Вступление на срединный путь (текущий курс, Аризона), занятие 36

[Speaker 1]
I thought I'd go back a bit and review where we are. Maybe we'll do it in the text, let me see. This is where we are.

It says, by the way, we've been concentrating on the Umitīdin, the monastic text, which is a commentary on Jetsun Kappa's various book on emptiness, which is called...

[Speaker 2]
Gombarabhsa.

[Speaker 1]
Gombarabhsa, okay. And we're supposed to be getting to Gombarabhsa and keep up with the translation from that, but I don't know. I'm just enjoying where we are.

So we were going to... Here it says, we're going to explain the exact nature of great compassion that one develops with the method just described. What was the method just described?

What visualization did they say to use to develop compassion? The buckets and the well. Remember everything banging around?

And this idea of a cycle, self-perpetuating cycle. So we're going to talk about the definition of compassion, its divisions and its separate explanations. Here's the definition.

A state of mind which focuses on all suffering living beings hopes that they could be free of that suffering with the same intensity of love that a mother feels for her only child. And it arises spontaneously. They don't have to think about it, okay?

Then they quoted this Gomrim, which you guys studied in Bok Chum, the first three classes, I think, something like that. Was that?

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, so you know all that. Then there were two kinds of great compassion. And we had it in one of the ACI courses, I don't remember, but it was one wishes that beings could be freed from pain and one wishes that they could protect all living beings from pain.

And implication of the second one is what? I'll take responsibility. I'll do it myself.

If it needs to be done, I'll do it. So the text said that Hinayana people, lower way people, could have the first great compassion but not the second, okay? What's the synonym for the second really?

[Speaker 2]
Pasam Nambak.

[Speaker 1]
Pasam Nambak. It's really taking personal responsibility. And you know, you need that if you're going to do Dharma.

You've got to be at a place where, you know, if nobody helps me, I'll still do it. If people criticize me, I'll still do it. If people put a website out and criticize me, I'll still do it.

No, you just have to be... Pasam Nambak is like, I'll just do it, I'll just take care of things. If nobody else does what they said or...

That often happens, right? If they said they'd take care of that and they didn't take care of it, or, you know, whatever. I don't care.

I'll take responsibility. And then the buck stops here. The buck stops here.

And then happily, joyfully, I'll take care of it. I'll do it. Even if people don't help me and even if people criticize me, I'll still get it done.

I'll still do what needs to be done. Okay? So that's Pasam Nambak.

Gyaltsab Jay, he quotes Gyaltsab Jay to prove that Hinayana people could have the first kind of great compassion. And here is where they divide compassion into three different types. One focuses upon things.

One focuses upon that which cannot be focused upon. And one focuses on the person alone. And those are very weird names, right?

Compassion that focuses on things. Compassion that focuses on things that you can't focus on. And compassion where you focus on the person alone.

So what the heck do those mean? That's what we're going to get to. We're working on that.

That's what we're really working on. And these are very famous and your own compassion should go through this evolution. Your feeling of love for other people.

It starts out you just like people because you like to like people or something like that and you don't think much about it. And then that's sort of a beginning level. And then the second level is you like people or you feel compassion for people because you realize they are impermanent.

Like grossly impermanent would be they have to die. Like we were in... We do this exercise every year.

We go see the family at Christmas time. And just to see how people live. And it's always this depressing exercise.

It's really depressing. And we love them all. They love us.

But just to go there and see who got sick, who died, who's unhappy, who's divorced, who's got cancer, who's broke something, who's getting old and finding out finally. And it's very depressing. So that kind of love focuses on somebody and says, oh you're getting old.

And thinks about that quality that everyone you meet is getting old moment by moment. So instead of just vaguely loving people, you love them because you know they have to die. They have to lose everything they own, everyone they love.

And so you focus on them and you think of those thoughts. And the highest kind of love is where you focus on their emptiness. And I don't know, I was playing with that during the break.

Consciously trying to love people and at the same time focus on how they're coming from me. So if I meet a person who's getting old or I meet a person who's dying or I meet a person who's angry, then it's all coming from me. So that's a much different kind of love.

And the third kind of love is special because the third kind of love can change the world. The third kind of love understands that the condition of anger or the condition of impermanence or even the condition of death that I see in other people is ultimately coming from me. Every soldier who dies in Iran, it's my fault.

That kind of love or concern for those soldiers is something extraordinary. I could stop that war if I could stop yelling at Christie. Something like that.

It's a higher kind of love. And it's only the third kind of love that can help people. It can change those things.

So it's an extraordinary evolution of love. He's describing an evolution of love through three stages. And it would be really nice to be able to teach people, especially the third kind of love.

Then he got into this thing where, look, they're all love. They all love people. They just have different take on the object.

One sees the object as a simple person. One sees the object as changing from moment to moment, getting older from moment to moment. One sees the object as my fault.

But the feeling they have is all the same. Yeah, which is, I wish I could take away their pain. Here.

I wish I could take away their pain. So, the feeling is the same, the object is different. The take on the object is different.

Got it? You have to get all that, or else you can't really, you won't really be able to get it. This is a statement he made.

Different types of compassion are exactly the same in how one focuses upon one's object, all living beings, and hope that they could be freed from pain. The feeling is the same, of all three kinds of compassion. Then he says, it's true that these different types of compassion are established through the object towards which we focus, because the auto-commentary says, the reason I repeated the word being, who's speaking?

Auto-commentary. Yeah, Chandrakirti, he's saying, Master Chandrakirti, he's saying, you know, I wrote this book called, what is it, Long Break? Yeah, Madhyamaka Avatara.

I wrote this book called, Anyway in the Middle Way, and in the beginning I had this verse, and I repeated the word being, living being, twice, because I wanted to distinguish between two kinds of compassion, right? Now, I made a note to myself, we always leave the boring stuff and then we do the fun stuff, and then I always say, we'll do the boring stuff later, so, let's do the boring stuff. We have to go find the verse where he says being twice, right?

Because it's kind of cheap not to go find it, you know? It's kind of, it's not very responsible for future generations, right? So, let's look it up.

We'll go to Gopher. And this is what this class is about. It's not really a class class.

I'm not trying to teach you the three kinds of compassion. It's not, no, and it's not a, it's not a ca ca ga class, we finished that. It's not an alphabet class.

It's really a, how to use tools like the, how to be a transcendent, and really sort of advanced transcendent. Nonetheless, I encourage people to sit in the class who never intend to learn a word of Tibetan, because it puts a seed in your mind. we were translating an interesting thing.

It's going to be in the class tomorrow. She doesn't like it when I say it's going to be in the class tomorrow. But anyway, there's this beautiful thing about, oh, sneak people peaks at the mandala, even if they're lousy people, because it puts a seed in their mind for, it's called an unstoppable seed.

And it's discussing secrecy. It's just, yeah, but you can sneak people a peak once in a while, because it puts some seed in their mind. So, this is all putting seed in your mind, right?

You'll be great at Tibetan, now or later, it doesn't matter. But stay here, learn the stuff. And we're going into a degree of detail that is very rare.

And it's just because we have six years to do it. Otherwise, I don't think I would do it. But we're just going very deep.

And the idea is overkill. You learn three kinds of compassion. You learn 16 different things about each one.

You forget 15 things about them. Then when you teach it to somebody, you remember one thing. And you wouldn't remember it if you hadn't done 16 things.

You see what I mean? That's the Geshe principle. That's why they make Geshe soup.

They memorize all the stuff, they forget everything two years after they graduate. But a certain basic stuff stays. And that's all we're going for.

Okay. So, let's find, what's the word for being here in this paragraph? What word are we going to search for?

[Speaker 2]
Droha?

[Speaker 1]
Was it droha? I think, going one, right? The one who goes.

Which means a creature or a living being. Would we look in Kangyur, Tengyur, or Sumbam for something by Narasitana Kirti? Tengyur, yeah.

The Indian commentary is translated into Tibetan. So, we'll go Tengyur. Do we want to search the whole Tengyur or can we narrow it down?

Uma, Madhyamika. As opposed to, for example, Vinaya or Abhidhamma or Prajnaparamita or logic. And you read this, I'll put the, you watch right here.

If you're trying to find a quotation, you watch. This is the 400 verses by Ayodeva. We don't need it right now.

This is a commentary. D.R. means Japa commentary. This is, who?

Buddhapalita. Why did they spell his name right? You only have eight characters in this whole system.

What's Tengyur? Bharatavatara. Okay.

These are all commentaries on Prajnaparamita. We don't need them. That's not it.

This is, Gomu, Bhavanakrama. Four of them. This is Jupa, okay?

In the monastery they call it Jupa. Just entering, okay? What are you studying?

Jupa. Okay, here it is. Dambor, say, repeat, okay?

Dambornga, She, Dagla, Shengyurching. First people, first people say, me, I, and they grasp to a self. Okay?

And then, Daki, Di, She, Mula, Chak, Gepa. Then they give rise, give birth to feelings, to desire for things, saying, Daki, this is mine. Sochun, say Sochun, Chandar, Rangwa, Mepayi.

Like a water wheel, or buckets in a well, Rangwa Mepayi. Hopelessly, helplessly, okay? Without any desire of their own.

Drola, Ninje, Jerkang, Delandu, I bow down to that thing which is compassion for all beings. Did we have a drola yet? Yeah, there it is in the last line.

Drola, to all living beings I bow down. What kind of living beings did he just... I'm sorry, what kind of compassion did he just bow down to?

How does that compassion think about beings? Sochun, Chandar, Rangwa Mepayi. They're being bashed around in buckets, like buckets in a well.

And they're just spinning up and down. So which one of the... Yeah, it's the second kind of compassion, which feels like, oh, you know, my relatives in L.A. are getting banged around by life. And they're stuck. And they're just going up and down in the cycle. And sooner or later the rope will break, you know, and the bucket will fall, and...

So that's the first kind of compassion. Let's keep going. Say drola, drola, yohe, yohe, chuhi, chuhi, nangi, nangi, dawa, dawa, dar.

Living beings are like the moon, which is reflected in rippling water. One more line. Yodam, Yodam, Rangshin, Rangshin, Nikhi, Nikhi, Tongbar, Tongbar, Tongwai, Tongwai, Okay.

That which sees that they are empty of any nature of their own, and they are shifting. Okay. Yohe.

One more line. Gyalwe, Gyalwe, Sepo, Sepo, Di, Di, Semkang, Semkang, Dronam, Dronam, This state of mind of the children of the victorious Buddhas, meaning bodhisattvas, who look at all beings, Nambar, Nambar, Dora, Dora, Chachir, Chachir, Ningde, Ningde, Wangyur, Wangyur, Shin. This is the king of all kinds of compassion, because it can free the world.

That's which one? The third one. This is coming from...

I'm sorry. I'm not sure which order he's going to play with, but we'll see. That could be a bit.

But anyway, the one that doesn't see them as self-existent, the one that sees them as coming from me, that's the one that can save the world.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Is there a Dora here? In this line.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, at the beginning, right here. Living beings are, are like a reflection of a moon in rippling water. Okay?

Like unsteady and not real. You see? Because is that the real moon?

Are the living beings that you love not real? Yes. Of course they're real.

You can touch them, you can hug them, right? So they're real, right? So they're not like a moon in the water, which is not the real moon.

Okay? Right?

[Speaker 2]
But they're like that.

[Speaker 1]
Well, they are like that. Why?

[Speaker 2]
Because they're changing. They're not permanent.

[Speaker 1]
Well, that's the rippling maybe, but I think the point here is the reflection in the water.

[Speaker 2]
Because it's a reflection of our own moment.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah. Yeah. There are reflections.

And they're also unreal. They're not what they look like. Like you wouldn't look at the moon in the water and think it was the real moon.

But you know, if you were like a little drunk or something, you might, you know, think it was the real moon. But that would be an illusion, right? So it's an illusion like that.

So the idea is that it looks like they're not coming from you. It looks like we can't stop the war in Iraq. Right?

It looks like we'd have to have another president first, or it's his fault, or it's not my fault. And that's wrong. That's an illusion.

And the truth is that it's coming from me, from my personal violence to people around me, on a small scale. You see? Or I wouldn't have to...

That wouldn't exist. You see? So that's the kind of love that's migmei tsewa.

Alright? Migmei tsewa techin chenmei tsek. That's the whole idea, right?

It doesn't focus on beings in the way that you're used to.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
It focuses on them in this new way.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
That's all. So let's go back to the verse, and this is why we looked this up in the first place. The word being is repeated twice in order to distinguish two compassions from each other.

Did he do that? Yeah. There's two drawers.

The first one refers to the buckets getting banged around. The second one refers to the moon in the water. So how do you want to write the footnote?

Well, scholars like it if you give them some page numbers and some kind of text number, even if it doesn't matter much. So, page 201B. Okay?

So, folio. I got this time Roman disease thing. How do you turn this off?

Oops. And you're saying, why is he taking our class time doing this? And what would my answer be?

It's a rule of translation, right? You never leave stuff to go back to. You do it when you're there.

And then the day you finish the last sentence you can give it to Bets and they can publish it. Otherwise you get this thing where every translator has a stack of old manuscripts lying around that are 80% finished. And they never finish the footnotes and stuff.

And if you die, at least it's in some kind of shape for people to use. Helpless buckets? We had this debate before.

[Speaker 2]
Oh my God.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, and I'm helpless buckets. And three people giggled. Okay.

What if I named these two? Impermanent? I don't know.

Breaking? How do you guys say? Fragile?

I don't know. They're busting up. But you don't want us to do that.

[Speaker 2]
I don't know.

[Speaker 1]
How do you want to imply they're impermanent?

[Speaker 2]
And then let the reader figure it out. Batter? Batter.

[Speaker 1]
I like batter. Now we have to find the quotation. If we're going to be scholarly, right?

We have to find the quotation. By the way, there's two kinds of books. One is scholarly, and that's what we're doing.

And, you know, it's overkill, and every single quotation is located, and nobody can argue with anything. And then there's books that you write to help real people. Like the Yoga Sutra translation.

We stripped out, we used... Somebody said, you couldn't have used 100 commentaries. It's true, we used about 400 commentaries.

And I didn't want to say that, because I thought nobody would believe it. But we used 300 or 400 commentaries. But you don't put that in the book.

You don't burden... You know some lady who's going to yoga in Yoga Floor in Tucson, and she just wants to pick up a book and find out about yoga. She doesn't want to know what page of the commentary...

She doesn't care, she doesn't want to know, and if you put that in, it would be three times thicker and she would never read it. So you have to... What was another rule of translation?

Define your audience at the beginning. Decide who's your audience. And it also makes you a better writer.

Because if you mix your audiences, you know, like you write half the book simply for the mass market, and then you write half of it all complicated with lots of footnotes for the other half in the same book, then nobody likes it. You see what I mean? So at the beginning you decide how detailed it is going to be.

We're trying to write a definitive commentary. We're trying to translate a definitive work. And then somebody like you guys, now five or ten years, you should put out a little book about the size of Yoga Sutra with a hundred pages in it that anyone can pick up at their hairdresser, and now read about emptiness for half an hour and get halfway through the book.

You see? No, really. Because that also helps people.

You have to be able to be both, right? You have to be able to produce both kinds. So anyway, we have to go find this quotation from the commentary.

When you're trying to find a quotation, what's a good rule? Pick something odd. Don't go searching for the word, and.

Okay? Because it will take all day. So, I think I find the weirdest combination of things here.

Kone Sohar is pretty unusual. These are things you just have to learn in your life. If you don't find it, why would that be?

Yeah, I mean, it could be a dozen reasons. You see, it could be our guys in ceremony typed it in wrong. It could be that the carver carved it wrong.

It could be that the person quoted it from memory and quoted it wrong. It could be another translation of the same text, so it's not spelled the same. You see?

Because these are all translations, right? but you always start with that. This is not it.

This is not it. Ooh, that's kind of something. That's not it.

Is this it? Huh? Is this it?

It's like a shepa, which was a commentary. I'm not sure if the...

[Speaker 2]
Yeah, it could be, right?

[Speaker 1]
But he didn't... He kind of added some stuff. No, I'm sorry, he didn't.

He cut it off, right? It is the quotation. So it's 223b.

By the way, he goes on to tell you which ones he was talking about. Hang on a minute. Actually, he never says...

He never says the second part of this quotation. He never says, because that's why I mentioned beings twice. Okay?

No, he never says it. Is this the auto-commentary? 3862.

How do you find that out? You start another gopher. Where are they?

Here it is. Oops. Do you see any gopher here?

Oh, it's right here. And you say 3862. So 3862 is the auto-commentary.

Okay? So we have a real problem here, which is what? He never said what the guy said he said.

Okay? The first half he said. Okay?

And our author has misquoted the second half.

[Speaker 2]
Let's try.

[Speaker 1]
Let's check. No, it's not really possible. This is the part.

This is the section. And he never said the second half. He never said, that's why I mentioned Goa twice.

What does he say after that? He says, in order to distinguish between these two kinds of compassion, that which focuses on things, and that which focuses on nothing, right? I...

There's this quotation, ドワヨウイチュウイナンギダワタ ヨウダラシニキトワトワ That's why I put in the line, Michael Brandon was closer, inside the moon metaphor is both impermanence and unreality. And it doesn't refer to the buckets at all. He never meant it to refer to the buckets.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
So, the one image of the moon in the water, because the water is rippling, conveys both impermanence and unreality. And he never said anything about saying Doa twice, beings twice. So what do we do now?

Well, we definitely got to go back and change my footnote. 223B I like to put it this way. Uh...

That's both changing, right? Thus reflecting, thus reflecting. Both types of thinking.

Okay? That's a polite way to get out of it. Now let's go back just for just a moment.

It's a good question you asked. Let's just make sure there's not another quotation that he gives in the next paragraph or something. But I don't think so.

That's not it. Then we're past that section. Let's see if anyone else mentioned it.

Maybe he just misquoted that it was from the auto commentary.

[Speaker 2]
Someone else had tried to speak in the auto commentary It might be the auto commentary as he heard it in the debate ground.

[Speaker 1]
That happens a lot. That happens a lot. But I kind of...

I don't know. I like the way he said it. It makes sense with the two kinds of going, but anyway.

Okay, we got out of that footnote. Yeah? Yeah?

Yeah, it's just a joke. Okay. Okay, now we're down to what we didn't translate before.

And this is where we skipped, and we skipped to the part that was sexy because it was the last class. So now we've got to go back and do another boring part. Okay.

I don't know... And this is because if something is either the compassion which focuses upon things, or the one which has no focus, then it must still be a compassion in which we focus upon beings.

[Speaker 2]
Okay?

[Speaker 1]
So, that's the continuation of the argument that... Is the feeling different among the three kinds of compassion? No, it's all love.

I don't want them to get hurt. I don't want them to hurt. Feelings are the same.

Is the object different? Yeah. So the object is not all living beings.

So the object of all three is not all living beings. Oh, so the object of all three is the same. So the difference between the three isn't based on differences of the object.

So the object is not the same of all three. So the object isn't the same of all three. And so since the only thing that distinguishes all three is their object, they're all the same.

Okay, here's clearing up that debate. Someone was going to come up here and not debate. And you get finer, right?

Then you learn to say, yeah, it's something... You have to say something like, it's how they take the object. It's the take on the object that's different.

The feel is the same. The object is the same. The take on the object is different.

How about that? Something like that. Now, how do you say that in literary English?

I don't know. Okay, here we go. Okay, now we're really going to start the class.

So Christy said I could go on to the top ten. No. Well, candy time.

Okay. She likes red vines. I hate them.

I like chocolate. I don't know. So we have this fight like in movies.

[Speaker 2]
Okay. Let's...

[Speaker 1]
Everyone who's not chewing, please repeat. One, two, three. Oh, by the way.

Well, let's do the first two words. First two words. One, two, three.

Down.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, wait. Does it go up or down?

[Speaker 1]
Does it go up or down? Right? In English.

It is so? Or is it so? Well, who said the last thing?

Who said the last thing? The other guy or us? We did.

So what's going to come next? Of course it's correct. It is too.

Okay. We're still talking our idea. So it's going to go down or up?

[Speaker 2]
Up.

[Speaker 1]
Up. So let's do it again. And then we'll keep going.

One, two, three. Down. Keep going.

What have we been using for downtown?

[Speaker 2]
Y'all.

[Speaker 1]
What? You don't remember? Okay.

Well, the glory of computers. Downtown. That too is true.

That must be the case. That is the case.

[Speaker 2]
What do you want to use? It is too. It is too.

[Speaker 1]
It is so because there's something that's evil. Okay? So whether it's the kind of compassion which is focusing on a person's impermanence, or whether it's the kind of compassion which is focusing on a person's emptiness, they're both focusing on people.

Okay? Alright. Let's read this one together.

By the way, it's verse. So normally, what's the beat? It's bam, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam.

If you're Milarepa or the first Panchen Lama? Bam, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam. Okay?

Got it? So try to read it in pairs. Because Master Chandrakirti, translated to Dutton, is bam, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam.

Okay, here we go. One, two, three. Pre-nasal.

Dro-wa, yo-wa, chi-yi, nam-di, da-wa, da. Yo-gang, rang-shin, ni-ki, tong-ba, tong-wa, hi. Dro-la, nin-je, kyur-kang, de-la, du.

Che-sun, ge-la. And that's true, because the text itself states... We just had this quotation.

We were just looking at this quotation. This is what the auto-commentary really said, right after it said, look, there's two kinds of compassion. And it said, dro-wa.

What's yo-wa? Who's mi-yo-wa?

[Speaker 2]
The children.

[Speaker 1]
Not moving. Unshakable. Chi means what?

Water. That's chi. This is chi.

Okay. Nam-di. Ng-da-wa.

Ng-da-wa. Moon. Ng...

Tong-ba. Empty. Tong-wa.

To see, like tong-lang. Nin-je. Compassion.

De-la-n-du. De-la-n-du. I bow down to that.

Animals are called gyur-yang in Sanskrit. Dun-dro in Tibetan. Dun-dro.

Those who go. Du. Bend over.

On all fours. So, this du means I bow down to. You want to say shifting?

Or is that too weird? Yo-wa means like.

[Speaker 2]
Wavering.

[Speaker 1]
Wavering.

[Speaker 2]
Shimmering water.

[Speaker 1]
It's got to imply like, changing from moment to moment.

[Speaker 2]
Shimmering. Shimmering is quite shiny.

[Speaker 1]
Shimmering is visual, and this has to be tactile.

[Speaker 2]
Shimmering. Undulating.

[Speaker 1]
Undulating.

[Speaker 2]
No. Too many.

[Speaker 1]
It's really shifting, but shifting sounds nice.

[Speaker 2]
Sounds sketchy.

[Speaker 1]
Constantly shifting. Constantly.

[Speaker 2]
No, but did you say it twice? He said it twice.

[Speaker 1]
Yo-wa. Yo-wa. In the first line.

[Speaker 2]
I like unstable. Is that okay?

[Speaker 1]
He uses it twice.

[Speaker 2]
That's true.

[Speaker 1]
This is great, because it gives me time to eat two of these things. But it's got to somehow imply impermanence, right? Instability.

[Speaker 2]
It's just the two of us. Is that okay?

[Speaker 1]
I kind of like that. Yeah? Okay.

Okay. Let's read it together. By the way, those of you who knew, when I go like this, you have to do it with force.

Ni. So I'm going Ni. Okay?

Like Ningbo. Okay? And Ning would be something different.

So Ni. Okay? And how do we do prenasals?

Oh, yeah. Like Like Da would mean Da would mean a spear. But Nda means the moon.

So, say it. Da. Nda.

Nda. Okay? So I'll go like that if you have to prenasal it.

[Speaker 2]
Oh, yeah.

[Speaker 1]
This is the sexy lady in Brazil who goes life number four. Then you have to do a vocalic sound. Okay?

Here. Da. Da.

I have one student who just refuses to do it. I'll move it over. Say Ga.

Ga. Ga means where are they? Say Ga.

Ga. It means I like it. Okay?

Big difference, right? Say Ga. Ga.

I like it. Okay? Ga.

Ga. Where are they? Okay?

Got it? And if you prenasal it, Nga. Nga.

How many? Or some. Some of them.

Gasshi. Okay? So anyway, here we go.

Oh, we're going to read it. One. Two.

Three. Ni.

[Speaker 2]
Je. Chen. Po.

Yin.

[Speaker 1]
Na. Re. Sun.

Du. She. We.

Sem. Chen. La.

Ni.

[Speaker 2]
Pe.

[Speaker 1]
Ni.

[Speaker 2]
Je.

[Speaker 1]
Yin. Da. Ma.

[Speaker 2]
Kya.

[Speaker 1]
Te. I'm going to try to do something with you guys, which is shorter sentences. The translation will be a little stiff, but it'll be easier for you to keep up with the Tibetans.

Anyway, we're going to do this one. Oh, I can't do it. Sorry.

Okay. Let's keep reading. One.

Two. Three. Da.

Yin. Na. Sem.

Chen. Sun. La.

Ni. Pe. Ni.

Je. Yin. Da.

Ma. Kya. Re.

Te. And that's true. What was the last thing he said?

Yeah. People are shifty and unreal. Okay?

[Speaker 2]
Why?

[Speaker 1]
That's true. Because, I would say, something is a kind of great compassion, or was it just compassion? Yeah.

It doesn't necessarily have to be the compassion which is focused on suffering beings, which is one of the three kinds of compassion. Tricky. There's a trick.

What's the feeling, I'm sorry, what's the take of Sem. Chen. La.

Mi. Pe. Ni.

Je. The compassion which is focused on beings. No, that's focused on things.

That's the compassion which is focused on things.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
It's, it's, how does it feel? It doesn't feel anything special. Just, oh, I'm sorry, you're suffering.

Okay? Like that. It's the one that most people have.

When you say, compassion which focuses on beings as one of the three, but could you refer to all three as compassions which focus on beings? Of course. You see what I mean?

So, he's, he's, when he, when he's, you have to learn, if you're going to learn the Vedic, if you're going to go to Sara, you have to learn sum du che we, or ning sen du gyur pe, nang sen du gyur pa. You see? It's a big difference.

If I say the compassion which focuses on living beings, which one of the three am I talking about? You don't know. You don't know.

Okay? If I say the compassion which focuses on beings as one of the three, then I'm just talking about one of the three, because they all focus on being.

[Speaker 2]
Right?

[Speaker 1]
So he's being a debater here. He's saying, he's being careful. He's not saying, oh, just compassion which focuses on beings.

He's saying, compassion which focuses on being as one of the three different kinds of compassion. So he's covering his rear end. So, that's obvious, right?

So give me his tension. He says, there's a kind of compassion which is not the one which focuses on sentient beings, living beings, which is one of the three. Give me his, so somebody just show.

Okay, give me one.

[Speaker 2]
Great compassion.

[Speaker 1]
I think that's okay. You can say that. You can say that.

Great compassion in general. So it's not focused on living beings. So, if something is great compassion, is it always the compassion which is focused on living beings?

Of course. So it's not. That's not a good teaching.

[Speaker 2]
We don't know which of the three it is.

[Speaker 1]
If something is great compassion, it's not necessarily the great compassion which focuses on living beings, which is one of the three, as a division of the three. That's all he's saying. That's all he's saying.

Can you accept that? I think you can give a better teaching, or an easier teaching. What would that be?

Pick one of the other two. Pick one of the other two. Take the compassion which is focused on things.

Oh, is it the one of the three, which is the compassion which is focused on beings only? Because it's a great compassion. See, that's an example which defeats this khyaba.

I'll say it again. This guy said, every form of great compassion is the one form of great compassion among the three, which is called focused on beings. Focused on living beings only.

Focused on living beings. So all you have to do is say, oh, so I guess the compassion which is focused on their emptiness is just focused on them. Why?

Well, because it's a great compassion. And you said any kind of great compassion must be the one of the three, which is called focused on living beings. Got it?

You've got to be able to think like this if you're going to walk into the big room. Got it? I'll say it again.

Any kind of great compassion in the world must be that one of the three which is called focused on living beings. True or false? False.

False. Because there's lots of kinds of great compassion which is not that one of the three. Because there's the other two of the three.

Right? Got it? No.

Okay, we'll go on. But you have to be able to think like this. You have to be like, boom, boom.

So I'll say it again. Every kind of compassion in the world is the one of the three which is called focused just on people. You say dharmadut.

So I say, oh, sure. Well, give me a counterexample. Give me one kind of compassion which is a kind of compassion, but it's not the one of the three which is called focused on people.

But it's the one that's not focused. Or the one which is focused on things. You see, that would be a good counterexample.

Got it? Why is he doing this? Why is he doing this?

Let's see. Here's that clencher. Got it?

Easier? Make it easier? Say this in Tibetan.

sem chen la sem chen la mik pe mik pe nying je nying je One more time. sem chen la sem chen la mik pe mik pe nying je nying je That compassion which focuses on living beings. Now that's a little uncomfortable, as Geshe Tutor Rinpoche would say, midewa.

Because that could refer to either all kinds of compassion, because they're all focused on living beings. Or it could refer to the one of the three compassions which is called focused on living beings. So to make life easier, we say, repeat this.

sem chen sem chen tam la tam la mik pe mik pe nying je nying je sem chen sem chen tam la tam la mik pe mik pe nying je What does tam mean? As in sem tam. Mind only school.

So what does tam mean? Just only. It just focuses on a living being.

That's a mayinga. That's a mayinga. What's a mayinga mean?

Yeah, it's a negation which implies something else. Which is what? When I say, oh this compassion just focuses on a living being.

Only focuses on a living being. What am I implying? There's other kinds of compassion which focus on their emptiness or their impermanence.

So when you clarify, when you use the word tam, sem chen tam la mik pe nying je That's compassion which is focused only on a living being. That makes it so easy. Oh, there he's talking about one of those three.

He's not just talking about compassion in general, because all compassion is focused on a living being. Got it? Nah.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
Even if you don't know what's going on, just know.

[Speaker 2]
That's what I did for years in the monastery.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah.

[Speaker 2]
It says, because if something is a kind. It says, something is a kind. Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
Got it? By the way, he creates these problems and then solves them for you. Why?

I mean, you'll remember 10% of it in three years from now. You'll be in a class and somebody will say, well isn't all compassion focused on a living being? You'll say, no, no, it's tam.

You know, and then people will think you know what you're talking about. Okay. Alright.

Go to the store with $100 if you intend to buy a $10 thing, right? Like, we prepare for the Tantric class. It takes two, three months.

It takes hundreds of hours. Like, we go in ready to answer any ridiculous question about the vows. And you'll only hear 5% or 10% of what we worked on.

You see what I mean? And that's the way you should go into a class. You should just go in like with all this sum stuff in the back of your head.

Okay. Now we're back to our text. There's a certain way in which the three different kinds of compassion are established through their focus.

That which focuses on qualities, which we call things. You might want to change it by the way, but that's coming later. Realizations such as we perceive that living beings are changing, that they have no substantial existence, or the quality of being self-standing.

What substantial means here is a little tricky. We got into it in the Mahamudra class. And there are many different interpretations of what substantial means.

So, what's one? Ben is not substantial. Yeah, but what is it?

[Speaker 2]
You could say that.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, you could say that. That's comfortable. That's like a Mahamudra number of what?

Two, I think?

[Speaker 2]
Not directly.

[Speaker 1]
Not substantial. No owner. It's really no owner.

All right. I mean, we'll use it that way. It can mean a lot of different things.

Like for Abhidharma, it might mean you can break it down in your mind so it's not substantial. You see, it's different. Anyway.

Okay, that's okay. Compassion which has no focus. Established by a sense that beings lack any nature of their own.

This sense depends upon a previous perception that they lack any such nature. What's he saying?

[Speaker 2]
You don't understand emptiness?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, but there's this previous word. What's that mean?

[Speaker 2]
That you had some previous realization of emptiness. Intellectually.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, you've had some previous insight into emptiness. It could be direct or it could be intellectual. And then at some later point you're feeling love for somebody and the sense of that emptiness comes up while you're feeling the love.

Whether it can happen at the exact same moment is a big debate that we're coming to. Or does the mind have to toggle moment to moment? Is it possible for one state of mind to entertain two separate perceptions of something?

Can you love someone and at the very same instant be aware of their emptiness? Or do you have to toggle between them? Here we go.

So that was samchen samla. We said nothing more than the being, right? Samchen samla.

We translate it here as nothing more. Just that. We're just looking at people.

This is the kind of compassion that most people have. What's the problem with that kind of compassion? Doesn't really do anything.

Breaks down.

[Speaker 2]
Yeah.

[Speaker 1]
A. It doesn't want to do anything which is level 3. Or even level 2.

But mostly level 3. It doesn't think it could change the world. It doesn't think it could stop the war in Iran, right?

But what if it doesn't think about their impermanence either? I think then maybe it could get into the problem of... It might also get prejudiced love.

You see? If I say love everybody in this room who's dying, you have to love everybody, right? Moment by moment, right?

If I say, you know, love everybody in this room, you might choose to love some that are nice to you and not love those who are not nice to you, right? But when I say love everybody in this room who is like about to fall off a cliff called death, well, then you can love everybody, apparently. All right.

Let's read this together. Ready? We still have some time.

One, two, three. chö la mik pe yin ché chö la mik pa pa dang rang kya thu pe se yu kyi pong we nang pa shar wa sung pa he ya sung pa tsam yin kyi ter nge pa ma yin te Right? You're just like, ma yin te.

And then there's going to be a yin te too, right? Ma yin te. You're just this far.

Gets to three. Ma yin te. And then, you know, it's coming.

Okay. You know something is coming. It's going to hit you on the head.

Okay. What's chö la mik pe yin ché? Compassion which focuses on things.

Let's say things right now. Like what kind of things? Impermanent.

They're impermanent. That person's impermanent. yin ché te la When we say, there's the say, that they have a sense, shar wa, nang pa shar wa, means had a sense.

He's using that wording to cover his rear end. He didn't say to pa, or shé pa, or nge pa, or any other word for perceive. Why?

He's setting you up for his later arguments, that you can have a sense of their impermanence while you're perceiving their emptiness. Like a background sense of their... You see, he's setting you up.

He's setting you up, yeah. Like, you can have a sort of an inkling of their impermanence while you're thinking about their emptiness. But you can't be seeing their impermanence while you're seeing their emptiness at the same moment.

Impossible. So he's setting you up with this number shar wa stuff. And we translate it as a sense of...

Because we're also playing along. Okay. So, what kind of senses could you have about somebody?

Is it just impermanent? Is that the only quality about people that would be useful to think about while you're loving them, that's not emptiness, and not thinking about nothing? No.

What other ones? Rangyat tuba. Rangyat tuba.

That's a Yogi Tala. The domination of the Rangasana. Right.

He says, he repeats, Rangyat tuba, which means self-standing. Don't depend on anything else. It's very similar to a modern idiom called Rangal Tumba.

Say, Rangal Tumba. We're trying to make you guys Rangal Tumba. Say, Rangal Tumba.

Rangal Tumba means self-running. Like... No, like the goal of the ACI courses, Sutra and Tantra, is to make you a Rangal Tumba Lama.

Yeah, like you just run on your own, you don't have to call up I don't remember that thing about Bhakti Ma... You know, we're trying to make you Rangal Tumba.

[Speaker 2]
Like, self... What are you calling?

[Speaker 1]
It's like independent but self-running. Rangal Tumba means stands on its own. Doesn't have to be propped up by...

It's like when they take the wheels off your bike. The trainer wheels. No trainer wheels.

Rangal Tumba means no trainer wheels. Okay. And that's what Diamond Mountain is for, is to produce these self-standing viruses.

Okay. Rangal Tumpe. Zeyu Kyi Toa.

Here's an interesting wording for people learning Tibetan. Tomba means what? Empty.

Toa means... It's more of a verb. It is empty.

Okay. So it's not a misspelling. Tomba Nyi means what?

Empty now. Shunya Ta. And then Tomba means...

Empty. Shunya. And Toa Wa means it is empty up.

And in English we say empty up. This chocolate... wrapper...

is empty now. Not chocolate. Okay.

In English we say empty up. In Tibetan they say empty by. They use the instrumental.

So the thing it's empty of will come before the word Toa. Okay. So here it is.

Empty by Zeyu. Self... An owner or a controller.

Okay. That's what substantial means here. And it can mean like ten different things and we're not going to get into it.

Okay. So, he gave you all these senses of which you could be having a sense while you're thinking about... while you're loving somebody.

Or you could think, oh my gosh, they're like heading towards their death. Mitapa. Oh my gosh, they're not Ranggatuba.

They don't stand on their own, they're dependent on other causes and effects. Right? They couldn't change today if they wanted to.

They're in result stage. You see what I mean? Whatever they do now will help them in a week, but...

but if they get a headache today, they just have to suffer.

[Speaker 2]
Right?

[Speaker 1]
They're... Oh, they're like not Ranggatuba. Zeyu.

They can't control themselves. They don't run their life. Right?

They're a victim of... their life is happening to them. You see what I mean?

Because they... of what they did in the past. Okay?

Got it? Are those the only senses you could have as you love somebody? He says, deyang tsumbatsamyin.

Say, tsumbatsamyin. Tsumbatsamyin means, that's just a representative example. Tsun means representative example.

Tsam means, you just had it. It's just. That's all.

It's just... He's just giving you a few examples, representative examples. Yin ki...

What's ki mean? 99% of time it means, ah, 1% of time it means, bat. So, guess what it is here?

Yeah, bat. Okay? Bat.

How would you know that? Yin's a verb. Yin means is.

You can't say, of the is. You know? You can say, tam ki dep.

Tom's book, right? But you can't say, is is. I mean, when there's a verb right in front of it, it's probably, it is.

Bat. Okay, yin ki. Derya ngepa mayin te.

It's not fixed at that. Where have you seen nge, like in Chang'e?

[Speaker 2]
Well, what?

[Speaker 1]
No. Yeah, you can say that. Yeah, ngepa.

They're definite. Do good, get good. Do bad, get bad.

They're ngepa. But in Chang'e, what's it mean? Changdun and ngedun.

Changdun means, he didn't say it literally. And ngedun means, it's fixed. That's what he meant.

It's literal. So, what he says here is, it ain't fixed at that. It's not definite.

Okay? So, And the der, for those of you who care, is a really difficult expression called Daini grammar case. It's not fixed at that.

Okay? De la or de ru. Okay?

Alright. And I'm gonna break it into two sentences to make it easier. And you should always, always look at a sentence and see if there's a way you could break it up to make it easier.

Ah, good question. He used the word sungba, right here. How does that different from serwa?

Say again? Serwa.

[Speaker 2]
Serwa.

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, serwa often means say in the sense of claim. Which implies that what's being said is false. Okay?

Or shaky. When you say state, it implies a little stronger. When you say bespoke, it's like the Buddha said it.

Now, normally when they sung, past tense sungs, they're a little bit hedging towards scriptural, authoritative scripture. And he doesn't specify who. It's Master Chandrakirti, it's every reference we've ever had in this book, where they've been talking about even Jetsun Kappa, you see.

So, they is the right way to translate it. Leave it ambiguous, because we don't know who he's talking about. So far he's been quoting Jetsun Kappa and Master Chandrakirti and some other texts.

Master Kamalaswamy. So, leave it, leave it, leave it ambiguous when it should be left ambiguous. There's a, they used to say in my company, we had a big factory, we did 30,000 pieces of jewelry every day.

It's amazing how many things can break on a little piece of a ring. But they'd say, if it ain't broken, don't fix it. Meaning, if it's, don't try to do the reader a favor and tell them who they is, if the author didn't tell them who they was.

Okay? All right. Is it fair to assume that these days are all middle way philosophers though?

You could say that. I think you could say that. Especially so far.

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

dak chit rang wang chen hi dong wei nang ba sha wei chi la mi pe yin che yang yi wei We're in trouble out there, I think. Uh, anyway. Uh, but they will just skip it.

Uh, rang wang chen how do y'all translate that? It means in control. All right.

It means we're not rang wang chen, you know, things just happening, right? At a result level.

[Speaker 2]
Is in control okay? Okay, all right.

[Speaker 1]
I think that's the owner one in the Mahamudra. So I think substantial might be the next, what's the next Mahamudra one? Huh?

I don't remember. Anyway. I don't know.

It's too literary for me. This is British thing. Okay.

We spent too long in this. We're American. We talk like that.

Here he's gonna explain. This is probably one of the sexiest parts of this whole section. He's gonna explain why they call it, why they give the three compassions their names.

Why is it called the compassion that looks at things? Why is it called the compassion that doesn't look at anything? Why is it called the compassion that just looks at people?

Okay? Why are they given their names? So here's the scriptural.

We can touch on the first one. We got six minutes left. Let's read it together.

Okay? One, two, three. NIN-JE DAM-BO LA SHU-LA MI-PE NIN-JE SHE SHE-PE GYU-SE YU-PE Let's cut it there.

RUH GYA-CH Say GYA-CH. GYA-CH GYA-CH GYA-CH GYA means shut it. SHIG means do it.

And when Rinpoche was first learning English people would sneeze and we'd all say Gesundheit or God bless and he'd say what's that mean, you know? And we'd say you know, it means like they used to believe your spirit came out when you sneezed or something and you, you know. So anyway he said okay.

And then the next time somebody sneezed in a restaurant with him he said oh, GYA-CH you know. And I'm like and the guy says what's that mean? Oh, it's Tibetan.

It's just like God bless. Okay. Anyway.

So when I oh, we have a chance like you can translate this. NING-JE NING-JE means what? DUM-BO first one LA to that let's skip to the end.

GYUD-ZEN a reason there's a reason YOD there is a reason why we CHE-PA yeah or we yeah, we we explain or use the word NING-JE compassion CHUD-LA-MIG-PA which focuses on things. Okay. So you got all the parts here.

I'll put it together for you. Okay. So tell us.

I'm so curious. One two three DE-YU LA DEN-BE GANG SA DE LA SEN-CHEN GE KEN-JIG GI KEN-JIG CHE PA DO Check this out. Open vowel at the end.

No suffix letter. Prefix letter coming. So if you're in a debate in the monastery, you'll hear it as KEN-JIG KEN-JIG and you'll say, I don't know, I never saw that.

You know. Okay. You'll hear it as KEN-JIG.

This is really, really nice. MI-THAG-PAI-TSEN-NI-SHAG-YI ME-ME-HE-CHEN Nobody can give me the definition of MI-THAG-PAI which is wrongly translated as impermanent. I prefer constantly changing or something like that.

Anyway MI-THAG-PAI-TSEN-NI-SHAG-YI ME-ME-HE-CHEN You don't just say it. MI-THAG-PAI-TSEN-NI-SHAG-YI ME-ME-HE-CHEN Nobody can give me the definition of changing thing. Oh, so somebody could give me the definition of changing thing.

MI-THAG-PAI-TSEN-NI-SHAG-YI YA-TA So give it to me. Give it to me. MI-THAG-PAI-TSEN-NI-SHAG-YI I'm sorry, what?

KEN-JIG-ME-ME-HE-CHEN You can just say KEN-JIG-MA ME-ME-HE-CHEN Get this thing now. KEN-JIG-MA ME-ME-HE-CHEN No, you got to snap your hand. And you have to stick it in the guy's face.

KEN-JIG-ME-ME-HE-CHEN Like that. You don't just... KEN-JIG-ME-ME-HE-CHEN And then...

But the long definition TSEN-NI-GE-PAI-TSEN-NI-SHAG-YI ME-ME-HE-CHEN Nobody can give me the longer definition. DE DE By the way, you never say DE to a cheer. Right?

You just repeat the verb. You just repeat the verb. Right?

You only say DE to what? DE And not TE-YA Right? TE-YA DE Right.

But I said ME-ME-HE-CHEN Nobody can show me the long definition of MI-THAG-PAI-TSEN And you said ME-ME-HE-CHEN Yeah. TE-YA That's the second ME-ME-HE-CHEN Then what was the verb? ME-ME-HE-CHEN What was the verb?

ME So you just say ME ME Right.

[Speaker 2]
ME Okay, right.

[Speaker 1]
There is no long definition. ME Then I say KEN-JIG-KI-KEN-JIG-KI-KEN-JIG-CHI-BI-CHU MI-THAG-PAI-TSEN-NI-SHAG-YI ME-ME-HE-PAI-TSEN So you're telling me that a thing which changes from moment to moment which comes into existence and passes out of existence moment to moment is not the longer definition of MI-THAG-PAI-TSEN And you say ME-ME-HE-CHEN ME-ME-HE-CHEN Okay, but anyway, that's it. Say, say KEN-JIG KEN-JIG KEN-JIG-KI KEN-JIG-KI KEN-JIG KEN-JIG CHI-BI-CHU CHI-BI-CHU MI-THAG-PAI MI-THAG-PAI TSEN-NI TSEN-NI GYE-PA GYE-PA

[Speaker 2]
GYE-ME GYE-ME

[Speaker 1]
GYE-ME Okay, so the long definition is things which are passing in and out of existence moment by moment They're being GYE-born and JIG-destroyed instant by instant Like, that's a much more beautiful definition So here it is here This person who has this kind of compassion in their heart has previously perceived that living beings are passing How do you want to say that? In and out of existence. Great.

Is that okay? It's not technically, you could get in trouble. I'm going to leave it.

It's so atomic that it works. Well, we can debate that. So anyway, we'll stop there.

And he's going to have a beautiful progression. He says, people who perceive things, we call it the compassion which perceives things, because of a whole progression that you go through. It's not just that you see things falling apart instant by instant.

It's not just that. It's that you perceive that, and because you got to that level, you pop up to another level, and because you got to that level, right there, you pop up to another level. See the delatene at the beginning?

Delatene, delatene, delatene. And then boom, you see their dependent origination. You see what I mean?

So, you got to come back for the next class. Okay. All right.

[Speaker 2]
Satsang with Mooji Okay, cool.

[Speaker 1]
See emptiness. Lots of people did retreats during the break. That's really good.