Вступление на срединный путь (текущий курс, Аризона), занятие 87

[Speaker 1]
So where's Will Mead? Oh, OK, you guys. You all know Will Mead, right?

Over there in the corner. He's doing a project which is kind of a very deliberate project called Suka Gomuka, which is coins for cows. And we had this theory that, I had this debate with Sharon and David, that I thought if you took good enough care of a cow, like if you gave them a choice, basically, that they could come and live comfortably, and you fed them well, and you took care of them well, and you gave them massages every day and stuff like that, then they wouldn't really mind if you took their milk.

So I don't know if I still subscribe to this, but at least for Seichi, right, we use milk products. So maybe there's an ashram in upstate New York called Sivananda, where they actually take old milk cows, and they take care of them until they die a natural death. Because even in India, as David was saying, at the Hong Kong conference, right, they take the males, and they kill them.

And he said nobody asked in India would admit that they were killing cows. And India is the largest exporter of leather in the world, so there's some kind of discrepancy there. And so at Sivananda ashram, they kept, I think, two cows, and they kept milking them.

And then there's a beautiful story about the next door neighbor had a herd of cows, and one of them kept breaking through the fence to stay with the Sivananda cows. And then finally, the rancher said he would let the cows stay with them. She kept breaking the fence down to stay with the other cows that weren't going to get killed when they stopped giving milk.

So they die a natural death. And in my idea, if you had a totally humane system of milking and stuff like that, and if it didn't hurt the children and stuff like that, you could have a 401k for the cows by overpaying for the milk purposely. So you're saying instead of $2 a gallon, you pay, I think it's $2.50 a gallon, right?

Because I saw it at Walgreens, because I was in the big city the other day. And you could pay $5 a gallon forever, and then it just gets put into the retirement fund. I believe that.

I think it would be a good idea. So basically, and we all eat, even those of us who are vegan, we eat chocolate, or we eat bread with milk in it, or stuff like that. So my idea was, he's got instructions in here.

You get a jar. You take the sticker off. You stick it on your jar.

You throw your excess change in the jar. And then once a year, you send 48 jars of change to Will Mean, or something like that. So he's going to hand these out, right?

But especially, we think it would be effective in yoga studios. So if you're somebody who is, if you hang out in yoga studios a lot, or you know somebody who teaches in a yoga studio, think about, talk to Will, OK? And then I think we could get it going.

Nonviolent dairy. And then it'd be healthier for everybody. I think dairy, violent dairy is very unhealthy for people.

I think it causes heart attacks, and cholesterol, and things like that. OK? So think about it.

All right. We're going to go straight into it. And you really got to work hard tonight.

Do you know why? It's not because Shiloh Tart's worse than that. We've got two really heavyweight debaters tonight, and they're going to be checking up on us.

One is Princess Claire, who's there, and King Will of the Bahamas, who's over there. He's just chilling out. He's saving his strength for the debate.

So you got to work hard, because they're going to be debating tonight. And they said Kendare could help them. But OK.

All right. Here we go. Say, chandende, la, jhampel, shunur, gyurpe, dikeche, sulto.

Then you read. OK. What's chandende?

Conquer. Right. What's jhampel?

Manju. Sri. So jham is manju, meaning soft.

And pel means glorious, right? Sri. So jhampel is, this is Manju Sri when he was just a bodhisattva, OK?

Pretending to be a bodhisattva. If you guys fall asleep, you don't get any refreshments, and I'm not debating with you, OK? Shunur gyurpe.

Dike means these words, right? Pelke means what? Tibetan language.

So ke means language. In a scripture, dike means the following words. Chesuldo means he offered the following words, or he preferred the following words.

It's an honorific. Sulto. And so it's a question.

And he says chandende, which means conquer. Kangla nyewa mikpa. Kangla, say kangla.

Mikpa. Kangla. Mikpa.

Then just skip here. Korwa le and dawa mingyur. Korwa le.

Dawa. Mingyur. What's korwa?

Yeah, dawa. Dawa? Dawa is like nyangan le depa, same verb.

To go beyond. So what's korwa le? Mindawa.

Not go beyond samsara. Not go beyond samsara. If you, mikpa, come.

Yeah. What is it that, if you are focusing on it, would prevent you from getting to nirvana? Self-existence.

Well, I'm just saying the question. It's just a question so far. So this is a difficult sentence.

O conqueror, at what, having looked at or is focused on, would living beings not be able to pass beyond samsara? OK? All right?

OK. So what's shunur gyurpa? Shunur pao, let's go.

What's shunur? Youthful, in his youthful form. OK, so gentle voice, in his youthful form.

Respectfully addressed the conqueror in the following words. O conqueror, please, what do you call them? I would say enlighten us, but that's a little too much.

Please. Who said that? Oh, that's really nice.

Please edify us as to that object which, if living beings remain focused upon it, prevents them from ever passing beyond the wheel of pain. OK? Something like that.

Let's read together. By the way, Anatole, I mean the important question, where is he? You know the important question.

Did you take care of the important question? Is the person ready who signed up? Yeah?

You are? Oh, Aniki, no problem. Probably French pastries.

OK, here we go. One, two, three. CHANG DEN DE GYI GA TSEL PA BYAMS PA DAG DANG DAG GYI WAR MIG PAS SEM CHEN NA KHOR WA LE MIN DAO.

Say Min Dao. Min Dao. So they misspelled it, right?

Why? It's a prenasal. But it's an open vowel bumping into a prenasal.

OK? So say Min Dao. Min Dao.

Mi? Min Dao. Mi?

Min Dao. Min Dao. Min Dao.

OK, good. Min Dao. And the conqueror.

What's a fancier word than replied? Woo, I like that. OK.

That was quick. And reply. It's that old.

And it should be Old Testament or something. And any time you see a person's name beginning a sentence and there's nothing to modify it, there's no endings or anything, especially in Sanskrit, then that's the evocative, right? They're being addressed.

What do you call it? Oh, gentle voice. Those living beings who remain focused upon dak dang dak ki war.

Yeah, nice. Remain focused upon me and mine cannot pass beyond the wheel of pain. Where are we in this book?

And why are they quoting the Buddha right now? Yeah, we're in the part. We already proved something with logic.

And now we're trying to prove it with scripture, right? What was the point that we were attempting to prove with logic? That we did prove with logic.

But they were just too stubborn to accept it. Yeah, you must see emptiness directly to reach nirvana, right? Why did that come up?

Yeah, that's pretty good. What did he say? He said, we're in the subject that you need to see emptiness directly to reach nirvana or to get rid of all your negative mental states.

Because a question arose of why does a bodhisattva who just saw emptiness outshine all lower practitioners, right? Or especially arhats. And then what's the connection?

Because a wrong idea would naturally come up in your mind that a bodhisattva who just saw emptiness directly is superior to lower arhats because naturally come up in your mind to think because they saw emptiness directly. You see what I mean? It would naturally come up in your mind to say a bodhisattva who just saw emptiness directly outshines lower, even arhats, because they've seen emptiness directly.

And then we say, well, that can't be because an arhat is, by nature, someone who saw emptiness directly already. And then they say no because they're hinayana, they're lower track. And then we're trying to prove that if they're an arhat and if they've gotten rid of their anger and jealousy forever, they must have seen emptiness directly.

And then why is that necessary to see emptiness directly to not get pissed off anymore? You OK? Ever.

And now we're into scriptural quotation. So he said, now it's Lord Buddha saying, if you're still focused on me and mine, then you can't pass beyond the cycle of pain, meaning reach nirvana. You can't reach nirvana.

All right, let's read together.

[Speaker 2]
Mm.

[Speaker 1]
It's very, what do you call it? Gratifying to me how many people I see teach now and they stand up and they go, mm. All right, pure transmission.

OK, one, two, three. One, two, three. DE CHI CHI SHEN NA, ZHANG PA DAG DA, SHEN DU YANG DAG PA, TONG BA DE MI, LEN NGON PA DU JE DO.

And if you ask, and if you were to ask, oh, gentle voice, why that is, it's because anyone who still, he says tonga, but he says yang dag pa tonga, OK? And then he says dak dang shen. So let's start with the dak dang shen.

What's dak dang shen? Yeah, me and others. Me and others, OK?

Excuse me? Duality? It's specifically people here, me and others.

But why yang dag pa tonga? Because yang dag pa usually means what? Like perfectly, or beautifully, or correctly, or like that, OK?

And then here is tonga, right, who sees. But this is a bad thing, right? I'm going to put this, OK?

Who still blanks, me and others. What's len ngon pa du je? Len ngon pa du je.

And I'll give you a clue. What's the second link of the 12 of the wheel? Yeah, it's du che pa.

It's du che pa. It's du je, nyi pa du je. So what's it?

Here it's a verb. Yeah, who? How do you want to call it?

Ngon pa du je means like abhisamskara, who's creating samskaras. How do you want to say it? Someone who is still blanking karma.

You say collect, but you want to say collect? Creating karma, OK. Anyone who still blanks, me and others, is creating karma.

It's du je means to do and to collect. So I think we'll say, it's OK, creating karma. So how do you want to translate the yon daba toa?

It means to see, right? It's the opposite, in a way. Find me a single, I'll give you a clue.

Don't get stuck in old prefixes left over from Sanskrit. Find a single English word which conveys what's happening here. But he's using words which are the opposite, you see?

It would be almost over-apprehending or something. So you tell me. Close.

It's closer. It's closer. I think perceive.

I think we have to stick with perceive. God, you got two tonight. That's so good.

Who still perceives. What's a stronger word, though? It's kind of buy-in to something.

Stronger than that. Stronger than believe. Stronger.

It's good, but it's too rare. You've got to consider the literary level of your audience. We're entering the dark ages.

I mean, read a newspaper. It's like six words. That's good also, but it's too high for the audience.

Stronger than recognize. Cleanse. But it also has to convey seeing somehow.

See is a person. Crash, still see is a person.

[Speaker 2]
How about currency?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, you guys are going in circles. OK. What's a stronger word for believe?

Stronger, like it's convinced. Oh, who said that? Who said to convince?

I like it. I'm going to say convince. Who is still convinced in me and others.

OK, I like that. That gives the right feeling. It's like an irrational over-believing, because that's exactly what it's supposed to be.

And it's creating karma. No, in me and others. They're still convinced in the difference between me and you.

And I like convince, because it has a pejorative connotation. It's like you're still convinced that Gershwin-Michael doesn't like ice cream. I mean, you know what I mean?

It implies that you have a false perception. OK. De, di, nyam, du, dak, du, nyan.

Let's read it together. One, two, three. De, di, nyam, du, dak, du, nyan, tam, che, le, tro, wang, gyur, ro, pao, wang, chao, wang, chi, yang, me, ching, dak, ni, dra, chong, ba, gyur, ro, she, chao, wang, dak, gi, she, so.

This is, by the way, the last talk here. And we see this in the Diamond Cutter Sutra. And I perceive that such people think to themselves, right?

That I am reaching freedom from all forms of suffering. I am becoming an enemy destroyer, right? Who, enemy destroyer, who has nothing whatsoever left to eliminate.

Some people don't like eliminate because it sounds too bowel movement, but I don't know. OK, I'm going to stick with it. It means to get something off away from you, though.

It does mean eliminate. Sorry. OK.

I don't like abandon because it's like an abandoned car and an abandoned wife. I don't know. Who has nothing whatsoever left to eliminate.

OK, so Lord Buddha is saying, and he's always, he introduces it this way. He says, dak, gi, she, so. He introduces things in his theory when he says, look, you're not omniscient, so there's some things you can't see.

But I perceive that there are people who still believe in, they still are convinced in me and mine, or me and you, right? And so, and then they practice the path sincerely, and they get pretty good at it, like they're doing their book, like they're up to four times a day or something. And then they say, God, you know, this is really working.

I'm getting enlightened now. You know, I can feel it. You know, like, I'm not so angry as I used to be.

And, you know, money comes easily, and, you know? OK, they think they're making progress. They think they are making progress.

Got it? I'm making progress. Got it?

And that's their downfall. I'm making progress. Is there not a me who's making progress?

YUGYUDAG MEIBEIQIU. Say, YUGYUDAG MEIBEIQIU. YUGYUDAG MEIBEIQIU.

Meaning what? Start the sentence with QIU. Yeah, yeah.

Because there's no... You're starting a sentence like this, you ready? Because there's no me, YUGYUDAG.

That does exist. YUGYUDAG, that does exist, OK? So I start a debate with the following thing, ready?

Because there's no such thing as this me which does exist. Yeah. How can you say DAGMA DUG, which means, you just gave a wrong reason, if I haven't asserted anything yet?

Huh? Yeah, I gave a reason, but, I'm not trying to prove anything yet. All I said, get it, all I said was, because there doesn't exist a me which does exist.

There's no Michael which does exist. Yeah, Jesse said it well, say it again. That statement's always wrong.

It doesn't matter what you're trying to prove. OK, all the rabbits at Diamond Mountain, they need their antlers clipped. Because there's no Michael which does exist.

OK, so it doesn't, or I could say anything, it doesn't matter. The reason itself is wrong already. You don't need to know what I'm trying to prove.

And that's how you start a debate, OK? King Will, I told him if he fell asleep, he couldn't debate. So, you could just say, start a debate, you start a debate in a debate ground, you get up and you say, because there is no Michael that does exist.

And then they're going to say, and then they have to prove that they're, so say, yu gi dak, me gi dak. Yu gi dak, me gi dak. Very important distinction, when you're teaching your students, you better go here.

You better go here. Because I still hear, not from you guys, but other places, you know, other, what do you call, less informed than buoy inhabitants. Who's still saying, there's no me, you know?

Like, that guy who thought he was becoming an enemy destroyer had a problem because he said, I'm becoming an enemy destroyer, right? Is that a problem? To say, Michael's becoming an enemy destroyer.

Is that a problem? It's not a problem. There's a yu gi Michael.

There's a Michael which does reasonably exist. Where? Se me mikpa.

I'm perceiving you. I'm not drunk. I'm not crazy.

I'm not in the throes of wild jealousy. I perceive you, you know? So you exist.

And you're up there teaching. That Michael exists, okay? So you don't ever want to say, this guy has a problem because he's saying, I'm becoming an arhat.

I'm making progress in my six times book. I'm up to four. You know?

Like, you can say that. There is such a guy. There's a will meet.

He's going to collect your jars and maybe the cows will get the money. I don't know. But, you know, somebody is there.

Right? Got it? But they're thinking what?

Megidda. Yeah. The me that, the me that exists not as my own projection.

Okay? Alright. But be very careful when you teach it.

And, you know, it'd be very beautiful if all the teachers that came out of Diamond Mountain were sensitive to this. And they taught that all the time. Every time they got to this thing of making fun of somebody who said, I don't like you.

They said, well, there is an I that does exist. But right now, you're not talking about him. Alright?

Got it? And then you have to explain to them, you know, what's the difference between the I that does exist. Basically, the I that does exist is in a good mood all the time.

And the I that doesn't exist is finding reasons why other people have, have hurt them or bothered them. Alright. That's pretty much the, what do you call it?

Barometer. Okay. Okay, here we go.

One, two, three. Re, chi, re, du, ki, se, dak, dir, ke, wa, ton, ne, san, ge, ki, chan, chu, ra, tet, son, da, son, ni, sa, wa, gyur, ro. Chi wa?

Chi dak. Yeah, when they die, okay, at the time of their death, right, du, du, ki, se, means at the time of the time. Okay, at the time of the time of their death they perceive, okay, they have a, they have a foresight which happens that dak, dir, ke, wa, they're going to take some certain rebirth.

I am going to take that kind of rebirth there. Okay, dak, dir, ke, and then they start tet som about san, ge. Yeah, they start to have doubt about the existence of enlightenment.

Why? Yeah, they thought they were in Arhat. They thought like I'm checked out of this place.

Somebody told me this weekend it was really cute this week. I'm, I forget, I'm leaving, I'm checking out of this popsicle stand or something like that but it means to leave an undesirable place and I'm blowing this popsicle stand? Yeah, okay, well, this was a big subject this week.

So, san, ge, ke, chang, jung, bat, tet som. Then they start to entertain doubt about the existence of enlightenment itself and som nyi sawa which is you will see this word once in 10,000 books and if you're really like Ava and you want to collect weird words, som nyi means to doubt and sawa means to eat. So, som nyi sawa is an idiom 2,000 years ago, 2,500 years ago that meant to entertain a doubt.

So, they, they start to have second, what do you call it? Second thoughts and doubt about the existence of Buddhahood itself. So, yeah, yeah, because then they thought they had blown, say blown this possible, san?

Alright, well, I'll try to get that into the translation somewhere. And then, and then they come and then they approach the time of their death and they, and they perceive then that I am going to take a certain rebirth and then they begin to doubt and have second thoughts about Buddhahood. It is, but it's redundant in the Tibetan also, and one rule of translation is don't fix it, you know?

If they want to, if Lord Buddha wants to be redundant, he has to write. Okay, which, and since he's never redundant, there must be some lesson there for us. I have something about the very existence of the enlightenment of a Buddha, okay?

Which is also sort of redundant. okay, notice the way I tried to get in the I, you see? Because he didn't say they, he said they are take a dock, you know?

I tried to slip that in. It would have gone smoother in the English if you said they perceived then that they are going to take a rebirth, but that's not the way Lord Buddha said it. He's, what do you call it?

He's harping on the dock thing. He wants you to be sensitive that he's repeating the dock thing, me, okay? So you have to be careful when you translate it.

Okay, one, two, three, four, five, six, 11, 12, 13, 15, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 37, 38, 40, 43, 59, 42, 43, 44, 46, 65, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, 79, 81, 100, 100, 132, for higher truth, okay? This is a long sutra. If you get through it, you get to have Diamond Cutter Sutra after that, okay?

It's coming. All right. One, two, three.

jamba, kanki, duje, tamje, ma kepa, tongwa de, dungel, yongsu, shepa, yinno. Oh, gentle voice. Anyone who perceives that no produced thing ever starts, right?

And get used to that for negative, okay? Perspective translators. Don't get stuck on, oh, tamje means all, because in English we don't say all of them aren't going.

We say nobody's going. And then so many people who translate Sanskrit into Tibetan, they just get stuck on, you know, all of them don't grow, you know? And then the people reading it, you put one more minor block obstacle in their way and pile that up over five pages and they get tired reading your stuff.

You see? It's not like nobody can figure out what you're trying to say. They know you're trying to say nobody's going, but you said all of them aren't going.

And they're like, okay, they mean nobody's going. And then they skip to the next sentence. And then there's another roadblock in their way.

And then after five pages they just put the book down. And that's what you don't want. You want them to read it all night.

Sharon Gannon said, oh, I stayed up all night reading Lama Kristi's book because it was so easy to read, you know? That's what you want. You don't want to put obstacles in people's ways.

Minor obstacles that accumulate and then make them put the book down, you know? Because they just suddenly get tired listening to you say all of them aren't going. Okay?

Got it? All right. Anyone who perceives that no person ever starts has totally grasped suffering.

And when the Buddha taught the Four Arya Truths, he did it in a way that he said the truth of suffering, say, dunyā-denpa, yon-su-shepa-cao. What should be your relationship to the Four Arya Truths? You see?

He didn't say, here are the Four Arya Truths. He said, here are what your relationships should be to the Four Arya Truths. And that's how he taught the Four Arya Truths.

He didn't say the First Arya Truth is suffering. He said, you should totally understand the First Arya Truth, which is suffering. He introduced the Four Truths that way.

Okay? So, what's our relationship supposed to be to the truth of suffering? Just God figure it out.

It's around you all the time. You are immersed in suffering. Nothing went right for you since the day you were born.

Born on a, what's it called so good? Born under a bad sign. Bad sign.

I've been down since I began to crawl. Like that. Like, since the day you were born, you've been in trouble, you know?

And he says, he doesn't say, oh, the First Noble Truth is, sorry, Arya Truth is suffering. He says, can you just figure out that everything is suffering, okay? You know, okay, got it?

And that's how he speaks of the Four Arya Truths. He doesn't, he always has a verb there to tell you how you should relate to that truth. Okay?

Let's go to this one. One, two, three. kam kyi chö nyi nyong wa me pa thong wa de nyi kun jung pang pa yi no And anyone who perceives that the true nature of things is something that never happens, okay, has given up the source of things.

So, what does he, what is he saying about what our relationship should be to the Second Arya Truth? Get rid of it, okay? Get rid of it.

What should your relationship be to the First Arya Truth? Can you just see that it's happening, okay? And then what should your relationship be to the source of that pain?

You know, let go of the, let go of the pot. What do you call it? Frying pan that's like red hot.

And you're like grabbing it and saying, why is this hurting, why is this hurting, you know? And he's like, just let go. You know, drop it.

Anna Forrest, who was in her Hong Kong class, she had us holding a yoga brick between our ankles in, what do you call that? Shalabhasana. And she made us sit there for a long time, you know, and now she's like, okay.

And everybody's like, she's going to let us, let the brick go. And she's like, no, you can't let the brick go yet. She's like, put all your suffering and all your frustrations and all your old bad relationships and all your crap, put it in that block right now.

So everybody's like, you know, and it's just, okay, now drop it, you know, and everybody drops it, you know, and it's really nice. It's really nice. Then she said, okay, you dropped it.

So now when you leave the class, you have to think you don't have it anymore. She was very cool. She was very cool about it.

And she also built up your abs that way. Okay. Which she also does.

She's like, wow, okay. Okay. And anyone who sees that all the things there are have already passed completely beyond grief has brought about the end of suffering.

Okay. Isn't that kind of weird? I mean, can a thing achieve nirvana?

Oh, beautiful. Say it louder. Yeah.

All things have natural nirvana, which is what? The fact that they don't exist from their own side. Okay.

Got it. So anyone who sees that has brought about the end of suffering. Why didn't he say Gopakke?

Like Semke, like achieve bodhicitta, develop bodhicitta. Say? Yeah.

Got it? Very sensitive. You have to be very sensitive here.

If you're not sensitive, you'll put a word in that will ruin the meaning. You can't cause cessation. You can only bring it about.

Got it? Yeah. Because it doesn't start.

It doesn't go through a process of being small, and then getting bigger, and then getting bigger, like that. It doesn't develop. It just comes into being when something leaves.

But it doesn't start. Got it? It comes into being, but it doesn't start.

And if you learn that distinction, the Buddha never uses the wrong verb. He would never say Gopakke. Okay.

Got it? You don't cause a cessation. You bring it about.

Okay. It's similar. Buddha is a little trickier because it has the parts which are caused and parts which cannot be caused.

It has parts which are caused and parts which are brought about. The Dharmakaya basically is uncaused and not brought about. I'm sorry.

It is brought about. And then the body of form, the paradise body and the emanation bodies, they are brought about. Sorry, they are caused.

And then there's a rule in logic that when you have parts of an object which are caused and parts of an object which are unchanging, you can say the whole thing is unchanging. Chö Sungpae Chö. Oh, let's read it together.

One. Did I blow something? I mean, that's what they say, right?

Okay, I'm just saying what they say. We're in the quotation part of the book. One, two, three.

GANG GI CHÖ THAM CHE SHIN TU MA GUE PA THONG BA DE NI NAM GO MA YIN NO CHÖ SUNG PAE CHÖ DANG Okay. And anyone who sees that... How do you translate Tham Che?

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Good. Because there's a negative coming.

That nothing in the universe you can say. I don't mind adding that here because it means that, right? And anyone who sees that nothing in the universe could ever GYE start...

I like to say start. Could ever start SHIN TU. Very not start?

How about we say at all? Okay. What's something stronger than saying at all?

Three. He got three. No, but we need a positive.

We need a positive. Oh, that's nice. Who said that?

That's nice. I like that. Could ever possibly start.

And anyone who sees that nothing in the universe could ever possibly start is practicing the path. Okay? Got it?

So now I'm just going to review this with you because you will hear it over and over in scripture. What should your relationship to the truth of suffering be? Figure it out.

Figure it out. Figure that you've been in it your whole life. Just figure it out.

What should your relationship be to the cause of that suffering or the source of that suffering? Drop it already. Like drop it already.

You know? Like let go of the pan. I mean it's hot.

It's burning your hand. Like let go. Then what should your relationship be to the end of that suffering?

Bring it about. Make it happen. Got it?

Make it happen. I didn't say cause. Okay.

And what should your relationship be to the path? Practice it. Practice it.

Got it? Those are very, very crucial in the presentation of the four truths. They always present them that way.

Okay? So you should think of them that way. Okay, here we go.

One, two, three. But, oh, oh, oh, don't say that. Don't say what you were going to say.

Don't say what you were going to say. Say shen. Shen.

Shen means butcher. Okay? Shen.

Shen. Okay? I just didn't want to hurt my ears.

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

Gyul shu. Dren negi. Gyula.

Rang ni dang. Gyul shu. Gi dre bu.

Den pa zin be. Den zin gi. Shen yu.

Sun ma chu we. Su ki ye na. Okay.

Okay, I'm going to break this sentence artificially, okay? Suppose, moreover, that a person who had achieved the... Drené is difficult.

Drené means staying in the result, staying in the result. And it means they are not in the act of removing their mental afflictions, it means they have finished. So it's the moment after the last bit of mental affliction.

That particular ngogyal kipangja, that particular mental affliction that they were working on is gone. So you go from, they call it working level to finished level. So you say somebody is a stream enterer, right?

And you say, are they working on it, or have they achieved drené yet? Got it? So drené means like they finished off the last period.

Now they're a real stream enterer. They're not in the process anymore. It's not a work in progress anymore, it's done, finished work.

Drené means that. And so each of the four, like stream enterer, once-returner, non-returner, arhat, they each have a basic level and a drené level. And that's something Abhidharma thinks, okay?

They're no longer working on it, they've already achieved the gokpa of that path, okay? Suppose, moreover, that a person who had achieved the result level of entering the stream were still acting I'm going to see if this works, I'm not sure it's relating relating to acting in a way where they had yet to What's sunjungwa? Sunjungwa.

Where do we know it from? Sunjungwa eto. Sunjungwa eto.

Yeah, it's one of the four powers of confession, which is called rooting the thing out, or ripping the thing out, right? And it's also a, it's a word for rape in Tibetan also. We had it today, Chökyi was translating the vow, Chökyi was translating today the questions that you are required to ask a novice monk who wants to be a full monk.

And you say, have you ever sunjungwa a gelongma? Have you ever forced yourself on a nun, on a fully ordained nun? Because if you have, you can't become a monk, you see what I mean?

There's a list of questions like, do you have really bad hemorrhoids? Do you owe a lot of money? Were you drafted and you're coming to the monastery after that?

You know, there's a list. And so sunjungwa is a very nasty word. It means to totally, what do you call?

Violate, in a way. Rip, you know. So, still acting where they had yet to.

But here's a good thing. Well, it would be good to sunjungwa. I'm going to put this, okay?

Existing. Existing in reality. This is delicate, right?

This is really delicate. This was something that Geshe Tutor Rinchen would call delicate, right? Ndebolamandu.

It's a little delicate here. Okay. So somebody has finished the experience of entering the stream, which is just another way of saying seeing emptiness directly.

So they have just completed the experience of seeing emptiness directly. But suppose even then, they were still acting in a way where they had yet to, now we can translate sunjungwa. Eradicate.

But can you eradicate that object? Got it? Who said debunk?

Oh my God. Perfect. I love it.

Perfect. Just perfect. Yeah, debunk is always a totally ridiculous idea.

You debunk ridiculous ideas. Perfect word. Absolutely perfect.

So they haven't yet debunked the thing they think they see when they think about me reaching stream entering. They are in the state of having completed their stream entering. Not steam entering.

I'm thinking about that. We're going to build a sweat lodge. But anyway, they're in the result, they're in the aftermath of having entered the stream.

They're done finishing the stream. And they have yet to debunk the idea that them and the stream entering are real. Who said that?

God, you guys are hot. Okay, it's a paradox. They couldn't be stream entering.

Got it? Let's see what Lord Buddha says. They're not debunker yet.

Let's read it together. One, two, three. TOG PA PO RANG NYID DA TOG CHA GYUN ZHUG GI DRE BU SHAK TU MED PA DA In that case, we would have to say that the person who had achieved this level and that the very person achieved this level and the resultant level of entering the stream that they had achieved were Shak Tu Med Pa.

Yeah, it couldn't be. Couldn't be. You got a better way to say that?

That would get into Gyalwa or something. It's a different language. Shak means to posit that something exists.

I want to say it cannot be established, but I want to say it in a more colloquial way, a more accessible way. You tell me. Huh?

It ain't so. Beth won't let me print a book if I put ain't so in it. Huh?

A what? It is. It means that...

But what it means is... Shak means... Shak Tu Med Pa means like to point to something or to say it exists or to...

They're not contradicting two things. They're just saying you could never posit the existence of that thing. It could never happen.

My. Could never happen. Okay?

Got it? It's a beautiful way to say it, right? He doesn't say, look, you can't achieve the result of stream mentoring and still think that everything's there.

You and the stream mentor. You can't do that. He says it differently.

He says, you know, there was this guy and he's stream mentor, but he was still seeing himself and the stream mentoring as self-existent. And then he says, yeah, but that could never be. You see?

He sets it up really well. I mean, when I was reading this paragraph, I had to read it like eight times because I'm like, wait a minute, that can't exist. And he's talking, you know, and he wants you to go through that.

Lord Buddha wants you to go through that process. He wants you to stop and think, but there is no such guy. And then he pulls out the punchline.

Guess what? There's no such guy. Okay?

Got it? Well, sorry? Oh yeah, okay.

Yeah. You're right. You're right.

What Ben is saying is that in Jeyta Vyeshi, your ignorance comes back. So in a way, you could say it does come back. But I'm not thinking Abhidharma.

Yeah. What Lord Buddha is describing here is is for someone to hold themselves as being themselves to hold themselves as being a living being and so on. Okay?

Ranggila Ranggi la dakta dzinpa. I missed the dak, right? You could say themselves, right?

As being me. As being themselves. Okay, let's stick with that.

Okay, let's do this one. I think Anatole. It's time.

You ready? Oh, Aniki. Yeah.

I don't know. I have a a dharchi, but I hope the dharchi is not too different. What is that?

What's a dharchi? It's like you... Aniki is such an awesome cook and all that.

You know, you have an imagination of what she might be bringing for a snack. And then, the dharchi is what the real thing that comes in the room. Hopefully there won't be much discrepancy.

Okay. One, two, three. What's the shershin sumgyapa le ramjo diji nyam du sem gyundu shukpa di nyam du dakhi gyundu shukpa dre bu topo nyam du sem sam What's the shershin sumgyapa?

The perfection of wisdom in sumgyapa, in 300 verses, which is the old name of the Diamond Cutter Sutra. Okay? Who said that?

Ah, cool. You got like... We should have this thing like football helmets when you get those decals.

You should get like little dharma things on your t-shirt or something. I don't know. Okay.

That's the old name for the Diamond Cutter Sutra, which is not written in verse. Written in verse. It doesn't have 300 verses.

That's kind of weird to call it the 300 verses on the perfection of wisdom. Okay. They had a measurement of shloka.

They had a measurement of length of prose also called a verse. So, when you said 300 verses, it just meant so many syllables. Why?

Why call a book, the book in 300 verses of 11 syllables of Sanskrit each? It's the same thing as a byte count on an ACIP file. Nobody can take out...

I mean, unless they're really clever. But, basically, you can't take out a letter and you can't stick in an extra letter. The byte count will change.

And in the old days, the reason to call scriptures by their byte count was to say, this is still the authentic original version. No one's added anything and no one's subtracted anything. Like, there's a lot of debates that the fourth chapter of the Yoga Sutra has been added.

And there are debates like that that we'll never be able to prove either way, really. But if you call the scripture, you know, the 30,000 byte perfection of wisdom, then it'll always be 30,000 bytes. When you take out one byte, you lose how many, Ari?

Like three... One letter is how many bytes? One ASCII letter?

Is it one byte? Yeah. So, it would change.

The byte count would change for the file. If you took out one letter, the byte count would change. It's like that.

In ASCII? Oh, okay. You guys can debate it out there.

Okay. King Will's mocked out. I don't know.

Okay. Now, if I were really responsible, what would I do? Huh?

Yeah, I would go get the English translation of it and insert this, you know, in these lines so it would match for later generations. Yeah, but I'm kind of lazy to do that. Okay.

All right, we'll do that. I was working on it today, so I know where it is. It's Jigme's.

Unfortunately, it's already converted. This is a nice thing that Jason did, or some... Oh, this is Jason, I think.

Right? He did a trilingual diamond cutter, so you can get it from him if you want. It's Unicode?

Not this one. So now, stream... Let's look for stream.

Well, here it is. Thanks. Now, Saburi, what do you think?

Do those who have entered this stream ever think to themselves, now I have attained the goal of entering the stream? Got it? It's a nice quotation to pull out here, because we just got through arguing about it.

So he's really on top of it here. Okay. Saburi answers Lord Buddha, who asks him, do people who entered this stream ever think I entered this stream?

Right? And then Saburi, who's supposed to be pretty smart, because he's... What is it, Manjushri Indecisive or something?

He says, no, they don't think they achieved stream entering. But we just had a quotation that said they do think they achieved stream entering. Yeah, and at the end of that quotation, they said that couldn't...

It could never be. It could never happen. Yeah, got it?

Don't get confused. So everybody agrees what? That when you reach stream entering, you don't think, I achieved stream entering.

So, yu gyu dak me a ta. Wow. So there's no such thing as the me which does exist.

Okay, good. All right, we won't go there. I'm waiting for Claire to fall asleep so I don't have to confront these guys.

Because children always beat you in debate. Let's see how far it goes. Okay.

And why is it so? It is all concrete because it would be impossible for them to enter anything at all. And this is why we can call them a stream enterer.

Got it? Why can you call them a stream enterer? Why precisely can you call them a stream enterer?

Because there's nothing to enter. Got it? Got it?

That's the beauty of the diamond cutter. Let's read it together. It's good luck because it's what?

Diamond cutter. Okay, one, two, three. Cham den de, kel de, gyun tu, shuk pa de, di nyam du, dak gi, gyun tu, shuk pe, re bu, to bo, nyam du, sen pa, kyur na, te ni, de dak tu, zin pa, gyur wa, lak so.

I feel uncomfortable with the gyur wa. It should have been gyur pa. Why?

What is it? What's the translation in English for gyur wa here? Yeah, say again.

That's half of it. Would. Would.

Because in English we use the past tense to indicate impossible consequence, you know. If you were to walk in the sky, you would stub your toes on the... Clouds.

Clouds. Got it? You would stub.

Okay, so in English you have to say would, you know. They don't say, those who walk in the sky stub their toes on... Clouds.

Got it? If you were to walk in the sky, you would stub your toes on the clouds. Got it?

So we use would to represent the... What's it called? Conjunction.

Is it? Conjunction? Subjunctive.

Anyway, maybe. But, but what's the subjunctive? Is it square?

Is what tense do you use in Tibetan? Past. In Tibetan you also use the past.

If you were to go, then you would stub your toes. Not if you go, you will. Got it?

To indicate the impossibility of it. You got it? So, I think, let's go look at Jason's Diamond Cutter and see if it's better.

Jinbar gyur. No. It's also.

Oh well. Okay. They probably mistranslated it.

Alright. Huh? There wasn't a ba.

But it would have, it shouldn't have had the a, ao. It shouldn't have had the a in front of it. Gyur.

It should have been gyur or nan gyur. Okay? Uh.

Okay. Read this one. One, two, three.

And they would begin to grasp to a living being, Semchen. And to a something that lives, Sok. And to a person, Kangsat.

Okay? Now, why does Lord Buddha use three different words for the same thing? You know?

Why did he say they would be grasping to a person? Why does he use, like three, he actually uses four different words. He uses dak, Semchen, Sok, and Kangsat.

He uses four different words for person. Why? And, Choney Lama takes a shot at explaining it.

And I spoke to the, esteemed translator of Choney Lama's commentary, Jigme, today, and I asked her, would you be willing to share with us what Choney Lama said, which is pretty weird. But, I thought you'd like to see it. So I inserted it here.

And I'm going to take it out as soon as we go over it. So he says, don't forget that the Tibetan for living being is Semchen, which means anybody who possesses a mind, right? Sem, Chen.

And then, he glosses Semchen as anyone who possesses thoughts, who possesses, Chen, thoughts, Sem, of torment here in the cycle of pain. Okay, got it? So, Say, Sangye, Sangye, Chandenday, Chandenday, Chöchen, Chöchen, Semchen, Semchen, Mayinbata, Mayinbata, No, I'm sorry.

No, Sangye, Sangye, Chandenday, Chandenday, Chöchen, Chöchen, living being, Mayinbata, Mayinbata, He said living and he said being. I mean, what else do you want? Who said that?

Eat more popcorn. You're ruining my debate. Semchen, living being, Yinbeichir, Buddha is a living being, right?

He is a living being, right? Semchen, Yinbata, Semchen, Yinbata, Say something. Chichir, Chichir, Chichir, Semchen, Mayinbata, So, Buddha is not a Semchen?

Mayinbe, Why the hell not? That was close. Sure, again, I would have killed me.

Why the heck not? Yeah, got it? So, next time you're in a debate ground and somebody says, is a Buddha a Semchen?

You're going to say, no, because he's not a being who possesses thoughts of torment here in the cycle of pain. So, apparently the Sem in Semchen always has to mean a tormented mind and not just any mind, okay? So, now you know that trick.

You know that. If you're in a debate ground in Saras, it's really good to pull out. Then he explains Sok, you see?

Because Lord Buddha in the Diamond Cutter, he says, if you hold to a person as being Srok, Sok, then you are also making a mistake. Meaning a being who lives. And then, Choney Lama, he just kind of glosses it in the normal sense of living, which means a sustained continuation over a lifetime.

That's no big deal. Okay. Is a Buddha a Sok, then?

No. Maintain life over a period of time. Is a Buddha...

Does a Buddha fit that definition of life? Does Buddha have life? I don't get it.

Does a Buddha fit that definition of life? Does a Buddha have life? It didn't say suffering life.

It didn't say suffering life. It just said sustained life. He has sustained life.

He didn't die. It says he's sustained life. We didn't say he was born and sustained his life.

We just said he has sustained life. Okay. Alright.

After he got enlightened, does he have sustained life? Yeah. So he's sustained life.

So he's a Sok, but he's not a... Samchen. Okay, got it.

Now we go to the third part in the Diamond Cutter Sutra. They say Kangsak. And this one, Choney Lama really...

But you're going to hear it, so you might as well know it. You're going to hear it in the debate ground. He's a Kangsak because he's filled, which is the meaning of Kang, with inferior mental states, which has called him to sak, which means to fall into the cycle of pain.

He's full and fell. Kangsak. Okay, got it?

Is a Buddha a Kangsak? Just so you know, technically a Buddha is a Kangsak. So this is a...

So what does Choney Lama have to say next? If everybody in the audience knows that Buddhas can be Kangsaks, and he's just explained Kangsak as meaning anyone who's filled with inferior mental states and fell into some kind of trouble. He's going to have to say, I'm just trying to give you a general idea of what Kangsak means.

It's not a Kyaba that everybody who's a Kangsak has inferior mental states, implying that Buddhas are... Kangsaks. Okay?

Buddhas are Kangsaks. They are personalities. They are personalities.

Pudgala in Sanskrit. Try to fit Pudgala into his explanation of Kangsak. It doesn't work.

Okay. That's a makyap. That's a makyap too.

That's sort of a makyap. Pudgala. For Kangsak.

Pudgala. Yeah. Person is much more accurate.

Yeah. Okay, so I'm going to wipe out that note. Now you know the differences.

Is Buddha a person? Yes. Is Buddha a living being?

Sorry, a being with life? Yes. Is Buddha a living being?

No. Not if you're using that to translate Semchen. Got it?

Okay. Is it wrong to grasp to someone as a living being? Yes.

You have to say there's an existing living being and there's a non-existent living being. Which one are you referring to, Geshe Michael? Yugyu Semchen or Megyu Semchen?

You got to learn this word. Say, Yugyu. Megyu.

Yugyu. Megyu. Yugyu means the one that does exist.

And you have to emphasize the does. It's the Geshe Michael that does exist. And then there's the Geshe Michael that doesn't exist.

Who's the Geshe Michael that doesn't exist? The one that you didn't create. What?

If you don't like popcorn, who should you blame? Yeah, you invented me. You created me standing up here.

If you don't like what's going on in this class, it's your fault. Okay? That's the...

If there's a Geshe Michael that you're mad at because you don't like popcorn, is that a Yugyu Geshe Michael or a Megyu Geshe Michael? It's a Megyu. It's the one that never could exist.

He's blameless. Okay. You can use that against your partner anytime.

Princess Claire, I'm waiting for you to fall asleep already. YOD. Oh, very difficult.

Very difficult. It's the word for cause. R-G-Y-U.

R-A-G-A-T-A-G-A-Y-A-T-A-G-Y-A-S-H-E-B-Y-U. And in rare occasions, gyu can mean which has cause to exist. Which can reasonably be said to exist.

That's the gyu. Drogyu mendu means what? Drogyu mendu.

Yeah, there's no cause to go. Meaning, you shouldn't go. Okay?

They don't say, there's no cause to go. They say, drogyu mendu. There's no reason to go, or there's, you shouldn't go.

There's an English expression like that. What is that? There ain't no cause to...

There's no cause to go, or something like that. Got it? It's very difficult.

Okay. Maybe we should debate. I think we get to another thing.

McNally, how late do you want this class to go? No. Huh?

As late as possible? Are you okay? No more time?

If we have a debate, is that enough time? No? Okay, we'll do more.

I can have fun. I can do it all night. But let's go for a while.

Okay, let's go for a while. Okay. Let's go again.

One, two, three. We can also refer to the Yungido. Good.

Mother Sutras. Sutras, yeah. Where they are explaining why the practice of the greater way is so kepo du pakpa.

Pakpa. L-L-L-L-L-O-A-L-O-Y-A. Aloya.

Say again one time. Nicely. Aloya.

Aloya. I heard that in like a dream last night over and over and I was like, ooh, that's nice. Aloya.

It's like pakpa. It means, so what does it mean kepo du pakpa? Why the practice of the greater way is so blank to that of the lower way.

Yeah, yeah, nice. Okay. Extraordinary.

Superior to the practice of the lesser way. Having heard what you heard about, from Ben I think, mostly of how we got here, what do you think he's not going to say of why Mahayana practice is superior to Hinayana practice? Yeah, he's not going to say that Mahayana practitioners have seen emptiness and Hinayana haven't.

Got it? So we're back to that theme again. Alright?

Okay. Now, K-Y-I. Ki.

Say, say, Ki. Ki.

[Speaker 2]
Yi. Yi.

[Speaker 1]
Yi. These are the four genitives. Ki, ki, yi, yi.

The four ways to say apostrophe S. John's book. Got it?

But at the end of a phrase, in one percent of the case, it's... but it's disjunctive. Okay?

It's true, you know, they don't establish that Mahayana is superior to Hin... I'm sorry. They do establish that Mahayana is superior to Hinayana due to the fact that one's mind is imbued with bodhicitta.

That's what he's saying here. He calls it what? Method.

Yeah. He calls it method as opposed to wisdom. So yeah.

How does Mahayana practice... How is it vastly superior to Hinayana practice? It is in...

The mind is imbued with method, bodhicitta. But, what's he going to say then? Rather, all the stuff, rather, yeah, rather than through some perception emptiness that they didn't have in the lower path.

Got it? In the lower way. Got it?

We distinguish the difference by their by the texture of their love and not by the depth of their realizations. Got it? We had a similar thing in Phoenix, I think.

Like, what is real love, right? Okay. Okay?

Got it? Sorry? Yeah.

Sorry. My high school English teacher would have hated it. She said, no more passive constructions, Geshe Michael.

Okay. Okay, ready? We're really stalling for you, Laura Christie.

Okay. One, two, three. Genshuki, Gyula, Denzinki, Shenyu, Sunma, Chungwe, Tsuki, Yena, Tonpa, Kunjonsu, Mapangbe, Deda, Shaktu, Mirruwa, Yingki.

This is unusual wording, that Sunjung, Sunjung thing. So, it'd be cooler to match what we had before. So we gotta go back and find Sunjung, wherever that was.

What did we say for that? Was it debunk? Oh, I'll just search for a debunk.

That's faster. Okay. This is a way that you can create a consistency in your translation, right?

You go back and try to use the same wording you did before. Suppose that there was someone who had entered the stream and had yet to debunk object they think they see because they still had in their mind the tendency to see things as real. Okay, let's just say that.

Suppose that there was someone who had entered the stream and had yet to debunk the object they think they see because they still had in their mind the tendency to see things as real. They would not then have pang baddha kunjar sum. Eliminated.

What's kunjar? Yeah, kundu jorwa means ati yoga or something. Okay?

Ati yoga. So yoga means to join or to bind someone. And kundu means completely binding.

So, I like to call it fetters. Okay? Which is nice.

They eliminated the three fetters that are eliminated because he used it twice by pathosin. Yeah. Okay?

They would not then have eliminated the three fetters that are eliminated by the pathosin. Kunjar sum kunjar sum shagyu me be chiru. No one could ever give me the three kunjars, the three fetters.

Kunjar sum shagyu me be chiru. Dhammadu. Kunjar sum shagyu yoga dha.

You can't. Shit. Hit me, man.

Shit. Yeah. Intellectual belief in self-existence, you can't entertain it anymore.

Unless you're really jealous. Okay. Second one.

No, I'm kidding. You can't do it anyway. Second one.

Doubt in the path. Yeah. And the third, which is sometimes given and sometimes not given.

Yeah. Belief in harmful ascetic practices. Like standing on one leg and holding your arm up for 30 years or something.

Okay? Alright. There's one more.

You stop liking ice cream. Stop being attached to it. Well, it's not listed normally.

And... And then they would shagtu miru. And it's all...

Let's go, man. You had it right last time. Yeah.

Could never happen. And then they... And then...

Saying they were... And then saying they were a stream enterer could never happen. You see what I mean?

Yeah, yeah. And then... Yeah.

You tell me then. And then it would... It's not that strong.

Miru. Inappropriate is good. Miru is good.

Inappropriate is good. And then it would be wrong. It's just wrong.

Sometimes miru just means wrong. And then it would be wrong to say that they were who they were. Right.

It'd be wrong to say they were stream enters. Got it? Because they hadn't given up the three mental afflictions that are always given up by seeing.

Okay? Because they still had that object they thought they saw. Which is why they said...

I wanted... Those of you who are sensitive to this difference. The difference between shengyu and migyu.

Okay? Say shengyu. Migyu.

Shengyu. Migyu. I look at the...

I look at the plate of popcorn. I see a big chunk of earth balance congealed on the top. And I'm like...

Yeah. And then I take a bite of it. You know?

I take a bite of it. There's one congealed piece. And then suddenly I realize it's like processed sugar or something.

I had a shengyu and I had a migyu. Okay? I had a shengyu and I had a migyu.

What was the migyu? What was I focused upon? No.

I was focused upon a congealed part of the popcorn. There is a congealed part of the popcorn. But my shengyu was what?

Big chunk of earth balance with no sugar. Because, you know, I'm not supposed to eat sugar, supposedly. Okay?

I might actually get prevented from having my popcorn. You see what I mean? So, shengyu exists or not?

Wait. Just... No.

You're the guy who can tell us the answer. Does the shengyu, the popcorn with just a big congealed piece of earth balance, exist? No, you gave me the verb already.

That was your cool thing tonight. What verb did you give? Debunk.

So it's not there. You see what I mean? Shengyu never was there.

Got it? What the shengyu refers to doesn't exist. Shengyu is like an imaginary thing between you and the migyo.

Got it? You lay a shengyu on top of... that's not there.

Got it? Is there a migyo? Are you focused on popcorn?

Yeah. Is there a big hunk of... what do you call stuff?

Earth balance there, without sugar in it? No. That's just something I created in my mind.

It's something I wanted so bad. Shen. Right?

What's shenpa shido? Free of the four attachments. It's an old lojong we had, right?

Shenpa means like, your heart's desire. Oh, I wish so bad that there was earth balance, a big congealed piece of earth balance there. So that, that I deny my mind under the influence of desire creates a...

some popcorn covered with earth balance where there is none. Got it? That's shengyu.

Got it? That's why you have to... Okay, do it.

Debunk it. Okay? Got it?

That's why you have to debunk it. It never was there, never will be there. Debunk it.

Huh? An image. It created an image in the mind, but not a...

an external piece of popcorn cover with earth balance. Got it? I'm not saying there's no imaginary object.

If there wasn't any imaginary object, I wouldn't have been disappointed. Okay. Not that I'm disappointed because I prefer sugar on it, but I'm just using it as an example so I don't get in trouble later for eating, you know, what I want to eat.

Okay. Alright. We can stop there, right?

That's enough, right? You can't go too late. Yeah.

Sometimes you can say that. Yeah. That's a big debate.

You go to the winter debates, you can debate that. Yeah. Did I make some boo-boo?

Yeah. Stream enters. They were stream enters, but now we can't say they are who they were.

They didn't say anything. They haven't said anything. They're just not who they were.

[Speaker 2]
Got it?

[Speaker 1]
No, they didn't say anything. Okay. Alright.

We're going to debate... Do you have a question?

[Speaker 2]
I just wanted to make sure we don't forget the gi.

[Speaker 1]
We'll catch it on the next one. You see, it'll be rather at the beginning of the next piece, but I'll make myself a note. Don't forget the gi.

Something's going on on Monday. I forget. Geshe Lotarn.

Oh, Geshe Lotarn. Okay. By the way, anyone with undertowel yoga empowerment can come to that.

So you don't have to have vajra gi necessarily. If you just have yamantaka, that's okay. You can come to Geshe Lotarn's two nights.

Sunday and Monday night. Okay? I think it's like 7.30, right?

It's okay. Call it 7.30. Okay? Huh?

More fun. He's really funny. Say again?

That's okay, because that's unreturned. Okay. All right.

We're going to debate right around where Rob Haggerty's sitting, or maybe where Alicia is, I think. Okay? So you've got to move.

I'm not sticking you. Don't worry. Do you want to do with Ben?

Is Ben okay?

[Speaker 2]
Yay!

[Speaker 1]
Dad, you're supposed to help me, Dad. These two guys are going to help her. Okay?

And they have some other ones. Tell me the first one. I forgot that.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Good. Yeah, yeah.

That's okay. You guys debate all the time. King Will's faking it.

Okay. Try your mic. Is it working okay?

[Speaker 2]
Hello.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, okay, okay. So first, this is how it starts, Claire. Okay?

Just so you know. This is how it starts. You don't have to do anything.

We're supposed to come up to you. We're supposed to bow down because you're a princess. We're supposed to say Did you touch it?

Did you touch it? Which means How about this one? Okay?

All right. And then you're This guy is ice cream. With a big slap.

He's supposed to jump and go like this, okay? So don't get worried. Okay.

[Speaker 2]
So, this guy is green. No.

[Speaker 1]
No.

[Speaker 2]
That's tough. So, this guy is No.

[Speaker 1]
So what color is this guy? Blue.

[Speaker 2]
Shucks. So this guy is the sky? No.

Why isn't the sky the sky?

[Speaker 1]
Why isn't the sky the sky? Wait, you gotta use your mic. Use your mic.

They can't hear you.

[Speaker 2]
Because it doesn't come from itself. Oh. Are you telling me the sky doesn't come from itself?

[Speaker 1]
Yes. Use the mic, use the mic. They can't hear you.

[Speaker 2]
Use the mic. Yes. So where does the sky come from?

Karma. Wow.

[Speaker 1]
Hang on. Okay. There's no such thing as karma.

[Speaker 2]
Ah, shit.

[Speaker 1]
I'm gonna do one, okay? So, the karma of getting this fruit, right? The karma of getting this fruit is that you have to steal stuff from other people.

[Speaker 2]
No. So what is the karma of giving the fruit?

[Speaker 1]
Getting the fruit. Getting the fruit.

[Speaker 2]
Giving fruit to other people.

[Speaker 1]
You gotta use the microphone.

[Speaker 2]
Giving fruit to other people.

[Speaker 1]
Yay.

[Speaker 2]
Mmm.

[Speaker 1]
Mmm. Mmm. Mmm.

So there is a fruit here. There is a fruit here. So there is a fruit here.

Say it in here.

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
Oh.

[Speaker 2]
Is there a fruit that came from giving other people? Is there a fruit that came from giving other people fruit? Yes.

[Speaker 1]
All right. Yes.

[Speaker 2]
Mmm.

[Speaker 1]
Is there a fruit that's not here? Yes. In the mic.

In the mic.

[Speaker 2]
Yes.

[Speaker 1]
So what kind of fruit is not here?

[Speaker 2]
The fruit that comes from swiping things.

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

Now they're gonna help you, okay? These two. They're not so sharp, but they're, you know.

You're okay. Okay. Wait.

You gotta eat this first. All right. So.

Gangbu kkakja yi me che. Oh. Oh.

The apricot. Gangbu. Gangbu kkakja yi me che.

So the apricot is the kkakja. Tak. Yeah.

Gangbu kkakja yi me che. Gangbu kkakja yi me che. Gangbu kkakja yi me che.

[Speaker 2]
In the mic. In the mic. Da.

Da.

[Speaker 1]
Me gyu gangbu me wa che. So there's no apricot there that was never there.

[Speaker 2]
There's no apricot there that was never there.

[Speaker 1]
Don't say da.

[Speaker 2]
Da.

[Speaker 1]
Gangbu yi me che. So there is a fruit there. There is an apricot there.

[Speaker 2]
There.

[Speaker 1]
So that's the apricot you got by stealing fruit, right?

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
So there is no apricot there that you get from stealing fruit.

[Speaker 2]
Yes.

[Speaker 1]
Great. Gangbu kkakja yi me che. There is a kkakja here.

[Speaker 2]
Here.

[Speaker 1]
There's a kkakja. Me gyu gangbu yi me che. There's an apricot there that was never there.

Oh, good. Me gyu gangbu Me gyu gangbu yi wa da. So the the apricot we thought that wasn't there must be there.

Because you said there's no kkakja here. I mean around that princess. Before she ate it.

Oh. Right?

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
So the apricot that you get from stealing is there.

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
Kkakja me wa da. So kkakja me wa da. So there's nothing there that we deny is there.

Right? Good. Okay.

So there is an apricot there that we got from stealing. So there is an apricot there that we got from stealing.

[Speaker 2]
No.

[Speaker 1]
Kkakja me gyu. Because there does exist a kkakja there.

[Speaker 2]
Around this princess.

[Speaker 1]
Oh. So So consider the apricot that we got from stealing. It's not the kkakja.

Oh good. So it exists. So we don't deny it.

Yeah. We deny the existence of apricots that you get from from grabbing them. Right?

Or buying them for that matter. Wait a minute. So there are some places in the world where apricots that you can't get from stealing don't exist.

There are some places in the world where apricots that you don't get from stealing don't exist. So in those places apricots that you do get from stealing do exist. Because there are places where apricots that you do get from stealing don't exist.

That you don't get from stealing don't exist. There are places where There are places where apricots that you don't get from stealing don't exist. According to you.

Because you said the princess doesn't have an apricot that you don't get from stealing. Doesn't not have an apricot that you don't get from stealing. You said there wasn't an apricot that you don't get from stealing with this princess.

You said there's no gaccha here. So is there an apricot that you do get from stealing here? So the gaccha is here.

Because there's no apricot that you get from stealing here.

[Speaker 2]
Just because that apricot's not here doesn't mean that...

[Speaker 1]
It's here.

[Speaker 2]
Right.

[Speaker 1]
Is there any place in the world where an apricot that you get from stealing doesn't exist? That's the big question. Is there any place in the world where an apricot that you get from stealing doesn't exist?

So if there are places where apricots that you get from stealing don't... not exist, then there must be places where apricots that you get from stealing do exist. Look, no matter where you go, can you find an apricot that you get from stealing?

So we can say that wherever you go, there exist apricots that you don't get from stealing. No. Can we say that right there, next to the princess, is the Gakja of apricots?

[Speaker 2]
No, it doesn't exist.

[Speaker 1]
So Gakja Meata. So you're saying the Gakja doesn't exist. So there's nothing that we should deny.

So apricots do come from stealing. All Gakjas. Doesn't matter, they're the same thing.

They're both denied. Both imaginary things that we deny. Oh yeah?

I assume you think you're talking about Rigpe Gakja. Or Lamki Gakja.

[Speaker 2]
Okay.

[Speaker 1]
The thing we deny with respect to the path, as opposed to the thing we deny with logic. I could say that. Okay?

So Lamki Gakja Chöchen. Let's take the thing that the path denies, or stops. Lamki Gakja Chöchen.

Yata. Yata. Are you saying it exists?

Dö. Dö. So it's not imaginary.

Oh, so it is imaginary. Lamki Gakja. But even though it's just imaginary, it exists.

So the apricot that you get from stealing does exist. Because it's imaginary. Same thing.

Huh? Help me out. Shit!

[Speaker 2]
What doesn't exist?

[Speaker 1]
Oh, okay. Take the apricot that came from stealing. It's not imaginary.

Does it exist because of your imagination? Create it in your mind. Well, that goes a little too far.

Just imagine it in your mind. You contradict all holy scripture.

[Speaker 2]
Scripture says...

[Speaker 1]
Because this is the statement of Shantideva himself. What does he say? What does he say?

What does that mean? You have contradicted holy scripture. Gakje chula marekpar.

Until you such time as you make contact with Gakja, you can't understand that it doesn't exist. Can you make contact with it? I didn't invent it.

He invented it. Gakje chula marek-marek. Sparsha.

Until you make contact.

[Speaker 2]
By believing in it?

[Speaker 1]
No. People believe in it who didn't recognize it. You can say recognize.

Until you recognize the Gakja, you can't deny its existence. Master Shantideva said. That's what he means by contact, I assume.

Until you recognize it. So you can recognize the Gakja. Yodata.

Gakja Yodata. It exists? Yeah.

Yodata. Are you telling me that the Gakja exists? Because you can recognize it.

The Lampi Gakja exists. Rigpe Gakja. Rigpe Gakja.

The Gakja you deny by your arguments about emptiness, right? That one doesn't exist. Merata.

It doesn't exist. Rigpe Gakja. So apricot that comes from stealing apricots doesn't exist.

So you can never recognize that it doesn't exist. Because you have to recognize it to see that it doesn't exist. But you have to recognize...

Master Shantideva said, you must recognize it to see that it doesn't exist. He said, you must recognize what? Gakpe chö la ma rek par.

Until such time as you recognize it. The what? The Gakja.

Gakpe chö la ma rek par. Rek, rek. R-E-G.

Until you make contact. No, he's not talking about that. It's R-E-G.

Until such time as you make contact with the Gakja. Dey ngu me dzinmayin. You can't see that it doesn't exist.

So you must be talking about the Lampi Gakja. Huh? So you must be talking about the Lampi Gakja.

Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. So, say he is. Say he's talking about the thing you removed by the practice of the path.

Which is the Lampi Gakja. Me ea pah. Oh.

[Speaker 2]
The Lampi Gakja exists.

[Speaker 1]
Oh. So that does exist. The thing you deny or the thing you debunk...

No. The thing you stopped with the practice of the path. Ye ea pah.

It does exist. Lama Gaccha exists.

[Speaker 2]
Your belief in the Gaccha exists.

[Speaker 1]
That's okay, you can say that. So, you can make contact with it. I mean in Shantideva's sense, in Master Shantideva's sense.

You can recognize it. Sure. What's an example of Lama Gaccha?

Something that you deny with the path. Something you stop with the practice of the path. Belief in the self-existent thing.

Yeah, belief in the self-existent thing. So, belief in the self-existent thing, treasure. Yatha.

Yulien, Yulchenyin. Is it an object or is it an object holder, meaning a subject? Subject state of mind or the object of that subject state of mind?

The belief in an apricot that you can get by stealing. The belief. Is it a subject state of mind or is it an object?

[Speaker 2]
That belief is an object. It could be, yeah, it could be, yeah, it's an object.

[Speaker 1]
My belief in the self-existent thing is the object. Yeah, I'm talking about your belief. Is that a Yulchen or a Yul?

Is it an object of a state of mind or is it a state of mind which perceives that object?

[Speaker 2]
It's the object. It's not the state of mind. It's the object that I'm holding.

[Speaker 1]
No, but Lamgyi Gakcha, what you're trying to stop with your practice of the path, right? Is it a state of mind or is it the thing that that state of mind is focused on? It's the thing that that state of mind is focused on.

That's the Rigvid Gakcha. That's the what? That's the Rigvid Gakcha.

That's the non-existent thing that you're trying to prove doesn't exist. You see what I mean?

[Speaker 2]
So the state of mind is focused on?

[Speaker 1]
Yeah, the Lamgyi Gakcha is the state of mind.

[Speaker 2]
So there is no state of mind.

[Speaker 1]
There is. No. Gakcha yena meypa yinmey makyap.

Gakcha yena meypa yinmey makyap. What's that mean? Gakcha yena meypa yinmey makyap.

That's what she's trying to prove. Gakcha yena meypa yinmey makyap. What's that mean?

Just because something is Gakcha doesn't mean it's necessarily makyap meypa. Non-existent thing. Sure.

Then you tell me Lamgyi Gakcha. Yeah, take what we're trying to stop with our practice. The path.

Are you telling me it exists? Yeah, it exists. Sure.

What's an example of it? My tendency. Denzin.

You can say denzin. My habit of holding things as existing truly. Habit di chö chen.

Okay, take that habit. Yul yin, yul chen yin. Is it an object of a state of mind or is it a state of mind itself?

No, I mean, in theory, if someone's reading your mind, it becomes the object. If I'm reading your mind, it's object. But normally, are we talking about it as a subject state of mind or?

I guess it's a subject state of mind. Yeah, it's a subject state of mind. Ya ta.

So it exists, right? Yeah. Yeah.

Yul chen yinba ta. Yul chen is the Tibetan word for subject, right? And it means object holder.

Yul chen yinba ta. Yes, it's an object. De.

Ko rang gi yul ya ta. So it has its object. It's a yul chen, it must have a yul.

It's a subject state of mind. Yeah. Yul chen yina, yul yu be ye chen.

Right? Okay. So gak cha chö chen.

Ya ta. Rigpe gak cha chö chen. Take the object that we deny with our whole study of emptiness, the three-headed purple elephant.

Yul ba ta. So it exists, right? Three-headed elephants exist.

Three-headed purple elephants exist, right? Shucks. So three-headed elephants don't exist.

They don't exist. Yul chen. So they can't be the object of a state of mind.

Of a state of mind. It can't be the yul of the yul chen. Yinba ta.

It doesn't exist. Maybe it should. I'm holding on to a rabbit's horn tightly, but it's cutting my fingers, you know?

You can't say I possess a non-existing thing, right? Okay, good. So the Buddha doesn't have a dharmakaya.

Because the Buddha doesn't possess a non-existing thing. If you have a dharmakaya, you're not Buddha. So Buddha does have a dharmakaya.

So dharmakaya is not the simple absence of something. The dharmakaya is a simple absence of something. So dharmakaya is an absence of something.

So dharmakaya doesn't exist. Yes. Oh, just because it's the absence of something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

So the absence of a self-existent thing exists. Oh, shut up. We've got to stop.

You ready? We're going to debate. We're going to debate.

King will. You've got to hold this up to your mouth, okay? I know.

Okay, ready? Ready? Okay.

[Speaker 2]
No, I disagree.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, ready? So pain does have an end. So pain does have an end.

[Speaker 2]
Yes, right.

[Speaker 1]
Okay, ready? Why does pain have an end? Why does pain have an end?

[Speaker 2]
Because medicine? There's a powerful medicine.

[Speaker 1]
Power medicine? There's a powerful medicine.

[Speaker 2]
There's a powerful medicine.

[Speaker 1]
And then we're supposed to go, Yay! So we'd like to thank Princess Claire and King Will. We'd like to give them a hand for being such good debaters.

And even though you beat us tonight, we would like to invite you back to debate again. Okay? Agree?

Okay. Goodnight. Disperse.