... And then say mikpe nyingje. Nyingje that has no focus, that focuses on no focus.

So we were talking about this. Okay, here we go. One, two, three.

Chang chö gyi sem yin la dzokpe chang chö la mikpe chang chö gyi sem yin. This is funny. Watch this one.

That's true. This is now, it's becoming a real monastic text. You have to think.

You just can't sit there and he's going to say everything for you. You have to think, why the heck did he say that? I mean, this big thing in monastic textbooks, you're always saying, why the heck did he say that?

Let's go over what he said. If something is bodhichitta, it must be a bodhichitta which is focused on total enlightenment. Okay?

And that's supposed to prove that if something is a compassion, it must be focused on all living beings. I'm sorry, they're both supposed to prove this third thing. Yeah, you can say that.

If something is great compassion, it must be focused on all living beings. Why? Because if something is bodhichitta, it must be focused on total enlightenment.

Does that make sense? This is a tricky one and you have to learn it and you have to go home and think about it, those of you who care and want to learn this stuff. But great compassion must be focused on all living beings.

If something is great compassion, it must be focused on all living beings because if something is the sky, it must be blue. If something is great compassion, it must be focused on all living beings because if something is the sky, it must be blue. I mean normally, normally.

If something is normally the sky, it's normally blue. Does it hold? Is that a logical statement?

I'll say it again. If something is compassion, it must be focused on all living beings because if something were the sky, it would have to be blue. Well, it's a beautiful statement because it's like general truth.

It's playing with two general truths. If A is true, I mean if balls weren't round, then compassion wouldn't have to focus on all living beings. Does that make sense?

You see? Like that. It's beautiful.

It's like the best reason. If I didn't have mental afflictions, then compassion wouldn't have to focus on all living beings. You see what I mean?

Something like that. You see? It's just a general truth.

Got it? If people didn't normally have two legs, then birds wouldn't have wings. You see what I mean?

It's like that. The definition of a bird is it's got to have two wings. Got it?

Well, think about it. Think about it. Think about it as a proof.

It's an interesting proof. Try it out in the debate ground. See if you get away with it.

Okay. And I'll give you another clue. It wasn't the whole proof.

It was the second half. And I blew it. Actually, I blew the chance.

Hang on. It's more this. Okay?

It's two parts to the proof. The reason has two parts. Okay?

Number three doesn't prove number two. I'll put it this way. Let me see.

Safeway Select Soft Caramel Cups are better to eat than eggplant because these taste good and eggplant doesn't taste good to me.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
How's that? The reason has two parts to it. The reason has two parts.

What were they? Eggplant doesn't taste good and caramel does taste good. You see?

So we call it a dual reason. The reason has two parts to it. So here, his reason has two parts to it.

The thing about the sky being blue is only the second half. So you can take it home and think about it. Okay.

We'll just continue on. One of them had been trying to prove two different things. What?

If something is great compassion, it doesn't necessarily have to be that one of the three compassions, which is called focused on beings. Okay? But it is the case that if something is compassion, then it must be focused on all living beings.

Great compassion. Yeah. Okay.

Got it? He just proved the first half of this. Now he's going to prove the second half of it.

Okay? Comfortable? I kind of like put it in right here.

The problem is he keeps saying they, right? And we keep having to supply it. We have to be very careful.

I'm going to hold out for a while. Okay? So now he's proving the second half.

What's the second half? If something is a great compassion, it must be a kind of compassion which is focused on all living beings. Okay?

So, careful. I'm not going to put in all because the second of the three is not called all. We'd lose the pun.

Okay. Anyway, here we go. He's going to prove the second half.

Moreover, it is true. Here we go again. There's three kinds of compassion, right?

We'll say them again. Great compassion. One is focused on samjantsam, plain old people.

It's not thinking about their emptiness. It just looks at them and says, I'm sorry for this person. Okay?

Samjantsam. Then chölamikte. It's focusing on some characteristic of them, typically their impermanence.

So it's called focused on dharma, focused on their theme. The third one is focused on nirvana. Nothing.

Their emptiness.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
So, one of them is called focusing on living beings, but all three of them focus on living beings. Okay? Right?

So if you wanted to prove that all three of them are focused on living beings, which two would you really have to concentrate on? The two that aren't called focused on all living beings. Okay?

So that's all he's saying here. Look, the one that has no focus at all and the one that's focused on some quality of them, some dharma of them, even those have to be focused towards all living beings. He didn't mention the third one because it's already called focused on living beings.

Okay? Got it? Not.

Okay. Here we go. Now I'm going to propose something.

This is the last class we have this semester. There's a nice section coming up where he explains why they have these weird names. And I thought we'd just go straight there and come back to this later.

Okay? So we have half an hour. We got a ready, catch, one, two, three.

Okay. Now a bodhisattva or someone who really understood the emptiness of this Florentine almon roca cookie, similar to a maple kind of doughnut, would give it away to the students. Give them a little bit anyway just so I don't look stupid.

Okay. Here's the old lady walking to the door behind me. It worked faster than I thought.

Thank you. Okay. Probably last line.

Okay. One, two, three. Nying je sum bo de, nik pe go ne, jok sung yu de.

Nying je sum bo de, nik pe go ne, jok sung yu de. You notice I fudged it here? Do you notice?

To their what? You can read that either way. You can say to how they focus or what they focus upon.

Right? It's cute, right? You kind of cover your bases.

And the Tibetan sounds just like that. It's not saying how they focus or what they focus. It's just their focus.

It's ambiguous. It's purposely ambiguous. Okay.

Anyway, it's a nice way to get out of translating something when you're not sure. Okay. One, two, three.

Chö la mik pe, nying je de, nga sem chen mi tak pa dang, rang kya thu pe, ze yu ki tong pa, tok pa sok la te ne. I think it's ze yu ki tong wa and not ze yu ki tong pa. How could I check?

This is what I call a statistic run. You do a statistic run. Like you type in ze yu ki tong wa and you type in ze yu ki tong pa, and then you just see if one like totally outwins the other one.

I'm sorry. What's that? Oh, a little bit difficult.

What is the verb devoid of? Yeah, tong wa. Ze yu ki...

Let's just say ze yu ki tong, and then we'll see what the next syllable is in each case.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
Where would I look? What kind of book is this? Does it belong to the Kangyur, the Tengyur, or the Sumbu?

Yeah, it's a Sumbu book. It was written by a monastic textbook writer in the 1500s, right? Any particular place?

Uma. We're in Uma. Ze yu ki tong pa in a book called Gomarasa by Jetsokapa.

So, heavy weight on the tong pa. Ze yu ki tong pa in the same book. Ze yu ki tong wa in a monastic textbook.

Ze yu ki tong wa by Kyabje Pavonka. Ze yu ki with nothing. Okay.

Oh, tong pa by somebody else. Ze yu ki tong pa in a Sarah J textbook, so we know that's got to be wrong. So, we could just safely use wa.

Ze yu ki tong pa in the book we're in. Ze yu ki tong ba again in the book we're in. Ze yu ki tong wa in the book we're in.

Ze yu ki tong wa in the book we're in. Two to two in the book we're in. I'm going to just give it up.

Okay. Yeah?

[Speaker 2]
Does it use tong pa or wa?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, it does. Suk tong ba o, tong wa ni suk so. It's different if you say suk tong wa o or tong wa ni.

Tong wa suk so. You see? In a verbal sense, it's more often tong wa.

Ze yu ki tong wa is more common. They tend to make more distinctions the older they go. You know?

They tend to, the older books are more sensitive to the Sanskrit, which makes more distinctions, generally speaking. And we once, we're going to arrange all the database by century. Then you could do a century check.

You see? Then you could do a statistical check by century. And if I had time, I would just do it.

It's a no-brainer. The catalog's done. So, somebody just has to put all the 14th centuries with the 14th centuries, and all the 15th centuries with the 15th centuries.

And then you could do a check by, has it evolved by time? You see? And does the older one tend to be more pa or wa?

You see? It'd be helpful. And then we were going to cut them up by geographical area.

Is this something that Amdawas do more than people from Utsang? You see what I mean? But we just didn't have time.

Okay. Yeah, it can, and how you translate it. It can have a lot of stuff.

If it were tongwa, you'd hedge it more. You'd shade it more verbally. Tongwa can never be emptiness.

It always has to be devoid of something. You see what I mean? More verbal shading.

But that's all. Okay. I'm going to say qualities.

Okay. So, basically think of your compassion as graduating through three steps. Number one, semjantam lamikpa.

Say, semjantam lamikpa. You're just looking at people at the shop and stop, and you're saying, oh, this poor guy. He's eating himself to death at the 31 flavors because he doesn't really have anything else, any other hope in his life.

[Speaker 2]
You know?

[Speaker 1]
I mean, that's one. But then there's a second, which is chö lamikpa nyingje. Say, chö lamikpa nyingje.

Here he's explaining what chö means in this context. It means a quality. What kind of quality?

Some kind of deeper quality to this person. What? For example, their subtle impermanence, their subtle changing nature.

You see what I mean? The fact that the child who is sitting with the guy who's killing himself with ice cream is also on his way there instant by instant. Unless he ends up at Diamond Mountain in the Bogdjima class or something.

Inexorably, he's already dead. I mean, he's already dead. You look at the kid, you look at the guy, you don't feel different.

The guy is closer maybe, but the kid is changing like this. The youthful energy that allows them to digest this ice cream faster and not get overweight will go away in a few years, and they'll still have the habit of eating it, and then they'll slowly kill themselves, and the time is going like this. You look at them and you...

So to have that kind of love, it depends on having sat in your year at Diamond Mountain and thought about impermanence for a long time. You see? Because then when you get to the shop and stop, and you see the kid, and you see the guy, you look at the guy, and you look at the kid, and suddenly you have the same feeling about the kid, because they're not in trouble yet.

They're still, what do you call it, oxidizing quickly. They still can convert it fast enough to not kill themselves with it. But because you've been meditating for six months on change, then you look at them and you just see a person who's in as much trouble as the father.

You see what I mean? So what he's saying here is that this second level of compassion depends on training. You've been meditating training yourself.

And he doesn't restrict it to the impermanence of the child. He says you could also see their lack of substantial existence, which means here it's not their real emptiness. It's that they're not independent of all the causes around them.

They're not self-standing. In modern colloquial, they say rangotumba. Our goal at Diamond Mountain and to the ACI courses is to make you rangotumba.

Rangotumba means we could cut you off, set you off on your own, and you would go make a Diamond Mountain somewhere, and you'd run it perfectly, and the students would all get all the stuff that you get. So the goal here is to make you rangotumba. Rangotumba means self-sufficient, like a kid reaches a point in their life when they're rangotumba.

And the idea of this institution, such as it is, is to make you dharma rangotumba, sutra and tantra rangotumba. You get through the courses, then you do all the tantric courses and then, okay, go start your own Diamond Mountain. Go save some people in Kentucky or something.

You know what I mean? You're rangotumba. But when it's used in philosophical terms, rangkhyatupa, same thing.

It means things don't stand by themselves. Things aren't independent of their causes. The fact that they're not independent of their causes is not quite their ultimate emptiness.

That's the third form of compassion. That's migme nyingje. The migme nyingje is working on the highest level of all, looking at objects and saying, these are not anything other than my projection.

If I want the world to be sane, there's only one way. I have to be sane. That's the whole bottom line.

So migme nyingje is a higher level. So we go up to these three levels of compassion. One just looks at the guy and says, oh my God, he's killing himself with the ice cream.

Then the second one says, man, the kid's killing himself too. It's just a matter of time. The rangkhyatupa part of that is there are conditions around the child that are causing this.

The society, the television, the marketing, the ignorance of the parents. I think when you get to that, you're kind of flirting with number three already. Then number three is definitely, this is my projection.

Why do I see people in America over killing themselves by eating? Because I can't control my own eating. At a subtle level, I can't control my own desire for food.

That's why I have to see this. So how do you cure obesity in America? Deal with your own subtle desire for food, and it will go away.

Because it's coming from your mind. It's very interesting. It has no reality.

It has no reality. All things are coming from us. All problems in America are being produced by your own bad habits.

It's kind of heavy. I think I'll eat a cookie. The word substantial existence has like ten different meanings.

I'm choosing here to make it a positive. I'm equating it to being self-standing. But that's not always the case.

When you study Mahamudra, there's a zeyu in there, and there's a self-standing in there which are different. And if you're interested, Chankya Rinpoche did a little essay on it. All the different kinds of zeyu.

And that's a difficult subject. That would take the whole night. But it's a good question.

Okay, here we go. This is tough. Say nambashara.

What does shara mean? Pashchima in Sanskrit. Sorry, that's the opposite.

Shara can mean to rise in the way that the sun rises in the east, so it became the word for east also. But you have to deal with this word here. Nambashara.

And I don't know how you want to translate. It can mean... I don't think so often.

But it could be, I guess. I think so. That's more like cherwa.

So shara, nambashara. Namba means... It's a very difficult word.

We establish this kind of compassion as the compassion which is focused on qualities, because when it looks at people and loves them, there's a nambashara in the mind of those people's impermanence, or those people's lack of a self-standing nature. So how do you want to translate it? I'll say it again.

We call this compassion, the compassion which is focused on qualities, because when it looks at people at the shop and stuff and feels bad for them, the mind is nambashara-ing an understanding of their impermanence or their lack of self-standing nature.

[Speaker 2]
Dawning is close.

[Speaker 1]
Now I warn you, later he's going to say, can you have two states in the mind at the same time? Can you tokpa dharmitakpa as you nambasharwa dharmitakpa? Tokpa means perceive, right?

Or realize. Nambasharwa, we have to perceive it. We haven't figured out the English word yet.

But while you're tokpa-ing a person, can you at the same time tokpa dharmitakpa? No, because the mind can't hold to two objects at the same instant, at the same microsecond. Like you can toggle.

Somebody put it in their meditation book, it was cute. I'm micro-toggling. It was very cute.

She stopped and makes me read this. I like the micro-toggle. It's a nice word.

So you can micro-toggle between two tokpas, right? But he's proposing something else. While you are tokpa-ing a person at the shop and stuff, you have a nambasharwa of how fast they're deteriorating already.

Or how they're a victim of the net of causation that they're in. Like can the kid break out of this eating thing? Almost impossible.

A sense is nice. A sense is nice because a sense is so vague you can get away with it on the debacle. You can say, he's having a sense of the impermanence while he's focusing on the person.

And a sense is so... I like it. I like a sense.

Do you want to try a sense? Do you have another one? Can you have an insight to their impermanence while you're focusing on them?

I guess you could. But insight is so often used for a hakta or things like that. It's too big.

That's another translator's job, is to place a word on the scale of your context, cultural context. Diamond Mountain, for example. We've got bokchimbas over here using insight every day.

And if we use insight way down here for a feeling that you get while you're focusing on the guy, we're going to bang into bokchimba. Inkling to me implies... It's almost like a sense of the impermanence almost a down...

What do you call it? Putting the guy down. Don't you have an inkling of what's going on?

You see, I mean, it's close. But so far I like feeling better. Or a sense.

I'm going to go for sense. I'm going to overrule everybody and go for sense. And then we'll change it later.

In our copious free time, which is at Diamond Mountain, become part of our language now. Invented by the lemons, I think. Okay.

I like sense because I'm setting you up for later. If we had said perceive or something, we'd be in trouble later, I'm telling you. So anyway, that's what it is.

The sense one has with it, possesses it. And it gets kind of long. It is...

Let me finish it and then we'll go back. Is there someone who wants to finish it? Okay.

Did you want to shorten it? That's pretty good. But I'm going to stick with sense.

It's got to be a little vaguer. We're going to get caught later. Okay.

So this establishes what it is. I'm going to leave it. Maybe we'll go back.

Otherwise we won't finish because we know he's going to kick me out of here soon. We've got to finish these three. Okay.

One, two, three. So he's careful to say that first at Diamond Mountain and during your lay room, in between worrying about what they're going to bring for lunch, you've already understood that people don't have any nature of their own, meaning what? The obesity you see in the country is not coming from them.

That it's coming from you. So that, they don't... Sitting in your yurt you figure that out.

Then you go to the stop and shop and you see the guy with the ice cream and you feel bad for him. And as you're focusing on him and wishing he was free of that pain, there's a part of your mind that's saying, but I made him. Got it?

It's beautiful, right? It's really, really profound because only with the third one you could change his reality. Only with the third one you could adjust his habits by what?

Changing your own habits. It's so profound. You can fix the world with the third one and not with the first two.

No matter how sweet they are, no matter how concerned they are, no matter how sociable, responsible they are, no matter how deeply felt they are, and the person's like crying all day, they can't change anything. Because then if you don't understand emptiness you'll go out and start a soup kitchen, just start a soup kitchen, right? Or like that, you see?

You won't understand how to fix it really. Do you have a question? It's a good question.

Would you have to have a direct perception of emptiness to have this kind of compassion? I think you could pull it off with an intellectual understanding. If you guys go to 31 Flavors on Wednesday, of course we might bump into you.

You know, you're going to have this thought, you're going to have this thought to some degree, and that's good. That's a kind of migme nyingje. That's already a migme nyingje.

We'll do one more. That's because he used the full form previously. He said migpa me la migme pe nyingje or something like that.

So what he's going to say, and I don't think we're going to get to it because we only have three minutes left, is that we're very much allowed to shorten these names. And that causes trouble because it gets called compassion with nothing it sees, and then what are you talking about? No object?

Is it not focused on all living beings? Okay, so here we go. Let's do the last one.

And that's a very appropriate place to stop for the semester. It's kind of cool that we finished the three. It's good debate fodder.

This is like endless debate fodder. Oh, he's telling me he's not focused on anything. Okay, here we go.

And are they Gelwa? Could you have both of them in the same day? Could you go through all three in the same day?

Yeah. In three moments, exactly. Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, like you lose your sin tongue. And then somebody gets angry at you, and you're like, for the first 30 seconds you're like, I've got to stop being angry at people. And then the second one is, well, at least it's impermanent.

And then the third is like, they're just stupid from their own side. Okay, he went through all three in a minute. Okay, got it.

With the last one, which is really the first one I think, right? You're just looking at them and feeling sorry for them. You know, oh, he's going to have a heart attack.

He's going to be in the hospital.

[Speaker 2]
Okay? Like that. Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. You could say that. Okay.

Of particular qualities? Let's try that. I know, that's a little dangerous, right?

[Speaker 2]
I'm going to leave it.

[Speaker 1]
What he's saying, which I agree with, is that then it gets mixed up with the single one, which is called, that which is focused on qualities. So, let's just leave it. Yeah?

I think my own personal experience is that when you start taking responsibility for one person, then it starts to spread to other people. So, like in the beginning, you like try to help him in some way or some... I don't know.

You know, I don't know. We did it... We were at Cold Stone and it was very sad.

We walked in and everyone in the room was killing themselves, obviously killing themselves. And then we ordered like a super tiny thing, you know? And then we went and split it together, you know, like these little tiny bites, you know?

And then there were three people sitting next to us who were really in trouble. And they looked at us and they were like... And they joked to us about it.

They said... Basically they were saying, oh, you're not killing yourselves with the ice cream. And see, so you...

Maybe you take a small portion and you sit down next to him and eat it sensibly. And then... Because you can't go up to somebody and say, you know, you're killing yourself, you know?

But you can sit next to them and set an example, right? And then that turns into a wish to start some project to help people with... You see, I mean, no.

And then it gets bigger and bigger. And then finally that ends up as this intergalactic thing. It becomes intergalactic and very beautiful, like a star just shining on all the planets, you know?

So I think it starts... It has to start with one person and then it spread. Then you get this idea like, well, how could I help more people, you know?

And then you start... It's an interesting... I'll give you two project seeds in your mind, you know?

One is how could you help the obesity thing. And then one is computer damage, damage to hands and minds with the email and stuff like that. And especially children.

There'll be a whole... William Gibson predicted it 20 years ago. There'll be a whole generation of people with subtle bone injuries and attention injuries, but also channel injuries, very serious channel injuries.

And could we invent a yoga that's just designed to help to address that? Could you do a... People are going to use computers.

You can't stop it. I don't think you should stop it. But could there be a yoga that addresses that damage?

And that would be... And then you could have like a retreat place. I know in my corporation we had about 30 IT guys who usually worked all night because the reports had to be run for the morning.

They had to be ready at 8 o'clock in the morning, so they would just stay all night. And they would go home at 9 or 10. And they all got these weird injuries.

So there are companies that would... If there was an ad in the IT magazines that said, send your crippled programmers for a weekend in the desert and we'll teach them how to type again, it would be a big business and it would be a big service. So anyway, think about it.

I'm not saying you have to start anything, but it's something to think about.

[Speaker 2]
Thank you very much.

[Speaker 1]
Thank you for helping with the translation. I think it's going to be a very nice translation because we got automatic critique as it came off the press before it got printed. And I think it's going to be very sort of wholesome because many people helped.

So I hope that Alistair will try to keep everyone's name from all the courses. Just so we can thank them in the book. It's good suggestions you have.

I was a little leery being a... I have to be hard-headed. It's part of my job, right?

And it's hard for me to accept suggestions. But over the last year and four semesters, I've come to really appreciate... You guys have given really good suggestions.

I mean very... Like the one you gave at the beginning of class. It makes it a much better piece.

So I think between us, we're going to make a nice piece of it. And it's like... I think it's the most important book on emptiness ever written.

So it's going to be nice to do it together. So I encourage you to keep it up.