Special Insight 2: Wisdom of Emptiness (23 August 2011)

0:17 We have a timely class. Report an error in the passage at 0:17 Highlight the passage at 0:17

0:25 Well, Report an error in the passage at 0:25 Highlight the passage at 0:25

0:31 there Report an error in the passage at 0:31 Highlight the passage at 0:31

0:49 is. I heard that on the... There's always an excuse, isn't there? Report an error in the passage at 0:49 Highlight the passage at 0:49

1:00 And some people, I think, are trying to avoid the prayers at the beginning of class. A Report an error in the passage at 1:00 Highlight the passage at 1:00

1:09 lot of people tend to come in late. getting emptier and Report an error in the passage at 1:09 Highlight the passage at 1:09

0:47 baseball game, which likely... Well, there Report an error in the passage at 0:47 Highlight the passage at 0:47

1:15 know a when I thought, you know, like, especially when they teach the traditional way, you know, well, for a half hour, it's not going to even get to what we were at last week. Report an error in the passage at 1:15 Highlight the passage at 1:15

1:28 Why are we rushing, why are we rushing off the door? And then, you know, repeatedly, after you were busy. Thank you. essence of really... Report an error in the passage at 1:28 Highlight the passage at 1:28

1:46 while, when that actually translates down as opposed to just an idea of an idea of what you're in it. Report an error in the passage at 1:46 Highlight the passage at 1:46

2:03 Tell me something I haven't heard before. Report an error in the passage at 2:03 Highlight the passage at 2:03

2:17 You're here! Yay! Report an error in the passage at 2:17 Highlight the passage at 2:17

2:24 might be hard to part sometimes. Report an error in the passage at 2:24 Highlight the passage at 2:24

2:30 door. See? One, two, three, four. Thank you. should be doing that. I'm just going to go to the test and make his face. Report an error in the passage at 2:30 Highlight the passage at 2:30

· · · silence, 1 minute

3:16 sent you an e-mail, a long one. Oh, he hasn't read it yet. An e-mail? He would have said something already. No. Not yet. Bye. Report an error in the passage at 3:16 Highlight the passage at 3:16

3:46 can't see. Report an error in the passage at 3:46 Highlight the passage at 3:46

· · · silence, 1 minute

4:18 free of the things that I really need. Report an error in the passage at 4:18 Highlight the passage at 4:18

4:25 So before Emily comes back, I'm going to welcome you to her class and give you an update on what's happening at Sachin Lane. Report an error in the passage at 4:25 Highlight the passage at 4:25

4:40 I know it's hard to find a parking spot around here, especially at this hour, so thank you for being so patient, those of you who make it every Tuesday. Report an error in the passage at 4:40 Highlight the passage at 4:40

4:54 Chikila will be starting her Discovering Buddhism class on September 8th and that goes from September 8th through October 6th from 7 to 9pm on Thursday nights. So if you have friends or relatives, acquaintances that you think might benefit from a class like that, you can invite them. Venerable Carol will be... Report an error in the passage at 4:54 Highlight the passage at 4:54

5:21 I don't know which Monday yet, but she'll be teaching an introduction to Tibetan Buddhism once a month. It'll be repeated the same class for people who walk in here and just wonder what it's all about. Report an error in the passage at 5:21 Highlight the passage at 5:21

5:35 And September 9th, Gisela will be teaching commentary on Yamantaka Hayas Yoga Tantra initiation will be required for that class. Report an error in the passage at 5:35 Highlight the passage at 5:35

5:47 And that'll be six Fridays. In a row. And September 11th, which is the 10th anniversary of September 11th, we decided to have an open house and prayer day here. And it's an opportunity to invite your friends, relatives, neighbors, people who might be curious about a center like ours, or if you want to show them where you attend classes, wonderful classes like Emily's. Report an error in the passage at 5:47 Highlight the passage at 5:47

6:18 And Emily's class will be coming to an end in September. This class, Emily? Report an error in the passage at 6:18 Highlight the passage at 6:18

6:26 The period of this class. Report an error in the passage at 6:26 Highlight the passage at 6:26

6:33 Okay. Report an error in the passage at 6:33 Highlight the passage at 6:33

6:55 I think he will be covering a, you'll be working with a specific sadhana that we can all follow. But we're still working on the details of that. So I'll have to talk to him about that. Report an error in the passage at 6:55 Highlight the passage at 6:55

7:15 Yeah, I don't know either. We're working through the details of that. Report an error in the passage at 7:15 Highlight the passage at 7:15

7:41 solitary. It's the one that's really common, right? The Yomitaka piece. Report an error in the passage at 7:41 Highlight the passage at 7:41

7:54 So I won't take up more time. Thank you. Report an error in the passage at 7:54 Highlight the passage at 7:54

· · · silence, 1 minute

9:16 All right, so let's start with a moment of quiet and setting our motivation and Report an error in the passage at 9:16 Highlight the passage at 9:16

· · · silence, 1 minute

10:14 remembering that there are countless beings who are all wanting to be happy and Report an error in the passage at 10:14 Highlight the passage at 10:14

10:43 yet experiencing a lot of frustrations, anxiety, Report an error in the passage at 10:43 Highlight the passage at 10:43

10:51 which Report an error in the passage at 10:51 Highlight the passage at 10:51

· · · silence, 1 minute

11:28 are inevitable in saṃsāra. straight, one across straight, Report an error in the passage at 11:28 Highlight the passage at 11:28

· · · silence, 4 minutes

11:49 And developing a wish to free all these beings from their suffering. To Report an error in the passage at 11:49 Highlight the passage at 11:49

12:20 do that we need to attain enlightenment. Report an error in the passage at 12:20 Highlight the passage at 12:20

· · · silence, 1 minute

13:04 So let's start with the praise to Manjushri in the white book on the first page. Report an error in the passage at 13:04 Highlight the passage at 13:04

13:21 Obeisance to my guru and protector Manjushri. Who holds to his heart a scriptural text symbolic of his seeing all things as they are. Whose intelligence shines forth as a sun unclouded by delusions or traces of ignorance. Who teaches in sixty ways with the loving compassion of a father for his only son. All creatures caught in the prison of saṃsāra, confused in the darkness of their ignorance, overwhelmed by their suffering. Report an error in the passage at 13:21 Highlight the passage at 13:21

13:46 You, whose dragon thunder-like proclamation of Dharma arouses us from the stupor of our delusions and frees us from the iron chains of our karma. Who wields the sword of wisdom, hewing down suffering wherever its sprouts appear, clearing away the darkness of ignorance. You, whose princely body is adorned with 112 marks of a Buddha, who has completed the stages achieving the highest perfection of a bodhisattva, who has been pure from the beginning, I bow down to you, O Manjushri. Report an error in the passage at 13:46 Highlight the passage at 13:46

14:15 or more opportunity. Report an error in the passage at 14:15 Highlight the passage at 14:15

14:26 With the brilliance of your wisdom, O compassionate one, illuminate the darkness in closing my mind. Enlighten my intelligence and wisdom so that I may gain insight into Buddha's words and the texts that explain them. Report an error in the passage at 14:26 Highlight the passage at 14:26

14:40 And then the Heart Sūtra in Gold Book on page 76. I Report an error in the passage at 14:40 Highlight the passage at 14:40

14:55 prostrate to the Aria Triple Gem. Thus did I hear at one time, the Bhagavan was dwelling on Mass Vulture's mountain in Rajgriya, together with a great community of Monsk and a great community of bodhisattvas. At that time the Bhagavan was absorbed in the concentration on the categories of phenomena called profound perception. Also at that time the Bodhisattva Mahasattva Arya Avalokiteshvara looked upon the very practice of the profound perfection of wisdom and beheld those five aggregates also as empty of inherent nature. Report an error in the passage at 14:55 Highlight the passage at 14:55

15:28 Then through the power of Buddha, the venable Shariputra said this to the Bodhisattva, Mahasattva Arya Avalokiteshvara. How should any son of the lineage train who wishes to practice the activity of the profound perfection of wisdom? He said that, and the Bodhisattva, Mahasattva Arya Avalokiteshvara said this to the venable Shariputra. Report an error in the passage at 15:28 Highlight the passage at 15:28

15:51 Shariputra, any son of the lineage or daughter of the lineage who wishes to practice the activity of the profound perfection of wisdom should look upon it like this, correctly and repeatedly beholding those five aggregates also of its empty inherent nature. Form is empty. Emptiness is form. Emptiness is not other than form. Form is also not other than emptiness. In the same way, feeling, discrimination, compositional factors and consciousness are empty. Report an error in the passage at 15:51 Highlight the passage at 15:51

16:19 Shariputra, likewise all phenomena are emptiness, without characteristic, unproduced, unceased, stainless, not without stain, not deficient, not fulfilled. Shariputra, therefore, in emptiness there is no form, no feeling, no discrimination, no compositional factors, no consciousness, no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind, no visual form, no sound, no odor, no taste, no object of touch. Report an error in the passage at 16:19 Highlight the passage at 16:19

16:50 There is no I element and so on, up to and including no mind element and no mental consciousness element. There is no ignorance, no extinction of ignorance and so on, up to and including no aging and death and no extinction of aging and death. Similarly, there is no suffering, origination, cessation and path. There is no exalted wisdom, no attainment and also no non-attainment. Report an error in the passage at 16:50 Highlight the passage at 16:50

17:15 Shariputra, therefore, because there is no attainment, bodhisattvas rely on and dwell in the perfection of wisdom, the mind without obscuration and without fear. Having completely passed beyond error, they reach the end point of nirvāṇa. All the Buddhas who dwell in the three times also manifestly completely awaken to unsurpassable, perfect, complete enlightenment in reliance on the perfection of wisdom. Report an error in the passage at 17:15 Highlight the passage at 17:15

17:41 Therefore, the mantra of the perfection of wisdom, the mantra of great knowledge, the unsurpassed mantra, the mantra equal to the unequaled, the mantra that thoroughly pacifies all suffering, should be known as true since it is not false. The mantra of the perfection of wisdom is declared, tayata om gate gate paragate parasamgate bodhishoha. Report an error in the passage at 17:41 Highlight the passage at 17:41

18:04 Shariputra, the bodhisattva, mahasattva, should train in the profound perfection of wisdom like that. Then the Bhagavan rose from that concentration and commended the Bodhisattva, Mahasattva, Arya, Avalokiteshvara, saying, Well said, well said, son of the lineage, it is like that. It is like that. One should practice the profound perfection of wisdom just as you have indicated. Even the Tata Gattas rejoice. Report an error in the passage at 18:04 Highlight the passage at 18:04

18:29 The Bhagavan having thus spoken the venerable Sharivadiputra, the Bodhisattva, Mahasattva, Arya, Avalokiteshvara, and those surrounding in their entirety, along with the world of gods, humans, asuras, and Gandharvas, were overjoyed and highly praised that spoken by the Bhagavan. And then on page 98 is Refuge and Bodhicitta. Report an error in the passage at 18:29 Highlight the passage at 18:29

18:58 I go for refuge until I am enlightened to the Buddha, the Dharma and the Supreme Assembly. By the merits I create through listening to the Dharma, may I become a Buddha in order to benefit all sentient beings. I go for refuge until I am enlightened to the Buddha, the Dharma and the Supreme Assembly. By the merits I create through listening to the Dharma, may I become a Buddha in order to benefit all sentient beings. Report an error in the passage at 18:58 Highlight the passage at 18:58

19:22 I go for refuge until I'm enlightened to the Buddha, the Dharma and the Supreme Assembly. By the merits I create through listening to the Dharma, may I become a Buddha in order to benefit all sentient beings. Report an error in the passage at 19:22 Highlight the passage at 19:22

19:51 We're talking about emptiness and how the root of all suffering is the ignorance that misconceives the way things exist. Believing that things exist in a more solid, concrete way. Then they actually do. Things do exist conventionally, but not as concretely as we think that they do. Report an error in the passage at 19:51 Highlight the passage at 19:51

20:21 And the biggest troublemaker is the grasping at an inherently existent I, or me. Report an error in the passage at 20:21 Highlight the passage at 20:21

20:36 So, right, and once we grasp onto that inherently existent me, then... We grasp onto things like our happiness and our suffering. We develop attachment to things that we find pleasurable and aversion to things that we find unpleasurable. Report an error in the passage at 20:36 Highlight the passage at 20:36

20:59 We have this separation between self and others. We create mental afflictions, etc. Report an error in the passage at 20:59 Highlight the passage at 20:59

21:07 So last time, Lama Sonkapa... Report an error in the passage at 21:07 Highlight the passage at 21:07

21:16 Clear the difference between the self that exists and the self that doesn't exist. There is a self or a person that does exist and there is a specific self or a person that does not exist. So this is very important to understand, right? Because it's easy with emptiness teachings to think, oh, okay, there's no self at all. Report an error in the passage at 21:16 Highlight the passage at 21:16

21:45 Oh, you're negating the self. There's no person at all. There's nothing that really exists. And that's wrong. Things do exist in a very subtle way. So in order to realize emptiness, we have to understand exactly and precisely and clearly what it is that we're refuting. We're not refuting existence altogether. We're refuting a type of existence that we grasp onto. Report an error in the passage at 21:45 Highlight the passage at 21:45

22:16 And one of the problems is that right now everything that we perceive is mixed with inherent existence. We're refuting inherent existence. But we've never had an appearance of something without the appearance of inherent existence. Report an error in the passage at 22:16 Highlight the passage at 22:16

22:44 It's very difficult to separate what exists from what doesn't exist. So I want to explore that a little bit further this week because that will be very important. Report an error in the passage at 22:44 Highlight the passage at 22:44

23:00 So we talked about Lama Tsongkhapa, talked about last time how we need to realize the selflessness of persons and the selflessness of phenomena. And it's easier to realize the selflessness of persons. So he starts by refuting. The self of persons, right? He starts by refuting the inherently existent person or me, right? So that is where we are now on page 267 if you have the text. Report an error in the passage at 23:00 Highlight the passage at 23:00

23:34 So I just want to warn you, today's class is going to be challenging, but please try to stick with it. Try to get into the reasoning here because we're getting into the reasonings now. So there are many different ways to try to refute inherent existence. There are many different reasonings. And Lama Tsongkhapa gets into one particular reasoning here, and this is the four-point analysis. Report an error in the passage at 23:34 Highlight the passage at 23:34

24:10 There's also a seven-fold reasoning. There's also a diamond slivers reasoning. There's also the reasoning of dependent arising. There's many different reasonings, but the one we're going to focus on. And this text is the four-point analysis. Report an error in the passage at 24:10 Highlight the passage at 24:10

24:35 So the four-point analysis is an ultimate analysis trying to help us understand that things cannot be inherently existent. Things cannot logically exist the way they appear. Report an error in the passage at 24:35 Highlight the passage at 24:35

24:58 And this is so difficult, right, because things have always appeared in a particular way, and now we have to imagine. Well, we have to separate the way things appear from the way they actually exist and refute the wrong appearance without refuting the way things actually exist. We have to separate two things that have never been separated in our minds. Report an error in the passage at 24:58 Highlight the passage at 24:58

25:27 So just by virtue of that statement, we know it's not going to be easy. It'll take some time. Report an error in the passage at 25:27 Highlight the passage at 25:27

25:37 So the four-point analysis. The first point is we need to identify the object of refutation or the object of negation, right? Report an error in the passage at 25:37 Highlight the passage at 25:37

25:55 Emptiness means that things don't exist in a particular way. So, and we need to realize that things don't exist in that way. So if we don't understand what it is, that we're refuting, then we can never have the correct view of emptiness. Report an error in the passage at 25:55 Highlight the passage at 25:55

26:19 If Report an error in the passage at 26:19 Highlight the passage at 26:19

26:25 I ask you to check the refrigerator and see if there's kimchi in the refrigerator, if you have no idea what kimchi is, you won't know whether there's kimchi in the refrigerator or not. We can only refute... The existence of kimchi in the refrigerator if we first know what kimchi is, right? So similarly, we'll only understand emptiness if we first know what it is that we're refuting. Report an error in the passage at 26:25 Highlight the passage at 26:25

27:03 So this is worth spending a lot of time on, is really understanding what it is that we're refuting. And they say that once we understand, once we correctly identify the object of refutation, then the realization of emptiness. Report an error in the passage at 27:03 Highlight the passage at 27:03

27:20 Is easy. I'm not sure about easy, but... All right. Straightforward. Much easier, at least. Once you know what kimchi is, it's pretty easy to see if it's in the refrigerator or not. If you don't know what it is, then you spend a lot of time searching in the refrigerator, thinking, oh, do you think this is it? Well, this thing, I'm not sure what it is. Report an error in the passage at 27:20 Highlight the passage at 27:20

27:51 Maybe that's kimchi, right? Or is it this? It's got a little mold on it, maybe that's kimchi. Or, you know, you can spend a lot of time looking through everything and trying to determine if it's kimchi, if you don't know what kimchi looks like, right? Similarly with emptiness. So first we have to identify the object of refutation, or oftentimes called the object of negation, the object that we're refuting, or the object that we're negating. Report an error in the passage at 27:51 Highlight the passage at 27:51

28:24 Not in words so much as in our experience. Report an error in the passage at 28:24 Highlight the passage at 28:24

28:30 And so we'll talk about that. The second one, Report an error in the passage at 28:30 Highlight the passage at 28:30

28:36 ascertaining the pervasion. So we'll talk about what that means. But basically this is saying if it exists inherently, then it must exist in this way or that way. If it exists inherently, it must either exist, okay, if the person exists inherently, it must exist as the same entity as its basis of imputation. Report an error in the passage at 28:36 Highlight the passage at 28:36

29:07 Or as a different entity as the basis of imputation. So we need to really think about it. If it exists in this way, it has to exist either this way or that way. Otherwise, it cannot exist at all. So the four-point analysis is saying if it exists inherently, either it has to exist as the same entity as the basis or as a different entity as its basis. Report an error in the passage at 29:07 Highlight the passage at 29:07

29:36 And we'll get into that, what all that means. So that's like saying if Report an error in the passage at 29:36 Highlight the passage at 29:36

29:56 we have pizza in the house, then it's either in the refrigerator or it's not in the refrigerator. There are no other options. Either it is or it's not. And there's no other possibility. Either it's there or it's not. And similarly, either it's the same entity or it's different entities. Or another way they say it is either if something exists. Report an error in the passage at 29:56 Highlight the passage at 29:56

30:26 Either it's one thing or it's many things. It's one or many. There are no other possibilities. Report an error in the passage at 30:26 Highlight the passage at 30:26

30:40 So we have to come to some sort of certainty in our mind. We need to come to a certainty in our mind that, okay, if it doesn't exist this way and it doesn't exist that way, then it cannot exist at all. Report an error in the passage at 30:40 Highlight the passage at 30:40

30:58 So that takes some thinking. Report an error in the passage at 30:58 Highlight the passage at 30:58

31:03 We'll get into the third and fourth points. So then we refute the first possibility, right, that the person and the aggregates are the same inherent entity, and then we refute that they're different entities. And then if we did step two correctly and well, then once we refute number three and number four, then we know it cannot inherently exist. Report an error in the passage at 31:03 Highlight the passage at 31:03

31:36 if... I'm searching for pizza and I search everywhere in the refrigerator and I search everywhere else in the house thoroughly and it's not in the refrigerator and it's not anywhere else. Then I can conclude with confidence that there is no pizza in the house. Report an error in the passage at 31:36 Highlight the passage at 31:36

32:00 But only if we do it really thoroughly. So that's what we need to do to realize emptiness. So this is one way of... Refuting inherent existence. It's not the only way. So we'll try things. I think our minds need many different ways. So this is one way we'll go into. And if it doesn't work for you, then I wouldn't worry about it also because there are many different reasonings. Report an error in the passage at 32:00 Highlight the passage at 32:00

32:32 So have you gotten teachings on the four-point analysis before? Report an error in the passage at 32:32 Highlight the passage at 32:32

32:50 So the first step, ascertaining or identifying the object of refutation. Report an error in the passage at 32:50 Highlight the passage at 32:50

32:58 Lama Tsongkhapa says the first of four essentials that exist with regard to this is to examine one's own mind so as to identify the manner of apprehending a self of persons. That was explained earlier. So we have to examine our own mind to see how it is that we're holding on to things as existing. Report an error in the passage at 32:58 Highlight the passage at 32:58

33:25 Because we are, right? For sure. We are. We are hanging on to an inherent existence. Otherwise, we wouldn't have any mental afflictions. We wouldn't be in saṃsāra. So first of all, we have to identify this target very clearly in our mind. Report an error in the passage at 33:25 Highlight the passage at 33:25

33:51 And it needs to not be just an intellectual understanding. It needs to be not just words. It has to be in our experience. Report an error in the passage at 33:51 Highlight the passage at 33:51

34:07 Okay, so we've talked about this quite a bit. What is being refuted? What is the object of refutation? Report an error in the passage at 34:07 Highlight the passage at 34:07

34:21 We'll talk about the words and then we'll get to the experience. Report an error in the passage at 34:21 Highlight the passage at 34:21

34:31 Inherent existence. An object or a person that seems to exist in and of itself inherently. Having their own essence, their own Report an error in the passage at 34:31 Highlight the passage at 34:31

34:52 intrinsic existence. their own Intrinsic existence that's independent of the mind that's perceiving it. An existence in its own right. Report an error in the passage at 34:52 Highlight the passage at 34:52

35:09 As if this is a pen in and of itself, independent of the mind. As if this is a table in and of itself, independent of the mind. Report an error in the passage at 35:09 Highlight the passage at 35:09

35:20 As if this is a microphone in and of itself, independent of the mind perceiving it. As if this body and mind... Exist in and of itself, independent of a mind that imputes it. Report an error in the passage at 35:20 Highlight the passage at 35:20

35:43 As if the me exists in and of itself without a mind imputing it. And that's the biggest one, right? Believing that there's a real me that exists in and of itself. So inherent existence, intrinsic existence. Report an error in the passage at 35:43 Highlight the passage at 35:43

36:08 Existence from its own side, right? Existence. Report an error in the passage at 36:08 Highlight the passage at 36:08

36:14 From its own side, from the side of the object or from the side of the person that's independent of the mind. Report an error in the passage at 36:14 Highlight the passage at 36:14

36:23 So many different terms referring to the same thing, according to Prasangika. I find that different terms are very useful to use because they all give you a specific meaning. Report an error in the passage at 36:23 Highlight the passage at 36:23

36:43 Existence by way of its own characteristics. Another one I really find useful. Existence within its basis of designation. So as if, Report an error in the passage at 36:43 Highlight the passage at 36:43

37:06 as if, okay, let's think of a car. As if a car exists among its parts. This is what we believe, right? A car exists among its parts. A person exists among its body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 37:06 Highlight the passage at 37:06

37:30 The building exists among its walls and floors and materials. Report an error in the passage at 37:30 Highlight the passage at 37:30

37:45 Nothing exists among its basis of designation. Report an error in the passage at 37:45 Highlight the passage at 37:45

37:52 So this is also true existence existing by way of its own entity. So remembering, what is the way that things don't exist? And Report an error in the passage at 37:52 Highlight the passage at 37:52

38:09 what does that mean? Things don't exist inherently. Report an error in the passage at 38:09 Highlight the passage at 38:09

38:21 So is there a person within the body and mind? Report an error in the passage at 38:21 Highlight the passage at 38:21

38:29 How does the person actually exist? Report an error in the passage at 38:29 Highlight the passage at 38:29

38:38 There's no person that exists among the body and mind. The person exists conventionally. What does that mean? Report an error in the passage at 38:38 Highlight the passage at 38:38

38:51 It's merely imputed upon a collection of parts. Okay. It's a name only. It's a name only. Is it only a name? No. Well, ultimately, yes. Report an error in the passage at 38:51 Highlight the passage at 38:51

39:09 Upon a valid basis. So there has to be. Yeah, there has to be. What is it? Depends. Report an error in the passage at 39:09 Highlight the passage at 39:09

39:17 A conventionally recognized base, or recognized as such by a valid cognizer of conventional reality. Is that right? Does that sound like it's getting there? Good. It's a bunch of words, isn't it? No, it's starting to sink in, but it's just all the terminology. Yeah. Right, so it's imputed or labeled or a name on a valid base, right? Report an error in the passage at 39:17 Highlight the passage at 39:17

39:48 Because a person, is a person a name? Report an error in the passage at 39:48 Highlight the passage at 39:48

39:57 The name person is, if I have a name person, is that the person that walks in the door and sits down? Is the name, is it a name that walks in the door and sits down? No. Why don't you say that a little more clearly? Report an error in the passage at 39:57 Highlight the passage at 39:57

40:23 It's merely labeled on a valid basis. A valid basis is conventionally determined by worldly renown and valid cognizers. It's not a valid basis from its own side. Report an error in the passage at 40:23 Highlight the passage at 40:23

40:55 We need to be very clear about what this object of refutation looks like in our own mind. The specific object of refutation, the subtlest object of refutation we're talking about here, Report an error in the passage at 40:55 Highlight the passage at 40:55

41:15 The sense that the object exists self-existently, as a self-contained unit, Report an error in the passage at 41:15 Highlight the passage at 41:15

41:37 inseparable from its parts, or inseparable from its basis, Report an error in the passage at 41:37 Highlight the passage at 41:37

41:46 as if undifferentiated like milk and water. Report an error in the passage at 41:46 Highlight the passage at 41:46

41:55 So it seems to exist self-existently, right, from its own side, as a self-contained unit. It's inseparable from the basis, like milk mixed with water. Report an error in the passage at 41:55 Highlight the passage at 41:55

42:18 So, for example, a car. A car. We have an image of a car in our mind, right? The car, what does a car, inherently existent car, look like? It seems to be a self-contained entity, right? An entity in and of itself that is inseparable from the parts of the car. It seems to be a solid, self-contained entity, inseparable from the parts, like pervading the parts, as if there's a solid, concrete thing covering its parts, like milk mixed with water. Report an error in the passage at 42:18 Highlight the passage at 42:18

43:15 That's what it seems like. There's a real car there amongst its parts. And it doesn't seem like there's one... It's more one part than the other. We don't really feel like, oh, well, the car, okay, it's inseparable from its parts, but the engine is really the car, right? That's not the way we look at it, right? It seems like the car is that whole solid concrete entity that's inseparable from the parts. Report an error in the passage at 43:15 Highlight the passage at 43:15

43:42 So that car doesn't exist. We think that there's a solid concrete entity inseparable from its parts, but that doesn't exist. Report an error in the passage at 43:42 Highlight the passage at 43:42

43:56 A superimposition by the mind. We think that there's a solid concrete entity there. And that's the way we see everything, right? Report an error in the passage at 43:56 Highlight the passage at 43:56

44:09 Does there seem to be a solid concrete entity that we call a clock pervading its parts? Right here, among its parts, we think that there's a clock, a solid entity. Report an error in the passage at 44:09 Highlight the passage at 44:09

44:24 A person, if we look at a person in the room, there seems to be a solid concrete person there. Covering the body and the mind, right? That's the most subtle person. Well, that's the most subtle object of refutation. A person that seems to be inseparable from the body and the mind. Report an error in the passage at 44:24 Highlight the passage at 44:24

44:53 So we get this feeling all the time, right? If I think, oh, that person is really annoying, what does that person look like in our mind? Report an error in the passage at 44:53 Highlight the passage at 44:53

45:08 Does it look like a solid, self-contained entity covering its parts? Report an error in the passage at 45:08 Highlight the passage at 45:08

45:18 Or if we think, oh, that chocolate cake looks really delicious. Solid, self-contained entity covering its parts. Gosh, Report an error in the passage at 45:18 Highlight the passage at 45:18

45:37 that iPad is really cool. I'd really like to buy one of those. Report an error in the passage at 45:37 Highlight the passage at 45:37

45:44 Solid, self-contained entity covering its parts. Right? So things don't exist that way. And especially the me. The me who just got mistreated. What does that feel like? Report an error in the passage at 45:44 Highlight the passage at 45:44

46:05 Feels pretty real, right? Pretty solid, concrete, self-contained entity. Doesn't feel like just a mere imputation on constantly changing particles and mental movement. It feels really real. So do people get that? Are people clear about what this object of refutation is? Report an error in the passage at 46:05 Highlight the passage at 46:05

46:38 Yeah, Report an error in the passage at 46:38 Highlight the passage at 46:38

46:42 so that's what we're refuting, right? We're not refuting the me, the conventionally existent me, the me that's imputed. We're refuting the me that seems to be real and here and solid and concrete. Report an error in the passage at 46:42 Highlight the passage at 46:42

46:59 I Report an error in the passage at 46:59 Highlight the passage at 46:59

47:06 mean, there are other senses of me that we get, right? Like the me that doesn't seem to be dependent on the body and the mind, right? The me that seems to have a body and mind. We need to refute those too, but those are less subtle. Report an error in the passage at 47:06 Highlight the passage at 47:06

47:23 Those don't exist either. Anything that's solid, seems solid and concrete, doesn't actually exist. Report an error in the passage at 47:23 Highlight the passage at 47:23

47:45 So if things existed that way, Report an error in the passage at 47:45 Highlight the passage at 47:45

47:52 ascertaining the pervasion. Report an error in the passage at 47:52 Highlight the passage at 47:52

47:59 Is there anything else we need to clarify with regard to this object of negation, this object of reputation? People get that. People understand that. People see that in their own experience, that we hang on to that. All the time. Like all day, every day. And things don't exist now. Report an error in the passage at 47:59 Highlight the passage at 47:59

48:46 So a Report an error in the passage at 48:46 Highlight the passage at 48:46

48:52 couple of quotes on this. Kenzo Jampatekchok says it is important to recognize this object of refutation because with this recognition we can meditate well on emptiness. Without it, we would have no basis for meditation. And we might think that emptiness simply means nothingness. Report an error in the passage at 48:52 Highlight the passage at 48:52

49:18 It is said that when one recognizes the negati well, the difficulty in understanding this is small. Report an error in the passage at 49:18 Highlight the passage at 49:18

49:32 When we recognize this negati or the object of refutation well, the difficulty in understanding emptiness is small. Report an error in the passage at 49:32 Highlight the passage at 49:32

49:46 And the yogi nurtures this feeling of inherent existence both in the actual meditation session and in everyday pursuits until it becomes evident. And even until it seems like the most plausible way for phenomena to exist, without a strong feeling for this kind of thingness of phenomena, there can be no understanding of what it means for phenomena to be without such a quality. Report an error in the passage at 49:46 Highlight the passage at 49:46

50:22 So the second point, ascertaining the pervasion. Report an error in the passage at 50:22 Highlight the passage at 50:22

50:30 So Lama Tsongkhapa says here this is the decision that if the person inherently existed, it must be... Established as either one entity with or different from the aggregates and that there is no means of establishment other than these two. Report an error in the passage at 50:30 Highlight the passage at 50:30

50:56 So if the person existed in its own right, inherently, intrinsically, from its own side, it would have to exist as the same inherent entity. As the aggregates or as different entities. So what does it mean to be the same entity? Report an error in the passage at 50:56 Highlight the passage at 50:56

51:31 So the pen and the shape of the pen are the same entity. Report an error in the passage at 51:31 Highlight the passage at 51:31

51:42 The pen and the color of the pen are the same entity. The pen and the emptiness of the pen are the same entity. The pen and the impermanence of the pen are the same entity. Report an error in the passage at 51:42 Highlight the passage at 51:42

52:02 They're all the same entity. Report an error in the passage at 52:02 Highlight the passage at 52:02

52:07 Whereas the pen and the book are different entities. The pen and its characteristics are the same entity. The pen and the book are different entities. Report an error in the passage at 52:07 Highlight the passage at 52:07

52:26 So one way they talk about the measure of something being the same entity is that to the direct perceiver, the two things do not appear as separate or different. Report an error in the passage at 52:26 Highlight the passage at 52:26

52:42 So what does that mean? To the direct perceiver, the two do not... Appear as separate or different. Report an error in the passage at 52:42 Highlight the passage at 52:42

52:53 So this is an important point. So to the I consciousness that perceives pen, the pen and the shape of the pen don't appear as different. To the I consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 52:53 Highlight the passage at 52:53

53:14 Conceptually we can separate out, right? Key word, conceptually we can separate out the pen from the shape of the pen, from the color of the pen. From the impermanence of the pen. Conceptually. But we're all talking about the same entity and we're looking at it in different ways. Report an error in the passage at 53:14 Highlight the passage at 53:14

53:43 To the direct perception, they don't appear separately. They don't appear as different. The color of the pen and the pen itself. Report an error in the passage at 53:43 Highlight the passage at 53:43

53:54 We can think about it in different ways. I can think about the color of the pen as separate. From the shape of the pen is separate from the pen itself, right? We can conceptually break things down and look at them in different ways, but they're all the same entity. They don't appear as different or separately to a direct perceiver, yeah? And that makes it the same entity. Report an error in the passage at 53:54 Highlight the passage at 53:54

54:26 So the Report an error in the passage at 54:26 Highlight the passage at 54:26

54:38 table and the wood of the table, are they same entity or separate entities? Report an error in the passage at 54:38 Highlight the passage at 54:38

54:57 The bell and the dinger, same entity or different entities? Report an error in the passage at 54:57 Highlight the passage at 54:57

55:14 The book and the paper that the book is made out of, same entity, different entities. So this makes sense, right? This is pretty clear what is the same entity and what's a different entity. Report an error in the passage at 55:14 Highlight the passage at 55:14

55:45 Slice of pizza and the smell of the pizza. Report an error in the passage at 55:45 Highlight the passage at 55:45

55:56 Same entity? Report an error in the passage at 55:56 Highlight the passage at 55:56

56:06 the pizza's not on the roof and it smells so bad. Report an error in the passage at 56:06 Highlight the passage at 56:06

56:15 The smells in the room, but the pizza's gone. If somebody smells like pizza after eating it, are they pizza? Report an error in the passage at 56:15 Highlight the passage at 56:15

56:30 Interesting thought. Of course you have a lawyer. Report an error in the passage at 56:30 Highlight the passage at 56:30

56:36 We would say that's the after. After scent. Report an error in the passage at 56:36 Highlight the passage at 56:36

56:47 Let's not go there. Let's save that. All right. Okay. Right? Okay. So if it was inherent, if the person that was inherently existent, it would have to be either the same entity as the body and the mind, the aggregates, or as a different entity as a body and mind, right? As the aggregates. If the person existed, well, let's take inherent existence out first, right? Report an error in the passage at 56:47 Highlight the passage at 56:47

57:24 If the person existed, It would have to be either the same entity as the aggregates or a different entity as the aggregate. Report an error in the passage at 57:24 Highlight the passage at 57:24

57:39 Either the clock is the same entity as the table or it's a different entity as the table. There are no other choices. Report an error in the passage at 57:39 Highlight the passage at 57:39

57:52 And once we add inherent existence, which is actually what we're trying to prove, right? If it inherently existed, it must be either the same inherent entity as the aggregates. Or it must be a different inherent entity as the aggregates. If it inherently existed, it would have to be the same inherent entity or a different, yeah? Report an error in the passage at 57:52 Highlight the passage at 57:52

58:19 No other choices, right? No other possibilities. Report an error in the passage at 58:19 Highlight the passage at 58:19

58:25 So we may have to think about that. But that's the gist of ascertaining the pervasion. It is the pervasion. Another way of talking about it is the necessity, right? If it existed inherently, it is necessarily either the same inherent entity as the aggregates or a different inherent entity. Report an error in the passage at 58:25 Highlight the passage at 58:25

58:50 It's necessarily, right? Pervasion is kind of a difficult word for some people. Okay, you've got the mic. Report an error in the passage at 58:50 Highlight the passage at 58:50

59:05 I think you have to hold it for a minute until the light goes on. Report an error in the passage at 59:05 Highlight the passage at 59:05

59:21 There. Oh, it's an impermanent phenomenon. So, okay. Report an error in the passage at 59:21 Highlight the passage at 59:21

59:37 Will it still work? Okay. So what I was thinking... Report an error in the passage at 59:37 Highlight the passage at 59:37

59:44 In the affirmative case, when you identified the pen as either the cap or the pen part, both of those would suffice to define what you're talking about. It's only in the negation of that where there's a difference. Because it's either or both. Report an error in the passage at 59:44 Highlight the passage at 59:44

1:00:07 If you can identify what you're talking about, it's not relevant in the affirmative. It's only when you're talking about not being able to find it is it important to be... It's you know, it's Report an error in the passage at 1:00:07 Highlight the passage at 1:00:07

1:00:18 talking about a convention oh Report an error in the passage at 1:00:18 Highlight the passage at 1:00:18

1:00:24 So if we're talking about, we're going to kind of go into that, but is this the pen? Is this the pen? If we're doing ultimate analysis, is this the pen? If we say yes, is this the pen? If we say yes to, we have two pens, right? Two inherently existing pens in ultimate analysis, right? If we're talking about conventionally, Report an error in the passage at 1:00:24 Highlight the passage at 1:00:24

1:00:59 Is this called a pen? Well, I mean, we don't really call this a pen, do we? If we look at, okay, is the hand the me? Well, yeah, I mean, if you stuck a pen in my hand, I would say you hurt me, right? So, conventionally, that's part of me, right? It's part of the basis of imputing me, right? Is the hand me, though? No. Is the hand the me that feels annoyed? Report an error in the passage at 1:00:59 Highlight the passage at 1:00:59

1:01:38 Is the hand the me that feels happy? No. It's the basis of imputation of a hand. Report an error in the passage at 1:01:38 Highlight the passage at 1:01:38

1:01:50 Right. Okay, if we say this hand is me, in ultimate analysis, I also say, okay, the head is me. I say, okay, then the arm is me. Then there are three me's there. Report an error in the passage at 1:01:50 Highlight the passage at 1:01:50

1:02:16 But we're going to get into that actually when we get into the third step. Report an error in the passage at 1:02:16 Highlight the passage at 1:02:16

1:02:29 So it depends on if we're talking conventionally speaking or ultimately speaking. Report an error in the passage at 1:02:29 Highlight the passage at 1:02:29

1:02:38 Because Genral Marimpa makes a distinction that I quite like. Technically speaking, more accurately speaking, is the hand me? Report an error in the passage at 1:02:38 Highlight the passage at 1:02:38

1:03:00 More accurately speaking, we could say the hand is called me. Or is part of me, right? Is the body me? Well, we call it me. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:00 Highlight the passage at 1:03:00

1:03:15 It isn't me, but we can call it me. Which is the difference between inherent existence and conventional existence. If we say the body and mind is me, that's being refuted. The body and mind isn't me, called me, Report an error in the passage at 1:03:15 Highlight the passage at 1:03:15

1:03:42 referred to as me. It can be labeled me. designated or imputed me, But the body and mind isn't me. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:42 Highlight the passage at 1:03:42

1:03:56 the basis of designation of the me. the hand isn't me, brain isn't me. Report an error in the passage at 1:03:56 Highlight the passage at 1:03:56

1:04:11 mental continuum, the mind stream isn't me. Report an error in the passage at 1:04:11 Highlight the passage at 1:04:11

1:04:17 the basis in which we impute. So we're going to set about trying to prove that with logical reasonings. Report an error in the passage at 1:04:17 Highlight the passage at 1:04:17

1:04:43 All right. Okay. So that's ascertaining the pervasion. If it exists, Report an error in the passage at 1:04:43 Highlight the passage at 1:04:43

1:04:57 if it existed inherently, it would have to exist in one of these two ways as the same entity, same inherent entity or different entities as the basis. All right. Report an error in the passage at 1:04:57 Highlight the passage at 1:04:57

1:05:17 That third one. Seeing the faults in claiming that the person and the aggregates are one inherent entity. Seeing the faults of asserting that the person and the aggregates are one inherent entity. Report an error in the passage at 1:05:17 Highlight the passage at 1:05:17

1:05:36 All right. Oh, I didn't write down these faults. Maybe at break time I'll write the faults. So there are three Report an error in the passage at 1:05:36 Highlight the passage at 1:05:36

1:05:55 faults that Lama Tsongkhapa enumerates to asserting that the person and the aggregates are one inherent entity. The person and the basis of imputation are the same entity. The person and the body and mind are the same entity. The first one is it would be pointless to assert a self. Report an error in the passage at 1:05:55 Highlight the passage at 1:05:55

1:06:24 It would Report an error in the passage at 1:06:24 Highlight the passage at 1:06:24

1:06:29 be pointless or senseless to assert a self. If the sameness of entity of those two were inherently established, then they would be an utterly indivisible one. Report an error in the passage at 1:06:29 Highlight the passage at 1:06:29

1:06:48 This is because if... The sameness of entity were ultimately established, then to whatever awareness those two appeared, they would necessarily not appear to be different. Report an error in the passage at 1:06:48 Highlight the passage at 1:06:48

1:07:03 So, let me think about it. The person and the aggregates, if they were inherently existent and the same entity, they would be utterly... They're exactly the same in every way. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:03 Highlight the passage at 1:07:03

1:07:33 If they were inherently existent in the same entity, they would have to be utterly the same in every way. Report an error in the passage at 1:07:33 Highlight the passage at 1:07:33

1:07:51 Like we were talking about before, right? So if we say the person and the body and the mind, the aggregates, are the same entity, right? Do we think they're the same entity? Are the person and the aggregates the same entity or different entities? Report an error in the passage at 1:07:51 Highlight the passage at 1:07:51

1:08:07 Same entity. Report an error in the passage at 1:08:07 Highlight the passage at 1:08:07

1:08:11 They're the same entity conventionally, right? Ultimately, inherently, are they the same entity inherently? Report an error in the passage at 1:08:11 Highlight the passage at 1:08:11

1:08:22 If they were. Okay, so the person and the aggregates are the same entity, we agree, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:08:22 Highlight the passage at 1:08:22

1:08:36 So if they were inherently existent, inherently one entity, Report an error in the passage at 1:08:36 Highlight the passage at 1:08:36

1:08:45 no matter how you looked at it, it would look exactly the same. No matter who you looked at it. It would look exactly the same, right? Because it would have to exist in and of itself independent of who's looking at it, right? If it inherently existed, it would have to exist in and of itself from its own side independent of who's looking at it. Anybody who looked at it would see exactly the same thing, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:08:45 Highlight the passage at 1:08:45

1:09:16 If it existed from its own side inherently in and of itself. Report an error in the passage at 1:09:16 Highlight the passage at 1:09:16

1:09:34 And no matter how you looked at it, right? How you look at it brings the mind into play, right? It brings imputation into play, brings dependence into play. Report an error in the passage at 1:09:34 Highlight the passage at 1:09:34

1:09:56 If it changes based on how you look at it, that means it can't exist from its own side, inherently independent. Report an error in the passage at 1:09:56 Highlight the passage at 1:09:56

1:10:15 So if it existed from its own side, the person and the aggregates, right? If they existed from its own side and they were the same entity, They would look exactly the same. They would be completely inseparable, indivisible. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:15 Highlight the passage at 1:10:15

1:10:38 So it would be senseless to assert a self. You already have the aggregates. The self is exactly the same as the aggregates. So why assert a self? There would be no reason to assert a self. Report an error in the passage at 1:10:38 Highlight the passage at 1:10:38

1:11:04 But we know conventionally, if we look at the body-mind in one way, it appears. A certain way. Or we could look at it in a different way. We can look at the body and mind in terms of it's a person, or we can look at it in terms of it's a body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:04 Highlight the passage at 1:11:04

1:11:28 Well, there are many different ways of looking at it, right? Report an error in the passage at 1:11:28 Highlight the passage at 1:11:28

1:11:39 So it's two different ways. There are two different ways. There are many different ways to look at the same thing. So that brings the mind into play. That brings imputation into play. But if it was inherently existent, it wouldn't matter how you looked at it. It would always appear the same. Report an error in the passage at 1:11:39 Highlight the passage at 1:11:39

1:12:13 The reason for this, Lama Tsongkhapa continues, the reason for this, Report an error in the passage at 1:12:13 Highlight the passage at 1:12:13

1:12:20 let me back up. So he finished the previous sentence by saying that if a sameness of entity were ultimately established, then to whatever awareness those two appeared, they would necessarily not appear to be different. The reason for this is that although among falsities or conventionalities, it is not contradictory for the mode of appearance and the mode of being to be in disagreement, such as necessarily contradictory in what is truly established, because the mode of being of what truly exists must appear just as it is to any mind to which it appears. Report an error in the passage at 1:12:20 Highlight the passage at 1:12:20

1:13:06 Actually, why don't we take a break and then contemplate this last point. Let's have a fresh mind for that one. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:06 Highlight the passage at 1:13:06

1:13:23 Then I can stall. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:23 Highlight the passage at 1:13:23

1:13:30 Huh? Report an error in the passage at 1:13:30 Highlight the passage at 1:13:30

1:13:36 The last sentence that I just said? I don't know if you're contemplating. I'll be trying to contemplate. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:36 Highlight the passage at 1:13:36

1:13:48 If a sameness of entity were ultimately established, then to whatever awareness those two appeared, they would necessarily not appear to be different. The reason for this is that although among falsities or conventionalities, it is not contradictory for the mode of appearance and the mode of being to be in disagreement, such is necessarily contradictory in what is truly established, because the mode of being of what truly exists must appear just as it is to any mind to which it appears. Report an error in the passage at 1:13:48 Highlight the passage at 1:13:48

1:14:23 must, it must. The mode of being of what truly exists must appear just as it is to any mind to which it appears. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:23 Highlight the passage at 1:14:23

1:14:38 So we'll cook that one. Report an error in the passage at 1:14:38 Highlight the passage at 1:14:38

1:15:06 I wanted to, but I just... Report an error in the passage at 1:15:06 Highlight the passage at 1:15:06

1:15:11 but it went well. Yeah, it was good. Yeah, she said impressed by it. That's what I wanted to talk to her about, but I didn't get a chance to. That's what I never know, to the interpreters. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:11 Highlight the passage at 1:15:11

1:15:24 very strange to me because the whole weekend he talked right to me, probably because I don't. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:24 Highlight the passage at 1:15:24

1:15:31 It's all just gesticulating wildly, very animated. It was very interesting. It was a little odd because I was right in the front, waiting for the translator. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:31 Highlight the passage at 1:15:31

1:15:53 Well, maybe everybody thought that he was looking just at them. Oh. Uh-huh. Very. Oh. Report an error in the passage at 1:15:53 Highlight the passage at 1:15:53

1:15:57 Lama Tsongkhapa, Shantideva, Report an error in the passage at 1:15:57 Highlight the passage at 1:15:57

1:16:25 Shantideva, Shantideva. the 10,000 people who are there, sure. Report an error in the passage at 1:16:25 Highlight the passage at 1:16:25

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:16:43 That makes it so much easier when you remember that. I get lost. Whatever we're feeling, that's kind of what I was trying to say. It doesn't exist. What we're talking about doesn't exist at all. It's not like we're trying to find kimchi that really exists. There ain't no kimchi. Report an error in the passage at 1:16:43 Highlight the passage at 1:16:43

1:17:08 I don't know. To me, it's the Tibetan thing. They cart before the horse and they present it in this way. The object reputation doesn't exist. Report an error in the passage at 1:17:08 Highlight the passage at 1:17:08

1:17:21 We're talking about labeling something that doesn't exist. That's what I find the most helpful. It either exists oneness. It doesn't matter. It's like, is this the pen? Yeah, is this the pen? Is it oneness with this? Yeah, well, I can pull it off, and then you have an academic argument, but you still know what the argument is. Report an error in the passage at 1:17:21 Highlight the passage at 1:17:21

1:17:44 There's a thing you have. Well, that doesn't exist either. It's all just different. that's the part, right? Yeah. Yeah, that's good. It's just a matter of being fair about how we're trying to find it because in the end we don't find it. It just seems easier to know. No, that's a good point. The object of remembering the object that she Report an error in the passage at 1:17:44 Highlight the passage at 1:17:44

1:18:19 because, you know, very... Yeah, we have to remember that again. Because I was like, okay, what am I trying to find? It's like, oh, I'm trying to find something I'm not going to find. Okay, then I can back up and look at it. Because I think that's where I make a lot of mistakes when I'm lost. Okay. Because then we're talking about, oh yeah, that's right, we're talking about a part of this part. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:19 Highlight the passage at 1:18:19

1:18:43 And of course they don't exist. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:43 Highlight the passage at 1:18:43

1:18:49 Rice cakes, they're not good. Report an error in the passage at 1:18:49 Highlight the passage at 1:18:49

1:19:11 Yeah. Thank you. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:11 Highlight the passage at 1:19:11

1:19:27 Oh, yeah? Yeah, because the battery little thing is flashing, so that's cool. Report an error in the passage at 1:19:27 Highlight the passage at 1:19:27

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:20:05 Just so you know, there are batteries. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:05 Highlight the passage at 1:20:05

1:20:13 They're supposed to be in where? Oh, okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:13 Highlight the passage at 1:20:13

1:20:22 Okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:22 Highlight the passage at 1:20:22

1:20:25 Maybe we should take, maybe we should have rechargeable batteries. It's probably sometimes it gets left on. A friend Report an error in the passage at 1:20:25 Highlight the passage at 1:20:25

1:20:49 of mine who sticks normal batteries in the recharger and it works. Report an error in the passage at 1:20:49 Highlight the passage at 1:20:49

1:21:22 Right, right, right. I love that. Right, right, right. Report an error in the passage at 1:21:22 Highlight the passage at 1:21:22

1:21:39 I Yeah, I love it. Exactly. In the dynamic. Exactly. Report an error in the passage at 1:21:39 Highlight the passage at 1:21:39

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:22:51 know I went Report an error in the passage at 1:22:51 Highlight the passage at 1:22:51

1:23:18 Carolina, is this making any sense? I'm trying to. No, but I'm very interested. say, I don't know, I don't know, okay, trying to understand it. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, this is a shocking class to come to, like, for a first time. Actually, we've been doing this for a while. Yeah, that's right. No, but I'm still, I kind of, I follow it because I've been in the show. I've been reading it, but still. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:18 Highlight the passage at 1:23:18

1:23:49 Sure, I can see, actually. I can see that you're following it. It's my life. I I don't don't know. get that blank look. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:49 Highlight the passage at 1:23:49

1:23:58 Is it Carolina or Carolina? Carolina. Carolina, okay. I don't know, I'd rather, you know, get it correct. Report an error in the passage at 1:23:58 Highlight the passage at 1:23:58

1:24:25 no care. Well, actually, it is because it's so bad. But you put it in there. I don't know about the same. I feel like it's been good. I feel like it's been good. I feel like it's been good. Report an error in the passage at 1:24:25 Highlight the passage at 1:24:25

· · · silence, 5 minutes

1:29:57 eye consciousness doesn't distinguish between the book. Report an error in the passage at 1:29:57 Highlight the passage at 1:29:57

1:30:06 So those are the same entities. Because the I consciousness doesn't The conceptual consciousness can slice up the same entity in different ways. Report an error in the passage at 1:30:06 Highlight the passage at 1:30:06

1:30:24 For the eye consciousness, the direct perceiver, it doesn't do that. It's the same entity. It doesn't distinguish between. So it's in that sense I was talking about it. I don't know if that addresses your question. Yeah, it does. I'm just thinking that for the eye to see the book. The book is pretty much the label in the face of its parts, right? So, and in a scene, it seems the same thing. Report an error in the passage at 1:30:24 Highlight the passage at 1:30:24

1:31:04 It's not the same, it's the same thing, but it's still a label. Yeah, I mean, just conventionally we say the high consciousness is the same book, but, you know, I mean, it's actually... Okay. Report an error in the passage at 1:31:04 Highlight the passage at 1:31:04

1:31:21 It doesn't exist, that's why I call it a book. Since it doesn't exist, that's how somehow we can have a discussion. Since it is not a book, we can call it a book. Report an error in the passage at 1:31:21 Highlight the passage at 1:31:21

1:31:38 That makes it easier to do. Report an error in the passage at 1:31:38 Highlight the passage at 1:31:38

1:31:47 you have, like, Photoshop can dissect the book into colors and layers, conceptual mind, The direct thing, even, you even pick up, flip the book, your eye consciousness will rapidly tell you if all the pages are in the book. eye consciousness gloms on the book or not. Report an error in the passage at 1:31:47 Highlight the passage at 1:31:47

1:32:09 Well, I Report an error in the passage at 1:32:09 Highlight the passage at 1:32:09

1:32:17 mean, the eye consciousness isn't a label book, right? It's just, it's pursuing shapes and colors. That's all it's doing. But conventionally, we say the eye consciousness pursues both. But it's because we're too lazy to slap you. Report an error in the passage at 1:32:17 Highlight the passage at 1:32:17

1:32:30 Also because there's a limit to our language. Report an error in the passage at 1:32:30 Highlight the passage at 1:32:30

1:32:38 I mean, you could say the high consciousness sees the basis of designation, but that's implying... Report an error in the passage at 1:32:38 Highlight the passage at 1:32:38

1:32:50 the... Report an error in the passage at 1:32:50 Highlight the passage at 1:32:50

1:32:53 the other class. Report an error in the passage at 1:32:53 Highlight the passage at 1:32:53

1:32:59 you have afflictive consciousness. That's... That's a consciousness, that's a mind with a superficial cause of error. Report an error in the passage at 1:32:59 Highlight the passage at 1:32:59

1:33:20 Please pass that merely imputed thing that we call salt. It would make life much more complicated. Report an error in the passage at 1:33:20 Highlight the passage at 1:33:20

1:33:34 So a couple people brought up really good examples at break that I love, like in the diamond cutter suture, right? trying to say, please pass the Report an error in the passage at 1:33:34 Highlight the passage at 1:33:34

1:33:31 Right. Report an error in the passage at 1:33:31 Highlight the passage at 1:33:31

1:33:44 This is not a book. That's why I can call it a book. Report an error in the passage at 1:33:44 Highlight the passage at 1:33:44

1:33:55 This is not a body. That's why I can call it a body. Report an error in the passage at 1:33:55 Highlight the passage at 1:33:55

1:34:07 We have to hear it in different ways. This is not a body. That's why we can call it a body. This is not, then the big one, this is not me. Report an error in the passage at 1:34:07 Highlight the passage at 1:34:07

1:34:20 That's why I can call it me. Report an error in the passage at 1:34:20 Highlight the passage at 1:34:20

1:34:26 This is not a room. That's why we can call it a room. This is not Sechenling. Report an error in the passage at 1:34:26 Highlight the passage at 1:34:26

1:34:38 That's why we can call it a room. Report an error in the passage at 1:34:38 Highlight the passage at 1:34:38

1:34:52 So, maybe that helps, or maybe that doesn't help. We have to think about it in many different ways. It is not. There is nothing. Report an error in the passage at 1:34:52 Highlight the passage at 1:34:52

1:35:03 The basis of imputation is not the imputed phenomenon. The basis is not what's being imputed. The basis... Is not the table. This is not the table. That's why I can call it a table. Report an error in the passage at 1:35:03 Highlight the passage at 1:35:03

1:35:33 Things sitting on this cushion is not a person. That's why you can call it a person. Report an error in the passage at 1:35:33 Highlight the passage at 1:35:33

1:35:44 So we have to, you know, we have to work. Report an error in the passage at 1:35:44 Highlight the passage at 1:35:44

1:35:55 So another example that I find useful. Report an error in the passage at 1:35:55 Highlight the passage at 1:35:55

1:36:05 Actually, let's use a couple of examples. So the United States of America. It existed from its own side. Okay. Where is the United States of America? Report an error in the passage at 1:36:05 Highlight the passage at 1:36:05

1:36:23 like a good Texas. Report an error in the passage at 1:36:23 Highlight the passage at 1:36:23

1:36:30 Is the state of California the United States of America? Report an error in the passage at 1:36:30 Highlight the passage at 1:36:30

1:36:44 Is Washington, D.C. the United States of America? Is Report an error in the passage at 1:36:44 Highlight the passage at 1:36:44

1:36:52 the collection of the 50 states the United States of America? Report an error in the passage at 1:36:52 Highlight the passage at 1:36:52

1:37:03 Is the collection of the 50 states the United States of America? Or Report an error in the passage at 1:37:03 Highlight the passage at 1:37:03

1:37:21 is it called the United States of America? So the collection of the 50 states is not the United States of America. That's why we can call it the United States. The collection of the 50 states is not the United States. Report an error in the passage at 1:37:21 Highlight the passage at 1:37:21

1:37:46 That's why we can call it by Report an error in the passage at 1:37:46 Highlight the passage at 1:37:46

1:38:01 the basis is not the imputed phenomena. The 50 states being the basis upon which the United States is imputed. Report an error in the passage at 1:38:01 Highlight the passage at 1:38:01

1:38:17 So it seems like there is a... Concrete hole, United States of America, covering the 50 states. And that concrete hole doesn't exist at all. Report an error in the passage at 1:38:17 Highlight the passage at 1:38:17

1:38:43 There seems to be a concrete hole that is a person that's covering the body and the mind. And that concrete hole does not exist at all. Report an error in the passage at 1:38:43 Highlight the passage at 1:38:43

1:39:07 There seems to be a concrete hole covering the parts of the car. A concrete hole does not exist. Report an error in the passage at 1:39:07 Highlight the passage at 1:39:07

1:39:35 So let's do a quick meditation on that. And we haven't, and we've done this before, and we just have to practice it. Report an error in the passage at 1:39:35 Highlight the passage at 1:39:35

1:40:13 Settling our minds, noticing the inhalation and exhalation of the breath. Report an error in the passage at 1:40:13 Highlight the passage at 1:40:13

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:40:54 So bringing to mind something that we consider to be beautiful. A Report an error in the passage at 1:40:54 Highlight the passage at 1:40:54

1:41:04 Buddha statue or a mountain, a painting, a Report an error in the passage at 1:41:04 Highlight the passage at 1:41:04

1:41:28 person. Report an error in the passage at 1:41:28 Highlight the passage at 1:41:28

1:41:40 Noticing that image in our mind Report an error in the passage at 1:41:40 Highlight the passage at 1:41:40

1:41:49 appears to be a concrete hole. Report an error in the passage at 1:41:49 Highlight the passage at 1:41:49

1:42:14 Now focus, refocus millions Report an error in the passage at 1:42:14 Highlight the passage at 1:42:14

1:42:25 of particles and subatomic particles that it's composed of. Report an error in the passage at 1:42:25 Highlight the passage at 1:42:25

1:42:42 Focusing on those particles and Report an error in the passage at 1:42:42 Highlight the passage at 1:42:42

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:43:25 ask yourself is there a concrete hole that covers those particles or Report an error in the passage at 1:43:25 Highlight the passage at 1:43:25

1:43:39 is that just a figment of our imagination? Next Report an error in the passage at 1:43:39 Highlight the passage at 1:43:39

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:44:40 bring up the me. The me that is sitting here at Sechenle on this chair, on this cushion, having Report an error in the passage at 1:44:40 Highlight the passage at 1:44:40

1:45:00 a strong feeling of this me covering the parts in the body, pervading the body, Report an error in the passage at 1:45:00 Highlight the passage at 1:45:00

1:45:14 comparable from the body and the mind, Report an error in the passage at 1:45:14 Highlight the passage at 1:45:14

1:45:19 indistinguishable from the body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:45:19 Highlight the passage at 1:45:19

1:45:31 The solid, concrete me, singular. Solid, Report an error in the passage at 1:45:31 Highlight the passage at 1:45:31

1:46:01 singular me, concrete seeming to cover its parts. Report an error in the passage at 1:46:01 Highlight the passage at 1:46:01

1:46:31 So looking deeper, looking at the millions of particles the Report an error in the passage at 1:46:31 Highlight the passage at 1:46:31

1:46:40 body is composed of, Report an error in the passage at 1:46:40 Highlight the passage at 1:46:40

1:46:46 focusing on those particles. Report an error in the passage at 1:46:46 Highlight the passage at 1:46:46

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:47:18 Is there really a solid concrete thing covering all those particles? Report an error in the passage at 1:47:18 Highlight the passage at 1:47:18

1:47:33 Butter spread all over those particles? Is there a me, concrete me, covering those particles? Report an error in the passage at 1:47:33 Highlight the passage at 1:47:33

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:48:34 Similarly with our mind, Report an error in the passage at 1:48:34 Highlight the passage at 1:48:34

1:48:42 noticing the different mental movements in our mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:48:42 Highlight the passage at 1:48:42

1:48:52 And feelings and perceptions that face and they abide and they cease constantly changing. They're Report an error in the passage at 1:48:52 Highlight the passage at 1:48:52

1:49:34 a solid concrete I or me covering all of those mental movements. You Report an error in the passage at 1:49:34 Highlight the passage at 1:49:34

· · · silence, 1 minute

1:50:21 may conclude that there's no solid concrete me within the body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 1:50:21 Highlight the passage at 1:50:21

1:50:40 Focusing our mind on the absence, the lack, Report an error in the passage at 1:50:40 Highlight the passage at 1:50:40

1:50:49 on finding as Report an error in the passage at 1:50:49 Highlight the passage at 1:50:49

1:51:03 undistractedly as we can. Report an error in the passage at 1:51:03 Highlight the passage at 1:51:03

1:51:29 Concrete. So Report an error in the passage at 1:51:29 Highlight the passage at 1:51:29

· · · silence, 2 minutes

1:53:20 starting with that strong sense of that solid concrete object or me to Report an error in the passage at 1:53:20 Highlight the passage at 1:53:20

1:53:37 see if that can exist. Report an error in the passage at 1:53:37 Highlight the passage at 1:53:37

1:53:48 Missing how strongly we hang on to that concrete solid me, how we think it's really there. Maybe Report an error in the passage at 1:53:48 Highlight the passage at 1:53:48

1:54:07 we see that that is totally a figment of our imagination. Something we completely made up with our conceptual mind. It doesn't exist at all. That me, that our whole lives revolve around. Report an error in the passage at 1:54:07 Highlight the passage at 1:54:07

1:54:34 I'm just not, I'm not just talking about you, right? I mean, everything we look at is in terms of Report an error in the passage at 1:54:34 Highlight the passage at 1:54:34

1:54:44 a point of reference that we call me. And Report an error in the passage at 1:54:44 Highlight the passage at 1:54:44

1:54:53 that concrete, solid me doesn't exist at all. Report an error in the passage at 1:54:53 Highlight the passage at 1:54:53

1:55:01 The magic, realizing that is the magic potion, right? To eliminate mental afflictions. Because if there's no solid, concrete me, Report an error in the passage at 1:55:01 Highlight the passage at 1:55:01

1:55:13 who is there to get offended? Report an error in the passage at 1:55:13 Highlight the passage at 1:55:13

1:55:17 Who is there to want to be liked, to want to be hired, to want to be appreciated, Report an error in the passage at 1:55:17 Highlight the passage at 1:55:17

1:55:33 to want happiness? Who is there that doesn't want to die? Report an error in the passage at 1:55:33 Highlight the passage at 1:55:33

1:55:54 Does that make sense? Report an error in the passage at 1:55:54 Highlight the passage at 1:55:54

1:56:02 Any comments or questions on that meditation or anything that I said? Report an error in the passage at 1:56:02 Highlight the passage at 1:56:02

1:56:11 There's a microphone behind Tim. It Report an error in the passage at 1:56:11 Highlight the passage at 1:56:11

1:56:24 has new batteries, thanks to Tim. Two points. The butter was great. It's like butter on toast. I can see that's, because I was kind of thinking of it before as like a sack, like a sack of potatoes. I was kind of thinking of like pulling the cover over this body. It's just like this little, like I could pull it off and you would just see nothing but atoms. And so I already had that, but the butter was, oh yeah, the butter. Report an error in the passage at 1:56:24 Highlight the passage at 1:56:24

1:57:02 And then when you were doing it and you said, oh, no covering all my emotions, I found that extremely easy. And then you said, oh, and this is difficult. Oh, okay. And I was like, oh, yeah, that totally I can see where emotions are just coming and going and there's no sack of potatoes covering that. No. But it was funny because I said, oh, no. I'd already decided that one was really easy about the time that you said it was. Report an error in the passage at 1:57:02 Highlight the passage at 1:57:02

1:57:33 All right. Well, all our minds are different, aren't they? Yeah, so good. The whole butter thing, it was pretty good too because I had picked, it's a beautiful object, the fog. I just love the way the fog rolls in because it can eat the city or something. And so it's really, really easy to think of fog as nothingness, a bunch of atoms, which is, you know, what it is, like a bunch of water pellets or whatever. Report an error in the passage at 1:57:33 Highlight the passage at 1:57:33

1:58:02 you know. Mm-hmm. So did you notice with the beautiful thing, right, when you focused on the particles, that sense of it being beautiful disappeared? Report an error in the passage at 1:58:02 Highlight the passage at 1:58:02

1:58:24 I mean, you have to have a solid object, right, for you to perceive, oh, that's beautiful. For me, then it was just water. Or, you know, it was like this gray thing instead of this thing that every time I look at the coast and see the fog rolling in. When it's like rolling over this, you know, big, I just go, wow, it's so cool. But yeah, you're right, it was just kind of like, then I'm just looking at this gray nothingness. Report an error in the passage at 1:58:24 Highlight the passage at 1:58:24

1:58:56 And then fog disappears, right, when you focus on the particles? And then it did disappear, and I'm like, yeah, it just disappeared, and I'm like, just like it does. Like it just, like that, and there's no fog. Yeah. So that was, you know, just by happenstance, that was a really good one thing to pick. Report an error in the passage at 1:58:56 Highlight the passage at 1:58:56

1:59:14 Yeah, that one's actually an analogy they often use for how nothing is solid. Yeah, so that's a good one. And then with the me, did you notice when you focused on the particles and the different mental events that the me, the appearance of me disappeared? Report an error in the passage at 1:59:14 Highlight the passage at 1:59:14

1:59:37 I had this weird thing where the only thing of me that even existed to begin with. Was the pants that I chose not to wear tonight. It was funny because it was like these blue jeans that I'm not wearing. But that was like the only solidness. Report an error in the passage at 1:59:37 Highlight the passage at 1:59:37

2:00:00 The jeans were you? That was the only solid. When I looked at the me, the solid me, there was no solid me, but there was these jeans. And it's funny because it's the jeans that I didn't wear. I thought that was kind of interesting. And they kind of... They kind of faded, but they still, those genes stayed a little concrete, but there was nothing in the genes. Report an error in the passage at 2:00:00 Highlight the passage at 2:00:00

2:00:26 Right. Yeah, I mean, and then, yeah, I mean, oftentimes we do that, right? We might be dissolving the concrete object that we're looking for, right? But still part of our mind is holding on to something else, like holding on to the genes as being solid or the... Particles as being solid, right? And then we have to do another meditation on the genes, right? Another meditation on the particles to see that those can be broken down further and further and further, right? Report an error in the passage at 2:00:26 Highlight the passage at 2:00:26

2:01:00 So there's nothing solid, nothing concrete and solid at all that we can hang on to in order to have attachment or aversion or jealousy or... Anger, irritation, there's nothing, if there's nothing to hold on to, there's nothing solid, how can we have a mental affliction? Report an error in the passage at 2:01:00 Highlight the passage at 2:01:00

2:01:24 A mental affliction, well because of habit, right? But if we're not holding on to anything solid, there is not a basis to have a mental affliction. Report an error in the passage at 2:01:24 Highlight the passage at 2:01:24

2:01:34 So that's so cool. Report an error in the passage at 2:01:34 Highlight the passage at 2:01:34

2:01:41 Whenever I have a mental affliction, clue, I'm holding on to something solid. What am I holding on to? And sometimes it's not obvious, right? Oh, I'm just feeling irritated. But if we look, if we check, there's something that we're hanging on to as being solid. Report an error in the passage at 2:01:41 Highlight the passage at 2:01:41

2:02:04 Yeah, Margaret. Yeah, you know, when you mentioned that, that's kind of what, when I was looking at my object, I could see that, for me, it was like, wow, this is something I just totally made up, you know. But I still had this subject, which was me, that was looking at it. And then when you went into the, look at what is, Me, I kept on observing this me, so there's this me that's still observing, so there's still this subject that's observing this object. Report an error in the passage at 2:02:04 Highlight the passage at 2:02:04

2:02:39 And to let go of this subject is just trying to see that there is no subject or object. I just kept on clinging, coming back to this. It was just very powerful to just kind of come back to this observer. you know, and, um, And to even have that observer trying to break that down, it started getting a little scary. Report an error in the passage at 2:02:39 Highlight the passage at 2:02:39

2:03:09 And so that's why I kept on wanting to come back. So in terms of, it's Report an error in the passage at 2:03:09 Highlight the passage at 2:03:09

2:03:21 almost like I feel it's almost intuitive for me at least and maybe completely off. It's just kind of, maybe that's where the common binding comes in. Just kind of like rest in it. I'm not sure what to do. Report an error in the passage at 2:03:21 Highlight the passage at 2:03:21

2:03:35 And then I feel like I'm constantly negating, but I'm in this infinite loop of like, oh, I'm trying to negate this object, which is the self. But then it's always like this self that's observing this object trying to negate. So there seems to be some kind of neutral situation where that can kind of cut through this concept of subject and object. Report an error in the passage at 2:03:35 Highlight the passage at 2:03:35

2:03:59 And I'm not sure if that makes sense. Yeah. Well, I think we have to do two different meditations then, you know, because you're, because we're, in that last meditation, we're looking for that solid concrete me that covers the body and the mind, right? So the mind often wants to go to something else, right? But just refute, just refute that solid butter-like, right, spread-like thing over the body and mind. Report an error in the passage at 2:03:59 Highlight the passage at 2:03:59

2:04:39 Focus on the absence as much as you can. And then, you know, maybe you'll notice you're still hanging on to the observer. Then change, right? And then in a different meditation, then search for the observer. So then where is that observer? I was looking at, okay, this eye consciousness. I couldn't get beyond that. I'm like, okay, this is the eye consciousness. Report an error in the passage at 2:04:39 Highlight the passage at 2:04:39

2:05:08 But I'm like, where is this coming from? So that's kind of where I got stuck. I was like, okay, forget it. Yeah, well that gets more and more subtle, right? Because we can refute certain things, like coarser things, and then we have subtler and subtler things that we're still hanging on to and we need to refute. Report an error in the passage at 2:05:08 Highlight the passage at 2:05:08

2:05:28 So that observer is difficult to refute. Because we still want to hang on to, well there's an eye that's watching what's going on. There's an eye that's observing, right? So, okay, where is that eye? What is that eye? Where exactly is that eye? Is that eye your eye consciousness? Report an error in the passage at 2:05:28 Highlight the passage at 2:05:28

2:05:53 Yeah, I mean, because that eye also seems to be a solid concrete thing, right, that's observing? Yeah. That observer seems to be a solid concrete thing, so then look for that observer. Is there a solid concrete observer observing these things? Is Report an error in the passage at 2:05:53 Highlight the passage at 2:05:53

2:06:14 it this moment? Is it this moment? Is it this moment? What does it look like? Does it have a shape and does it have a color? Report an error in the passage at 2:06:14 Highlight the passage at 2:06:14

2:06:23 We have to go at it in many different angles. Is it at the eye consciousness? What are the fallacies? What are the faults if we say it's the eye consciousness? What you just said was very helpful about going from moment to moment because it could shift from eye consciousness to ear consciousness. But they're each very different experiences of what I perceive as this eye. Report an error in the passage at 2:06:23 Highlight the passage at 2:06:23

2:06:52 Looking at the moment of what is actually dependently arising, that helps a lot more, for me at least. Okay. Yeah, yeah, that's helpful. Good, good. And another thing we can do too is, okay, who is observing? Turning our mind, what is observing? Report an error in the passage at 2:06:52 Highlight the passage at 2:06:52

2:07:11 And we Report an error in the passage at 2:07:11 Highlight the passage at 2:07:11

2:07:22 seem to think that there's some kind of concrete observer witness or something, right? And turn your attention to that. What is it? Report an error in the passage at 2:07:22 Highlight the passage at 2:07:22

2:07:39 Sometimes. Sometimes that can help too. We all have to kind of, we have to try different things until something works, right? Because it doesn't work from its own side, right? It works. You know, different things work for different people's minds. And we can use, yeah, anyway. Report an error in the passage at 2:07:39 Highlight the passage at 2:07:39

2:08:03 So that's excellent. Yeah. Report an error in the passage at 2:08:03 Highlight the passage at 2:08:03

2:08:18 Any other comments, questions? Report an error in the passage at 2:08:18 Highlight the passage at 2:08:18

2:08:26 So that solid concrete thing doesn't exist at all. Report an error in the passage at 2:08:26 Highlight the passage at 2:08:26

2:08:35 What exists is... An imputation on an appearance. We have appearances to our minds and we label them. We have data that appears that we organize and label with our conceptual mind. Report an error in the passage at 2:08:35 Highlight the passage at 2:08:35

2:08:57 There's no solid concrete thing at all. There are no singular objects from their own side. Singular objects are created, imputed by the mind. Report an error in the passage at 2:08:57 Highlight the passage at 2:08:57

2:09:22 So we'll continue with the... Four-point analysis next week. Report an error in the passage at 2:09:22 Highlight the passage at 2:09:22

2:09:31 Also, I was asked to make an announcement about, so I'll be co-leading an emptiness retreat at Vajrapani from September 1st to the September 5th with two amazing teachers, Tenzin Choki, that many people know, and John Landau. Report an error in the passage at 2:09:31 Highlight the passage at 2:09:31

2:09:53 So that goes from Thursday night to Monday lunchtime. Labor Day weekend, so if you can come for all or part of that, that would be great. Shane is looking for a ride, so if anybody can offer Shane a ride, useful. Report an error in the passage at 2:09:53 Highlight the passage at 2:09:53

2:10:18 So we'll have class next Tuesday, and the following Tuesday I have the intention to have class. And we'll see. I think I'm being optimistic, but we'll see I might be way too unprepared. prepared for class, but I'll, we'll, so stay tuned to that following Tuesday. I will send out the homework. Report an error in the passage at 2:10:18 Highlight the passage at 2:10:18

2:10:51 The practice homework is throughout your day to notice how things appear as concrete and solid and existing from its own sight and get a really clear I get a lot of familiarity with that and a clear appearance of what that looks like and how that pervades our existence, pervades our perceptions. Report an error in the passage at 2:10:51 Highlight the passage at 2:10:51

2:11:28 So let's do some dedications on page 240, up through the middle of 241. Report an error in the passage at 2:11:28 Highlight the passage at 2:11:28

2:11:50 Due to the merits accumulated over the three times by myself and all the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, which are empty from their own side, may I... Report an error in the passage at 2:11:50 Highlight the passage at 2:11:50