Lati Rinbochay: Oral Debate

Translated by Daniel Perdue based on Jeffrey Hopkinss classes

Jeffrey Hopkins, 1999. No portion may be reproduced without written permission.

Colors, White and

ed

!pril ", 19#$ %ape &ide 1 Jeffrey' He has a different format for (ettin( back to the route in which one has accepted the basic conse)uence *that is, the +dod route,. -adhi inbochay. /s whate0er is a color necessarily red1 2pponent. / accept the per0asion. . /t follows that whate0er is a color is necessarily red. 3. / accept it. . /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is red because of bein( a color. 3. %he reason is not established. . /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a color because of bein( suitable as a hue. 3. Whate0er is suitable as a hue is not necessarily a color. . /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a hue is necessarily a color because 5that which is suitable as a hue5 is the definition of color. 3. / accept that whate0er is suitable as a hue is necessarily a color. . /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a hue is necessarily a color. 3. / accept it. . /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a color because of bein( suitable as a hue. 3. / accept it. . /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is red because of bein( a color. 3. / accept it. . /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not red because of bein( white. 3. Whate0er is white is not necessarily not red. . /t follows that whate0er is white is necessarily not red because there is no common locus of the two, white and red. 3. %he reason that there is no common locus of the two, white and red, is not established. . /t follows that there is no common locus of the two, white and red because the two, white and red, are mutually e6clusi0e. Jeffrey. He says that you could (o on to say that the reason is not established here, but this is where the book stops and if you do (o on

it will harm you. 7ou may (et confused. 3. / accept it. . /t follows that the two, white and red, are mutually e6clusi0e. 3. / accept it. . /t follows that there is no common locus of the two, white and red. 3. / accept it. . /t follows that whate0er is white is necessarily not red. 3. / accept it. . /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not red because of bein( white. 3. / accept it. . /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is red because of bein( a color. 3. %here is no per0asion. . /t follows that whate0er is a color is not necessarily red. 3. / accept it. . %sa8 9!ma:in(8 ;inished8< What is the difference between bein( red and bein( a color1 3. %here are three possibilities. . /t follows that there are not three possibilities =osit somethin( which is both *&omethin( which is both is the sub4ect the color of a ruby. %his implies that you can (o on to say that it is this and it is that. /t will be alri(ht if you say, 5%he sub4ect, the color of a red flower.5 ;or the second possibility whate0er is red is necessarily a color %hen, whate0er is a color is not necessarily red. 9;or instance< the sub4ect the color of a white reli(ious conch. &omethin( which is neither one nor the other is the sub4ect the form of a cairn. &o there are the three possibilities. %here is somethin( which is both %here is somethin( which is one and is not the other. 2ne says, 5Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other.5 %here is somethin( which is neither one nor the other. When one says 5possibility5 *mu,, one is sayin( 5limit5 *mtha+,. 2ne thin( that mi(ht be confusin( here is that one says 5/t follows that there are not three possibilities.5 %his is an e6pression that is the opposite of the truth. Here there are certainly three possibilities. >ut when one debates one will say, 5/t follows that it is not that5 or 5/t follows that that does not e6ist.5 2ne is tryin( to trap the opponent. &o / say, 5/t follows that there are not three possibilities. =osit somethin( which is both.5 2nce you say that there are the three possibilities, the Challen(er will play with you and

say that there are not the three possibilities He will say, 5=osit somethin( which is both5 or 5=osit the three possibilities.5 He is 4ust playin( out his trap on you. ?@>!%@ %W2 Challen(er. /s whate0er is a color necessarily red1 ?efender. / accept it C. /t follows that whate0er is a color is necessarily red ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is red because of bein( a color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a color because of bein( suitable as a hue. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. &pell it out. ?. Whate0er is suitable as a hue is not necessarily a color. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a hue is necessarily a color because 5suitable as a hue5 is the definition of color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a hue is necessarily a color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a color because of bein( suitable as a hue. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect is red because of bein( a color. A. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect is not red because of bein( white. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. &pell it out. ?. Whate0er is white is not necessarily not red. C. /t follows that whate0er is white is necessarily not red because there is no common locus of the two, white and red. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that there is no common locus of the two, white and red, because the two, white and red, are mutually e6clusi0e. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the two, white and red, are mutually e6clusi0e. ?. / accept it C. /t follows that there is no common locus of the two, white and red.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is white is necessarily not red. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not red because of bein( white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is red because of bein( a color. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is a color is not necessarily red. ?. / accept it. C. What is the difference between the two, red and color1 ?. %here are three possibilities. C. =osit somethin( which is both. ?. %he sub4ect. the color of a ruby *pad ma ra (a+i kha do),. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a ruby, is a color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby, is a colorBB *%he ?efender has to (i0e a reason now., ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a hue is necessarily a color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a ruby. is red. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby. is redBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a red hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a red hue is necessarily red. ?. / accept it. C. Now, which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whate0er is red is necessarily a color. Whate0er is a color is not necessarily red. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a hue is necessarily a color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is

not red. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not redBB ?. >ecause of bein( white. C. /t follows that whate0er is white is necessarily not red. ?. / accept it. C. Now, posit somethin( which is neither one nor the other. ?. %he sub4ect, a pillar. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a pillar, is not a color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, a pillar, is not a colorBB ?. >ecause of not bein( suitable as a hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is not suitable as a hue is necessarily not a color. ?. / accept it C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a pillar, is not red. ?. / accept it C. %he sub4ect, a pillar, is not redBB ?. >ecause of not bein( a color. C. /t follows that whate0er is not a color is necessarily not red. ?. / accept it. inbochay. %hat is the way. %here are three possibilities. !pril C, 19#$ 9probably< inbochay. 9!bout debate< Dany thin(s that you don+t know will be cleared away' you will (enerate understandin(. !s your i(norance decreases and your knowled(e increases, one by one, e0entually you will (et to the point where you do know e0erythin( and you ha0e no i(norance. !nother 0irtue of it is that if you are (oin( to meditate on the 0iew or culti0ate the altruistic mind of enli(htenment, it helps you there. /t helps to keep the mind from bein( distracted. /t helps to keep the mind steady. !nd it keeps the mind sharp. 9/t helps< when you are doin( analytic meditationon 5/5. !t that time when you are meditatin(, doin( analytic meditation on anythin(, you will not be (eneratin( afflictions. %here is (reat 0irtue in not (eneratin( afflictions for an hour or half an hour. %he purpose for studyin( the dharma is to stop the afflictions, and for howe0er lon( you can stop them there is that much ad0anta(e. ;or the fourth possibility of somethin( which is neither one nor the

other, it does not ha0e to be somethin( that is an e6istent. /t can be somethin( that is a nonBe6istent. %his is somethin( that is neither, it is not this and it is not that. >ut if there is somethin( that is an e6istent, then you put in that. %here are four alternati0esBBthree possibilities, four possibilities, mutually inclusi0e, and mutually e6clusi0e. %hus, with re(ard to the two, human and !merican, you ha0e to choose one of these four. /f someone says that there are four possibilities, what would you posit that is an !merican and not a human1 ! horse. ! horse1 /s a horse an !merican1 /f someone says that there are three possibilities, what do you posit as somethin( that is both1 %he sub4ect, Jeffrey. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, Jeffrey, is an !merican. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, Jeffrey, is an !mericanBB ?. >ecause of bein( born in !merica. inbochay. %here is no per0asion in that. Whate0er is born in !merica is not necessarily an !merican. %he sub4ect, an !merican deer.?. >ecause of *1, bein( a human and *", bein( born in !merica. C. /t follows that whoe0er *1, is a human and *", is born in !merica is necessarily an !merican. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, ?akBd:a( inbochay+s son *Dr. Norbu+s son who was born in !merica,, is an !merican. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that he is because of *1, bein( a human and *", bein( born in !merica. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. %he sub4ect, the teacher, is an !mericanBB*7ou see you+0e lost and now he is askin( for another reason., ?. >ecause of *1, bein( a human and *", ha0in( !merican parents. C. /t follows that whoe0er *1, is a human and *", has !merican parents is necessarily an !merican. */n the %ibetan custom one need not be born in the country, but one must ha0e parents of that nationality. ! child born of !merican parents in /ndia would still be an !merican., ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the teacher, is a human. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the teacher, is a humanBB ?. >ecause of bein( a person desi(nated in dependence upon any of

the fi0e a((re(ates of a human. C. /t follows that whoe0er is a person desi(nated in dependence upon any of the fi0e a((re(ates of a human is necessarily a human. ?. / accept it. C. Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whoe0er is an !merican is necessarily a human. Whoe0er is a human is not necessarily an !merican. %he sub4ect, -ati inbochay. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, -ati inbochay, is a human. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect -ati inbochay is a humanBB ?. >ecause of bein( a %ibetan. C. /t follows that whoe0er is a %ibetan is necessarily a human. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, -ati inbochay, is not an !merican ?. / accept it C. %he sub4ect -ati inbochay, is not an !mericanBB ?. >ecause his parents are not !mericans. C. /t follows that whoe0er+s parents are not !mericans is necessarily not an !merican. ?. / accept it C. =osit somethin( which is neither. ?. %he sub4ect, a sheep. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a sheep, is not a human. ?. / accept it C. %he sub4ect, a sheep, is not a humanBB ?. >ecause of bein( an animal. C. /t follows that whate0er is an animal is necessarily not a human. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a sheep, is not an !merican. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect a sheep, is not an !mericanBB ?. >ecause of not bein( a human. C. /t follows that whate0er is not a human is necessarily not an !merican. ?. / accept it.

%ape &ide " !pril C, 19#$

%he basis for =urBbuB4ok+s book on lo(ic is ?harmakirti+s =ramana0arttika which is his commentary on ?i(na(a+s =ramanaB samuchachaya or Compendium on Ealid Co)nition. /t says in the =ramana0arttika. 5>ecause the potencies of blue and so forth are seen as separate by the eye consciousness.5 %hen the Challen(er uses this )uote to state a )uestion to the ?efender. %he phyir here indicates a )uestion. He says, 5>ecause a presentation of colors is not e6plained at the point of this passa(e,...5 %hen there is the )uote from the =ramana0artBtika. %his is one instance in the =ramana0arttika where color is presented. %here are many such instances. %his is not the only one. %hus, the debateBB C. >ecause a presentation of colors is not e6plained at the point of this passa(e, 5>ecause the potencies of blue and so forth are seen as separate by the eye consciousness.5 ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that a presentation of colors is e6plained at the point of this passa(e, 5>ecause the potencies of blue and so forth are seen as separate by the eye consciousness.5 ?. / accept it C. /t follows that it is not so because the two, definitions and di0isions, do not e6ist with respect to color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the two, definitions and di0isions, do e6ist with respect to color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. ;irst, posit the definition of color. ?. %he sub4ect, that which is suitable as a hue. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a hue, that it is the definition of color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a hue, it is the definition of colorBB *-eadin( out of this inbochay is (oin( into debate on the definition of color. He is askin( for the reason why 5that which is suitable as a hue5 is the definition of color. %hen inbochay supplies the reason., ?. >ecause *1, there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and definiendum with respect to it and color and *", it and color are established in the relationship of definition and definiendum.

C. /t follows that if *1, there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and definiendum with respect to it and color and *", it and color are established in the relationship of definition and definiendum, then it is necessarily the definition of color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect that which is suitable as a hue, that there is no ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and definiendum with respect to it and color. =osit the mode of ascertainment. ?. %here is 9a mode of ascertainment< because *1, whate0er is a color is necessarily suitable as a hue, *", whate0er is suitable as a hue is necessarily a color, *F, whate0er is not a color is necessarily not suitable as a hue, *G, whate0er is not suitable as a hue is necessarily not a color, *C, if color e6ists, then that which is suitable as a hue necessarily e6ists, *$, if that which is suitable as a hue e6ists, then color necessarily e6ists, *#, if color does not e6ist, then that which is suitable as a hue necessarily does not e6ist, and *H, if that which is suitable as a hue does not e6ist, then color necessarily does not e6ist. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a hue, that such is that which is posited as the mode of ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and definiendum with respect to it and color ?. / accept it C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect that which is suitable as a hue, that it is not established in the relationship of definition and definiendum with color. =osit the mode of establishment ?. %here is 9a mode of establishment< because in order to ascertain color with 0alid co(nition one must first ascertain that which is suitable as a hue with 0alid co(nition. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a hue that such is that which is posited as the mode of establishment in the relationship of definition and definiendum of it with color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so because if colors are di0ided, there are not two. A. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that if colors are di0ided, there are two. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that there are not two. =osit the two.

?. %here are 9two<. %he sub4ects, the twoBBprimary color and secondary color. C. /t follows that for the e6pression 5When colors are di0ided, there are two,5 two such are those which are to be posited. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so because the two, definitions and di0isions, do not e6ist with respect to primary color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the two, definition and di0ision, do e6ist with respect to primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. ;irst, posit the definition of primary color. ?. %here is 9a definition of primary color<. %he sub4ect, that which is suitable as a primary hue. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a primary hue, that it is the definition of primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a primary hue, it is the definition of primary colorBB ?. >ecause *1, there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and definiendum with respect to it and primary color and also *", it and primary color are established in the relationship of definition and definiendum. C. /t follows that if *1, there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and definiendum with respect to it and primary color and also *", it and primary color are established in the relationship of definition and definiendum, then it is necessarily the definition of primary color. ?. / accept it 9Note that the pre0ious format layin( out the modes of ascertainment and establishment may be reproduced here as they apply to primary color.< C. /t follows that it is not so. /f primary colors are di0ided. how many are there1 ?. %here are four. C. /t follows that there are not four. =osit the four. ?. %here are 9four<. %he sub4ects, the fourBBblue color, yellow color, white color, red color. C. /t follows that for the e6pression, 5/f primary colors are di0ided, there are four.5 four such are those which are to be posited.

?. / accept it. 9%his debate is continued on %ape &ide G of !pril 9,19#$.< C. Now, it follows that it is not so because the two, definition and di0ision, do not e6ist with respect to blue color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the two, definition and di0ision, do e6ist with respect to blue color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of blue color. ?. %here is 9a definition of blue color<. %he sub4ect, that which is suitable as a blue hue. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a blue hue, that it is the definition of blue color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a blue hue, it is the definition of blue colorBB 9Note that here as before the ?efender can (i0e the two part reason positin( the per0asions and relationship of definition and definiendum. inbochay offered an alternati0e form.< ?. >ecause it is the positor of blue color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is the positor of blue color, then it is necessarily the definition of blue color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so because if blue colors are di0ided, there are not the twoBBnatural blue color and manufactured blue color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that if blue colors are di0ided, there are the twoBBnatural blue color and manufactured blue color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a natural blue color. ?. %here is 9a natural blue color< %he sub4ect, the color of 0aidurya. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of 0aidurya, is a natural blue color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of 0aidurya. is a natural blue colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a natural blue hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a natural blue hue is necessarily a natural blue color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a manufactured blue color.

?. %here is 9a manufactured blue color.< %he sub4ect, the color of blue cotton cloth. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of blue cotton cloth, that it is a manufactured blue color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect the color of blue cotton cloth is a manufactured blue colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a manufactured blue hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a manufactured blue hue is necessarily a manufactured blue color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so because the two, definition and di0ision, do not e6ist with respect to yellow color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the two, definition and di0ision, do e6ist with respect to yellow color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of yellow color. ?. %here is 9a definition of yellow color.< %he sub4ect, that which is suitable as a yellow hue. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a yellow hue, that it is the definition of yellow color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect that which is suitable as a yellow hue, it is the definition of yellow colorBB ?. >ecause it is the re0erse of yellow color+s meanin(. C. /t follows that if somethin( is the re0erse of yellow color+s meanin(, then it is necessarily the definition of yellow color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so because if yellow colors are di0ided, there are not the twoBBnatural yellow color and manufactured yellow color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that if yellow colors are di0ided, there are the twoBB natural yellow color and manufactured yellow color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a natural yellow color. ?. %here is 9a natural yellow color.< %he sub4ect, the color of purified (old. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is a natural

yellow color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is a natural yellow colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a natural yellow hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a natural yellow hue is necessarily a natural yellow color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a manufactured yellow color. ?. %here is 9a manufactured yellow color<. %he sub4ect, the color of a yellow silk robe. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a yellow silk robe, is a manufactured yellow color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a yellow silk robe, is a manufactured yellow colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a manufactured yellow hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a manufactured yellow hue is necessarily a manufactured yellow color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so because the two, definition and di0ision, do not e6ist with respect to white color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the two, definition and di0ision, do e6ist with respect to white color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. ;irst, posit the definition of white color. ?. %here is 9a definition of white color<. %he sub4ect, that which is suitable as a white hue. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a white hue, that it is the definition of white color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect. that which is suitable as a white hue, it is the definition of white colorBB ?. >ecause it is the positor of white color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is the positor of white color, then it is necessarily the definition of white color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so because if white colors are di0ided there are not the twoBBnatural white color and manufactured white color.

?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that if white colors are di0ided, there are the twoBBnatural white color and manufactured white color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a natural white color. ?. %here is 9a natural white color<. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a natural white color ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a natural white colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a natural white hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a natural white hue is necessarily a natural white color. ?. / accept it . C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a manufactured white color. ?. %here is 9a manufactured white color<. %he sub4ect, the color of the White House. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of the White House, is a manufactured white color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect the color of the White House, is a manufactured white colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a manufactured white hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a manufactured white hue is necessarily a manufactured white color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so because the two, definition and di0ision, do not e6ist with respect to red color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the two, definition and di0ision, do e6ist with respect to red color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of red color. ?. %here is 9a definition of red color<. %he sub4ect. that which is suitable as a red hue. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a red hue, that it is the definition of red color. ?. / accept it.

C. With respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a red hue it is the definition of red colorBB ?. >ecause it is the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of red color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of red color, then it is necessarily the definition of red color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so because if red colors are di0ided, there are not the twoBBnatural red color and manufactured red color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that if red colors are di0ided, there are the twoBBnatural red color and manufactured red color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a natural red color. ?. %here is 9a natural red color<. %he sub4ect, the color of the >uddha !mitayus. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of the >uddha !mitayus, is a natural red color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of the >uddha !mitayus, is a natural red colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a natural red hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a natural red hue is necessarily a natural red color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a manufactured red color. ?. %here is 9a manufactured red color<. %he sub4ect, the color of a red car. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a red car, is a manufactured red color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect the color of a red car, is a manufactured red colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a manufactured red hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a manufactured red hue is necessarily a manufactured red color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so because the two, definition and di0ision, do not e6ist with respect to secondary color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the two, definition and di0ision, do e6ist with respect to secondary color.

?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of secondary color. ?. %here is 9a definition of secondary color<. %he sub4ect, that which is suitable as a secondary hue. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a secondary hue, that it is the definition of secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, that which is suitable as a secondary hue it is the definition of secondary colorBB ?. >ecause secondary color is its definiendum. C. /t follows that if secondary color is its definiendum, then it is necessarily the definition of secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. /f secondary colors are di0ided, how many are there1 ?. %here are ei(ht. C. /t follows that there are not ei(ht. =osit the ei(ht. ?. %here are 9ei(ht<. %he sub4ects, the ei(htBBthe cloud color which is that, the smoke color which is that, the dust color which is that, the mist color which is that, the illumination color which is that, the darkness color which is that, the shadow color which is that, and the sunli(ht color which is that. C. /t follows that for the e6pression, 5/f secondary colors are di0ided, there are ei(ht,5 ei(ht such are those which are to be posited. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a cloud color which is that. ?. %here is 9a cloud color which is a secondary color<. %he sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud, is cloud color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud, is a cloud color which is thatBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a cloud hue which is that. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a cloud hue which is that is necessarily a cloud color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a smoke color which is that. ?. %here is 9a smoke color which is a secondary color<. %he sub4ect,

the color of blueBblackBsmoke. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of blueBblack smoke, is a smoke color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of blueBblack smoke, is a smoke color which is that. ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a smoke hue which is that. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a smoke hue which is that is necessarily a smoke color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a dust color which is that. ?. %here is 9a dust color which is a secondary color<. %he sub4ect, the (reyish color of dust. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the (reyish color of dust, is a dust color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the (reyish color of dust, is a dust color which is thatBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a dust hue which is that. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a dust hue which is that is necessarily a dust color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a mist color which is that. ?. %here is 9a mist color which is a secondary color<. %he sub4ect, the bluish color of mist in the east. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the bluish color of mist in the east, is a mist color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect the bluish color of mist in the east, is a mist color which is thatBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a mist hue which is that. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a mist hue which is that is necessarily a mist color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit an illumination color which is that. ?. %here is 9an illumination color which is a secondary color<. %he sub4ect, the whitish color of illumination. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the whitish color of illumination, is an illumination color which is that. ?. / accept it.

C. %he sub4ect, the whitish color of illumination, is an illumination which is thatBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as an illumination hue which is that. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as an illumination hue which is that is necessarily an illumination color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a darkness color which is that. ?. %here is 9a darkness color which is a secondary color<. %he sub4ect, the color of black darkness. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of black darkness, is a darkness color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of black darkness, is a darkness color which is thatBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a darkness hue which is that. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a darkness hue which is that is necessarily a darkness color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a shadow color which is that. ?. %here is 9a shadow color which is a secondary color<. %he sub4ect, the color of a tree+s shadow. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a tree+s shadow, is a shadow color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a tree+s shadow, is a shadow color which is thatBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a shadow hue which is that. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a shadow hue which is that is necessarily a shadow color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit a sunli(ht color which is that. ?. %here is 9a sunli(ht color which is a secondary color<. %he sub4ect, the color of oran(e sunli(ht. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of oran(e sunli(ht, is a sunli(ht color which is that. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of oran(e sunli(ht, is a sunli(ht color which is thatBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a sunli(ht hue which is that. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a sunli(ht hue which is that is

necessarily a sunli(ht color which is that. ?. / accept it. %he primary colors were di0ided into natural or innate primary colors and manufactured primary colors. ! natural color is not somethin( that is made by a person. /t is not the result of someone+s ha0in( dyed it into a material. /t is a natural color. ! manufactured color is somethin( made by a person by puttin( dye in and so forth. %he color of 0aidurya was posited as a natural blue color. ! 0aidurya 9?as lists biBdruBma, &anskrit 0idruma< is some type of precious stone. /t may be a catseye stone, or accordin( to DonierB Williams it may be some type of coral. When we say 5which is that5 as in the e6pression 5a cloud color which is that,5 it means 5which is a secondary color5 as, for e6ample 5a cloud color which is a secondary color.5 %hat is because amon( cloud colors there are primary colors and secondary colors' so, it has to be specified as a cloud color which is a secondary color. /n the same way, with respect to smoke colors, there are primary and secondary smoke colors. /t may be the same for all of the ei(ht secondary colors. / don+t know if the color of darkness has both primary and secondary colors. / don+t know of any e6cept for black darkness. &till, that is the reason for sayin( 5which is that.5 7ou know cloud. 7ou know smoke. ?ust is like when a car or a train (oes by and a lot of dust is stirred up. Dist is a smokeBlike mass as near to a mountain. /llumination is a whitish bri(htness. ?arkness is the black color at ni(httime. @0en durin( the daytime if inside the house it is dark, that too is darkness. &hadow is like that when the sun is shinin( and there is a person+s shadow, a mountain+s shadow, and so forth. &unli(ht is like that outside. %here is white, whitish, reddish, oran(e sunli(ht. /n the early mornin( it is oran(e, and in the e0enin( it is oran(e a(ain. ?urin( the day it is white or whitish. Now, the two, cloud color and primary color, ha0e three possibilities. C. What is the difference between cloud color and primary color1 ?. %here are four possibilities. C. /t follows that there are not four possibilities. ;irst, posit somethin( which is both. ?. %here is 9a cloud color which is a primary color<. %he sub4ect, the color of a white cloud. %he sub4ect, the color of a yellow cloud. %he sub4ect, the color of a red cloud. %he sub4ect, the color of blue cloud.

*7ou can posit any of these four., C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white cloud, is a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a white cloud, is a primary colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a primary hue. C. /t follows that if somethin( is suitable as a primary hue, then it is necessarily a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of a white cloud, that it is a cloud color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of a white cloud, it is a cloud colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a cloud hue. C. /t follows that if somethin( is suitable as a cloud hue, then it is necessarily a cloud color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, posit somethin( which is a primary color and is not a cloud color. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is a primary color and is not a cloud color<. %he sub4ect, the color of a white flower. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of a white flower, that it is a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of a white flower, it is a primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is white. C. /t follows that if somethin( is white, then it is necessarily a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of a white flower, that it is not a cloud color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of a white flower, it is not a cloud colorBB ?. >ecause it is a flower color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is a flower color. then it is necessarily not a cloud color. ?. / accept it.

C. Now, posit somethin( which is a cloud color and is not a primary color. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is a cloud color and is not a a primary color<. %he sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud, that it is a cloud color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud, it is a cloud colorBB ?. >ecause it is suitable as a cloud hue. C. /t follows that if somethin( is suitable as a cloud hue, then it is necessarily a cloud color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud, that it is not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud, it is not a primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is a secondary color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is a secondary color, then it is necessarily not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, posit somethin( which is neither one nor the other. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is neither a cloud color nor a primary color<. %he sub4ect, the color of smoke. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of smoke, that it is not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of smoke, it is not a primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is not suitable as a primary hue. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not suitable as a primary hue, then it is necessarily not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of smoke, that it is not a cloud color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of smoke, it is not a cloud colorBB ?. >ecause it is not suitable as a cloud hue.

C. /t follows that if somethin( is not suitable as a cloud hue, then it is necessarily not a cloud color. ?. / accept it. %he color of sunli(ht is a color of illumination, but whate0er is a color of illuminatin( need not be the color of sunli(ht. %here is the color of the illumination of li(htnin( and the color of illumination of moonli(ht which are not colors of sunli(ht.

/n collo)uial %ibetan we say, 5%hen...5 *anBnos, deBnas,, but when debatin( we say, 5Now,...5 *da, as in the e6pression, 5Now, it follows that it is not so.5 /n trainin( new monks they are always first tau(ht to recite the debates out loud because that brin(s e0erythin( to(ether. /f one 4ust reads, the meanin( does not come to(ether and e0erythin( remains scattered. When monks are debatin(, they clap their hands to(ether. %he ri(ht hand is method and the left hand is wisdom. %he clappin( of the hands to(ether symboli:es a union of method and wisdom. /n dependence upon the practice of a path of a union of method and wisdom one is liberatin( oneself from all of cyclic e6istence and drawin( others up to the path of omniscience. %here are 0essels or channels of wisdom in the wrists, and when one claps these ha0e to touch. When these two channels of wisdom meet, this (enerates wisdom. %hat is its symboli:ation. When you practice debate' you should learn how to clap in this way. 2nly the Challen(er claps his hands durin( the debate, and he only claps once at the end of whate0er he is statin( to the ?efender. 2f course, there is no fault in knowin( how to clap in debate. %hen if you ha0e to do it somewhere, you will know how. 2therwise, / doubt that it is suitable e0erywhere. =eople mi(ht think that it is 0ery beautiful. %here are schools of definitions bein( established in 0arious places like &wit:erland, ;rance, and so forth. /f you (o to these places, you will ha0e to know how to clap your hands to(ether in debate. 2therwise, you 4ust will not know it. 9;rom %ape &ide F of !pril #. 19#$< /t is not necessary to proceed throu(h a debate as in the former case when debate !.1 was first done. 2ne need not always follow the route in which the ?efender first )uestions the establishment of the

reason in the first statement of the fundamental conse)uence, 5/t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is red because of bein( a color.5 2ne may follow the route in which the ?efender first accepts the basic conse)uence. %his is then in the opposite order from the way in which we did it before. %hus, if debate ! 1 is done in this way, the mode of procedure is as follows. C. /s whate0er is a color necessarily red1 ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is a color is necessarily red. ?. / accept it. C. %hen it follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is red because of bein( a color. ?. / accept 9that the color of a white reli(ious conch is red<. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not red because of bein( white. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is white is necessarily not red because there is no common locus of the two, white and red. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that there is no common locus of the two, white and red, because the two, white and red, are mutually e6clusi0e. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the two, white and red, are mutually e6clusi0e. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that there is no common locus of the two, white and red. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is white is necessarily not red. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not red because of bein( white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is red because of bein( a color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a color because of bein( white. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is white because of bein( one with the color of a white reli(ious conch. ?. / accept it.

C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is one with the color of a white reli(ious conch. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a color because of bein( one with the color of a white reli(ious conch. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is red because of bein( a color. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is a color is not necessarily red. ?. / accept it. 2ne may proceed as before to consider the difference between the two principals of the debate, color and red, by way of reckonin( the possible relationships. !nother mode of procedure at this point was offered by inbochay.< C. /f there is no per0asion, then posit 9a countere6ampleBBsomethin( that is a color and is not red<. ?. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect. the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a hue is necessarily a color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not red. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not redBB ?. >ecause of not bein( suitable as a red hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is not suitable as a red hue is necessarily not red. ?. / accept it !nother format for debate !.1 results if the ?efender (i0es the correct answer that there is no per0asion to the Challen(er+s ori(inal )uestion. 5/s whate0er is a color necessarily red15 /f the ?efender (i0es this correct answer at the be(innin( of the debate, there are two possible modes of procedure correspondin( to the procedures at the end of debate as in the former two presentations of !.1. %hese two

are as follows. =rocedure 2ne C. /s whate0er is a color necessarily red1 ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /f there is no per0asion. then posit 9somethin( that is a color and is not red<. ?. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a hue is necessarily a color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not red. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not redBB ?. >ecause of bein( white. C. /t follows that whate0er is white is necessarily not red. ?. / accept it. =rocedure %wo C. /s whate0er is a color necessarily red1 ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is a color is not necessarily red. ?. / accept it. C. /f there is no per0asion, then what is the difference between those two1 ?. %here are three possibilities. !t this point the debate proceeds as before *see pp., when the relationships between the two principals of the debate are posited and debated. -ati inbochay has presented two new modes of procedure the second of which has two types. %he first new procedure is that in which the ?efender accepts the basic conse)uence when it is first stated. %hen after the Challen(er leads the ?efender back to the second statement of the basic conse)uence, they follow the route in which the ?efender )uestions the establishment of the reason in the basic conse)uence. %his procedure is 4ust as before e6cept that the

two ma4or routes of the debate are re0ersed in order. %he second new procedure is that in which the ?efender answers correctly the Challen(er+s ori(inal )uestion by pointin( out that there is no per0asion. %hen within this second new way he (a0e two possible procedures that the debate may follow.< No matter what the ?efender answers we will know what to do. %he mode of procedure is determined by the ?efender,s answers. Here the 0arious procedures were applied to debate !.1, but all the others are the same. /f you meditate thinkin( on the debates, then you will know them all. /f you do not remember it, then think about it and meditate on it. 7ou will know it. /f you do it with (reat stren(th for a month thinkin( on it, then you will know a lot. /t will form well. 7ou will understand well. %here are si(ns, of whether people understand it well or not and you will (ain them. /f you do it well, you will become skilled, whereupon it will help a (reat many other people. &eein( you, they will become skilled also. /t will help the country itself, which will impro0e due to the fact that people who were not formerly skilled in these treatises are attainin( skill in them. %here were si6 scholars called the ornaments of the world. Na(ar4una, !san(a, Easubhandhu, ?i(na(a, ?harmakarti, and !ryade0a. %hey are adornments of the world. %hey are not called adornments for any other reason e6cept that they were wise. /n the same way you can become the adornments of !merica, of the West, and of the world. /f you put (reat force into it, you can learn 0ery )uickly. 7ou do not ha0e to do it for a lon( time. =ut (reat effort into it for a month, and you will become 0ery skillful. We do not always ha0e to be debatin( about, 5whate0er is a color is necessarily red.5 We can think about 5whate0er is a color is necessarily a thin( *dn)os po, bha0a,.5 %he mode of procedure is the same. C. /s whate0er is a color necessarily the color of red cloth1 ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /f there is no per0asion. then posit 9somethin( that is a color and is not the color of red cloth<. ?. %he sub4ect, the color of a white shirt. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white shirt, is not the color of red cloth. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a white shirt, is not the color of red clothBB

?. >ecause of not bein( suitable as a red cloth hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is not suitable as a red cloth hue is necessarily not the color of red cloth. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white shirt, is not a color. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white shirt, is a color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a white shirt, is a colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( white. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white shirt, is white. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a white shirt, is whiteBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a white hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a white hue is necessarily white. ?. / accept it. C. Now then *+o na, is whate0er is red necessarily the color of red cloth1 ?. %here is no per0asion. C. =osit 9somethin( that is red and is not the color of red cloth<. ?. %he sub4ect, the color of a red book. %he sub4ect, the color of a red flower. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby. C. /s whate0er is red necessarily the color of a ruby1 ?. %here is no per0asion. C. =osit somethin( which is red and is not the color of a ruby<. ?. %he sub4ect, the color of a red book. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a red book, is a red color. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a red book, is a red colorBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a red hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a red hue is necessarily a red color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a red book, is not the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a red book, is not the color of a rubyBB ?. >ecause of not bein( suitable as a ruby hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is not suitable as a ruby hue is necessarily

not the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. What is the difference between the two, red color and the color of a ruby1 ?. %here are three possibilities. C. /t follows that there are not three possibilities. =osit somethin( which is both 9a red color and the color of a ruby<. ?. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby in the east. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby in the west. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby of the /ndian (o0ernment. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment, is the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment, is the color of a rubyBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a ruby hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a ruby hue is necessarily the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment, is red. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment, is redBB ?. >ecause of bein( a particularity of red. C. /t follows that whate0er is a particularity of red is necessarily red. ?. / accept it. C. Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whate0er is the color of a ruby is necessarily red. Whate0er is red is not necessarily the color of a ruby. %he sub4ect, the color of a red flower. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a red flower, is red. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a red flower, is redBB ?. >ecause of bein( a particularity of red. C. /t follows that whate0er is a particularity of red is necessarily red. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a red flower, is not the color

of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a red flower, is not the color of a rubyBB ?. >ecause of not bein( suitable as a ruby hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is not suitable as a ruby hue is necessarily not the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. =osit somethin( which is neither. ?. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not red. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not redBB ?. >ecause of bein( white. C. /t follows that whate0er is white is necessarily not red. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not the color of a rubyBB ?. >ecause of not bein( suitable as a ruby hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is not suitable as a ruby hue is necessarily not the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. Now, what is the difference between the two, the color of a ruby and the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment1 ?. %here are three possibilities. C. /t follows that there are not three possibilities. =osit somethin( which is both 9the color of a ruby and the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment<. ?. %he sub4ect, the color of a lar(e ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. %he sub4ect, the color of a better ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. %he sub4ect, the color of a worse ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. *2ne cannot posit 4ust the same thin( here. /t is not suitable to posit the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. 2ne must posit an instance or a particularity of the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment' therefore, the ?efender posits, for instance, 5the color of a lar(e ruby of the !merican (o0ernment.5, C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a lar(e ruby of the !merican

(o0ernment, is the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a lar(e ruby of the !merican (o0ernment, is the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernmentBB ?. >ecause of bein( a particularity of the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. C. /t follows that whate0er is a particularity of the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment is necessarily the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a lar(e ruby of the !merican (o0ernment, is the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a lar(e ruby of the !merican (o0ernment, is the color of a rubyBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a ruby hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a ruby hue is necessarily the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whate0er is the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment is necessarily the color of a ruby. Whate0er is the color of a ruby is not necessarily the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby of the /ndian (o0ernment. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a ruby of the /ndian (o0ernment, is the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby of the /ndian (o0ernment, is the color of a rubyBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a ruby hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a ruby hue is necessarily the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a ruby of the /ndian (o0ernment, is not the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. ?. / accept it C. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby of the /ndian (o0ernment, is not the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernmentBB ?. >ecause of not bein( suitable as a hue of a ruby of the !merican

(o0ernment. C. /t follows the whate0er is not suitable as a hue of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment is necessarily not the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. ?. / accept it. C. =osit somethin( that is neither. ?. %he sub4ect, the color of purified (old. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is not the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is not the color of a rubyBB ?. >ecause of not bein( suitable as a ruby hue. C. /t follows that whate0er is not suitable as a ruby hue is necessarily not the color of a ruby. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is not the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is not the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernmentBB ?. >ecause of not bein( suitable as a hue of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. C. /t follows that whate0er is not suitable as a hue of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment is necesassarily not the color of a ruby of the !merican (o0ernment. ?. / accept it. C. /s whate0er is a horse necessarily a white horse1 ?. %here is no per0asion. C. =osit 9somethin( which is a horse and is not a white horse<. ?. %he sub4ect, a black horse. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a black horse, is a horse. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, a black horse, is a horseBB ?. >ecause of bein( a particularity of horse. C. /t follows that whate0er is a particularity of horse is necessarily a horse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a black horse, is not a white horse. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, a black horse, is not a white horseBB ?. >ecause of not bein( a person desi(nated in dependence upon any

of the fi0e a((re(ates of a white horse. C. /t follows that whate0er is not a person desi(nated in dependence upon any of the fi0e a((re(ates of a white horse is necessarily not a white horse. ?. / accept it. C. %hen it follows that the sub4ect, a black horse, is a horse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a black horse, is a person. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a black horse, is a nonBassociated compositional factor. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a black horse, is not a color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a black horse, is not black. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a white horse, is not white. ?. / accept it. %ape &ide G C. /t follows that a bearded man is not a man. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that a bearded man is a man. ?. / accept it C. /t follows that a white horse is white. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that a white horse is not white. /t follows that white cotton cloth is not white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that white paper is not white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that white paper does not e6ist. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that white paper does e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that somethin( which is paper and which is white e6ists. ?. / accept it. C. =osit 9somethin( which is paper and which is white<. ?. %he sub4ect, white paper. C. /t follows that white paper is white. ?. Why1

C. /t follows that white paper is not white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that somethin( which is paper and which is white does not e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. 97our assertion is< finished8 /t follows that white paper does not e6ist. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that white paper does e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that white paper does not e6ist because somethin( which is paper and is also white does not e6ist. /t follows that a white horse does not e6ist because somethin( which is a horse and is also white does not e6ist. &omethin( which is paper and is also white does not e6ist because the two, paper and white, are mutually e6clusi0e. /t follows that it is so because *1, whate0er is paper is necessarily an ob4ect of touch and *", whate0er is white is necessarily a color. &earch it out. /n0esti(ate it -earn it with the easy thin(s. When you know the si(ns, definitions, di0isions, and so on of the easy topics, then later on it will be easy also. 9Continuin( %ape &ide C from !pril 1G, 19#$< C. Now, what is the difference between the two, cloud color and secondary color1 ?. %here are three possibilities. C. /t follows that there are not three possibilities. =osit somethin( which is both 9a cloud color and a secondary color<. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is both<. %he sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud, that it is a cloud color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud, it is a cloud colorBB ?. >ecause it is suitable as a cloud hue. C. /t follows that if somethin( is suitable as a cloud hue then it is necessarily a cloud color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud, that it is a secondary color.

?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of an oran(e cloud, it is a secondary colorBB ?. >ecause it is suitable as a secondary hue. C. /t follows that if somethin( is suitable as a secondary hue, then it is necessarily a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whate0er is a cloud color is necessarily a secondary color. Whate0er is a secondary color is not necessarily a cloud color. %he sub4ect, the color of blueBblack smoke. C. /t follows that whate0er is a cloud color is necessarily a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white cloud, is a secondary color because of bein( a cloud color. 7ou asserted the reason and the per0asion. ?. / accept 9that the color of a white cloud is a secondary color<. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white cloud, is not a secondary color because of bein( a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white cloud, is not a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white cloud, is a secondary color because of bein( a cloud color. 7ou asserted the reason and the per0asion. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white cloud, is a cloud color because of bein( suitable as a cloud hue. ?. / accept 9that the color of a white cloud is a cloud color<. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white cloud, is a secondary color because of bein( a cloud color. 7ou asserted the reason and the per0asion. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is a cloud color is not necessarily a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. 97our assertion is< finished8 /t follows that the two, cloud color and

secondary color, do not ha0e three possibilities. ?. / accept it. C. Now, what is the difference between the two, cloud color and secondary color1 ?. %here are four possibilities. C. 97our assertion is< finished8 %he ne6t debate which was (i0en by -ati inbochay be(ins with a )uote from Chapter /, &hloka 13, =ada ! of the %reasury of Inowled)e *!bhidharmakosha, of Easubandhu. C. =osit the two types of form 9as e6pressed in the passa(e<+ 5;orm has two types or twenty types.5 ?. %here are 9two types of form<. %he sub4ects, the twoBB colorBform and shapeBform. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ects, the twoBcolorBform and shapeBform, that those two9as e6pressed in the passa(e<, 5;orm has two types or twenty types,5 are to be posited in that way. C. Now, posit the twenty types of form 9as e6pressed in the passa(e<. 5;orm has two types or twenty types.5 ?. %here are 9twenty types of form<. %he sub4ects, the twentyBBthe twel0e colorBforms and the ei(ht shapeBforms. C. /t follows that the twenty types 9as e6pressed in the passa(e<, 5;orm has two types or twenty types,5 are to be posited in that way. ?. / accept it. 9Now we do not need to e6plain the twel0e types of colorBforms. We ha0e co0ered those.< C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit the ei(ht shapeBforms. ?. %here are 9ei(ht shapeBforms<. %he sub4ects, the ei(htBBhi(h form, low form, lon( form, short form, le0el form, nonBle0el form, round form, and poly(onal form. C. /t follows that the ei(ht shapeBforms are to be posited in that way. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a hi(h form. ?. %here is 9a hi(h form<. %he sub4ect, the shape of an immeasurable palace in the fourth concentration. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the shape of an immeasurable palace in the fourth concentration, is a hi(h form. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the shape of an immeasurable palace in the fourth concentration, is a hi(h formBB

?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a hi(h form. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a hi(h form is necessarily a hi(h form. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a low form. ?. %here is 9a low form<. %he sub4ect, the shape of the sphere of wind that is a lower basis. 9&cientists nowadays say that this does not e6ist. We say it e6ists and we ha0e to fi(ht for it.< C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the shape of the sphere of wind that is a lower basis, is a low formBB. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the shape of the sphere of wind that is a lower basis, is a low formBB ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a low form. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as a low form is necessarily a low form. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a lon( form. ?. %here is 9a lon( form<. %he sub4ect, the shape of Dount Deru. 9=roceed as before.< C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a short form. ?. %here is 9a short form<. %he sub4ect, the shape of an atom. 9=roceed as before.< C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a le0el form. ?. %here is 9a le0el form<. %he sub4ect, the shape of an e0en surface. 9=roceed as before.< C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a nonBle0el shapeBform. ?. %here is 9a nonBle0el shapeBform<. %he sub4ect, the shape of an une0en surface. 9=roceed as before.< C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a round form. ?. %here is 9a round form<. %he sub4ect, the shape of a ball. 9=roceed as before.< C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a poly(onal form. ?. %here is 9a poly(onal form<. %he sub4ect, the shape of a poly(onal house. 9Hi(h and low form can be posited 4ust in terms of where one is. %hus in relation to us because the house of a person in the fourth

concentration is abo0e us it is hi(h. !nd 4ust because the form of this sphere of wind below us, is below us, it is a low form. /f one were born into the four concentrations proceedin( up throu(h them one by one hi(her and hi(her, it could happen that one would ha0e bi((er and bi((er houses as one proceeded. %his could happen, but it would not necessarily happen. When bein(s are born into those concentrations, they are born immediately with whate0er si:e they are (oin( to ha0e in that lifetime and their clothin( and dwellin( are produced with them. %he land in the first concentration is destroyed when the land is destroyed by fire at the end of an eon. %his susceptibility to fire is a fault. %he second concentration has a fault that makes it susceptible to destruction by water. %he third concentration has a fault that makes it susceptible to destruction by wind. %he fourth concentration is immo0able. @0en when the world system is destroyed at the end of a (reat eon, the land and so forth of the fourth concentration is not destroyed. !ll four of the concentrations ha0e common en0ironments in which not 4ust one but 0arious people are born on that le0el.< Now, the two, cloud color and primary color, ha0e four possibilities. %he two, cloud color and secondary color, ha0e four possibilities. %he two, the color of a white cloud and primary color, ha0e three possibilities. %he two, the color of a white cloud and secondary color, are mutually e6clusi0e. %he two, the color of an oran(e cloud and secondary color, ha0e three possibilities. %he two, the color of an oran(e cloud and primary color, are mutually e6clusi0e. %he two, the color of a flcwer and primary color, ha0e four possibilities. %he two, the color of a flower and secondary color, ha0e four possibilities. %he two, the color of a red flower and primary color, ha0e three possibilities. %he two, the color of a white flower and primary color, ha0e three possibilities. %he two, the color of a yellow flower and primary color, ha0e three possibilities. %he two, the color of an oran(e flower and secondary color, ha0e three possibilities. %he two, the color of a bluish flower and secondary color, ha0e three possibilities. %he two, secondary color and primary color, are mutually e6clusi0e. /f someone asks, 5What is the difference between secondary color and primary color15, they are mutually e6clusi0e. !nd when he says, 5%he two, secondary color and primary color, are mutually e6clusi0eBB5 9one must answer< 5>ecause of *1, bein( different and *", a common locus is

not possible.5 9%he debate runs like this.< C. What is the difference between the two, secondary color and primary color1 ?. %hey are mutually e6clusi0e. C. /t follows that the two, secondary color and primary color are mutually e6clusi0e. ?. / accept it. C. %he two, secondary color and primary color, are mutually e6clusi0eBB ?. >ecause *1, those two are different and *", a common locus is not possible. C. /t follows that if *1, those two are different and *", a common locus is not possible then they are necessarily mutually e6clusi0e. ?. / accept it. 9Jenerally the definition of mutual e6clusion is 5*1, they are different and *", a common locus is not possible.5 %hey are different. %hey are di0erse or indi0idual. %hey are two ob4ects which do not ha0e a common locus. ! common locus is not possible, it does not e6ist.< With re(ard to two phenomena that are mutually inclusi0e. C. What is the difference between the two, primary color and that which is suitable as a primary hue1 ?. %hey are mutually inclusi0e. C. /t follows that the two, primary color and that which is suitable as a primary hue, are mutually inclusi0e. ?. / accept it. C. %he two, primary color and that which is suitable as a primary hue, are mutually inclusi0eBB ?. >ecause *1, a common locus of those two is possible and *", there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion 9between them<. C. /t follows that if *1, a common locus of those two is possible and *", there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion 9between them<, then they are necessarily mutually inclusi0e. ?. / accept it. 97ou ha0e to state the first part of the reason as 5*1, a common locus of those two is possible5 rather than the faulty 5those two are different5. %his is because an opponent could state a countere6ample of an ob4ect of knowled(e of which the bein( is impossible such as the

two, pillar and pot, or the two, permanent phenomenon and thin(. ! common locus of either of these phenomenon with anythin( would not be possible.< C. What is the difference between the two, colorBform and color1 ?. %hey are mutually inclusi0e. C. /t follows that the two, colorBform and color, are mutually inclusi0e. ?. / accept it. C. %he two, colorBform and color, are mutually inclusi0eBB ?. >ecause *1, a common locus of those two is possible and *", there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion 9between them<. C. /t follows that if *1, a common locus of those two is possible and *", there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion 9between them<, then they are necessarily mutually inclusi0e. ?. / accept it. %he two, shapeBform and shape, are mutually inclusi0e. %he two, colorBform and shapeBform, are mutually e6clusi0e. %his is so because *1, colorBform and shapeBform are different and *", a common locus is not possible. %hen there is per0asion too. 9N@W ?@>!%@< C. Now, it follows that it is not so because if somethin( is *1, a permanent phenomenon and *", has four possibilities with primary color, then it necessarily does not ha0e three possibilities with secondary color. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /f there is no per0asion, posit 9a countere6ample<. ?. %he sub4ect, different from primary color. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, different from primary color, that it is a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, different from primary color, it is a permanent phenomenonBB ?. >ecause there is a common locus of it and the nonBmomentary. C. /t follows that if there is a common locus of it and the nonB momentary, then it is necessarily a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, different from primary color, that it has four possibilities with primary color.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, different from primary color, that it does not ha0e four possibilities with primary color. ;irst, posit somethin( which is both 9a primary color and different from primary color<. ?. %here is 9somethin( that is a primary color and is different from primary color<. %he sub4ect, the color of a blue medicine >uddha *san)s r(yas sman )yi bla bai tu ry+i kha do),. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of a blue medicine >uddha, that it is a primary color.B ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of a blue medicine >uddha it is a primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is blue. C. /t follows that if somethin( is blue, then it is necessarily a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of a blue medicine >uddha, that it is different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of a blue medicine >uddha, it is different from primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is di0erse from primary color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is di0erse from primary color, then it is necessarily different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit somethin( which is a primary color and is not different from primary color. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is a primary color and is not different from primary color<. %he sub4ect, primary color. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, primary color, that it is a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, primary color, it is a primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is suitable as a primary hue. C. /t follows that if somethin( is suitable as a primary hue, then it is necessarily a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, primary color, that it is not different from primary color.

?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, primary color, it is not different from primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is one with primary color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is one with primary color then it is necessarily not different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit somethin( that is different from primary color and is not a primary color. ?. %here is 9somethin( that is different from primary color and is not a primary color<. %he sub4ect, a pillar. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a pillar, that it is different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, a pillar, it is different from primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is mutually e6clusi0e with primary color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is mutually e6clusi0e with primary color, then it is necessarily different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a pillar, that it is not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, a pillar, it is not a primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is not a formBsource. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not a formBsource, then it is necessarily not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. =osit somethin( which is neither 9a primary color nor different from primary color<. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is neither a primary color nor different from primary color<. %he sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, that it is not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, it is not a primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is not a color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not a color, then it is necessarily not a primary color.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, that it is not different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, it is not different from primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is ascertained as nonBe6istent. C. /t follows that if somethin( is ascertained as nonBe6istent, then it is necessarily not different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, different from primary color, that it does not ha0e three possibilities with secondary color. ;irst, posit somethin( which is both 9a secondary color and different from primary color<. ?. %here is 9somethin( that is both a secondary color and different from primary color<. %he sub4ect. the color of a (reen !mo(asiddhi >uddha. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of a (reen !mo(asiddhi >uddha, that it is a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of a (reen !mo(asiddhi >uddha, it is a secondary colorBB ?. >ecause it is suitable as a secondary hue. C. /t follows that if somethin( is suitable as a secondary hue, then it is necessarily a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of a (reen !mo(asiddhi >uddha, that it is different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of a (reen !mo(asiddhi >uddha, it is different from primary colorBB A. >ecause it is mutually e6clusi0e with primary color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is mutually e6clusi0e with primary color, then it is necessarily different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. %here is 9somethin( that is one and is not the other<. Whate0er is a secondary color is necessarily different from primary color. Whate0er is different from primary color is not necessarily a secondary color.

%he sub4ect a hi(h form. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a hi(h form, that it is different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, a hi(h form, it is different from primary color ?. >ecause it is di0erse from primary color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is di0erse from primary color then it is necessarily different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a hi(h form, that it is not a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, a hi(h form, it is not a secondary colorBB ?. >ecause it is not a colorBform. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not a colorBform, then it is necessarily not a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit somethin( that is neither 9different from primary color nor a secondary color<. ?. %here is 9somethin( that is neither different from primary color nor a secondary color<. %he sub4ect, only permanent. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, only permanent, that it is not a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, only permanent, it is not a secondary colorBB ?. >ecause it is not an e6istent. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not an e6istent, then it is necessarily not a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, only permanent, that it is not different from primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, only permanent, it is not different from primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is nonBe6istent. C. /t follows that if somethin( is nonBe6istent, then it is necessarily not different from primary color.

?. / accept it.

9N@W ?@>!%@< C. /t follows that it is not so because if somethin( has three possibilities with primary color and three possibilities with secondary color, then it necessarily does not ha0e four possibilities with shapeB form. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /f there is no per0asion, posit 9a countere6ample<. ?. %he sub4ect, different from shapeBform. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, different from shape form, that it has three possibilities with primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, different from shapeBform, that it does not ha0e three possibilities with primary color. =osit somethin( which is both 9a primary color and different from shapeB form<. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is both a primary color and different from shapeBform<. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of a ruby, that it is a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of a ruby, it is a primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is red. C. /t follows that if somethin( is red, then it is necessarily a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of a ruby, that it is different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the color of a ruby, it is different from shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is di0erse from shapeBform. C. /t follows that if somethin( is di0erse from shapeBform, then it is necessarily different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. Which is necessarily the other1 Which is

not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is one and not the other<. Whate0er is a primary color is necessarily different from shapeBform. Whate0er is different from shapeBform is not necessarily a primary color. %he sub4ect, permanent phenomena. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, permanent phenomena, that they are different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, permanent phenomena, they are different from shapeBformBB ?. >ecause *1, it is an e6istent and *", it is not one with shapeBform. C. /t follows that if somethin( *1, is an e6istent and *", is not one with shapeBform, then it is necessarily different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, permanent phenomena, that it is not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, permanent phenomena, it is not a primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is not a thin(. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not a thin(, then it is necessarily not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. =osit somethin( which is neither 9a primary color nor different from shapeBform<. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is neither a primary color nor different from shapeBform<. %he sub4ect the son of a barren woman. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the son of a barren woman, that it is not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the son of a barren woman, it is not a primary colorBB ?. >ecause it is not a color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not a color, then it is necessarily not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the son of a barren woman, that it is not different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it.

C. With respect to the sub4ect, the son of a barren woman, it is not different from shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is not an e6istent. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not an e6istent, then it is necessarily not different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. Now, with respect to the sub4ect, different from shapeBform, it follows that it has three possibilities with secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, different from shapeBform, that it does not ha0e three possibilities with secondary color. ;irst, posit somethin( which is both 9different from shapeBform and a secondary color<. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is both different from shapeBform and a secondary color<. %he sub4ect, the color of an oran(e Dan4u(hosha. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of an oran(e Dan4u(hosha, that it is different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect the color of an oran(e Dan4u(hosha, it is different from shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is a particularity of that which is different from shapeB form. C. /t follows that if somethin( is a particularity of that which is different from shapeBform, then it is necessarily different from shapeB form. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of an oran(e Dan4u(hosha, that it is a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect the color of an oran(e Dan4u(hosha, it is a secondary colorBB ?. >ecause it is a secondary color which is the two red and yellow. C. /t follows that if somethin( is a secondary color which is the two, red and yellow, then it is necessarily a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is one and not the other<. Whate0er is a secondary color is necessarily different from shapeBform. Whate0er is different from shapeBform is not necessarily a secondary color. %he

sub4ect, the nonBproduct space. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, that it is different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, it is different from shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is permanent. C. /t follows that if somethin( is permanent, then it is necessarily different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space that it is not a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, it is not a secondary colorBB ?. >ecause it is not a color. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not a color, then it is necessarily not a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit somethin( which is neither 9a secondary color nor different from shapeBform<. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is neither a secondary color nor different from shapeBform<. %he sub4ect, a skyBflower. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect a skyBflower, that it is not a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, a skyBflower, it is not a secondary colorBB ?. >ecause it is nonBe6istent. C. /t follows that if somethin( is nonBe6istent, then it is. necessarily not a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a skyBflower, that it is not different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect a skyBflower, it is not different from shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is not di0erse from shapeBform. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not di0erse from shapeBform then it is necessarily not different from shapeBform.

?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows with respect to the sub4ect, different from shapeB form, that it has four possibilities with shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, different from shapeBform that it does not ha0e four possibilities with shapeBform. =osit somethin( which is both 9a shapeBform and different from shapeBform. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is both a shapeBform and different from shapeBform<. %he sub4ect, a lon( form. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a lon( form, that it is a shapeB form. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, a lon( form, it is a shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is one of the ei(ht shapeBforms. C. /t follows that if somethin( is one of the ei(ht shapeBforms, then it is necessarily a shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a lon( form, that it is different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, a lon( form, it is different from shapeB formBB ?. >ecause it is di0erse from shapeBform. *2ne also mi(ht ha0e correctly said, 5>ecause it is a particularity of shapeBform.5, C. /t follows that if somethin( is di0erse from shapeBform, then it is necessarily different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. =osit somethin( which is a shapeBform and is not different from shapeBform. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is a shapeBform and is not different from shapeBform<. %he sub4ect, shapeBform. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, shapeBform, that it is a shapeB form. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, shapeBform. it is a shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is suitable as a shapeBform. C. /t follows that if somethin( is suitable as a shapeBform, then it is necessarily a shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, shapeBform, that it is not

different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, shapeBform, it is not different from shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is one with shapeBform. C. /t follows that if somethin( is one with shapeBform, then it is necessarily not different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. =osit somethin( which is different from shapeBform and is not a shapeBform. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is different from shapeBform and is not a shapeBform<. %he sub4ect, the twoBpillar and pot. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the twoBpillar and pot, that it is different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the two BBpillar and pot, it is different from shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is mutually e6clusi0e with shapeBform. C. /t follows that if somethin( is mutually e6clusi0e with shapeBform, then it is necessarily different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the twoBBpillar and pot, that it is not a shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the twoBBpillar and pot, it is not a shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is an ob4ect of touchBsource. C. /t follows that if somethin( is an ob4ect of touchBsource, then it is necessarily not a shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. =osit somethin( which is neither 9a shapeBform nor different from shapeBform<. ?. %here is 9somethin( which is neither a shapeBform nor different from shapeBform<. %he sub4ect, the flower of a dry tree. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the flower of a dry tree, that it is not a shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the flower of a dry tree, it is not a shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is not a form.

C. /t follows that if somethin( is not a form, then it is necessarily not a shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the flower of a dry tree, that it is not different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the flower of a dry tree, it is not different from shapeBformBB ?. >ecause it is not an e6istent. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not an e6istent, then it is necessarily not different from shapeBform. ?. / accept it. 2ne way of learnin( the relations between phenomena is to mi6 (roups of three and four to(ether and then debatin( the possibilities. Here we mi6ed three and two to(ether for the sake of your (ettin( to know them. /n this way we debate on some one thin( that has three possibilities with one thin( and four possibilities with another. %his is not 0ery important, but if you know a portion here and a portion there then it is (ood. %his discussion of possibilities helps one to reali:e the limits of per0asion *khyabmtha+, 9 emainder of tape side #, all of sides H and 9, and a third of side 13 are taken with the &unday !pril 1H, 19#$ class durin( which all of the class members debated with each other under the (uidance of -ati inbochay. %here is a technical fault with the tape which makes it almost inaudible =robably it was taped without the benefit of a separate microphone. !ll of the debates seem to be on colors < ClassB Donday !pril 19B %ape &ide 13 C. >ecause form does not ha0e the two, definition and di0ision. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that form does ha0e the two, definition and di0ision. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of form. ?. %here is 9a definition of form<. %he sub4ect, suitable as form. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, suitable as form, that it is the definition of form. ?. / accept it.

C. With respect to the sub4ect, suitable as form, it is the definition of formBB ?. >ecause it is the triply )ualified positor of form. C. /t follows that if somethin( is the triply )ualified positer of form, then it is necessarily the definition of form. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that it is not so. /f forms are di0ided, how many are there1 ?. %here are fi0e. C. /t follows that there are not fi0e. =osit the fi0e. ?. %here are 9fi0e types of form<. %he sub4ect, the fi0eBBformBsource. soundBsource, odorBsource, tasteBsource, and tan(ible ob4ectBsource. C. /t follows that the fi0e 9in the statement< 5/f forms are di0ided, there are fi0e,5 are to be posited in that way. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of formBsource. ?. %here is 9a definition of formBsource<. %he sub4ect the ob4ect of apprehension of an eye consciousness. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the ob4ect of apprehension of an eye consciousness, that it is the definition of formBsource. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the ob4ect of apprehension of an eye consciousness, it is the definition of formBsourceBB ?. >ecause it is the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of formBsource. C. /t follows that if somethin( is the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of formBsource, then it is necessarily the definition of formB source. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. /f forms are di0ided, how many are there1 ?. %here are two. C. /t follows that there are not two. =osit the two. ?. %here are 9two types of form<. %he sub4ect, the twoBBcolorBform and shapeBform. C. /t follows that the two in the statment 5/f formBsources are di0ided, there are two,5 are to be posited in that way. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of soundBsource. ?. %here is 9a definition of soundBsource<. %he sub4ect, the ob4ect of hearin( of an ear consciousness.

C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the ob4ect of hearin( of an ear consciousness, that it is the definition of soundBsource. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the ob4ect of hearin( of an ear consciousness, it is the definition of soundBsourceBB ?. >ecause it is the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of soundB source. C. /t follows that if somethin( is the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of soundBsource, then it is necessarily the definition of soundB source. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. /f soundBsources are di0ided, how many are there1 ?. %here are ei(ht. C. /t follows that there are not ei(ht. =osit the ei(ht. ?. %here are 9ei(ht soundBsources<. %he sub4ect. the ei(htBBthe twoBB pleasant and unpleasant sounds which indicate 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which are arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness, the twoBBpleasant and unpleasant sounds which do not indicate 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which are arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness, the twoBBpleasant and unpleasant sounds which indicate 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which are arisin( from elements not con4oined with consciousness. and the twoBBpleasant and unpleasant sounds which do not indicate 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which are arisin( from elements not con4oined with consciousness. C. /t follows that the ei(ht 9in the statement< 5When soundBsources are di0ided, there are ei(ht,5 are to be posited in that way. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a pleasant sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. ?. %here is 9such a sound<. %he sub4ect, the sound e6pressin( doctrine 9made< by the WishBJrantin( Jewel *the ?alai -ama,. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the sound e6pressin( doctrine 9made< by the WishBJrantin( Jewel, is a pleasant sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the sound e6pressin( doctrine 9made< by the WishB

Jrantin( Jewel, is a pleasant sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousnessBB ?. >ecause of bein( an attracti0e *yiddu +on( ba, sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisinn( from elements con4oined with consciousness.C. /t follows that whate0er is an attracti0e sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness is necessarily a pleasant sound indicatin( 9meamin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit an unpleasant sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. ?. %here is 9such a sound<. %he sub4ect. the sound of acB cusation by the master. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the sound of accusation by the master, is an unpleasant sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the sound of accusation by the master is an unpleasant sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousnessBB ?. >ecause of bein( an unattracti0e sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. C. /t follows that whate0er is an unattracti0e sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and whicn is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness is necessarily an unpleasant sound indicatin( -meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. ?. / accept it 97id du +on( ba means comin( to the mind pleasant+ and attracti0e. 2ur speech arises from a collection of thin(s includin( the palate the ton(ue+ the throat+ and 0arious thin(s. !mon(st this collection are the four elements. %herefore our speech arises in dependence upon the four elements %he elements+are said to be

con4oined with consciousness because they are con4oined with or held by the mental continuum. 5/ndicatin( to sentient bein(s5 means that it re0eals meanin( to sentient bein(s. /t has meanin(. /t is re0elatory sound because it has meanin( it re0eals meanin(.< C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit a pleasant sound not indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. ?. %here is 9such a sound<. %he sub4ect+ the sound of a ba(pipe 9made< by a player. C. /t follows that the sub4ect. the sound of a ba(pipe 9made< by a player+ is a pleasant sound not indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect+ the sound of a ba(pipe 9made< by a player+ is a pleasant sound not indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousnessBB ?. >ecause of bein( an attracti0e sound not indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness C. /t follows that whate0er is an attracti0e sound not inB dicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness is necessarily a pleasant sound not indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient be.n(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit an unpleasant sound not indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousB ness. ?. %here is 9such a sound<. %he sub4ect+ the sound of a policeman+s fist hittin( 9someone<. C. /t follows that the sub4ect. the sound of a policeman+s fist hittin( 9someone<+ is an unpleasant sound not indiB catin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. ?. / accept it. 9&uch sounds as a policeman+s fist hittin( someone or a person+s playin( a musical instrument do not re0eal meanin(.< C. %he sub4ect the sound of a policeman+s fist hittin( 9someone<+ is an unpleasant sound not indicatin( 9meanB in(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness ?. >ecause of bein( an unattracti0e sound not indicatin( 9meanin(< to

sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. C. /t follows that whate0er is an unattracti0e sound not indicatin( 9meanin(A to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness is necessarily an unpleasant sound not indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements con4oined with consciousness. ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit a pleasant sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements not con4oined with consciousness. ?. %here is 9such a sound<. %he sub4ect+ the sound e6presB sin( doctrine 9made< by an 9unembodied< emanation. C. /t follows that the sub4ect the sound e6pressin( docB trine 9made< by an 9unembodied< emanation+ is a pleasant sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and wnich is arisin( from elements not con4oined with consciousness. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect the sound e6pressin( doctrine 9made< by an 9unembodied< emanation+ is a pleasant sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements not con4oined with consciousnessBB ?. >ecause of bein( an attracti0e sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements not con4oined with consciousness. C. /t follows that whate0er is an attracti0e sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements not con4oined with consciousness is necessarily a pleasant sound indicatin( -meanin(< to sentient bein(s arisin( from elements and which is not con4oined with consciousness. ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit an unpleasant sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements not con4oined with consciousness. ?. %here is 9such a sound<. %he sub4ect+ the sound of coarse words spoken by an 9unembodied< emanation. 9=roceed as before.< C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit a pleasant sound indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements not con4oined with consciousness.

?. %here is 9such a sound<. %he sub4ect the sound of a (uitar 9played< by an 9unembodied< emanation. 9=roceed as before.< C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit an unpleasant sound not indicatin( 9meanin(< to sentient bein(s and which is arisin( from elements not con4oined with consciousness. ?. %here is -such sound<. %he sub4ect, the sound of water. %he sub4ect the sound of a house fallin( down. %he subB 4ect, the sound of wind. 9=roceed as before.< C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of odorBsource. ?. %here is 9a definition of odorBsource<. %he sub4ect+ the ob4ect of smell of a nose consciousness. C. /t follows that the sub4ect. the ob4ect of smell of a nose consciousness+ is the definition of odorBsource. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect+ the ob4ect of smell of a nose consciousness+ is the definition of odorBsource B ?. >ecause of bein( the positor of odorBsource. C. /t follows that whate0er is the positor of odorBsource is necessarily the definition of odorBsource. ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows that it is not so. /f.those are di0ided+ how many are there1 ?. %here are four. C. /t follows that there are not four. =osit the four. ?. %here are 9four types of odorBsources<. %he sub4ect+ the four *consistin( of, the twoBBpleasant *:him bo, and unpleasant odors and the twoBBe)ual and une)ual odors. C. /t follows that the four 9in the statement< 5When odorB sources are di0ided, there are four,5 are to be posited in that way. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit an e)ual odor. ?. %here is 9an e)ual odor<. %he sub4ect. the odor of rice. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the odor of rice, is an e)ual odor ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect+ the odor of rice. is an e)ual odorBB ?. >ecause of bein( obser0ed as an e)ual odor. C. /t follows that whate0er is obser0ed as an e)ual odor is necessarily an e)ual odor.

?. / accept it. 9Kncooked rice has an e)ual odor. 5@)ual5 here means that it has little odor or none. but it has an odor that will not infect other thin(s with its smell.< C. =osit an une)ual odor. ?. %here is 9an une)ual odor<. %he sub4ect+ tne odor of (arlic. C. /t follows that the sub4ect+ the odor of (arlic. is an une)ual odor. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect+ the odor of (arlic+ is an une)ual odorBB ?. >ecause of bein( obser0ed as an une)ual odor. 9!lso suitable as a si(n here is+ 5because of bein( a stron( *or powerful, odor.5 !nd suitable as a sub4ect here is the odor of an efflu0ium.< C. /t follows that whate0er is obser0ed as an une)ual odor is necessarily an une)ual odor. ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit a pleasant odor. ?. %here is 9a pleasant odor<. %he sub4ect. the odor of sandalwood. C. /t follows that the sub4ect. the odor of sandalwood+ is a pleasant odor. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect. the odor of sandalwood+ is a pleasant odorBB ?. >ecause of bein( an attracti0e odor. C. /t follows that whate0er is an attracti0e odor is necB essarily a pleasant odor. ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit an unpleasant odor. 3. %here is 9an unpleasant odor<. %he sub4ect+ the odor of impurity *mi tsan) ba,. C. /t follows that the sub4ect. the odor of impurity, is an unpleasant odor. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect. the odor of impurity. is an unpleasant odorBB ?. >ecause of bein( an unattracti0e odor. C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of tasteBsource. ?. %here is 9a definition of tasteBsource<. %he sub4ect+ the ob4ect of e6perience of a ton(ue consciousness. C. /t follows that the sub4ect. the ob4ect of e6perience of a ton(ue consciousness+ is the definition of tasteBsource. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect+ the ob4ect of e6perience of a ton(ue consciousB ness, is

the definition of tasteBsourceBB ?. >ecause of bein( the meanin( re0erse of tasteBsource. C. /t follows that whate0er is the meanin( re0erse of tasteB source is necessarily the definition of tasteBsource. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. /f tastes are di0ided+ how many are there1 ?. %here are si6. C. /t follows that there are not si6. =osit the si6. ?. %here are 9si6 types of tastes<. %he sub4ect+ the si6BB sweet. sour+ bitter+ astrin(ent+ hot. and salty. C. /t follows that the si6 9in the statement< 5When tastes are di0ided+ there are si6+5 are to be posited in that way. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a sweet taste. ?. %here is -a sweet taste<. %he sub4ect. the taste of molasses. C. /t follows that the sub4ect+ the taste of molasses+ is a sweet taste. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect+ the taste of molasses+ is a sweet tasteB 9What do you say here1 %he taste of molasses is a sweet tasteBB ?o you know why the taste is sweet1 /s su(ar sweet1 7es. it is sweet. How do you know that it is sweet1 When you say that it is sweet+ what do you mean1 7ou know sweet. 7ou are always drinkin( sweet tea. /f you say that the taste of molasses is a sweet taste because its taste is sweet+ then you are statin( the basis of disputation *i.e..the sub4ect, as the si(n *i.e.+ the reason, itself. &uch an approach is shameful. %he reason that it is a sweet taste is because it is obser0ed as a sweet taste. 52bser0ed as a sweet taste5 means that it is obser0ed or reali:ed as sweet by a 0alid co(ni:er. %hus+ either 5because of bein( obser0ed as a sweet taste5 or 5because of bein( reali:ed as a sweet taste5 are suitB able si(ns of somethin(+s bein( a sweet taste.< ?. >ecause of bein( obser0ed as a sweet taste. C. /t follows that whate0er is obser0ed as a sweet taste is necessarily a sweet taste. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a sour taste. ?. %here is 9a sour taste<. %he sub4ect the taste of lemon. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the taste of lemon, is a sour taste. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect the taste of lemon+ is a sour tasteBB

?. >ecause of bein( obser0ed as a sour taste. C. /t follows that whate0er is obser0ed as a sour taste is necessarily a sour taste. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a bitter *kha ba, taste. ?. %here is 9a bitter taste<. %he sub4ect+ the taste of dikBda *ti) ta,. 9!ccordin( to ?as dikBda is Jentiana chiretta. 5a bitter plant (rowin( in the Himalayas which is lar(ely used as an antidote a(ainst fe0er and li0er complaints ...it cures all kinds of bilious fe0er.5< C. /t follows that the sub4ect+ the taste of dikBda. is a bitter taste. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect the taste of dikBda+ is a bitter tasteBB ?. >ecause of bein( obser0ed as a bitter taste. C. /t follows that whate0er is obser0ed as a bitter taste is necessarily a bitter taste. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit an astrin(ent taste. ?. %here is 9an astrin(ent taste<. %he sub4ect+ the taste of bread. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the taste of bread, is an astrin(ent taste. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect the taste of bread+ is an astrin(ent tasteBB ?. >ecause of bein( obser0ed as an astrin(ent taste. C. /t follows that whate0er is obser0ed as an astrin(ent taste it necessarily an astrin(ent taste. ?. / accept it C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a hot *i.e., pun(ent, taste. ?. %here is9a hot taste<. %he sub4ect, the taste of pepper. C. /t follows that the sub4ect+ the taste of pepper+ is a hot taste. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the taste of pepper, is a hot tasteBB ?. >ecause of bein( obser0ed as a hot taste. C. /t follows that whate0er is obser0ed as a hot taste is necessarily a hot taste. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit a salty taste. ?. %here is a 9a salty taste<. %he sub4ect. the taste of salt *l4a)s tsha+i ro,. 9Here he posited the honorific of salt.< C. /t follows that the sub4ect+ the taste of salt+ is a salty taste. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the taste of salt, is a salty tasteBB

?. >ecause of bein( obser0ed as a salty taste. C. /t follows that whate0er is obser0ed as a salty taste is necessarily a salty taste. ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of tan(ible ob4ectBsource. ?. %here is 9a definition of tan(ible ob4ectBsource<. %he sub4ect+ the ob4ect of touch of a body consciousness. C. /t follows that the sub4ect. the ob4ect of touch of a body consciousness+ is the definition of tan(ible ob4ectB sourceBB ?. >ecause of bein( the positor of tan(ible ob4ectBsource. C. /t follows that whate0er is the positor of tan(ible ob4ectB source is necessarily the definition of tan(ible ob4ectB source. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. /f tan(ible ob4ectB sources are di0ided+ how many are there1 ?. %here are ele0en. C. /t follows that there are not ele0en. =osit the ele0en. ?. %here are 9ele0en tan(ible ob4ectBsources<. %he sub4ect, the ele0en *consistin( of, the four elemental tan(ible ob4ects and the se0en tan(ible ob4ects arisen from eleB ments. C. /t follows that the ele0en 9in the statement< 5/f tan(iB ble ob4ectB sources are di0ided. there are ele0en.5 are to be posited in that way. ?. / accept it.

%he definition of earth is 5hard and obstructi0e.5 %he deB finition of water is 5wet and moistenin( 5 %he definition of fire is 5hot and burnin(.5 %he definition of wind is 5li(ht and mo0in(.5 %he mode of procedure for debatin( these definitions is the same as before. %here are se0en tan(ible ob4ects arisen from elements. %hey are smcoth+ rou(h. li(ht. hea0y+ cold+ hun(er+ and thirst. ! smooth tan(ible ob4ect is satin. ! rou(h tan(ible ob4ect is a rppe made out of hemp. ! hea0y tan(ible ob4ect is the tan(ible ob4ect which is a stone or iron. ! li(ht tan(ible ob4ect is a feather. Cold is what you feel when you are cold. Hun(er is like when the stomach is empty. %hirst is when the mouth is dry. /f you do not drink water+ your mouth will become dry. %he mode of procedure for debatin( these is the same as before. =osit a smooth tan(ible ob4ect. /t is a smooth

tan(ible ob4ectBB >ecause of bein( a particularity of smooth tan(ible ob4ect. /t is the same. /t will be easy. Now comes the presentation of established bases.

@stablished >ases
C. >ecause in the te6t which says+ 5>ecause there are two ob4ects of comprehension+ there are two 0alid co(ni:ers+5 there is no e6planation of the presentation of established bases. ?. %he reason is not established C. /t follows that in the te6t which says+ 5>ecause there are two ob4ects of comprehension+ there are two 0alid co(B ni:ers+5 there is an e6planation of the presentation of established bases. ?. / accept it. 9%his )uote is from the root te6t of the =ramna0arttika or ?harmakrti+s Commentary on *?i)n(a+s, 5%reatise on Ealid Co(nition.5 %he presentation of established bases is taken from there. @stablished >ases are not tau(ht in the same way that we did colors. %he followin( are synonyms. established bases, established by 0alid co(nition+ ob4ect of knowled(e+ that which is suitable as an ob4ect of awareness+ e6istent. obser0ed by 0alid co(nition. pheB nomena, holder of its own entity+ ob4ect of comprehenB sion, ob4ect reali:ed by 0alid co(nition, ob4ect, ob4ect known by a mind, ob4ect of comprehension of an e6alted knower+ ob4ect reali:ed by an e6alted knower. %hese are mutually inclusi0e. Whate0er is one is necessarily the other. Whate0er is the other is necessarily the one. %hey are mutually inclusi0e because *1, a common locus is possible and *", they are ascertained *as ha0in(, the ei(ht approaches of per0asion. ;urther if *with respect to phenomena, a common locus is possible and they are ascertained *as ha0in(, the ei(ht approaches of per0asion, then they are necessarily mutually inclusi0e. !lso synonymous with the abo0e are hidden phenomena and *its definition, ob4ect reali:ed in a hidden manner by the thou(ht apprehendin( it. When we say that two thin(s are mutually inclusi0e+ it means that they ha0e the same meanin(. %heir (reater and lesser per0asions are the same. !s with re(ard to the same person+ we may say 5?an5 or 5?aniel.5 %he

names are different, but the meanin( is the same. @6cept for a difference of name the meanin( is the same. /t is like this for established base, ob4ect of knowled(e, and so forth. %he names are different, but the meanin( is the same. /f we call either name. the person will answer. /n this way. ob4ect of knowled(e is itself a hidden phenomenon. @stablished base is itself a hidden phenomenon. =henomenon itself is a hidden pheB nomenon. %here are many names, but the meanin( is the same. Now, if established bases are di0ided, there are twoBBpermanent phenomena and thin(s. =ermanent phenomeB non has the followin( synonyms. (enerally characteri:ed phenomenon, con0entional truth+ common locus of the nonB momentary and phenomenon, phenomenon which is a mere imB putation by term or thou(ht and is not established as a specifically characteri:ed phenomenon, phenomenon which is not able to perform a function ultimately. %hese are mutually inclusi0e. %hey ha0e the same meanin(. Jenerally nonBthin(, not produced, and not composed are mutually inclusi0e. !lso included here are empty of the ability to perform a function, not created, unsuitB able as the threeBBproduction, destruction, and abidin(. %hese si6 are mutually inclusi0e. /f we apply *the )ualiB fier,5phenomenon to each of these+ they will still be mutually inclusi0e. %hus. a phenomenon which is a nonB thin(, phenomenon which is empty pf the ability to perB form a function, nonB composed phenomenon+ phenomenon which is not suitable as the threeBBproduction, destruction, and abidin(, nonBproduced phenomenon, nonBcreated phenomenon, and permanent phenomenon are all mutually inclusi0e. Non thin( is not mutually inclusi0e with permanent phenomena. /f we add 5phenomena5 to nonBthin(, then it will be mutually inclusi0e with permanent phenomena. %his is because nonBthin( has two typesBB those nonBthin(s which are permanent phenomena and those nonB thin(s which are nonBe6istents. When we say 5phenomenon which is a nonBthin(5+ e6cept for the permanent phenomena there are none. !lso, with nonBcomposed, there are nonBcomposed permanent phenomena and nonBcomposed nonBe6istents. %hese are different. NonBcomposed phenomena, howe0er, means permanent phenomena and does not mean nonBe6istents. %he power of this word +phenomena+ is that e6cept for permanent phenomena we do not need any other. /f we do not put the word +phenomena+ with it, it will

not be mutually inclusi0e with permanent phenomena. =osit the definition of permanent phenomena. %he sub4ect, that which is obser0ed as a common locus of phenomena and the nonB momentary. =osit the definition of (enerally characteri:ed phenomena. %he sub4ect, phenomena which are a mere imputation by term or thou(ht and are not established as specifically characteri:ed phenomena. =osit the definition of con0entional truth. %he sub4ect, a phenomenon which is not able to perform a function ultimately. =osit the definition of nonB thin(. %he sub4ect, that which is empty of the ability to perform a function. =osit the definition of phenomenon which is a nonBthin(. %he sub4ect, phenomenon which is empty of the ability to perform a function. =osit the definition of the nonBcomposed. %he sub4ect, the nonBdisinte(ratin(. =osit the definition of nonB composed phenomenon. %he sub4ect, phenomenon which is nonB disinte(ratin(. =osit the definition of nonBcreated. %he sub4ect, the nonBproduced. =osit the definition of nonBcreated phenomenon. %he sub4ect, nonB produced phenomenon. %here are two definitions of the nonBcomposed. 2ne is the nonB disinte(ratin(. %he other is unsuitable as the threeBBproduction, destruction, and abidin(. /n the study of established bases the mode of proB cedure for debatin( is the same as that for colors. Here as before we ask for definitions, di0isions, and illustraB tions. !s before, we say, 5=osit the definition of estabB lished base. %hat is the definition of established baseBB Now, how many phenomena which are mutually inclusi0e with established base are there1 =osit those. Now, if estabB lished bases are di0ided, there are not the twoBBpermanent phenomena and thin(s. /t follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of permanent phenomena. How many phenomena are mutually inclusi0e with permanent phenomena15 %his is as before. %he followin( are synonymous with thin(. that which is able to perform a function, impermanent phenomena, the momentary, the created, the produced, the composed, suitable as the threeBB production, destruction, and abidin(, cause, producer, helper, effect, the produced, the helped, specifically characteri:ed phenomena, phenomena which are not established by mere imputation by term or thou(ht, ultimate truth, phenomena which are able to perform a function ultimately, manifest phenomena, ob4ect reali:ed directly by a

direct 0alid co(ni:er.. %hese are mutually inclusi0e. %hey ha0e the same meanin(. Now. posit the definition of thin(. %he sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function. =osit the defB inition of impermanent phenomena. %he sub4ect, the momenB tary. =osit the definition of composed phenomena. %he sub4ect. the disinte(ratin(. !lso, *for the definition of composed phenomena one can posit, the suitable as the threeBB production, destruction, and abidin(. %here is no difference. =osit the definition of specifically charB acteri:ed phenomena. %he sub4ect, phenomena which are not mere imputations by term or thou(ht and are established by their own nature. !lso suitable as a definition of specifically characteri:ed phenomena is an ob4ect which is not a mere imputation by term or thou(ht and is established from the side of its own uncommon mode of subsistence. %his is different from the other but it is somethin( that is posited. =osit the definition of ultimate truth. %he sub4ect, phenomenon which is able to perform a function ultimately. =osit the definition of manifest phenomena. %he sub4ect ob4ects reali:ed directly by a direct 0alid co(ni:er. =osit the definition of cause %he sub4ect, the producer. !lso *for the definition of cause, is the helper. =osit the definition of effect. %he sub4ect, the produced. !lso, the helped. 9@ffects are helped by the causes.< Causes are helpers, producers, or contributors.< New ?ebate C. /t follows that the twoBBestablished base and permanent phenomenon are mutually e6clusi0e. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is an established base is necesB sarily not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect. the nonBproduct space, is not permanent because of bein( an established base. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is an established base is not necessarily not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that a common locus of established base and permanent phenomenon e6ists.

?. / accept it C. /t follows that established base and permanent phenomenon are not mutually e6clusi0e. ?. / accept it. C. ;inished8 Now, what is the difference between established base and permanent phenomenon1 ?. %here are three possibilities. C. ;inished8 =osit somethin( which is both 9an established base and a permanent phenomenon<. ?. %he sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, is an established base. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, is an established baseBB ?. >ecause of bein( established by 0alid co(nition. 9!lso acceptable here is, 5because of bein( an e6istent.5 %his is because it is suitable to state the definition or to state a synonym as the si(n.< C. /t follows that whate0er is established by 0alid co(nition is necessarily an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, is a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, is a permanent phenomB enonBB ?. >ecause of bein( a common locus of phenomena and the nonB momentary. C. /t follows that whate0er is a common locus of phenomena and the nonBmomentary is necessarily a permanent phenomB enon. ?. / accept it. C. Now, which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necesB sarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whate0er is a permanent phenomenon is necessarily an established base. Whate0er is an established base is not necessarily a permanent phenomenon. %he sub4ect, a pot. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a pot, is an established base. ?. / accept it C. %he sub4ect, a pot, is an established baseBB ?. >ecause of bein( an e6istent.

C. /t follows that whate0er is an e6istent is necessarily an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a pot, is not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, a pot, is not a permanent phenomenonBB ?. >ecause of bein( a thin(. C. /t follows that whate0er is a thin( is necessarily not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. =osit somethin( which is neither 9an established base nor a permanent phenomenon<. ?. %he sub4ect the horn of a rabbit. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, is not an established base. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, is not an established baseBB ?. >ecause of not bein( established by 0alid co(nition. C. /t follows that whate0er is not established by 0alid co(nition is necessarily not an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, is not a permanent phenomenon. 9!fter some hesitation on the part of the ?efender, in bochay said that once whate0er is a permanent phenomenon is necessarily an established base and you ha0e already said that the horn of a rabbit is not an established base, how could you ha0e any )ualm that it mi(ht be permanent1 @0erythin( that is a permanent phenomenon is an established base and this is not an established base' therefore there can be no doubt that it is not permanent.< ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, is not a permanent phenomenonBB ?.>ecause of not bein( an e6istent. C. /t follows that whate0er is not an e6istent is necessarily not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. / ha0e two important thin(s to e6plain to you. / ha0e to tell you some history as back(round and then / will tell you those two thin(s. %he dharma is somethin( to be known. 2nce kncwn if one practices it, it

can help both superficially and deeply. @0en if you do not practice it, if you do come to know the dharma, then in this lifetime you will not be dull. !nd in the future lifetime you will not be dull either. @0en if you do not *...,, it will come that you seek to benefit people more and you will ha0e less thou(ht to harm others. ;or a practitioner not only will he or she help this and future lifetimes, but a practitioner (ains happiness %ape for self and country. *...chan(e to new tape, &ide 1F Howe0er, if one practices in accordance with >uddha+s way+ there is no need e0en to e6plain that happiness and comfort will come to that person and that country. / am not (oin( to elaborate on this in detail, in brief the dharma is important. &ince you know that it is important, your be(innin( your study of >uddhism here in this uni0ersity will not only help you but will also help the uni0ersity and it will help the coun try. Now / could e0en put my si(nature to the fact that if it is studied well, it will spread and it will help. He *referrin( to J.H., is makin( (reat effort to establish this pro(ram for you. !nd if people come to ask you what it is like to study, whether or not it is difficult to understand, whether it is e6plained clearly, then you should not answer that it is difficult it is not e6plained well, and that it is difficult to (et at. 7ou should say that it is easy, it is easy to understand, if you understand it it will help. 7ou should say thin(s like that. He is attemptin( to establish somethin( that is 0ast. 7ou should not say thin(s that contradict that because since it is dharma, as many people as enter into it so much will it help. 7our altruistic thou(ht will help you and due to their enterin( into the dharma, it will help them too. %hrou(h this it will increase in the country more and more and then it will brin( happiness and comfort to the country in (eneral. ;rom your own point of 0iew / think that if you study and (et it strai(ht, then you should not say that it is difficult but you should say that it is easy. /t will make it easier for you and it will help others to enter into this teachin(. 7our sayin( that it is easy will brin( (reat 0irtue and benefit to you. /n one sense it helps becase they people will be meetin( with the >uddhist teachin( and in another sense it helps becuase it helps the country. Dy two thin(s to e6plain are that. &o the two parts are that you should study it well, you should en(a(e in it well, and secondly that you should try to cause other people to en(a(e in it by sayin( that it is easy. /f you say that it is difficult, then other people will feel inferior, they will feel depressed, they will feel unable, and they will not ha0e a

wish to look into it. %ry to e6plain that it is ad0anta(ious and that it is 0ery helpful. /f you do en(a(e in e6plainin( the many (ood reasons for en(a(in( in the study then it will help them, help you, and help the country. Whoe0er you meet with be they (reat people or small people, it will help a lot. / had thou(ht to say this before but had for(otten. /n our own monastery there would be thousands of monks. =eople would come from our own areas our own lands from far away. /f we had sat there tellin( them that it is 0ery difficult to read, it takes a lot of effort, there is a lot of discomfort in this and that, then the people would 4ust run away and (o back. Howe0er, when you tell them that it is easy to do, it is 0ery comfortable, when you study the books are 0ery interestin(, that there is a lot of ad0anta(e that you can (et out of it, and then e0en that one can become a Jeshay or a lama or an abbot, that one can (et a hi(h position, then the people will think that they will do that. %hey ha0e a wish to (i0e it a try. 7ou could e6plain such thin(s also. /f you study a lot, since there are a lot of uni0ersities you could (et a 4ob here and there and you could e0en (et rich and a lot of dollars will come. >ecause the mind is somethin( that can chan(e, it is 4ust ready to (o this way or that way. %hat is the truth. /t is not a lie at all. /t is true that there would be (reat benefit. /t is definite that there would be (reat benefit if the countries of the West did pay a lot of attention to >uddhism. &ince in all of these countries the people know a whole lot of different thin(sBBscience, lan(ua(es, and so forth if it e0er started anywhere, it would be 0ery easy for other countries to assume it, to take it. Whate0er you want to achei0e you can achei0e. /f you want to become an emperor of the world you can become such. /f you want to achei0e the position of >uddhahood, you can do so. %he teacher and students ha0e to be a (roup. We must take care in what we are sayin(. New ?ebate C. /t follows that established by a 0alid co(ni:er is not the definition of established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that establishd by a 0alid co(ni:er is the definition of established base because *1, there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and definiendum with respect to it and established base and *", it and established base are established in the relationship of definition and definiendum.

?. %he first reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, established by a 0alid co(ni:er, that there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and definiendum with respect to it and established base because the coe6tensi0enesses of bein(, not bein(, e6istin(, and not e6istin( *as on p. 1G, are established. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, established by a 0ald co(ni:er, that there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and definiendum with respect to it and established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the first reason is established. ?. / accept it. C. ;inished8 ?. %he second reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, established by a 0alid co(ni:er, that it is established in the relationship of definition and definiendum with established base because in order to ascertain established base with 0alid co(nition one must first ascertain it with 0alid co(nition. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, established by a 0alid co(ni:er, that it is established in the relationship of definition and definiendum with established base. ?. / accept it. C. ;inished8 /t follows that the second reason is established. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, established by a 0alid co(ni:er, is the definition of established base. ?. Why1 C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, established by a 0alid co(ni:er, that it is the definition of established base because *1, there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and definiendum with respect to it and established base and *", it and established base are established in the relationship of definition and definiendum. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that if *1, there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and definiendum with respect to it and

established base and *", it and established base are established in the relationship of definition and definiendum, then it is not necessarily the definition of established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, established by a 0alid co(ni:er, is not the definition of established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that there is no definition of established base. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that there is a definition of established base. ?. / accept it. C. =osit it. ?. %he sub4ect, obser0ed by a 0alid co(ni:er.L C. /t follows that the sub4ect, obser0ed by a 0alid co(ni:er is the definition of established base. ?. / accept it. C. ?hi8 %he three spheres. /t folows that the sub4ect, obser0ee by a 0alid co(ni:er, is not the definition of established base because of bein( the definition of e6istent. 9Here some say, 5?hi8 %he three spheres.5 %his is, 52m a ra ba d:a na dhi8 %he three spheres.5 7ou ha0e to say the first si6 syllables )uietly and then the last is said audibly in a hi(h 0oice drawin( out the timin( of the syllable.< ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, obser0ed by a 0alid co(ni:er, that it is the definition of e6istent because it is said, 5+2bser0ed by a 0alid co(ni:er+ is the definition of e6istent and +established by a 0alid co(ni:er+ is the definition of established base.5 9%his is said in the Collected %opics te6t. /f you are (oin( to do it more e6tensi0ely, 5/t both follows that it is that and follows that it is that *de yin par thel yin par thel (nyis, because of bein( the thou(ht of =urB 4okBchamB(ya inBboBchay. /t follows that it is so because those two said in the Collect %opics, +2bser0ed by a 0alid co(ni:er is the definition of e6istent and established by a 0alid co(ni:er is the definition of established base.+5< ?. / accept it. C. ;inished8 7ou ha0e directly contradicted your basic position. *rtsa ba+i dam bca+ dn(os +(al tsha, /t follows that M obser0ed by a 0alid co(ni:er is the definition of e6istent and established by a 0alid co(ni:er is the definition of established base. ?. / accept it.

C. /t follows that obser0ed by a 0alid co(ni:er is not the definition of established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that established by a 0alid co(nier is the definition of established base. ?. / accept it. C. ;inished8 /t follows that whate0er is established by a 0alid co(ni:er is necessarily an established base. ?. / accept it. C. ;inished8 /t follows that whate0er is established by a 0alid co(ni:er is necessarily an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is an established base because of bein( established by a 0alid co(ni:er. ?. / accept it. 9%hen on the basis of debate >.1 there is the followin(.< C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is a permanent phenomenon becuase of bein( an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is not a permanent phenomenon because of bein( an impermanent phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pt, is an impermanent phenomenon because of bein( momntary. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is momentary is necessarily an impermanent phenomenon because momentary is the definition of impermanent phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follos that momentary is the definition of impermanent phenomenon because momentary is the definition of impermanent phenomenon, that which is able to perform a function is the defintion of thin(, and disinte(ratin( is the definition of composed phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that momentary is not the definition of impermanent phenomenon, that which is able to perform a function is not the definition of thin(, and disinte(ratin( is not the definition of composed phenomenon. ?. / accept it.

C. /r follows that there is no definition of impermanent phenomenon. 9%he mode of procedure here is 4ust as before. /f the ?efender says that there is a definition of impermanent phenomenon, tell him to posit it.< ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that impermanent phenomenon is not a definiendum. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, impermanent phenomenon, that its illustrations do not e6ist. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that ilustrations of impermanent phenomena do e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that since ilustrations of impermanent phenomena e6ist, there must be that which makes impermanent phenomena know. 9/n dependence upon these illustrations, it follows that there e6ists that which makes impermanent phenomena know. /f illustrations of impermanent phenomena esist, it must be a definiendum. /f there is an illustration, there must be a definition which is that whcih makes known that which is defined. =ot, for instance, is an illustration of impermanent phenomena. =ot is an impermanent phenomenon. %his is so because it is momentary. %here must be somethin( that is makin( it know *mtshon byed,. %hat which is makin( it known is its momentariness. &ince pot is momentary, its bein( impermanent must be know. %his means known to the mind, it mkaes one understand it. %ht which is makin( known means the same thin( as definition or the definer. ;or e6ample, the fact that you are a bein( that is imputated in dependence on the fi0e a((re(ates shows *mtshon,, makes known, or makes one understnd that you are a person. %hus, if someon esays that impermanent phenomenon is not a definiendum, it follows that ilustrations of impermanent phenomena do not e6ist. /f there are illustrations, then it follows that there must e6ist somethin( which makes known. /n dependence on these illustrations, that which makes impermanent henomena known is shown. /f these e6ist, it follows that impermanent phenomenon is a definiendum. /t follows that it is so because in dependence on these illustrations there is somethin( to be known. ?efiniendum is what is to be known.< ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that since there is that which makes impermanent phenomena known, impermanent phenomenon must be a definiendum.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows that since there is that which makes impermanent phenomena known, impermanent phenomenon must be a definiendum. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that if impermanent phenomenon is a definiendum, then the defintion of impermanent phenomenon must e6ist. =osit it. 9When the ?efender hesitated, inbochay asked if his head had not become bi((er after the e6planation. /n the be(innin( your head will (et bi((er, but then tomorrow or the ne6t day it will shrink back down to normal si:e. /t seems that when you do not understand thin(s, your head (ets bi((er. When you understand how to do this with one you can do the others. / am teachin( in this way so that you can understand it )uickly. >ecause he is interested in thin(s bein( done )uickly, / ha0e been thinkin( about how to teach you so that you will understand )uickly and understand it well. %his is not the way we usually teach it in %ibet. &o e0en if your head (ets bi( with re(ard to one it will not with re(ard to the later. /t will be easy. Now continuin( the debate after backin( up a hit. /t wil be easy. Now continuin( the debate after backin( up a bit.< C. /t follows that ilustrations of impermanent phenomena do e6ist. ?. / accept. C. /t follows that in dependence on these ilustrations, impermanent phenomenon has a definer *mi rta( par mtshon byed yod,. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that impermanent phenomenon is a definiendum. ?. / accept it. C. =osit the definition. ?. %he sub4ect, that which does not stay for a second moment. 9%his definition is in the Collected %opics of JoBman( Colle(e.< C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which does not abide for a second moment, that it is the definiotion of impermanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is an impermanent phenomenon necessariy does not abide for a second momnt. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, you, do not abide for a second moment. ?. / accept it. C. Where does the second moment (o1 /f id does not stay, where will

it (o1 With respect to the second moment, not stayin(, where will it (o1 %hen, it follows that the sub4ect, the second moent, is not an impermanent phenomenon. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that it is not becuase of not bein( somethin( that does not stay as a second moment, because of stayin( as the second moment. 9%he second moment abides as the second moment does it not1< ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the second moment, is a permanent phenomenon. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that it is because *1, it is an e6istent and *", it is not an impermanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the second moment, *1, is an e6istent and *", is not an impermanent phenomenon. /t follows that the sub4ect, your second moment, is a permanent phenomenon. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that your second moment is a permanent phenomenon because of not bein( somethin( which does not stay as the second moment. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, your second moment, is not an impermanent phenomenon. 9JH points out that this is chan(in( from stayin( for a second moment to stayin( as a second moment. /t is the second moment so it has to abide as the second moment. !bidin( for a second moment would mean that it would ha0e to abide for another moment. %he reason inbochay is presentin( this specious sub4ect is to see if we can make up an answer to take care of the specious ones.< ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that that which does not stay for a second moment is not the definition of impermanent phenomena. ?. / accept it. C. Now, posit the definition of impermanent phenomena. ?. %he sub4ect, the momentary. C. ;inished8 /f follows that the sub4ect, the momentary, is the definition of impermanent phenomena. ?. / accept it.

C. /t follows that whate0er is momentary is necessarily an impermanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. 9?on+t lose the ori(inal debate. %hat is why we are doin( all of this.< C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is an impermanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is a permanent phenomenon because of bein( an established base. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is an established base is not necessarily a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. ;inished8 Now, what is the difference between the two, established base and permanent phenomenon1 ?. %here are three possibilities. C. /t follows that there are not three possibilities. =osit somethin( which is both 9an established base and a permanent phenomenon<. ?. %he sub4ect, the nonBproduct space. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is an established base. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is an established baseBB ?. >ecause of bein( a hidden phenomenon. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a permanent phenomenonBB ?. >ecause of bein( a common locus of phenomenon and the nonB momentary. C. /t follows that whate0er is a common locus of phenomenon and the nonBmomentary is necessarily a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. Now, which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whate0er is a permanent phenomenon is necessarily an established base. Whate0er is an established base is not necessari,y a permanent phenomenon. %he sub4ect, pot. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is an established base. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, pot, is an established baseBB

?. >ecause of bein( established by a 0alid co(ni:er. C. /t follows that whate0er is established by a 0alid co(ni:er is necesarily an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, pot, is not a permanent phenomenonBB ?. >ecause of bein( momentary. C. /t follows that whate0er is momentary is necessarily not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. Now, posit somethin( which is neither 9an established base nor a permanent phenomenon<. ?. %he sub4ect, a skyBflower. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a skyBflower, is not an established base. ?. >ecause of not holdin( its own entity. C. /t follows that twhate0er does not hold its own entity necessariy is not an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a skyBflower, is not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, a skyBflower, is not a permanent phenomenonBB ?. >ecause of not bein( an e6istent. C. /t follows that whate0er is not an e6istent is necessarily not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. New ?ebate off of >.1 C. /s whate0er is an established bse necessarily a permanent phenomenon1 ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is an established base is necessarily a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is a permanent phenomenon because of bein( an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is not a permanent phenomenon because of bein( an impermanent phenomenon.

?. %he reason is not established C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is not a permanent phenomenon because of bein( momentary. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er s momentary is necessarily an impermanent phenomenon because momentary is the definition of impermenent phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that momentary is the definition of impermanent phenomenon because that which is able to perform a function is the definition of thin(, disinte(ratin( is the definition of composed phenomenon, and produced is the definition of created phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that that which is able to perform a function is the definition of thin( because that which is able to perform a function is the meanin( of re0erse of thin(. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that that which is able to perform a function is not the meanin( re0erse of thin(. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that thin(+s meanin( re0erse does not e6ist. ?. Why1 C. =osit it. ?. %here is 9a meanin( of re0erse of thin(<. %he sub4ect, created phenomenon. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, created phenomenon, is the meanin( re0erse of thin(. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, created phenomenon, is a definition. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, created phenomenon, is not a definiendum. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, created phenomenon, that it is a definiendum because its definition e6ists. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, created phenomenon, that it does ha0e a definition because produced is its definition. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, produced, that it is the

definition of created phenomenon because in the Collected %opics it says, 5=roduced is the definition of created phenomenon.5 ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that produced is the definition of created phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, created phenomenon, that its definition does e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, created phenomenon, that it is a definiendum. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, created phenomenon, that it is not a definition. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, created phenomenon, that it is not the definition of thin(. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, created phenomenon, that it is not thin(+s meanin( re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. ;inished8 Now, posit thin(+s meanin( re0erse. ?. %he sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function, that it is thin(+s meanin( re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function, that it is the definition of thin(. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that that which is able to perform a function is the definition of thin(, disinte(ratin( is the definition of composed phenomenon, and produced is the definition of created phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that momentary is the definition of impermanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is momentary is necessarily an impermanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is an impermanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it.

9=roceed as before with debate >.1 as on pp. 1"FB1"$.< /f thin(s are di0ided, there are three. %he three are matter, consciousness, and nonBassociated compositional factors. /n another way the three are form, consciusness, and nonBassociated compositional factors. /n the &autrntika system, they assert matter, consciousness, and nonBassociated compositional factors. /n the Chittamatra system, when thin(s are di0ided, they assert form, consciousness, and nonBassociated compositional factors. %hey do not assert matter. /f it is done in the system of the &autrantikas, matter and form are not mutually inclusi0e. /n the &autrantika system, matter, consciousness, and nonBassociated compositional factors are thin(s. %he definition of matter is that which is atomically established. %he mode of procedure for debatin( this is the same. %hey say, 5>ecause matter does not ha0e the twoBBdefinition and di0ision. %he reason is not established. =osit the definition of matter. /t is the definition of matterBB5 When matter is said, it is understood as a collection of many particles or atoms. Ksually in %ibet clothin( that is made out of a lot of patches is also caled matter *bem po,. /t is somethin( that is made up out of a lot of thin(s. /f matter is di0ided, there are twoBBe6ternal matter and internal matter. %he di0ision in this way can also be made for formBBe6ternal form and internal form. %hose forms included within a continuum are internal forms. %hose forms not included within the continuum are internal forms. %hose forms not included within the continuum of a person are e6ternal forms. ;orms included within the continuum of a person are internal forms. /nternal form has fi0e types. @6ternal form has fi0e types. We ha0e already posited some of the fi0e e6ternal forms. %hese are the forms not included within a person+s continuum. %hese are the fi0eBBform, sound, odor, taste, and tan(ible ob4ect. %hese fi0e are called the fi0e e6ternal forms, the fi0e meanin(s *don,, the fi0e ob4ects, the fi0e sources, and the fi0e ob4ectBsources. /nternal form has the fi0eBBeye sense power, ear sense power, nose sense power, ton(ue sense power, and body sense power. doesn+t internal form ha0e the fi0e of form, sound, odor, taste, and tan(ible ob4ect1 7es, there are the fi0e internal sources included within a continuum. %hese are the fi0e internal sources of form, sound, odor, taste, and tan(ible ob4ect. What is the reason that we do not say that there are ten internal forms includin( the fi0e sense powers and the fi0e sources1 /t is probably because you

already name the fi0e sources with re(ard to e6ternal form that we do not name them a(ain for internal form. %he senses cannot be percei0ed by someone else+s senses, they cannot appear to someone else+s senses, whereas one+s own form, sound, odor, taste, and tan(ibility can appear to somebody else+s senses. %hus, we say that there are fi0e internal forms. %he definition of e6ternal form is that which is established as e6ternal particles. %he definition of internal form is that which is established as internal particles. %hey are done in that way. %he definition of an eye sense power is the clear internal physical thin( which is the uncommon dominant condition *bda( rkyen, for its own effect which is an eye consciousness. ;or the definitions of the other sense powers you can 4ust substitute ear consciousness and so on in the place of eye consciousness. !n illustration of an eye sense power is a clear internal physical thin( ha0in( a shape like a sarma flower in the continuum of a person. %he definition of an ear sense power is the clear internal physical thin( ha0in( a shape like a cut bundle of wheat in the continuum of a person. %he definition of a nose sense power is the clear internal physical thin( ha0in( a shape like *the ends of two, copper needles in the continuum of a person. %he definition of a ton(ue sense power is clear internal physical thin( ha0in( a shape like a cut half moon in the continuum of a person. %he definition of a body sense power is the clear internal physical thin( which is the uncommon dominant condition of its own effect which is a body consciousness. !n illustration of a body sense power is a clear internal physical thin( ha0in( a shape like *bya re( na +4am (yi ba(s palta bu,. %hat sub4ect is a body sense power because of bein( a clear internal physical thin( which is a body conscoiusness. %his is the way you ha0e to say it. %hus, form has the twoBBinternal form and e6ternal form. /f posited as three, there are the three BB internal, e6ternal, and both internal and e6ternal. Daterial phenomena which are both internal and e6ternal is, for instance, the locus of the senses, in other words, these thin(s that you see here. >ecause it is included within the continuum it is internal. >ecause it is the ob4ect of others sense conscousnesses it is e6ternal. Now comes consciousness. Consciousness has the twoBB definition and di0ision. Clear and knowin( is the definition of consciousness. /f consciousnesses are di0ided, there are twoBBsense consciousnesses and mental consciousnesses. %he definition of sense consciousness is a knower which is produced in dependence on a phyical sense power

which is its own uncommon dominant condition. %he definition of a mental consciusness is a knower which is produced in dependence on a mental sense power which is its own uncommon dominant condition. /f sense consciousnesses are di0ided, there are fi0eBB eye consciousness, ear, consciousness, nose consciousness, ton(ue consciousness, and body consciousness. %he definition of an eye consciousness is a knower which is produced in dependence on its own uncommon dominant conditon which is an eye sense power and its own uncommon ob4ect of obser0ation condition which is form. %he definition of an ear consciousness is a knower which is produced in dependence on its own uncommon dominant condition which is an ear sense power and its own uncommon ob4ect of obser0ation condition which is sound. %he definition of a nose consciousness is a knower which is produced in dependence on its own uncommon dominant condition which is a nose sense power and its own uncommon ob4ect of obser0ation condition which is odor. %he definition of a ton(ue consciousness is a knower which is produced in dependence on its own uncommon cominant condition which is a ton(ue sense power and its own uncommon ob4ect of obser0ation condition which is taste. %he definition of a body consciousness is a knower which is produced in dependence on its own uncommon dominant condition which is a body sense power and its own uncommon ob4ect of obser0ation condition which is tan(ible ob4ects. %he definitions of the fi0e sense consciousnesses are done in this way. %here is a difference between eye consciousness *mi( shes, and a consciousness ha0in( the aspect of the eye *mi( (i rnam par shes pa,. We ha0e already posited some of the consciousnesses ha0in( the aspect of the eye. %hey are the minds. @ye consciousnesses ha0e both minds and mental factors. %his is also true for the other fi0e consciousnesses from ear consciousnesses throu(h mental consciousnesses. consciousnesses ha0in( the aspect of the eye ha0e only mind and do not ha0e mental factors. %his is true of all si6 of the consciousnesses ha0in( the aspect. %hey ha0e only the main mind. %hus, that is consciousness. Now comes nonBassociated compositional factors. %here are tow definitions for nonBassociated compositional factors. /t makes no difference. %he definition is either a thin( which is neither form nor consciousness or a thin( which is neither a material phenomenon nor a consciousness. Whiche0er one you posit, ther is no difference. ;or the Chittamatra system you must posit a thin( which is neither a form

nor a consciousness as this definition. !n ucommon assertion of the &autrantikas is the definition as a thin( which is neither material phenomenon nor a consciousness. /f nonBasociated compositional factors are di0ided, ther are twoBB nonBassociated compositional factors which are persons and nonB associated compositional factors which are not persons. %he definition of person is a bein( which is imputed in dependence on any of the fi0e a((re(ates. %here is some debate on this definition at the time of studyin( awarenesses and knowers. /f persons are di0ided, ther are twoBcommon bein(s and &uperiors. %here are three 0ehiclesBBHearer 0ehicle, &olitary eali:er 0ehicle, and Dahayana 0ehicle. ! person who has not attained a &uperior path of any of the three 0ehicles is called a common bein(. ! &uperior path is a path of seein( or hi(her. %his is the reason for callin( them common bein(s. /n the !bhid(armakosha it says, 5%hose who ha0e not attained a &uperior path *of seein(, are common bein(s.5 ! person who has attained a &uperior path of any of the three 0ehicles is called a &uperior. %here are three kinds of &uperiorsBBHearer &uperiors, &olitary eali:er &uperiors, and Dahayana &uperiors. %here are si6 kinds of common bein(s. %here are si6 kinds of common bein(s ha0in( the basis of a mi(rator. %he si6 are common bein(s ha0in( the basis of a hell bein(, common bein(s ha0in( the basis of a hun(ry (host, common bein(s ha0in( the basis of an unimal, common bein(s ha0in( the basis of an human, common bein(s ha0in( the basis of a demiB(od, and common bein(s ha0in( the basis of a (od. %here are probably not any &uperiors that ha0e the basis of any of the three lower types, but there are cases of &uperiors ha0in( the basis of a human, demiB(od, or (od. then what about a &uperior who intentionally takes rebirth as an animal1 /s this not a case of a &uperior who has the bse of an animal1 No, because they are 4ust assumin( that appearance, assumin( that form. %here are four types of hell bein(, hot hell bein(s, cold hell bein(, nei(hborin( hell bein(s, and tribellin( hell bein(s. %here are three types of hun(ry (hostsBBthose ha0in( e6ternal obstructions, those ha0in( internal obstructions, and those ha0in( both e6ternal and internal obstructions. %here are two types of animalsBB those li0in( in the *watery, depths and those scattered about the surface. %hose scattered about the surface are li0in( in the places that the humans li0e. %hese are do(s, sheep, (oats, horses, and so forth. Humans are of the four continents and the ei(hts subB continents or smaller continents. %he four continents are the @astern

called &uperior >ody, the &outhern called ?:amBbu, the Western called Ksin( 26en, and the Northern called Knpleasant &ound. %here are many other world systems. %his is done accordin( to the way outs is, ha0in( four continents and ei(ht subBcontinents. /n brief, there are three types of (odsBB(ods of the desire realm, (ods of the form realm, and (ods of the formless realm. @6tensi0ely, there are twentyBse0en kinds of (odsBBsi6 types of (ods of the desire realm, se0enteen kinds of (ods of the form realm, and four kinds of (ods of the formless realm. we can posit these thin(s as sub4ect. &ub4ects are not rare. %hese are the nonBassociated compositional factors that are persons. Now these are to be posited as the nonBassociated compositional factors which are not persons. %hey are thin(, that which is able to perform a function, created phenomena, and so forth *refer to the phenomena which are mutually inclusi0e with thin( on pp. 13GB13C,. %here are many synonyms. /t is from the point of 0iew of their selfB re0erses or the opposite of the ne(ati0e of themsel0es that they are nonBassociated compositional factors which are not persons. ;or e6ample, thin( is a nonBassociated compositional factor, but whate0er is a thin( is not necessarily a nonBassociated compositional factor that is not a person. %here are many such nonBassociated compositional factors which are not persons includin( cause and effect. /t has to be somethin( that is not any of the other kinds of thin(s. &omethin( such as a table will not ft because it is form. %here are many, for instance, year, month, time, day, ni(ht, all times, the three times of past, present and future. %hese are all nonBassociated compositional factors which are not persons. We are (oin( to mi6 in a lot of discussion of possibilities with this and then you will understand them. /n another way, it established bses are di0ided, there are the twoBB one and different, the twoBBob4ects of knowled(e of which the bein( is possible an ob4ects of knowled(e of which the bein( is not possible, the twoBBdefinition and definiendum, the twoBBne(ati0e phenomena and positi0e phenomena, the threeBB0irtues, nonB0irtues, and neutral, the twoBBspecifically characteri:ed phenomena and (enerally characteri:ed phenomena, and the two truths. %he mode of procedure for debatin( these is the same as before. 2ne be(ins, 5>ecause if established bases are di0ided, there are not the twoBBone and different,...5 %he ?efender says, 5%he reason is not established.5 /t follows that there are such. / accept it. 7ou know how to debate it. Now the first is the di0ision into the twoBBone and different. %he definition of one is a phenomenon that is not di0erse. 7ou know the

reason that it is the definition of one. /llustrations of one *sin(ular phenomena1, are ob4ect of knowled(e, established bse, e6istent, thin(, permanent phenomenon, pot, pillar, (od, human, demiB(od, common bein(, &uperior. %hese are all one. /llustrations of phenomena which are different are the twoBBpillar and pot, the twoBB permanent phenomenon and thin(, the twoBBob4ect of knowled(e and e6istent, the twoBBestablished base and established by a 0alid co(ni:er, the twoBBup and down, the twoBBeast and west, the twoBB south and north, the twoBB!merica and /ndia, the twoBB(olden pot and copper pot. When you say it in this way, they are all different. When there is 4ust one to each sub4ect, it is one. ;or instance, if we say, 5%he sub4ect, pot,5 it is one. ! sub4ect with two is different. When you think of different, two di0erse phenomena appear to the mind. Now comes the di0ision of established bases into definitions and definiendums. %he definition of definiendum is a triply )ualified imputed e6istent. !nother definition of definiendum is a triply )ualified ob4ect of comprehension. ?efiniendums are, for instance, ob4ect of knowled(e, established base, e6istent, phenomenon, hidden phenomenon, ob4ect of comprehension, ob4ect, permanent phenomenon, (enerally characteri:ed phenomenon, con0entional truth, nonBthin(, thin(, ultimate truth, etc. %hese are all definiendums are they not1 %he reason that somethin( is a definiendum is because it is a triply )ualified imputed e6istent, because it is a triply )ualified ob4ect of comprehension, or because its definition e6ists. /f there is definition of somethin(, then it is necessarily a definiendum. ?efiniendum means ob4ect to be know *mtshon par bya ba,. ?efinition means tht which makes known *mtshon byed,. ;or e6ample, ob4ect of knowled(e is a definiendum. =ot is an illustration *of ob4ect of knowled(e,. &uitable as an ob4ect of awareness is that which makes known or the definition *of ob4ect of knowled(e,. =ot+s bein( an ob4ect of knwoled(e shows that it is established by a 0alid co(ni:er. /t shows it to the mind or mkes it known to the mind. /t causes the mind to know that it is an established base because it is established by a 0alid co(ni:er. %hat is definiendum. /llustrations of definition are established by a 0alid co(ni:er, obser0ed by a 0alid co(n:ier, suitable as an ob4ect of awareness, etc. %hese are all definitions are they not1 %here are many definitions. %hat is the di0ision of established bases into the twoBBdefinitions and definiendum. Now comes the di0ision into the twoBBob4ects of knowled(e of which

the bein( is possible and ob4ects of knowled(e of which the bein( is not possible. the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e of which the bin( is possible is that whch is obser0ed as a common locus of its bein( e6istin( and bein( suitable as an ob4ect of awareness. %he definition of an ob4ect of knowled(e of which the bein( is not possible is that whch is obser0ed as a common locus of its bein( not e6istin( and bein( suitable as an ob4ect of awareness. for e6ample, with respect to ob4ects of knowled(e of which the bein( is not possible we must osit contradictories like the twoBBpillar and pot, the twoBBpermanent phenomenon and thin(, the twoBBdefinition and definiendum. %hese are al ob4ects of knowled(e of which the bein( is not possible. Whate0er is contradictory is necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e of which the bein( is not possible. Whate0er is a definiendum is necessarly an ob4ect of knowled(e of which the bein( is possible. Whate0er is a definition is necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e of which the bein( is possible. With respect to ob4ects of knowled(e of which the bein( is not possible, posit contradictories such as the twoBBnorth and south, the twoBBeast and west, the twoBB?efender and Challen(er, the twoBB(od and human, the twoBBhell bein( and hun(ry (host. 7ou h0e to posit two thin(s whcih do not ha0e a common locus. 7ou cannot posit somethin( like two pots as a sub4ect here because there is a common locus of two pots such as the twoBB(olden pot and copper pot. /f you must posit the bein( of two pots, you can posit the sub4ect, the twoBB(olden pot and copper pot. %he bein( of one human e6ists, the bein( of two humans e6ists, the bein( of three humans e6ists. Howe0er, when you posit two contradictories, it is an ob4ect of knowled(e of which the bein( is not possible. for e6ample, if you say the twoBBestablished base and established by a 0alid co(ni:er, this is not an ob4ect of knowled(e of which the bein( is not possible. *%his is at odds with the use of this sub4ect, the twoBBestablished base and establishd by a 0alid co(nier, as phenomena which are different as on p. 1F9, but it does not contradict what was said earlier., !lso, the twoBBthin( and ob4ect of knowled(e is not an ob4ect of knowled(e of which the bein( is not possible. &o tomorrow and the ne6t day we will mi6 this with a lot of discussion of possibilities, we will be(in it. We ha0e ne(ati0e phenomena and positi0e phenomena left to do. 7ou know the definitions of thin( and permanent phenomena. 7ou know the definitions of (enerally and specifically characteri:ed phenomena.

%ape side 1$ !pril "H, 19#$ Jenerally, for a statement of which neither the per0asion nor the reason is established as for instance, 5/t follows that the sub4ect, horse, is a consciousness because of bein( a permanent phenomenon,5 you say that the reason is not established. /f you say that there is no per0asion, you are acceptin( that the reason is established. /f someone says, 5/t is not a human because of not bein( a particulrity of human,5 there is not per0asion. Whate0er is not a particularity of human is not necessariy not a human. for e6ample, human is human, but human is not a particularity of human. *%o the abo0e statement, you would say, 5/t follows that the sub4ect, human, is not human because of not bein( a particularity of human.5 7ou can say that somethin( is a pot because of bein( a particularity of pot. 7ou can say that somethin( is such and such because of bein( a particularity of that, but you cannot say that it is not such and such because of not bein( a particularity of that. *2ne can, howe0er, say that a horse is not a particularity of pot because of not bein( a pot. /n this case the per0ason, whate0er is not a pot is necessarily not a particularity of pot, is established., New ?ebate C. /t folows that the two, manifest phenomenon and nonBhidden phenomenon, are mutually e6clusi0e. ?. / accept it. C. %he two, manifest phenomenon and nonBhidden phenomenon, are mutually e6clusi0eBB ?. >ecause *1, they are different and *", a common locus of the two does not e6ist. C. /t follows that if *1, they are different and *", a common locus of the two does not e6ist, then they are necesarily mutually e6clusi0e. ?. / accept it. New ?ebate C. /t follows that hidden phenomenon and nonBmanifest phenomenon are mutually e6clusi0e. ?. Why1 C. What is the difference1 ?. %here are three possibilities. C. =osit somethin( whcih is both *a hidden phenomenon and a nonB

manifest phenomenon,. ?. %he sub4ect, the nonBproduct space. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a hidden phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a hidden phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a hidden phenomenonBB ?. >ecause of bein( an established base. C. /t follows that whate0er is an established base is necessarily a hidden phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a nonBmanifest phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. %he sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a nonBmanifest phenomenonBB ?. >ecause of not bein( a thin(. C. /t follows that whate0er is not a thin( is necessarily a nonBmanifest phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C' Now, which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whate0er is a hidden phenomenon is necessarily a nonBmanifest phenomenon. C. /t follows that whate0er is a hidden phenomenon is necessarily a nonBmanifest phenomenon. ?. Why1 C. /f there is no per0asion, posit a countere6ample. ?. %he sub4ect the nonBproduct space. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is not a nonB manifest phenomenon. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a manifest phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a thin(. ?' Why1 C. >ecause of bein( a manifest phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a thin(. ?. Why1

C. >ecause of bein( a manifest phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a thin(. ?. Why1 C. >ecause of bein( a manifest phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a manifest phenomenon because of not bein( a nonBmanifest phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a nonBmanifest phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the nonBproduct space, is a nonBmanifest phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. ;inished8 Now, what is the difference between the two, hidden phenomenon and nonBmanifest phenomenon1 ?. %here are three possibilities. C. Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whate0er is a nonBmanifest phenomenon is necessarily a hidden phenomenon. C. /t follows that whate0er is a nonBmanifest phenomenon is necessarily a hidden phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, is a hidden phenomenon because of bein( a nonBmanifest phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, is a nonBmanifest phenomenon *mn(on kyur ma yin pa yin par thel, because of bein( a nonBactuality *dn(os po+ma yin ba,. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, is a nonBmanifest phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit, is a hidden phenomenon. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that it is because of bein( a nonBmanifest phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established.

C. /t follows that it is so because whate0er is a nonBmanifest phenomenon is necessarily a hidden phenomenon' because you asserted the per0asion. What does this ha0e1 %here is somethin( that is both. %here is somethin( which is a hidden phenomenon and is not a nonBmanifest phenomenon. %here is somethin( *to be posited, which is not a hidden phenomenon and is a nonBmanifest phenomenon. %here is nothin( whih is neither *that is, not a nonBmanifest phenomenon and not a hidden phenomenon,. %here are a lot *of relationships, like this. &omethin( which is a hidden phenomenon and not a nonBmanifest phenomenon is like a pot. somethin( which is a nonBmanifest phenomenon and is not a hidden phenomenon is like a nonBe6istent. &omethin( which is both *i.e., a nonBmanifest phenomenon and a hidden phenomenon, is uncaused space. %here is nothin( which is neither, but you mi(ht ha0e one in !merica that is not either so brin( it tomorrow. %here is nothin( which is not either. &o we (et three possibilities without there bein( somethin( which is neither, ri(ht1 %here+s probably one in Washin(ton. When you went to New 7ork, wasn+t there one1 7es, there are three possibilities without there bein( somethin( which is neither. JH. Well, this is different from the usual type of three possibilities, ri(ht1 &o when one says, 5Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1,5 what do you ha0e to say1 *- answers, 7ou do not need that. 7ou do somethin( which is one and not the other and then somethin( which is the other and not the one as when doin( four possibilities, and then somethin( which is neither does not e6ist. When there are three possibilities, it does not necessarily ha0e to occur that one per0ades the other, that the other is not necessarily the one, and that there is somethin( which is one and not the other. 7ou can answer back that there are three possibilities. %here is somethin( that is both. %here is somethin( that is one and not the other, and there is somethin( that is the other and not the one. %here are three aspects *kha, to it, ri(ht1 /n the books there is no e6planation of three possibilities such as this. >ut such a thin( is implied by the Collected %opics *1,. %here are such three possibilities. When there are three possibilities, it is not necessary that there be one that is necessarly the other, that there be one that is not necessarily the other, and that there be only one direction in whih somethin( is one and not the other. >ut there is somethin( which harms this 0iew. */f it is like that,,

then there comes to be a difference of three possibilities in which somethin( is one and not the other, somethin( is the other and not the one, there is somethin( that is neither, and there is nothin( that is both. for instance, with respect to the twoBpermanent phenomenon and actuality. %here is somethin( which is a permanent phenomenon and not an actuality, somethin( which is an actuality and not a permanent phenomenon, and somethin( which is neither, but nothin( which is both. We do not say that there are three possibilities between the twoBBpermanent phenomenon and actuality. We say they are contradictory. %here are a lot like that. New ?ebate *?e0elopin( out of ?ebate >.13, C. /t follows that that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness is not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e because that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is possible is not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. &pell it out. *- . When you say that there is no per0asion, what are you sayin(1 %hink about it., ?. @0en thou(h that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is possible is not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible, this does not entail that that whcih is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness is not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e. *- . 7ou are sayin( like this when you say there is no per0asion . that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness is the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e, and that whch is suitable a an ob4ect of an awareness the berin( of which is possible is not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. Now debate with him sayin(, 5/t follows that that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of whch is possible is not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible and that which is suitable a an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is not possible is not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible.5 *When the student could not (et it, he redirected., Well, debate this way, 5/t follows that that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is possible is not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible.5,

C. /t follows that that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is possible is not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of whcih is possible. ?. / accept it. C. Why is that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is possible not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible1 ?. >ecause whate0er is an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is possible is not necessrily an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. C. /f there is no per0asion, posit a countere6ample. ?. %he sub4ect, the twoBBpermanent phenomenon and actuality. %he sub4ect, the twoBBa pillar and a pot. *!ll of the ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible will work., C. /t follows that the sub4et, the twoBBa pillar and a pot, is an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is possible. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, the twoBBa pillar and a pot, an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is possible1 ?. >ecause of bein( an ob4ect of comprehension of an omniscient consciousness the bein( of which is possible. C. /t follows that whae0er is an ob4ect of comprehension of an omniscient consciousness the bein( of which is possible is neessarily an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is possible. ?. / accept it. C. Now, it follows that that which is suitable a an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is not possible is not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is not possible, not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible1 ?. >ecause whate0er is it is not necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is not possible is not necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. ?. / accept it. C. =osit it. *- . !ll of the ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible will work, ri(ht1,

?. %he sub4ect, a pot. C' /t follows that the sub4ect, a pot, is suitable as an b4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is not possible. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, a pot, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is not possible1 ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as an ob4ect of an omniscient consciousness the bein( of which is not possible. C. /t follows that whate0er is suitable as an ob4ect of an omniscient consciousness the bein( of which is not possible is necessarily suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is not possible. ?. / accept it. JH. ;or an omniscient consciousness the bein( of which is not possible can you posit the twoBBthe first and second moments of an omniscient consciousness1 - . 7es, that+s alri(ht. !lso, you can say the twoBBthe omniscient consciousness in the continuum of &hakyamuni >uddha. %hese are both omniscient consciousnesses but there is nothin( which is both. Howe0er, in the aBdo Collected %opics this definition is posited in this way. /t says, 5%hat which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is possible is the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. %hat which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is not possible is the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible.5 %he author of this te6t is JamByan(BchokBhlaBodBser *+4am dbyan(s mcho( hla +od :er,. /t is 4ust called the aBdo Collected %opics. /t is 0ery famous. Dost people study the Collected %opics from that. !mon(st the 0arious Collected %opics te6ts of the different (roups there are many disa(reements. Now when one teaches the refutation of this. that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of whih is possible is not the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. /f someone asks, 5Why isn+t it15 */t is because, whate0er is an established base is necessarily suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is possible. /f someone asks, 5Why is there per0asion15 */t is because, whate0er is an established base is necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e of an awareness the bein( of which is possible. 5Why is that posited15 *>ecause, whate0er is an established base is necessarily an ob4ect of comprehension of an omniscient consciousness the bein( of which is possible.

!nd there is one other part we ha0e to do. %hat+s ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. %hat which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is not possible does not obtain as the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. !nd it is the same here. Whate0er is an established base is necessarily suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of whih is not possible, but whate0er is an established base is not necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. /f someone asks, 5Why is whate0er is an established base necessarily suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness the bein( of which is not possible15 */t is because, whate0er is an established base is necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e of an awareness the bein( of which is not possible. *%his is so, because whate0er is an established base is necessarily an ob4ect of comprehension of an omniscient consciousness the bein( of which is not possible. *JH. @0erythin( which e6ists would be the ob4ect of comprehension of the twoBBthe omniscient consciousness of the >uddha Iashyaba and the omniscient consciousness of the buddha &hakyamuni. !nd that is an awareness the bein( of which is not possible, ri(ht1, =robably what they are understandin( in the aBdo Collected %opics is that it itself is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness and somethin( which is it is possible, and it itself is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness and somethin( which is it is not possible. %hey say 5awareness *knowin(, an ob4ect the bein( of which is not possible.5 %he phrase 5of which the bein( is not possible5 (oes with the ob4ect and not with the awareness. *JH. /n the aBdo Collected %opics they are understandin( 5of which the bein( is not possible5 as (oin( with the ob4ect and not with the awareness, 5an awareness the bein( of which is not possible.5 /t is a )uestion of whether the (eneti0e on possible *srid ba+i, (oes with merely the en6t syllable, awareness, or with the whole followin( phrase, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness., When one says 5of which the bein( is possible5 it (oes with the awareness itself or, in the aBdo te6t, it (oes with the ob4ect itself. Now yesterday we did the two, one and different, and the two, (enerally and specifically characteri:ed phenomena. Now let+s look at positi0e *s(rub pa, and ne(ati0e phenomena *d(a( pa,. %he definition of a ne(ati0e phenomenon is that whih is reali:ed by a thou(ht apprehendin( it by way of e6plicitly eliminatin( its own ob4ect of ne(ation. %he definition of a positi0e phenomenon is a phenomenon

which is not reali:ed by a thou(ht apprehendin( it by way of e6plicitly eliminatin( its own ob4ect of ne(ation. %hese definitions ar posited this way in the %utor+s and the aBdo Collected %opics. %hese are posited in terms of the thou(ht apprehendin( them. %hey can also be defined from the point of 0iew of the term e6pressin( them. =robaby =anBchen &oBnamBdrakBba posits them in this way, by the term which appears to the awareness. He (i0es the definition of ne(ati0e phenomenon as an ob4ect such that when its meanin( appears to an awareness, it appears in the aspect of a ne(ati0e phenomenon. %he definition of a positi0e phenomenon is an ob4ect such that when its meanin( appears to an awareness, it appears in the aspect of a positi0e phenomenon. %he meanin( has to appear to an awareness, ri(ht1 *%he meanin(, itself appears in the aspect of a ne(ati0e phenomenon. %he definitions of positi0e and ne(ati0e phenomena are like this. %his is by the term which appears to the awareness. JH. /f it is done by way of the term only, what about emptiness and impermanent phenomenon1 - . Well, impermanent phenomenon, accordin( to the (oBman( Collected %opics is a ne(ati0e phenomenon. 2thers posit it as a positi0e phenomenon. Ne(ati0e phenomena are such as we ha0e discussed before. nonBhidden phenomenon, nonB manifest phenomenon, nonBpot, nonBpillar, opposite from not bein( pot. /n the (oBman( Collected %opics opposite from not bein( pot is not posited as a ne(ati0e phenomenon. 2ther ne(ati0e phenonena are opposite from bein( pot, opposite from not bein( a pillar, emptiness, liberation, the selflessnes of persons. %hese are all ne(ati0e phenomena. =ositi0e phenomena are like pot, pillar, human, (od. @0en demiB (od *lha ma yin, is a positi0e phenomenon. %here are a lot of e6ceptions. &ome say, 5Well, if impermanent phenomenon is a ne(ati0e phenomenon, then is permanent phenomenon a positi0e phenomenon15 No, it+s a ne(ati0e phenomenon. ?emiB(od has a ne(ati0e particle in its name, and that should be enou(h to make it a ne(ati0e, but it is a positi0e phenomenon. 7ou understand positi0e phenomena, ri(ht1 these are all positi0e phenomenaBBwood, house, table, rice, 0e(etable, meat, potatoe. %he opposite of bein( a pot is a ne(ati0e phenomenon because of the portion which says 5opposite.5 !lso, opposite from bein( opposite from bein( a pot is a ne(ati0e phenomenon. 2nce there is a ne(ati0e particle in it, no matter how many you line up it is still a ne(ati0e phenomenon. almost always. %here are two sides on the )uestion of

impermanent phenomenon. =robably here in the %utor+s Collected %opics and in the aBdo Collected %opics impermanent phenomenon is a positi0e phenomenon, but there are other opinions. /t does not make any difference where you posit it, there are two ways of thinkin( about it. /f when you think about impermanent phenomenon what appears to the mind is somethin( that does not stay, then it is a ne(ati0e phenomenon. /f what appears to the mind is momentariness and disinte(ratn(, then it is a positi0e phenomenon. %here is not a lot of difference. %here are two ways of thinkin( about it. %hose who say it+s ne(ati0e, say it+s ne(ati0e. &ometimes they pull the ears. *JH. / don+t know if he means we should pull their ears or if they would pull our ears. =robably he means they would pull our ears for talkin( too much about it, makin( such a bi( deal out of it., Now there are the threeBB0irtue and so forth *d(e so(s (sum,. %hese are 0irtue *d(e ba,, nonB0irtue *mi d(e ba,, and the neutral *lun( ma bstan,. %he definition of 0irtue is that whcih is *1, indicated *as a 0irtue, and *", abides in the class of that which issues forth happiness as the fruition which is its own effect. 5/ndicated5 or 5re0ealed5 means here 5that which abides as either 0irtue or nonB 0irtue.5 %hus, in this case of definin( 0irtue, it means that which is 0irtuous. /t means that which is definite as 0irtuous or nonB0irtuous. /t does not necessarily refer to >uddha+s ha0in( said it this way or that way which is what those words often mean. 5!bides in the class of that which issues forth happiness5 is said because there are, for instance, 0irtues which ha0e been o0ercome by hatred and do not issue forth happiness. >ut they are still 0irtues. %his means that there are e6ceptions that merely 5abide in the calss of.5 / doubt that these effects ha0e to issue forth in another lifetime. Eirtues that are o0ercome by hatred do not ha0e any fuition of happiness. %hey are not destroyed from the root. %he definition of nonB0irtue is that which is *1, indicated *as a nonB 0irtue, and *", abides in the class of that which issues forth sufferin( as the fruition which is its effect. JH. /f the portion which says 5indicated *as a nonB0irtue,5 were left out, what fault would there be1 /f someone said that the definition of nonB0irtue is that which abides in the class of that which issues forth sufferin( as the fruition which is its effect, would there be anythin( to harm this position1 - . =robably not in terms of understandin(, but it does eliminate somethin(. ;or instance, as in the case of a 0irtue, what about the cause of a fruition which is its effect1 =robably they are thinkin( of cause and effect. ;or

instance, there is a cause that issues forth happiness as its fruition which is its effect. %he debate would be like this. %his will come in more detail in the (reater presentation of cause and effect in the 5Diddlin( =ath of easonin(.5 =robably 5indicated5 is stated in order to refute this reasonin(. %here is no other purpose. ;or the sake of understandin( you don+t need the first part. %hese causes that lead up to 0irtue may be causes that issue forth happiness, but are they 0irtues1 Daybe this is the reason it is so stated, for the sake of eliminatn( such thin(s as the prior arisin( *sn(a lo(s su byun( ba, of happiness which is its fruition and effect. We ha0e to make a difference between what is stated for the sake of understandin( and what is stated for the sake of eliminatin( cle0er debate. /t is a0oidin( a 0erbal fallacy. ;or instance, when one states the definition of a tenet system one be(ins by sayin(, 5it is *1, one of the four proponents of tenets.5 %his is only for the sake of refutin( a 0erbal fallacy. %he definition of a neutral phenomenon is that which is not indicated as somethin( which is a 0irtue or a nonB0irtue. *JH. / o0eruse the word 5neutral5 in my translation system. %his is one of the many words / translate as 5neutral.5, Eirtues are posited as the ethics of abandonin( killin(, the ethics of abandonin( stealin(, the ethics of abandonin( se6ual misconduct, and so forth throu(h the ten 0irtues. %he ethics of abandonin( killin(, of abandonin( stealin(, of abandonin( se6ual misconduct, of abandonin( lyin(, and so on are each illustrations of 0irtue. %he nonB0irtues are killin(, stealin(, se6ual misconduct, lyin(, harsh words, di0isi0eness, senseless talk, co0etousness, harmfulness, and wron( 0iew.

D/&&/NJ =!J@&BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB word, 5shin(,5 may refer to either trees or to thin(s of wood. %hus, this definition is of chon shin( which is only a tree., there are those who say that a table is not a treeLwood. /t is not comfortable to say that this is not a treeLwood. ! table is established from a tree, it is not a tree, they say. %here ar those who say that whate0er is a tree is necessarily that which has branches, 0eins, and lea0es. /f you say like

that, you ha0e to say that what is made out of (old, these (olden thin(s, are not (old. %his is not comfortable. /n winter there are no lea0es and 0ens, but it says 5possesses.5 /n (eneral you can say that a tree has lea0es and 0eins. */f you say this tree has flowers, that does not necessarily mean it has them now. What about pine trees1 %hey don+t ha0e 0eins., /sn+t there somethin( (oin( at the top1 *&ure, inside the needle there must be a passa(eway., Now when one says there are two 0alid co(ni:ers of the two ob4ects of comprehension, there are two ob4ects of comprehensionBB specifically characteri:ed phenomena and (enerally characteri:ed phenomena. &ince there are those two, there are the two, direct percei0ers which take specifically characteri:ed phenomena as their apprehended ob4ects and inferential co(ni:ers which take (enerally characteri:ed phenomena as their apprehended ob4ects. %he enumeration of 0alid co(ni:ers is definite as these two. 2h, there is a little fault in the words. ;or e6ample, there are the two ob4ects of comprehensionBBspecifically and (enerally characteri:ed phenomena. &ince there are those, there are the two types of 0alid co(ni:ersBB direct 0alid co(ni:ers which take specifically characteri:ed phenomena as their apprehended ob4ects and inferential 0alid co(ni:ers which take (enerally characteri:ed phenomena as their apprehended ob4ects. /f / did not e6plain the meanin( of the actual scripture but only e6plained the ancillary topics, it would not help. *&o / e6plained it., Now the two, *1, all established bases are it and *", it is an established base, ha0 four pssibilities. somethin( which is both is ob4ect of knowled(e, e6istent, established base, phenomenon, and so on. 7ou can posit all of those. *JH. ?oes 5all established bases5 mean 5whate0er is an established base15, No, 5all established bases5 is understood as the (enerality re0erse *spyi ldo(,. When one says, 5%he sub4ect, all established bases, is a permanent phenomenon. ;rom amon( the two, actualities and permanent phenomena, it is a permanent phenomenon, ri(ht1 /t is that sort of thou(ht. *%he reason he is sayin( all established bases is that he is referrin( to the (enerality, the opposite of the ne(ati0e of the (enerality of established base, which is a permanent phenomenon., Now somethin( which is *1, all established bases are it and *", it is not an established base is only a permanent phenomenon. !ll established bases is a permanent phenomenon, ri(ht1 &ince it is a permanent phenomenon, it has to be only a permanent phenomenon.

2nly a permanent phenomenon is a nonBe6istent, but there are thin(s which are it. Whate0er is a permanent phenomenon is necessarily only a permanent phenomenon. Whate0er is a permanent phenomenon is necessarily not an actuality, ri(ht1 /f someone asks whether or not only a permanent phenomenon e6ists, it does not. Whate0er is an actuality is necessarily only an actuality. !ll established bases are only a permanent phenomenon. 2nly a permanent phenomenon itself is not an established base. 2nly a permanent phenomenon is not an e6istent. 2nly a (enerally characteri:ed phenomenon is not an e6istent. 2nly a con0ntional truth is not an e6istent. 2nly a nonBactuality is not an e6istent. 2nly an actuality is not an e6istent. 2nly an impermanent phenomenon is not an e6istent. 2nly a product is not an e6istent. Now ha0in( done this. 2nly ob4ect of knowled(e is an e6istent. /t is not the same. Why is only ob4ect of knowled(e an e6istent1 NonB ob4ect of knowled(e is not an e6istent, ri(ht1 NonBob4ect of knowled(e is a nonBe6istent ri(ht1 &ince nonBob4ect of knowled(e is a nonBe6istent, only ob4ect of knowled(e itself obtains as an e6istent. %he others are the same. 2nly established bse is an e6istent. 2nly e6istent is an e6istent. !ll he phenomena which are synonymous with established base are the same. *JH. 2nce you take the basis from which you di0ide e0erythin(, since e0erythin( is that if you consider that basis, then you can say that only that e6ists, ri(ht1 /f you say only e6istent, or onlyestablished base, then that does e6ist. >ut then once you di0ide that into two thin(s, you cannot say that only a permanent phenomenon e6ists. @0en thou(h somethin( may be only a permanent phenomenon, only a permanent phenomenon itself does not e6ist. &o he is talkin( about what is the most basic cate(ory and what is not., 2nly established base is an e6istent. NonBestablished base does not e6ist, ri(ht1 /s there anythin( which is not an established base and e6ists1 No. %herefore, only established base is an e6istent. ?o you ha0e it1 *JH. When you (et the pair of opposites like permanent phenomenon and nonBpermanent phenomenon. /f its opposite does not e6ist and it does, then only it e6ists., 7ou ha0e to understand the reason. When someone says, 5Why is only a permanent phenomenon a nonBe6istent15 you ha0e to say it is because actuality e6ists. /s the sub4ect, only a permanent phenomenon, an e6istent1 No. Why is the sub4ect, only a permanent phenomenon, not an e6istent1 >ecause actualities also e6ist. Jot it1

;or e6ample, only you do not e6ist, ri(ht1 %here ar the others of us, ri(ht1 %his is the thou(ht. 2nly ob4ect of knowled(e is an e6istent. @0en one thin( which is not an ob4ect of knowled(e does not e6ist, ri(ht1 %here is nothin( which is both not an ob4ect f knowled(e and is an e6istent, ri(ht1 %he sub4et, only ob4ect of knowled(e, e6ists bcause nonBob4ect of knowled(e does not e6ist, nonBob4ect of knowled(e is not an e6istent. /n the same way only an actuality does not e6ist because permanent phenomena also e6ist. 2kay1 2thers are the same. 2nly a pot is not an e6istent. 2nly a pillar is not an e6istent. %he *reasonin( for these, (oes the same way. 2nly a (enerality is not an e6istent. 2nly an instance is not an e6istent. 2nly a (enerality does not e6ist because instances e6ist. 2nly an instance is not an e6istent because (enealities also e6ist. 2nly a horse is not an e6istent because donkeys also e6ist. !re there are donkeys1 ?o you know donkeys1 !re there any donkeys in !merica1 2nly a horse does not e6ist beause mules also e6ist. %he father of a mule is a donkey, ri(ht1 %he mother of a mule is a horse. 2nly a pot does not e6ist because there are many nonBpots. &o somethin( which is *1, all established bases are it and *", it is not anestablished base is only a permanent phenomenon. &omethin( which is *1, it is an established base and *, not all established bases are it is the sub4et, actuality. !ctuality itself is an established base. !ll established bases are not an actuality. !ll established bases *constitute1, a permanent phenomenon. !ll phenomena constitute a permanent phenomenon. Well, then one state the reasons and predicates, 5Well, it follows that the subet, all established bases, is a permanent phenomenon.5 / accept it. %hen it follows that actuality is a permanent phenomenon. Why1 /t follows that it is so because all established bass are a permanent phenomenon. %he per0asion does not arise. %here is no per0asion. !ll established bases are bein( thou(ht of from the point of 0iew of its selfBre0erse. *JH. &o when you say all established bases you do not mean each and e0ery established base. 7ou mean 4ust that (enerality of all established bases., Now, it follows that the sub4et, actuality, is not an established base. Why1 /t follows that actuality is an established base. / accept it. /t follows that all established bases are not a permanent phenomenon because actuality is an established base. %here is no per0asion. Now you understand. &omethin( which is *1, it is an established base and *",

all established bses are not it is actuality, pot, pillar, and so forth. Now there are a lot that are neither. What is somethin( which is *1, it is not an established base and *", all established bes are not it1 2nly an actuality, only a pot, only a pillar. %hen if you answer back these, it will work. /f you answer the son of a barren woman, the horn of a rabbit, and so on, it will work. /f you think on this relationship of four ossibilities, it will help you. Now / am (oin( to state out some possibilities for you and you ha0e to (i0e the sub4ets. What is the difference between one and ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible1 Ji0e an answer. *Joes around the room and (ets three different answers., %he meanin( of synonymity is that one is necessarily the other and the other is necessarly the one. &omethin( whic is both and somethin( which is neither can also be posited for two synonyms. /f you sy that they are synonymous, it follows that whate0er is an ob4ect f knowled(e the ben( of which is possible is necesarily one. / accept it. /s there per0asion1 %hen it follows that the sub4ect, the twpBBob4ect of knowled(e and established bse, are one because of bein( an ob4ct of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. /t follows that the sub4ect the twoBBactuality and impermanent phenomenon, are one because of bein( an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. %here are a lot like that that wil comeBBactuality and impermanent phenomenon. actuality and that which is able to perform a function, ob4ect of knowled(e and established base, permanent phenomenon and (enerally characteri:ed phenomenon. *JH. Would the sub4ect, two pots, work1, When you say two pots there is somewhat of a factor of issimilarity. %he sub4ect, the twoBBa pot and a blbous flatBbased phenomenon able to perform the function of holdin( water, would work. /n (eneral if you say two pots or the two, a pot and a pot, it would be one. ! pot is one with a pot, ri(ht1 2h, but you are probably thinkin( of somethin( which is two pots, ri(ht1 %hat woud probably work here. /f follows that the sub4ect, the twoBBactuality and that which is able to perform a function, are one because of bein( an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. *JH. Now don+t feel that you ha0e to answer stupidly. 7ou can correct yourself and answer properly. you+0e made a mistake but don+t feel that you ha0e to hold onto it., ?o you understand1 %hose of you who said that it is three possibilities posit which is necessarily the other, which is not neessarily the other, and posit

somethin( which is one and not the other. Whate0er is one is necessarily an ob4ect of knwled(e the bein( of which is possible. Whate0er is an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible is not necessarily one. %he sub4ect, the twoBBpermanent phenomenon and actuality. C. /t follows that the sub4et, the twoBBpermanent phenomenon and actuality, are an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. ?. 2h, the sub4ect, the twoBBactuality and that which is ablke to perform a function. *JH. there is somethin( which is both an actuality and that which is able to perform a function, ri(ht1, C. Why is the sub4ect, the twoBBactuality and that which is able to perform a function, an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible1 ?. >ecause of bein( obser0ed as a common locus of 91, somethin( which is it e6ists and *", also bein( suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. C. /t follows tht the sub4et, the twoBBactuality and that which is able to perform a function, are not one. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4et, the twoBBactuality and that which is able to perform a function, are not synonyms. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that the sub4et, the twoBBactuality and that which is able to perform a function, are synonyms. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the twoBBactuality and that which is able to perform a function, are one. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that they are because of ein( synonyms. ?. %here is no per0asion. %here is a difference between one and synonymous. %he twoBB actuality and that which i able to perform a functionBBare synonymous, they are not one. %hey are not one because of bein( different phenomena. %hose two are definition and definiendum, ri(ht1 %hey are different and di0erse. %hey are not one, they are synonyms. /t is like that. %here are a lot like that. %he twoBBestablished bse and ob4ect of knowled(eBBare synonymous, they are not one. 2kay1 %he twoBBob4ect of comprehension and e6istentBBare synonyms. !lthou(h their meanin( is the same, those two are not one. %hey are not one. Whate0er is one must ha0e the same actual name. ;or e6ample, the

sound e6pressin( 5pot5 is pot+s actual name. %he sound e6pressin( 5pillar5 is pillar+s actual name. %he sound e6pressin( 5ob4ect of knowled(e5 is the actual name of ob4ect of knowled(e. %he actual names of the twoBBactuality and that which is able to perform a functionBBare understood as di0erse and unshared. %hey are di0erse actual names. %hey are that because of bein( different phenomena. &o there are three possibilities between one and ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. C. Now what is the difference between the two, one and definiendum1 *- . /t will help you to think about the per0asions in order to understand established bases., &y it. ?. %here are three possibilities. C. /f there are three possibilities, posit which per0ades the other, which does not per0ade the other, and somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whate0er is one is necessarily a definiendum. Whate0er is a definiendum is not necessarily one. %he sub4ect, the twoBBestablished base and e6istent. C. *- . ?o you others a(ree with that1 ?o you say that what0er is one is necessarily a definiendum1 @6press your ndi0idual thou(ht., /f you say whate0er is one is necessarily a definiendum, what is the fult1 7ou ha0e to see the fault. &ay i. ?. %he sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function. C. i(ht. %he sub4ect, tht which is able to perform a function. %he sub4ect, that which is suitable as an ob4et of an awareness. %hese are definitions, not definiendums. %hey are one, not different. do you understand1 /f someone says that whate0er is one is neesarily a dfiniendum, say, 5/t follows that the sub4ect, that which is able to perform function, is a definiendum because of bein( one. /f they say it is a definiendum say, 5/t is not a definiendum because of bein( a definition.5 %he twoBBdefinition and definiendumBBare contradictory, ri(ht1 %hey are contradictory. ?o you understand1 /f someone says, 5/t follows that actuality and that which is able to perform a function are contradictory beause definition and definiendum are contradictory,5 there is no per0asion. /n (eneral that which is called definiendum and that which is called definition are contradictory. /t is not said that ctuality and that which is able to perform a function are contradictory. %hat which is abl to perform a function and acutaity are synonyms, ri(ht1 %hat which is suitable s an ob4ect of an awareness and ob4et of knowled(e are synonyms. ! common locus of *1, the

nonBmomentary and *", phenomenon and permanent phenomenon are synonyms. !ll of them are synonyms. @0en so definition and definiendum are contradictory. >ut a specific case of definition and definiendum are not contradictory. Now those of you who say that there are four possibilities posit somethin( which is a definiendum but not one. ?. he sub4ect, the twoBBestablished base and e6istent. C. What do you posit s the definition of the twoBBestablished base and e6istent1 %hat+s (ood. 7ou coul say each of them is a definiendum because each has a definition and the two to(ether has a definition because established by a 0alid co(ni:er and obsered by 0alid co(ni:er is that definition. %here is a lot of debate like that. Whate0er is a definiendum is necessarily one. /t is said that those two to(ether are not a definiendum. ?o you understand1 Whate0er is a definiendum is necessarily one. /f someone says, 5/t follows that the sub4ect, different, is one because of bein( a definiendum,5 that is ri(ht. ?ifferent itself is one. ?ifferent is not different. ?ifferent is one with different, but it is also one itself. 2kay1 %here are a lot of unusual sub4ects like sayin( different is one, wo is ne, three is one, and so on. %hey really debate it. /t follows that two persons are not two. /t follows that two dollars are not two. &o what is the difference between the two, definiendum and one1 %here are three possibilities. &omethin( which is both is a pot. Whate0er is a definiendum is necessarily one. Whate0er is one is not necessarily a definiendum. =osit those definitions. %he sub4ect, a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon able to perform the function of holdin( water. %he sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function. %hose. 2kay1 Now in the same way, what is the difference between one and definition1 %here are three possibilities. Whate0er is a definition is necesarily one. Whate0er is one is not necessarily a definition. /t is the same as before. Here posit the definiendums as the sub4ects. 2kay1 Now what is the difference between one and ne(ati0e phenomenon1 =robably you do nt know this well. %here are our possibilities. &omethin( which is both is the opposit of nonBpot. !lso, nonBpermanent phenomenon is one and also is a ne(ati0e phenomenon. /t is a ne(ati0e phenomenon because of bein( an affirmin( ne(ati0e. !s / e6plained before, ne(ati0e phenomena are of two types, affirmin( ne(ati0es and nonBaffirmin( ne(ati0es. !lso, you

can ut the definition of ne(ati0e phenomenon as the reason. 2r you can say it is a ne(ati0e phenomenon because of bein( an eliminator of the other *apoha, (:han sel,. Ne(ti0e phenomenon and eliminator of the other are synonyms. =ut the sub4ect as nonBpot or the opposite of nonBpot. %he sub4ect is one because of bein( a phenomenon which is nonBdi0erse. Now somethin( which is one but not a ne(ati0e phenomenon is the sub4ect, a pot. %he sub4et, a pillar. &omethin( which is a ne(ati0e phenomenon but not one is the sub4et, the twoBBnonBpermanent phenomenon and nonB(enerally characteri:ed phenomenon, or the sub4ect, the twoBBnonBpot and nonBpillar. /f you posit such sub4ets, it will fit. Now there are a lot which are neither. 2kay1 What is the difference between one and 0irtue1 %here are four possibilities. &omethin( which is one and is a 0irtue is the sub4ect, an action of abandonin( killin( *sron( (cod spon( ba+i las,. %he sub4et, (i0in(. %he sub4et, ethics. 7ou can posit those. &omethin( whic is one and not a 0irtue is the sub4ect, permanent phenomenon, or the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e. &omethin( which is a 0irtue and not one is the sub4ect, the ten 0irtues. %he two, one and 0irtue, ha0 four possibilities. &omethin( which is one and is an ob4ect of knowled(e the ben( of which is not possibile does not e6ist. Not e0en one. *%his must be by way of sayin( that one and ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible are contradictory., /f someone says, 5What is the differnce between one and contradictory15 they are contradictory. &omethin( which is one and contradictory does not e6ist. &o tha is one. Now for different, what s the difference between the two, different and ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible1 ?. %here are four possibilities. C. What do you posit as somethin( which is both1 ?. %he sub4ect, the twoBBa pillar and a pot. C. 2h, it follows that the sub4ect, the twoBBa pillar and a pot, is an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which possible. /t follos with respect to the sub4et, the twoBBa pillar and a pot that somethin( whic0h is it e6ists. ?. Why1 C. ;inished8 /t follows tha the twoBBa pillar and a potBBis not an ob4ect o knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. ?. / accept it.

C. ;inished8 Now what do you posit as both1 ?. %he sub4ect, the twoBBactuality and that which is able to perform a function. C. Now what do you posit as somethin( which is different and is not an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible and is not different. ?. %he sub4ect, a po. C. Now what is the difference between the two, different and ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. ?. %here are three possibilities. C. What do you propose as somethin( which is both1 ?. %he sub4ect, the twoBBa pillar and a pot. C. How do you posit which is necessarily the other, which is not necessarily the other, and somethin( which is one but not he other. ?. Whate0er is different is necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. C. /t follows that there is per0asion. ?. Why8 C. ;inished8 %hen. ?. Whate0er is an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible is necessarily different. Whate0er is different is not necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. %he sub4ect, the twoBBactuality and that which is able to perform a function. Whate0er is an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible must ha0e two phenomena which are contradictory. 7ou must ha0e two. %he twoBBa pillar and a pot. %he twoBBpermanent phenomenon and actuality. %he twoBBdefinition and definiendum. %he twoBBmental consciousness and sense consciousness. %he twoBB common bein( and &uperior. %he twoBB(od and human. %he twoBeast and west. -ike these. %he twoBBthe sky and the earth. %he twoBB 0irtue and nonB0irtue. %he twoBBfault and benefit. %here are a lot. %he twoBBlar(e and small. %he twoBB(ood and bad. %he twoBBsupreme and low. ?o you understand1 Now what is the difference between the two, different and definiendum1 What is the difference between the two, different and definition1 %hey debate this a lot. /s the twoBestablished base and ob4ect of knowled(eBBa definiendum or not1 %hey debate like that. =robably in (eneral they are contradictory. Whate0er is a definiendum is necssrily one, ri(ht1 =robably they are contradictory.

?ifferent and definiendum are contradictory. ?ifferent and definition are contradictory. @0en so, it is debated a lot. &ome say whate0er is a definition is necessarily not different and whate0er is a definition is necessarily one, ri(ht1 %hen if that is so *others say,, isn+t the twoBB that which is able to perform a function and the momentaryBBa definition1 /t follows that it is because of bein( the definition of the twoBBactuality and impermanent phenomenon. *%he others respond to this tht, they are definitions indi0idually, they are not a definition f the two of them *%he debate (oes like this., /t follows that the sub4ect, the twoBBactuality and impermanent phenomenon, is a definiendum because of bein( the definiendum of the twoBBthat which is able to perform a function and the momentary. %he reason is not established. %hose two are indi0idually definiendums, they are not a definiendum of those two. Ha0in( said that, they debate it back an forth a lot. Now what is the difference between the two, different and 0irtue1 =robably it is the same as before with the two, one and 0irtue. ?ifferent and 0irtue ha0e four ossibilities. ?ifferent and nonB0irtue ha0e four possibilities. ?ifferent and nonB0irtue h0e four possibilities. ?ifferent and nonB0irtue ha0e four possibilities. ?ifferent and neutral phenomena ha0e four possibilities. 7ou should think about it. %hen you wil ascertain these established basesBBob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is not ossible and those the bein( of which is possible, definiendum and definition, one and different, and so forth. /f you understand these, you will understand. !ctuality itself is an actuality, others are re0ersed from this. NonB actuality is a permanent phenomenon. 7ou ha0e to say that nonB actuality is a permanent phenomenon. %he definition of actuality is itself a permanent phenomenon. %he definition of that which is able to perform a function is itself a permanent phenomenon. %here are a lot. %he re0erse of actuality is a pemanent phenomenon. 2ne with actuality is a permanent phenomenon. ?ifferent from actuality is a permanent phenomenon. =henomenon which is di0erse from actuality is a permanent phenomenon. 7ou ha0e to say that all of these are permanent phenomena. Jot it1 What is opposite from not bein( an actuality1 /t is an actuality. What is opposite from not bein( an actuality1 /t is an actuality1 /t is a permanent phenomenon. /f you apply this to othersBBimpermanent phenomenon, product, pot, pillar, and so forthBBit is the same. 2ne with pot is permanent phenomenon. %he definition of pot is itself a permanent phenomenon. ?ifferent from pot is a permanent phenomenon. /t is said like that. %hey ar

permanent henomena. Jot it1 so now we will not (o back to look at established bses and colors. -ater when we enumerate the three possibilities, four possibilities, and so on you will ascertain it. We must (o on. W will not (o back. /dentifyin( e0erses Now we are (oin( on to identifyin( re0erses. /f there is somethin( left o0er from established bases / will offer it to you later, but let+s (o on to the re0erses. When we (et to thin(s later, we will crossBapply them. Now the basic source )uote fo identifyin( re0erses is 5>ecause all thin(s natually abide in their own entities.5 /t is clear. someone asks what the reason is. !ll thin(s naturally are not mi6ed with others and abide in their own entities. therefore, they are re0ersed from all similar and dissiilar thin(s. *JH. &o because all thin(s naturally abide without bein( mi6ed with other thin(s, with thin(s other than themsel0es, therefore they abide n their own entities., %here is a definition, but at the moment / do not remember it. !t the end it says 5depends on a re0ersal,5 but / don+t remember the first part. ?on+t write it now. /f you don+t ha0e it all, it is not a definition. *JH. >ecause all phenomena abide naturally in their own entities they are not mi6ed with others and so forth., !ll thin(s abide naturally as themsel0es, not mi6ed with others. %hey do not become di0erse but abide naturally in their own entities. %hus, for each and e0ery phenomenon one can posit a re0erse. there is a re0erse which is a re0ersl from all that is not itself for each phenomenon. With respect to re0erses, there are the four re0erses. (eneralB re0erse *spyi ldo(,, selfBre0erse *ran( ldo(,, meanin(Bre0erse *don ldo(,, and illustrationBre0erse *(:hi ldo(,. Jot it1 Now if we apply this to a basis, for instance, to actuality. /f you apply it to actuality, actuality is itself the (eneralBre0erse and the selfBre0erse of ob4ect of knowled(e and the (eneralBre0erse of ob4ect of knowled(e. =ermanent phenomenon is itself the selfBre0erse of permanent phenomenon and the (eneralBre0erse of permanent phenomenon. %hat which is able to perform a function is the meanin(Bre0erse of actuality. @arlier we said, 5this is the definition of that because this is the meanin( of that,5 ri(ht1 %his is it. %hat which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness is the meanin(Bre0erse of ob4ect of knowled(e. %hat which i a commn locus of bein( a phenomenon and bein( nonB momentary is the meanin(Bre0erse of permanent phenomenon. !pply

it to the others in the same way. 2kay1 ! pot is an ilustrationBre0erse of actuality and an illustrationB re0erse of ob4ect of knowled(e. Kncaused space is an illustrationB re0erse of permanent phenomenon. Jot it1 7ou say, 5%his is an ilustrationBre0erse of that because of bein( an illustration of that.5 %his is the meanin( of bein( an illustration. 7ou say, 5%here is an e6ample of this on pa(e 19 line C. With respect to the sub4et, actuality, it is not an illustration of itself because ha0in( ascertained it by a lid co(n:er there is no possibility of not ha0in( ascertained actuality by a 0alid co(ni:er. %his ios what is said here, 5/t follows that it is an ilustration of actuality because *1, it is an actuality and *", ha0in( ascertained it by a 0alid co(ni:er, there is a nonBascertainin( of actuality by a 0alid co(ni:er. %hat nonBascertainin( is the meanin( of actuality+s illustration and the illustrationBre0erse of actuality. %hat somethin( is *1, an actuality and *", there is someone who has ascertained it by a 0alid co(ni:er but has not ascertained actuality by a 0alid co(ni:er is the meanin( of bein( an illustration of actuality. /t is an illustrator *mtshon byed, of somethin(+s bein( an actuality. %here is an ascertainin( of a pot without ha0in( ascertained actuality, ri(ht1 %here is someone who has ascertined pot but has not ascertained actuality, ri(ht1 /n dependence on pot there is a place for establishin( other actualities. /n the same way, pot is an ilustration of ob4ect of knowled(e, ri(ht1 /t is an ob4ect of knowled(e. %here is an ascertainin( of it without ha0n( ascertained ob4ect of knowled(e. 2ne ascertains a pot. %here is a nonBascertainin( of pot as bein( an ob4ect of knowled(e. /n dependence on a pot ... Jot it1 Now uncaused space is an illustration of permanent phenomenon. /t is somethin( which is a permanent phenomenon. %here is an ascertainin( or uncaused space without there bein( an ascertainin( of permanent phenomena in dependence on that. %here is a basis for establishin( it. /f someone asks how it establishes it, it is because it implies the meanin( of it. ;or e6ample, the sub4et, a pot, is an actuality because of bein( somethin( which is able to perform a function. %he sub4et, a pot, is n ob4ect of knowled(e because of bein( somethin( which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. %he sub4ect, uncaused space, is a permanent phenomenon because of bein( somethin( which is able to perform a function. %he sub4et, a pot, is an b4ect of knowled(e because of bein( somethin( which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. %he sub4et, uncaused space, is a permanent phenomenon because of bein( a common locus of the

nonBmomentary and phenomena. %his is the way in which they establish it. Jot it1 /t is like that. %his is wha is understood by illustrationBre0erse and meanin(Bre0erse. Jot it1 Now when one says pot+s re0erse, actuality+s re0rse, the re0erse of ob4ect of knowled(e pillar+s re0ese, and so on this is to be understood as the selfBre0erse. /t is not understood as the illustrationBre0erse, nor is it understood as the meanin(Bre0erse. /t is understood as the (eneralBre0erse or the selfBre0erse. When someone says, 5=osit the re0erse of ob4ect of D/&&/NJ &2D@%H/NJ88 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNies. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the two, blue and yellow, are indirect contradictories because they indirectly abide as mutually dissimilar. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er phenomena indirectly abide as mutually dissimilar are necessarily indirect contradictories because that which indirectly abides as mutually dissimilar is the definition of indirect contradictories. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the two, blue and yellow, indirectly abide as mutually dissimilar. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the two, blue and yellow, are indirect contradictories. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the two, blue and yellow, are contradictories. ?. / accept it.

C. /t follows that a common locus of the two, blue and yellow, is not possible. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is blue is necessarily not yellow. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a sapphire, is not yellow because of bein( blue. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a sapphire, is yellow because of bein( blue. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is a color is not necessarily yellow. ?. / accept it. C. !ma:in(8

?ebate !.G @6tended C. /s whate0er is a color necessarily blue1 ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is a color is necessarily blue. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is blue because of bein( a color.

?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is a color because of bein( an instance of color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is an instance of color because the three si(ns of its bein( an instance of color are complete. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, that the three si(ns of its bein( an instance of color are complete because *1, it is a color, *", it is related with color as a phenomenon which is the same essence and *F, many common locuses of bein( other than it and also bein( colors are established. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, that the three si(ns of its bein( an instance of color are complete. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is an instance of color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is a color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is blue because of bein( a color. ?. / accept it.

C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is not blue because of bein( yellow. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is yellow because of bein( the color of purified (old. ?. /t follows that the color of purified (old is the color of purified (old because the color of purified (old e6ists. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the color of purified (old e6ists because the color of purified (old is an established base. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the color of purified (old is an established base because the color of purified (old is established by a 0alid co(ni:er. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is established by a 0alid co(ni:er is necessarily an establised base because established by a 0alid co(ni:er is the definition of established base. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that established by a 0alid co(ni:er is the definition of established base because established by a 0alid co(ni:er is the positor of established base. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that established by a 0alid co(ni:er is the positor of established base because established by a 0alid co(ni:er is the triply )ualified positor of established base.

?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, established by a 0alid co(ni:er, is the triply )ualified positor of established base because of bein( the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, established by a 0alid co(ni:er, that it is the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, established by a 0alid co(ni:er, that it is the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, established by a 0alid co(ni:er, that it is the triply )ualified positor of established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, established by a 0alid co(ni:er, that it is the positor of established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is established by a 0alid co(ni:er is necessarily an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is an established base. ?. / accept it.

C. /t follows that the color of purified (old is an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the color of purified (old e6ists. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the color of purified (old is the color of purified (old. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is yellow. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is yellow. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is not blue. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of purified (old, is blue because of bein( a color. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is a color is not necessarily blue. ?. / accept it. C. !ma:in(8

- . =rimary colors are of four typesBBblue, yellow, white, and red. %hese are its di0ided phenomena. %hose thin(s which are primary colors must be put as four types. 7ou ha0e to posit four types of

primary colors. %hus, you ha0e to say it is because of this. C. /t follows that white is a primary color because it is a phenomenon which is a di0ision of primary colors. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, white, that it is not a phenomenon which is a di0ision of primary colors. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that if primary colors are di0ided, there are not four. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that if primary colors are di0ided, there are four. ?. / accept it. C. =osit the four. ?. %he fourBBblue, yellow, red, and (reen. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, (reen, is a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that respect to the sub4ect, (reen, that it is not a primary color because it is a secondary color. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that there is per0asion because the two, primary color and secondary color, are contradictory. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the two, primary color and secondary color, are contradictory because the two, primary and secondary are

contradictory. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the two, primary and secondary, are contradictory. What is the meanin( of 5primary15 What is the meanin( of 5secondary15 What is to be understood by 5primary15 What is to be understood by 5secondary15 *- . %he primary or root part of the body is the trunk and the secondary or branch parts are the hands, the feet, the head. %hese are the branches. %he primary and secondary parts are contradictory. ;or a tree, the trunk is the primary part and the branches are the secondary parts., !re the two, primary and secondary, contradictory1, ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the two, primary color and secondary color, are contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, (reen, is not a primary color becaue of bein( a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit the four primary colors. ?. %he sub4ect, the fourBBblue, yellow, white, and red. C. /t follows that the fourBBblue, yellow, white, and redBBare the phenomena which are the di0isions of primary colors. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, white, is a phenomenon which is a di0ision of primary color.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is a color because of bein( white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is red because of bein( a color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not red because of bein( white. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is white because of bein( suitable as a white hue. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is suitable as a white hue because of bein( an instance of white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white flower, is not an instance of white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of a white cloth, that it is not an instance of white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that an instance of white does not e6ist. ?. / accept it.

C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, white, that it is not a (enerality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, red, that it is not a (enerality. ?. / accept it. *- . /f white is not a (enerality, red must not be a (enerality. 7ellow must not be a (enerality. /f follows that oclor is not a (enerality. /t follows that there is no (enerality., C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, color, that it is not a (enerality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality, is not a (enerality. /t follows that permanent phenomenon is not a (enerality. /t follows that ob4ect of knowled(e is not a (enerality. /t follows that there is no (enerality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the two, (enerality and instance, do not e6ist. /t follows that if ob4ects of knowled(e are di0ided, there are not the two, (eneralities and instances. *- . / for(ot one di0ision earlier. /f established bases are di0ided, there are the two, (eneralities and instances. / for(ot this one., /t follows that if established bases are di0ided, there are not the two, (eneralities and instances. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that if established bses are di0ided, there are the two, (eneralities and instances.

?. / accept it. C. =osit one. ?. %he sub4ect, actuality. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, color, is a (enerality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, red, that it is a (enerality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respet to the sub4ect, white, that it is a (enerality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that instances of white e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. =osit it. ?. %he sub4ect, the color of a white flower. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white flower, is an instance of white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is an instance of white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is white. ?. Why1

C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, that it is white because it is an instance of white. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that there is per0asion because whate0er is an instance of white is necessarily complete in the three si(ns of bein( an instance of white. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that there is per0asion because if somethin( is an instance of white, then *1, it is necessarily white, *", it is necessarily related with white as a phenomenon which is the same essence, and *F, many common locuses of bein( other than it and also bein( white are necessarily established. *- . %he first re)uirement of somethin(+s bein( an instance of white is that it be white. /t is 4ust the same when applied to others. !n instance of blue is such because *1, it is blue, *", it is related with blue as a phenomenon which is the same essence, and *F, many common locuses of bein( other than it and also bein( blue are established. %hen what is it for red1 /f you apply this to red, an instance of red is such because *1, it is red, *", is is related with red as a phenomenon which is the same essence, and *F, many common locuses of bein( other than it an dalso bein( red are established. Now if this is applied to yellow, an instance of yellow is such because *1, it is yellow, *", it is related with yellow as a phenomenon which is the same essence, and *F, many commmon locuses of bein( other than it and also bein( yellow are established. /t is done the same way for pillar, pot, actuality, and ob4ect of knowled(e, permanent phenomenon, person. ?o you understand1 7ou are an instance of human, ri(ht1 7ou are a human. 7ou are related with human as a phenomenon which is the same essence. When you say, 5related with human as a phenomenon which is the same essence,5 it means that if there were no humans then you would not e6ist. !nd many common locuses of bein( other than you and also bein( human are established. %here are a lot, ri(ht1 Common locuses which are other than you and also human are a lot. !ll of us are humans, but we are not you. %here are a lot of

humans who are not you, ri(ht1 7ou understand, ri(ht1 /n (eneral, if three si(ns of somethin(+s bein( an instance are complete, they are these three, ri(ht1, /t follows that if somethin( is an instance of white, then *1, it is necesarily white, *", it is necessarily related with white as a phenomenon which is the same essence, and *F, many common locuses of bein( other than it and also bein( white are necessarily established. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is an instance of white is necessarily white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not red because of bein( white. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is red because of bein( a color. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is a color is not necessarily red. ?. / accept it. C. !ma:in(8 Ha0e you learned how to (o between1 *JH. / think he means ha0e you learned how to (o the other way., ;rom the section on dispellin( ob4ections.

C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a white reli(ious conch, is a color because of bein( white. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a white reli(ious conch, is not white because of not bein( arisen from the elements. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a white reli(ious conch, is not arisen from the elements because of bein( an element. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a white reli(ious conch, is an element because of bein( a reli(ious conch. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a white reli(ious conch, that it is an element because it is the element which is earth. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a white reli(ious conch, is the element which is earth because of bein( hard and obstructi0e. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is hard and obstructi0e is necessarily the element which is earth because hard and obstructi0e is the definition of earth. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that hard and obstructi0e is the definition of earth because in the Collected %opics it says, 5Hard and obstructi0e is the definition of earth.5

?. / accept it. C. /t follows that hard and obstructi0e is the definition of earth. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is hard and obstructi0e is necessarily earth. ?. / accept it. C. it follows that the sub4ect, a white reli(ious conch, is earth. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ec, 0e(etable, is earth. ?. Why1 C. >ecause of bein( hard and obstructi0e. ?. %he reason is not established. C. What is it that it is not1 /s it not hard1 /s it not obstructi0e1 ?. /t is not hard. C. What does it mean when you say 5hard15 /sn+t a 0e(etable hard1 ?. Not al of them are hard. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, 0e(etable, is not earth. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, metal, is not hard and obstructi0e. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that the sub4ect, metal, is earth.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, earth, is earth. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, sil0er, is earth. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, 0e(etable, is earth. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, metal, is earth. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, metal, is a tan(ible ob4ect which is an element. /f follows that the sub4ect, (old, is a tan(ible ob4ect which is an element. ?. Why1 C. >ecause of bein( earth. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, (old, is a tan(ible ob4ect which is an element. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, (old, is not a tan(ible ob4ect which is arisen fromm the elements. /t follows that the sub4ect, metal, is not a tan(ible ob4ect which is arisen from the elements. ?. Why1

C. /t follows that the sub4ect, metal, is not a tan(ible ob4ect arisen from the elements ecause of bein( a tan(ible ob4ect which is an element. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows the there is per0asion because the two, tan(ible ob4ects arisen from the elements and tan(ible ob4ects which are the elements, are contradictory. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that it is so because whate0er is a tan(ible ob4ect which is an element is necessarily somethin( which is an element and somethin( which is a tan(ible ob4ect, and whate0er is a tan(ible ob4ect arisen from the elements is somethin( which is arisen from the elements and is a tan(ible ob4ect. %his is what is to be said. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the two, tan(ible ob4ects arisen from the elements and tan(ible ob4ects which are the elements, are contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, (old, is not a tan(ible ob4ect arisen from the elements because of bein( a tan(ible ob4ect which is an element. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, (old, is a tan(ible ob4ect arisen from the elements because of bein( hea0y. %here are the se0en tan(ible ob4ects arisen from the elements BB hea0y, li(ht, smooth, rou(h, cold, hun(er, and thirst BB ri(ht1 ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a white reli(ious conch, is a tan(ible ob4ect arisen from the elements because of bein( hea0y.

?. %here is no per0asion. C. %here is per0asion. /t follows that the sub4ect, a white reli(ious conch, is not arisen from the elements because of bein( an element' because of bein( a reli(ious conch. ?oesn+t the te6t say this1 ?. 7es. ?. 2h8 Whate0er is a tan(ible ob4ect arisen from the elements must be arisen from the elements. %his is not arisen from the elements. /t is an element, ri(ht1 Detal, (old and so on. %hink about it. Wet and moistenin( is the definition of water, ri(ht1 whate0er is wet and moistenin( is necessarily water. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, alcohol, is water. ?. / accept it. C. 2h8 !lcohol is water. /t follows that tea is water. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that beer is water. /t follows the milk is water. ?. / accept it. C. 2h8 Dilk is water1 ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that milk is water. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, boiled butter, is water. ?. / accept it. /t follows that

C. >oiled butter is water1 /t follows that the sub4ect, milk, is water. ?. / accept it. C. When a person wells milk, are they sellin( water1 When you buy milk, do you buy water1 ?. 7es. C. 7ou are always drinkin( tea. !re you drinkin( a lot of water1 ?. 7es. C. /s it water1 /s tea water1 ?. /t is water. C. 2h8 %ea is water. >eer too is water. >oiled butter too is water. !lcohol too is water. /s all of it water1

Ha0e you ascertained it1 Ha0e you ascertained the colors1 7ou ha0e to listen to the last one and think about what answer to (i0e. %hink about it. JH. 7ou should debate with me. 2therwise / am sittin( here like a fool.

?ebate !.C @6tended

C. /s whate0er is a color necessarily a primary color1 ?. / accept it.

C. /t follows that whate0er is a color is necessariy a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t 9absurdly< follows that the sub4ect, the color !mo(hasiddhi, is a primary color because of bein( a color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is not a primary color because of bein( a secondary color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is secondary color because of bein( the secondary color which is the two, blue and yellow. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is the secondary color which is the two, blue and yellow, because of bein( (reen. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is (reen because of bein( a color which is a mi6ture of blue and yellow. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is a color which is a mi6ture of blue and yellow is necessarily (reen because a mi6ture of blue and yellow is posited as (reen, a mi6ture of red and yellow is posited as oran(e, and a mi6ture of red and blue is posited as black. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that a mi6ture of blue and yellow is not to be posited as (reen, a mi6ture of red and yellow is not to be posited as oran(e, and of (reen

a mi6ture of red and blue is not to be posited as black. *- . When he says that the reason is not established, he is sayin( that they are not so, ri(ht1, /t follows that with respect to color, it is not to be posited as the two, primary colors and secondary colors. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that with respect to color, it is to be posited as the two, primary colors and secondary colors. ?. / accept it. C.Well, posit what is to be understood *(o don tshul (sum, by primary color and secondary color. ?. %he primary colors are the colors of the four elements. %he secondary colors are those arisen in dependence on the primary colors. C. /t follows that econdary colors are said to be arisen in dependence upon primary colors. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that ther is nothin( which is to be posited as a secondary color which is a mi6ture of primary colors. How is it posited1 ?. / ha0e already e6plained what is to be posited as a secondary color which is a mi6ture of primary colors. C. =lease repeat what you said. ?. %he colors of the four elements are to be put as the four primary colors. Colors which are arisen from a mi6ture of the primary colors are to be posited as the secondary colors. C. Now since it is like that, it follows that secondary colors are to be

posited from a mi6ture of primary colors. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that there is a secondary color to be posited from a mi6ture of blue and yellow. ?. / accept it. C. =osit the color which is a mi6ture of blue and yellow. ?. %he sub4ect, (reen. C. /t follows that (reen is to be posited from a mi6ture of blue an yellow. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is a color which is a mi6ture of blue and yellow is necessarily (reen. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is (reen because of bein( a color which is a mi6ture of blue and yellow. 7ou asserted the reason and the per0asion. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows tha the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is a secondary color which is composed of the two, blue and yellow. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is a secondary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is a color.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is not a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is aprimary color because of bein( a color. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is a color because of bein( that sub4ect. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, that it is the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi because it is itself. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ec, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi,' that it is itself because it is a substantial phenomenon *rd:as chos,. *- . %here are substantial phenomena and re0erse phenomena, ldo( chos. 7ou ha0e not (otten to this yet. /t is the last in this te6t., ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, that it is itself. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is that sub4ect. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi is a color. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of (reen !mo(hasiddhi, is a primary color because of bein( a color. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t (ollows that whate0er is a color is not necessarily a primary color. ?. / accept it. C. !ma:in(8

/dentifyin(

e0erses

*!t "F.1C$ a new class be(ins. /t is apparently the class of Day C, 19#$, and be(ins with debates on the topics in identifyin( re0erses., *With re(ard to a debate on the difference between *1, the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function and *", definition, -ati inbochay saye that, ha0in( ascertained this one you can then use it as an e6ample of the others. What is the difference between the two, the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function and definiendum1 What is the defference between the two, the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function an dpermanent phenomenon1 What is the

difference betwen the two, the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function and actuality1 /t is like that. !pply it o0er to these.

C. What is the difference between the two, the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function and definition1 ?. %here are four possibilities. C. /t follows that there are not four possibilities. which is both. =osit somethin(

?. %he sub4ect, the triply )ualifies substantial e6istent of actuality. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, that it is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6itent of actuality, why is it coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function1 ?. >ecause it is synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. C. /t follows that if somethin( is synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function, then it is necessarily coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, that it is a definition. ?. / accept it.

C. With respect to the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, why is it a definition1 ?. >ecause it is a positor *+4o( byed,' because of bein( the positor of actuality+s definition. C. /t follows that if it is the positor of actuality+s definition, then it is necessarily a definition. ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit somethin( which is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function but is not a definition. ?. %he sub4ect, one with tat which is able to perform a function. *- . 2ne with that which is able to perform a function will not work. With respect to one there is somethin( to be debated. ;or e6ample, the definition of one is.

a phenomenon which is not di0erse.

Now when that is applied to a basis, the definition of one with actuality is.

a phenomenon which is not di0erse from actuality.

%he definition of one with which is able to perform a function is.

a phenomenon which is not di0erse from that which is able to perform a function.

/t may be that way, ri(ht1 /t is somethin( to debate about. What you ha0e posited here, somethin( which is coe6tensi0e with re0erse of that which is able to perform a function but is not a definition1 /t is okay., C. /t follows with respct to the sub4ect, one ith that which is able to perform a function, that it is not a deinition. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, one with that which is able to perform a function, why is it not a definition1 ?. >ecause of bein( a definiendum. C. /t follows that if somethin( is a definiendum, then it is necessarily not a definition. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, one with that which is able to perform a function, that it is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, one with that which is able to perform a function, why is it coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function1 ?. >ecause *1, it is different from the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function and *", whate0er is it is necessarily the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function and whate0er is the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is necessarily it.

C. /t follows that if somethin( *1, is different from the referse of that which is able to perform a function and *", whate0er is it is necessarily the re0erses of that which is able to perform a function and whate0er is the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is necessarily it, then it is neccessarily coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not so. =osit somethin( which is a definition but is not coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. %here is such. %he sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awarenes.. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, that it is a definition. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, why is it a definition1 ?. >ecause it is the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e. C. /t follows that if somethin( is the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e, then it is necessarily a definition. ?. / accept. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awarenes, that it is not coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, why is it not coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function1

?. >ecause it is not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function, then it is necessarily not coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, that it is not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function, then it is necessarily not coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, that it is not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, why is it not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function1 ?. >ecause there is not common locus of bein( suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness and also bein( the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. *- . 2h, there is no common locus of bein( suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness and also bein( the re0erse of that which is able to perform

a function1 /t follows that there is a common locus because that which is able to perform a function is such. 2kay1 /f someone says there is no common locus, if someone says that there is nothin( which is a common locus of the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function and suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, then what is there1 /s there a common locus1 %he common locus is that which is able to perform a function. %hat which is able to perform a function, ri(ht1 %hat which is able to perform a function is necessarily suitabe an ob4ect of knowled(e, ri(ht1 ?o you understand1 He said that there is no common locus. 7ou ha0e to say, 5/t follows that there is a common locus because the which is able to perform a function is such.5, C. /t follows that there is a common locus because that which is able to perform a function is such. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that there is a common locus of the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function and suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows with respect to the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, that it is not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, why is it not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function1 *- to ?efender. snynonymous1, 7ou ha0e to think about it. Why aren+t they

?. >ecause it is not coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function.

C. /t follows that those two are not coe6tensi0e. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is not necessarily suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. ?. / accept it. C. =osit it. /f whate0er is the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is not necessarily suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, then posit it. ?. %he sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function, is not suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. ?. Why1 C. >ecause of bein( the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function, that it is not the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. *JH. 7ou follow1 7ou should be (i0in( honest answers in here. ?on+t purposely make trouble., /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function, that it is its own re0erse becuase it is an established base. *- . %his was in the colors section earlier, wasn+t it1 /t carries o0er., ?. / accept it.

C. !ma:in(8 /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function, that it is the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function, that it is not suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. ?. Why1 C. >ecause of bein( the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. ?id you say that it is not suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness1 *- . 7es, you said that whate0er is the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is not necessarily suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness for there is the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function. ?idn+t you1, %hen 5Why15 was the ri(ht answer. ?on+t think that 4ust because a reason is (i0en that you then say the wron( thin(. %hen she (a0e a reason. Now you ha0e to respond to the reason, and that is where you will find out where your trouble is. %he reason happens to be true., 2H, / see. 2kay. Why1 C. /t follows that the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function, is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is necessarily suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. ?. / accept it.

C. /t follows that whate0er is the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is necessarily suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that it is so because of bein( synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, that it is not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, why is it not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function1 *- . What is the fault1 %hose two are not synonymous because of what fault1 7ou ha0e to think about it. 7ou ha0e to say that if they were synonymous, then there would be such and such a falt. %hus, they are not synonymous., -et+s see, a common locus of the two... *- . %here is a common locus of them, isn+t there1 /sn+t there1 %he common locus is that which is able to perform a function., *JH. 7ou see, that was your wron( answer to be(in with. 7ou said there was no common locus. &o they ha0e 4ust pro0ed to you that there is a common locus of that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an

awareness and the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. %hat is that which is able to perform a function. %hat which is able to perform a function is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness and it is the re0erse of that which is able to perform a functin. &o that 4ust shows you that answer was wron(. 7ou cannot say that they are not synonymous because there is no common locus., *- . &he said, 5Why are they not synonymous15 /f they were synonymous, then what would the fault be1 Now the meanin( of bein( synonymous..., ;rom "F.G31 to "F.GF1 the tape is completely inaudible. %hen the class picks up from there. %he same debate is continuin( with the ?efender now positin( somethin( which is neither coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function nor a definition. C. %he sub4ect, the horn of a rabb0it. *- to ?efender. /f there is an e6istent to posit, then you ha0e to put that., ?. %he sub4ect, a pot. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a pot, that it is not coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, a pot, why is it not coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function1 ?. >ecause it is not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. C. /t follows that if somethin( is not synonymous with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function, then it is necessarily not coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a pot, that it is not a definition. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, a pot, why is it not a definition1 ?. >ecause it is a definiendum. C. /t follows that if somethin( is a definiendum, then it is necessarily not a definition. ?. / accept it. C. Now there are four possibilities.

?ebate C.F *- . %his is the same as the last one. /t is a bit lon(. /f you only do it once,..., C. /s whate0er is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function necessarily a definition1 ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is necessarily a definition. ?. / accept it. C. /t 9absurdly< follows that the sub4ect, the definition of actuality, is a definition because of bein( coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it.

C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the definition of actuality, is not a definition because of bein( a definiendum. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the definition of actuality, is a definiendum because of bein( the definiendum of the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, actuality, that its dfinition is the definiendum of its triply )ualified substantial e6istent because it is a triply )ualified imputed e6istent. ?. %he reason is not established. C. %he sub4ect, actuality,... *&kip in class time to new debaters., C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function, that whate0er is its re0erse is necessarily the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the third reason is established. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, actuality, that whate0er is its triply )ualified substantial e6istent is necessarily the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the second reason is established.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, is different from the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the first part of the reason is established. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, that *1, it is different from the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function and 91, whate0er is it is necesarily the re0erseof that which is able to perform a function and whate0er is the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is necessarily it. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, that it is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, is a definiendum because of bein( coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. / acceptit. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, is not a definiendum because of bein( a definition. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, is a definition because of bein( the definition of the definition of actuality.

?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, actuality, that its triply )ualified substantial e6istent is the definition of its definition because it is a triply )ualified imputed e6istent. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that iof somethin( is a triply )ualified imputed e6istent, then its triply )ualified substantial e6istent is the definition of its definition. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, actuality, that its triply )ualified substantial e6istent is the definition of its definition. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, is the definition of the definition of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ec, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, is a definition. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality, is not a definiendum because of bein( a definition. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the triply )ualified substnatial e6istent of actuality, is a definiendum because of bein( coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. ?. %here is no per0asion.

C. /t follows that whate0er is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is not necessarily a definiendum. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is necessarily not a definiendum. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that it is not the case that whate0er is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function is necessarily not a definiendum. ?. / accept it. C. /f there is no per0ason, then posit it. ?. %he sub4ect, the definition of actuality.

?ebate C.C *in part, ?. / accept that it is that. established. %he third part of the reason is not

C. /t follows that whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily actuality which is one with actuality because *1, whate0er is that is necessarily one wth actuality and *", whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necesarily one with actuality. *- . >ecause whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily actuality which is one with actuality and whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily actuality which is arisen as one with actuality., ?. / accept that.

C. /t follows tht whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily actuality which is one with actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the third part of the reason is established. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows whate0er is actuality which is one with actuality is necessarily actuality+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the second part of the reason is established. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is different from actuality+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the first part of the reason is established. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the first part of the reason is established. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, that *1, it is different from actuality+s re0erse and *", whate0er is it is necessarily actuality+s re0erse and whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily it. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is

coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is a permanent phenomenon because of bein( coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is not a permanent phenomenon because of bein( an impermanent phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is an impermanent phenomenon because of bein( a caused phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is a caused phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is an impermanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is an impermanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is not a permanent phenomenon.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ec, actuality which is one with actuality, is a permanent phenomenon because of bein( coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse is not necessarily a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C' !ma:in(8 Now what is the difference between the two, the phenomena coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse and permanent phenomenon1 ?. there are four possibilities. C. /t follows that there are not four possibilities. which is both. ?. %he sub4ect, one with actuality. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, one with actuality, is a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ec, one with actuality, a permanent phenomenon1 ?. >ecause of bein( a common locus of bein( a phenomenon and bein( nonBmomentary. C. /t follows that whate0er is a common locus of bein( a phenomenon and bein( non3momentary is necessarily a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, one with actuality, is coe6tensi0e with =osit somethin(

actuality+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, one with actuality, coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse. ?. >ecause of bein( synonymous with actuality+s re0erse. C. /t follows that whate0er is synonymous with actuality+s re0erse is necessarily coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Now posit somethin( which is a permanent phenomenon but is not coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse. ?. %he sub4ect, uncaused space. C. /t follows that the ub4ect, uncaused space, is a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, uncaused space, a permanent phenomenon1 ?. >ecause of bein( a (enerally characteri:ed phenomenon. C. /t follows that whate0er is a (enerally characteri:ed phenomenon is necessarily a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, uncaused space, is not coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, uncaused space, not coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse1

?. >ecause of not bein( synonymous with actuality+s re0erse but is not a permanent phenomenon. ?. %he sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, actuality which coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse1 is one with actuality,

?. >ecause *1, it is different from actuality+s re0erse and *", whate0er is it is necessarily actuality+s re0erse and whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily it. C. /t follows that if somethin( *1, is different from actuality+s re0erse and *", whate0er is it is necesarily actuality+s re0erse and whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily it, then it is necessarily coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, not a permanent phenomenon1 ?. >ecause of bein( an impermanent phenomenon. C. /t follows that whate0er is an impermanent phenomenon is necessarily not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it.

C. =osit somethin( which is neither. ?. %he sub4ect, a pot. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a pot, is not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, a pot, not a permanent phenomenon1 ?. >ecause of not bein( a (enerally characteri:ed phenomenon. C. /t follows that whate0er is not synonymous with actuality+s re0erse is necessarily not coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Now there are four possibilities. *-ati inbochay lau(hs at this. =erhaps it is because the Challen(er is affirmin( that there are four possibilities., ;rom "F.$FF to "F.#3H two students repeat the same debate that has 4ust been completed, C.C. !ny differences from the last are insi(nificant. !t "F.$$3, howe0er, -ati inbochay discussed the reasons 4ustifyin( why whate0er is actuality and why whate0er is actuality which is one with actuality is necessarily actuality+s re0erse. Whate0er is actuality which is one with actuality is necessarily actuality+s re0erse because *1, whate0er is actuality which is one with actuality is necessarily one with actuality and *", whate0er is one with actuality is necessarily actuality+s re0erse. Whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily actuality which is one with actuality because *1, whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily one with actuality and *", whate0er is one with actuality. 7es, those two *reasons, to to(ether. Whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily actuality which is one with actuality because whate0er is that is necessarily one with actuality and whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily one with actuality. %his is what is in

the book ri(ht1 %hese two are put to(ether, ri(ht1 %here are two sides to this. When you are establishin( the per0asion (oin( one way, it follows that whate0er is actuality which is one with actuality is necessarily actuality+s re0erse because *1, whate0er is that is necessarily one with actuality and *", whate0er is one with actuality is necessarily actuality+s re0erse. %his is one side. Now whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily actuality which is one with actuality because *1, whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily one with actuality and *", whate0er is one with actuality is necessarily actuality which is one with actuality. 7ou put two for each of them. %his is the reason. %here is the establishment of the second and third parts of the reason, ri(ht1 %here are two parts to it. %here is the establishments of the per0asion such that whate0er is actuality which is one with actuality is necessarily actuality+s re0erse. 7ou think of that part for one. %hen there is the per0asion (oin( the other way, whate0er is actuality+s re0erse. 7ou think of that part for one. %hen there is the per0asion (oin( the other way, whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily actuality which is one with actuality. ?o you understand1 Whate0er is actuality which is one with actuality+s re0erse is necessarily actuality which is one with actuality. %hese are established indi0idually. ?ebate C.$ C. /s whate0er is actuality+s illustrationBre0erse necessarily actuality+s re0erse1 ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is necessarily actuality+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t 9absurdly< follows that the sub4ect, sound, is actuality+s re0erse because of bein( an illustrationBre0erse of actuality. actuality+s illustrationBre0erse is

?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, sound, is an illustrationBre0erse of actuality because of bein( an illustration of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is an illustation of actuality is necessarily an illustrationBre0erse of actuality. ?./ accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, sound, is actuality+s re0erse because of bein( an illustrationBre0erse of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, sound, is not actuality+s re0erse because of bein( different from actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, sound, is different from actuality. ?. / accept it. *JH. %hat is off isn+t it1 No, / am sayin( that we don+t need to record the debates at all., @alier when we talked about established bases, we referred to ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. there is somethin( called 5the bein( of which is possible.5 %here are two, that the bein( of which is possible and ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. %hat was there, ri(ht1 !nd there are two, that of which the bein( is not possible and o4bects of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. Now if someone asks, 5What is the difference between the two, that of which the bein( is possible and ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of

which is possible15 Whate0er is an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible is necessarily somethin( the bein( of which is possible, but whate0er is somethin( the bein( of which is possible is not necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. *%his is so because, only a permanent phenomenon, only an actualtiy, only a (enerality, only an instance, and nonBe6istent are thin(s of which the bein( is possible. %hey are not ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. ;or e6ample, the bein( f only a permanent phenomenon e6ists, the bein( of it is possible. /t is said that ob4ect of knowled(e is only a permanent phenomenon. @stablished base is said to be only a permanent phenomenon. %hey are thin(s which are only permanent phenomena. &ince its bein( e6ists its bein( is possible. ;or e6ample, the bein( of nonBe6istent e6ists. /f you are asked to posit the bein( of nonBe6istent, posit the sub4ect, the horn of a rabbit' the sub4ect, the child of a barren woman' or the sub4ect, the flower of a dry tree. %he bein( is possible. %he bein( e6ists. @0en so, these are not ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. Jot it1 Now there are three possibilities between the tw, ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible and that of which the bein( is possible. ;or somethin( which is both posit theseBthe ob4ects of knowled(e. %hey are thin(s the bein( of which is possible and they are ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible and they are ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 Whate0er is an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible is necessarily somethin( the bein( of which is possible. Whate0er is somethin( the bein( of which is possible is not necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. 7ou can say the sub4ect, nonBe6istent. ;or somethin( which is neither you can posit the sub4ect, the twoBB pillar and pot. 7ou can posit the ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. %hey are not somethin( the bein( of which is possible and they also are not ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. /n the same way, there are three possibilities between the two, that the bein( of which is not possible and ob4et of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. &omethin( which is both is the sub4ect, the twoBBpermanent phenomenon and actualtiy. /t is somethin( the bein( of which is not possible and it is also an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein(

of which is not possible. Now, which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 /t is somethin( the bein( of which is not possible because somethin( which is it does not e6ist. /t is somethin( the bein( of which e6ists because there is somethin( which is it. 7ou can say like that. Jot it1 Now somethin( is an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible because *1, there is somethin( which is it and *", it is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. &omethin( is that the bein( of which e6ists because somethin( which is it e6ists. 7ou ha0e to say that somethin( is an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which does not e6ist because *1, there is nothin( which is it and *", it is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. When you say that somethin( is that the bein( of which does not e6ist, it is because somethin( which is it does not e6ist. 7ou can say it more briefly. Why is it that somethin( is that the bein( of which does not e6ist1 >ecuase somethin( which is it does not e6ist. %here are three possibilities between the two, that the bein( of which is not possible and ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. &omethin( which is both is the twoBBpermanent phenomenon and actuality. When yu say which is necessarily the other, which is not necessarily the other, and posit somethin( which is one and not the other, then whate0er is an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible is necessarily that the bein( of which is not possible, whate0er is that the bein( of which is not possible is not necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. 7ou can posit these. the sub4ec, the horn of a rabbit' the sub4ect, the child of a barren woman' the sub4ect, a self of persons' the sub4ect, a substantially e6istent independent self. %here are two, a selflessness of persons and a self of persons. What is called a selflessness of persons is an e6istent. %he self of persons is a nonBe6istent. %hese are what1 %hey are that the bein( of which is not possible. %hey are not ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. 2kay1 &omethin( which is neither is a pot, or a pillar. %hey are neither that the bein( of which is not possible nor ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. %hey are neither. ?o you understand1 Now with respect to identifyin( re0erses, there is somethin( to be posited with respect to definition and dfiniendum. ;or e6ample, there are four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of definiendum. When these are posited, what are they1

1. one with definiendum ". definiendum which is one with definiendum F. the definiendum of the triply )ulified imputed e6istent G. the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the triply )ualified imputed e6istent

%hey are posited in this way. Jot it1 &imilarly, there are four phenomena which are coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the triply )ualified imputed e6istent.

1. one with the triply )ualified imputed e6istent ". the triply )ualified imputed e6istent which is one with the triply )ualified imputed e6istent F. the definition of definiendum G. the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of definiendum.

%hey are like that. Jot it, ri(ht1 7ou know how to posit these ri(ht1 /f you don+t ascertain these well, then when you apply it to others you will be mistaken. 7ou ha0e ascertained this well, ri(ht1 Now there are four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of definition.

1. one with definition ". definition which is one with definition F. the definiendum of the trily )ualified substantial e6istent G. the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the triply )ualified substantial e6istent

%hen there are four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. 1. one with the triply )ualified substantial e6istent ". the triply )ualified substantial e6istent which is one with the triply )ualified substantial e6istent F. the definition of definition G. the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of definition.

%his is how they are to be posited. ?on+t (et confused. Now if we apply this to actuality a little it will be okay. %hink about it. /f you do not think about it well, you will (et confused. /f you knew the other one well, you would not (et confused. Now, it follows that there are not four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the definiendum of that which is able to perform a function. *Confused student, %hink about it. %here is this, ri(ht1 *%he four phenomena coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse are.,

1. one with actuality ". actuality which is one with actuality F. the definiendum of that whcih is able to perform a function G. the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of that which is able to perform a function.

%here are these four, ri(ht1 /s the definiendum of that which is able to perform a function a definiendum1 /t is a definiendum, ri(ht1 %hus, there are four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the definiendum of that which is able to perform a function. Now posit the four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the definiendum of that which is able to perform a function.

1. one with the definiendum of that which is able to perform a function ". the definiendum of that which is able to perform a function which is one with the definiendum of that which is able to perform a function F. the definiendum of the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of that which is able to perform a function G. the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of that which is able to perform a function.

Now posit the four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of that which is able to perform a function.

1. one with the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of that which is able to perform a function ". the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of that which is able to perform a function which one with the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of that whch is able to perform a function F. the definition of the definiendum of that which is able to perform a function G. the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of the definiendum of that whih is able to perfrom a function

Now posit the four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the definition of actulaity. %here ae these ri(ht1 *%he four phenomena coe6tensi0e with that whcih is able to perfrom a function are.,

1. one with that whih is able to perform a function ". that which is able to perfrom a function which is one with that which is able to perform a function F. the definition of actuality

G. the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality.

Now there are those four, ri(ht1 Now posit the four henomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the definition of actuality.

1. one with the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality ". the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality which is one with the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of actuality F. the definition of the definition of actuality G. the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of the definition of actuality

/t is like that. %hen you can apply this o0er to ob4ect of knowled(e, permanent phenomenon, and so on. 7ou must apply it to all them. %hen you will know it, ri(ht1 2kay1 Now then there is another *d:a,. %here are the four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the definition of the definition of actuality. &uch ones are limitless. there are a lot of these. %here are the four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the definiendum of the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of that which is able to perform a function. -ike that. 7ou can (et a lot of them. 2kay1 Now there is this. ;or e6ample, when you posit an illustrationB

re0erse *(h:i ido(, of ob4ect of knowled(e, you can posit a pot, a pillar, actuality, and so on. When you posit an ilustrationBre0erse of actuality, you can posit a pot, a pillar, and so on. 7ou can posit these. When you posit an illustrationBre0erse of actuality, you can posit a pot, a pillar, and so on. 7ou can posit these. When you posit an illustrationBre0erse of pot, you cannot posit a (olden pot. /f you are asked to posit an illustrationBre0erse of pot, it is not suitable to posit the sub4ect, a (olden pot. 7ou ha0e to say, 5%he sub4ect,a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is made from copper and is able to perform the function of holdin( water' the sub4ect, a bulbous flatB based phenomenon which is made from sil0er and is able to perform the function of holdin( water' the sub4ect, a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is made from wood and is able to perform the function of holdin( water' the sub4ect, a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is made from metal and is able to perform the function of holdin( water' the sub4ect, a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is made from earth and is able to perform the function of holdin( water' the sub4ect, a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is made from brass and is able to perfrom the function of holdin( water' the sub4ect a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is made from precious substances and is able to perfrom the function of holdin( water, and so on. ;or illustratons of pot, you ha0e to posit these. ;or instances of pillar, if you posit a sandalwood pillar, a 4uniper pillar, or a metal pillar, it will not work. When you posit an illustration of pillar, *you must posit, sandalwood which is able to perform the function of holdin( up, 4uniper which is able to perform the function of holdin( up, a precious substance which is able to perform the function of holdin( up, concrete which is able to perform the function of holdin( up, stone which is able to perfrom the function of holdin( up. /f you ask why it is so, it is like this. /n the same way there are many others that this is to be applied to. =robably o6en, persons, like that. ;or e6ample, whate0er is a reali:ation of a (olden pot is necessarily a reali:ation of a pot. Ha0in( reali:ed a (olden pot, one has reali:ed a pot. /f you ha0e reali:ed a (olden pot, you ha0e already reali:ed a pot. /t is not suitable as an illustration. /t does not obtain as an illustrationBre0erse. /f a (olden pot were an illustrationB re0erse of a pot, then a (olden pot would ha0e to be an illustration of

pot. /f a (olden pot were an illustration of pot, then there would ha0e to be an ascertainin( of (olden pot by a 0alid co(ni:er which is not an ascertainin( of pot. %his does not e6ist. a (olden pot is a basis of emanation of pot. %his does not e6ist. %he sub4ect, a (olden pot, is a pot because of bein( a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon able to perfor the function of holdin( water. /f you say this, there is no basis of emanation. *(rul sku sa,. *JH. /f somethin( is (oin( to be an illustration of somethin(, it has to be such that if you understand the illustration you do not necessarily understand it. Whereas if you ascertained a (olden pot with 0alid co(nition, you would ascertain pot with 0alid co(nition. %herefore, if you are (oin( to posit an illustration of pot, you cannot say (olden pot. 7ou ha0e to say a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is made from (old and is able to perform the function of holdin( water., Ha0in( ascertained a (olden pot with 0alid co(nition, there is no nonBascertainin( of pot, by a 0alid co(ni:er, ri(ht1 Ha0in( ascertained a !merican human by a 0alid co(nier, there is no nonBascertainin( of human by a 0alid co(ni:er. /t is not suitable to say that one has ascertained an !merican human by a 0alid co(nier, but has not ascertained a human by a 0alid co(ni:er. /t is not suitable to say that one has reali:ed a wooden pillar but has not ascertained a pillar. 2ne has ascertained a wooden pillar, ri(ht1 %his is not )uite like it. =robably there are a lot of this type. Human is like this, cow is like this, table is like this. ;or e6ample, ha0in( ascertained a wooden table, one has ascertained a table. %here are probably a lot like that. ;or e6ample, these actualities are illustrationBre0erses of ob4ect of knowled(e. Ha0in( ascertained actuality by a 0alid co(ni:er, there is a nonBascertainin( of ob4ect of knowled(e by a 0alid co(ni:er. !ctuality is a basis of emanation of ob4ect of knowled(e. %he sub4ect, actuality, is a n ob4ect of knowled(e. %he sub4ect, actuality, is an ob4ect of knowled(e because of bein( suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. !ctuality is a basis of emanation of ob4ect of knowled(e. %here is a nonBascertainin( of ob4ect of knowled(e by a 0alid co(ni:er after ha0in( ascertained pot by a 0alid co(n:er. %here is such a thin(. *JH. %his holds true between (olden pot and pot, but not between pot and actuality or between actuality and ob4ect of knowled(e.

Ha0in( ascertained ascertained pot by a by a 0alid co(ni:er, knowled(e by a 0alid

a (olden pot by a 0alid co(ni:er you ha0e 0alid co(ni:er. When you ha0e ascertained pot you ha0e not necessarily ascertained ob4ect of co(ni:er.

;or e6ample, it is not suitable to say that ha0in( ascertained a white cow by a 0alid co(ni:er, one has not ascertained a cow by a 0alid co(ni:er. /t is not suitable to say that ha0in( ascertained a spotted o6 by a 0alid co(nier, you had not ascertained an o6. =robably the ascertainment by a 0alid co(ni:er or nonBascertainment with respect to pots and so forth is an eye consciousness. No, probably the ascertainment of a (olden pot by a 0alid co(ni:er is somethin( that appears to a thou(ht consciousness. 7es. 7es. ;or e6ample, if there is a person who does not know the con0entionality of a pot and sees a (olden pot, he ascertains *by the eye consciousness, a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is made from (old and is able to perform the function of holdin( water. He ascertains that it is (old, that it is bulbous, that it is flatBbased, that it is able to carry water. %hese are thin(s which are seen by a 0alid co(ni:er which is an eye consciousness. @0en so if one says 5pot5 to him he does not understand the con0entionality. He does not know what a pot is. &o if you say to him, 5/sn+t this a pot15 *he understands,. 7ou ha0e to desi(nate the term. When he first came his eye consciousness ascertained all of this, but he did not know what it was *in the sense of not knowin( the name,. !nd then when he poured tea into it, he then understood that it was a thin( for holdin( tea *1mo,. He understood that it was a mo, a thin( for drinkin( tea. 7ou ha0e (ot it, ri(ht1 /t is like that. eali:in( by a 0alid co(ni:er is like that. When he first ascertained it, he wondered what it was. He thou(ht, 5/ wonder what this is for.5 %hen he poured some tea into it and then he understood that it was a mo for drinkin( tea. %his is reali:ation by a thou(ht consciousness. ;irst he understood by the eye consciousness that it was He did not reali:e what it was. /f there were a (olden pot there and he saw it, the eye consciousness would reali:e that it is bulbous, flatB based, able to carry water. He would not reali:e what it was. %hen another person would ask, 5/sn+t this a pot15 /t is a pot. He is desi(natin( the con0entionality. Jot it1 %hen ha0in( ascertained it by the eye consciousness, he has reali:ed a pot, he has thorou(hly

reali:ed a (olden pot, he has also thorou(hly reali:ed a pot. ;or e6ample, a person who has ne0er seen an o6 at all upon seein( a black o6 will think, 5What is this animal15 His eye consciousness reali:es the form and so forth and he thinks, 5What is this15 When another says, 5%his is an o6 isn+t it15 he will understand that it is an o6. /t is like this. %he reali:ation by thou(ht is like this. =robably *the section on, identifyin( re0erses is finished now. !fter this it appears that we should do the limits of per0asion between *those topics,. /f we do not do the three possibilities and four possibilities, you will not understand. Now posit these. =osit one with definiendum. ?. %he sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. C. =osit one with pot. =osit one with actuality. ?. %he sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function, is one with pot. ?. Why1 C. !ma:in(8 =osit one with pot. ?. %he sub4ect, a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water. C. /t follows that the sub4et, a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perfrom the function of holdin( water, is one with pot. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perfrom the function of holdin( water, is not different from pot.

?. Why1 C. !ma:in(8 =osit one with pot. ?. %he sub4et, pot. C. 2h8 %his is what you ha0e to posit, ri(ht1 =osit one with actuality. ?. %he sub4et, actuality. C. =osit one with ob4et of knowled(e. ?. %he sub4et, ob4ect of knowled(e. C. %his is not to be confused. =osit one with bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water. ?. %he sub4ect, bulbous flatBbased phenomenon able to perform the C. 2h, this is what you ha0e to posit, ri(ht1 =osit one with definiendum. ?. %he sub4ect, defiendum. C. =osit definiendum which is one with definiendum. ?. %he sub4ect, definiendum. C. =osit pot which is one with pot. ?. %he sub4et, pot. C. =osit the definiendum of a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water. ?. %he sub4ect, pot. C. =osit the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon able to perform the function of holdin( water. ?. %he sub4ect, pot. C. >efore we applied it to actuality, didn+t we1 /f someone asked, 5=osit one with actuality,5 what did you posit1 %he sub4ect, actuality, ri(ht1 /f someone asks you to posit actuality which is one with actuality... ?. %he sub4ect, actuality. C. /f someone asks you to posit the definiendum of that which is able to perform a function... ?. %he sub4ect, actuality.

C. /f someone asks you to posit the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of that which is able to perform a function... ?. %he sub4ect, actuality. C. @6cept for that there is nothin( to posit, ri(ht1 %hus, posit one with pot. ?. %he sub4ect, pot. C. 2h, posit pot which is one with pot. ?. %he sub4ect, pot. C. =osit the definiendum of a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water. ?. %he sub4ect, pot. C. =osit the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water. ?. %he sub4ect, pot. C' 2h, it is that also. Now posit one with definiendum. ?. %he sub4ect, definiendum. C. =osit definiendum which is one with definiendum. ?. %he sub4ect, definiendum. C. =osit the definiendum of the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. ?. %he sub4ect, definiendum. C. =osit the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. ?. %he sub4ect, definiendum. C. @6cept for that there is nothin( to posit, ri(ht1 No matter where you are... @0en if a >uddha came, he could not posit somethin( else. %here is nothin( else to think about. =osit one with the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. ?. %he sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. C. =osit the triply )ualified imputed e6istent which is one with the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. ?. %he sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. C. =osit the definition of definiendum. ?. %he sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. C. =osit th triply )ualified substantial e6istent of definiendum. ?. %he sub4ect, the trily )ualified imputed e6istent. C. %here is no reason to be doubtful about it. 7ou ha0e to posit the sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. %here is nothin( else to posit. Now posit one with definition. ?. %he sub4ect, definition. C. =osit definition which is one with definition.

?. %he sub4ect, definition. C. =osit the definiendum of the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. ?. %he sub4ect, definition. C. =osit the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the trily )ualified substantial e6istent. ?. %he sub4ect, definition. C. ?o you understand1 =osit one with the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. ?. %he sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. C. =osit the triply )ualified substantial e6istent which is one with the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. ?. %he sub4ect, the triply )ualified iputed e6istent. C. =osit the definition of definiendum. ?. %he sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. C. =osit the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of definiendum. ?. %he sub4et, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. C. %here is no reason to be doubtful about it. 7ou ha0e to posit the sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent. %here is nothin( else to posit. Now posit one with definition. ?. %he sub4ect, definition. C. =osit definition which is one with definition. ?. %he sub4ect, definition. C. =osit the definiendum of the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. ?. %he sub4et, definition. C. =osit the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. ?. %he sub4ect, definition. C. ?o you understand1 =osit one with the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. ?. %he sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. C. =osit the triply )ualified substantial e6istent which is one with the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. ?. %he sub4et, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. C. =osit the definition of definition. ?. %he sub4et, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. C. =osit the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of definition. ?. %he sub4ect, the triply )ualified substantial e6istent. C. @6cept for these there is nothin( else to posit. =osit one with permanent phenomeon. ?. the sub4ect, permanent phenomenon.

C. =osit permanent phenomenon which is one with permanent phenomenon. ?. %he sub4ect, permanent phenomenon. C. =osit the definiendum of a common locus of phenomenon and the nonBmomentary. ?. %he sub4ect, permanent phenomenon. C. =osit the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of a common locus of phenomenon and the nonBmomentary. ?. %he sub4ect, permanent phenomenon. C. =osit one with a common locus of phenomenon and the nonB momentary. ?. %he sub4ect, a common locus of phenomenon and the nonB momentary. C. =osit a common locus of phenomenon and the nonBmomentary which is one with a common lous of phenomenon and the nonB momentary. ?. %he sub4ect, a common locus of phenomenon and the nonB momentary. C. =osit the definition of permanent phenomenon. ?. %he sub4ect, a common locus of phenomenon and the nonB momentary. C. =osit the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of permanent phenomenon. ?. %he sub4ect, a common locus of phenomenon and the nonB momentary. C. 2h, this is not to be confused. =osit one with color. ?. %he sub4ect, color. C. =osit color which is one with color. ?. %he sub4ect, color. C. =osit the definiendum of suitable as a hue. ?. %he sub4ect, color. C. =osit the trply )ualified imputed e6istent of suitable as a hue. ?. %he sub4ect, color. C. =osit one with suitable as a hue. ?. %he sub4et, suitable as a hue. C. =osit suitable as a hue which is one with suitable as a hue. ?. %he sub4ect, suitable as a hue. C. =osit the definition of color. ?. %he sub4ect, suitable as a hue. C. =osit the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of color.

?. %he sub4ect, suitable as a hue. C. Now there is no confusion. %his is 4ust ri(ht. %he mode of procedure in identifyin( re0erses is like that. %here is nothin( else to posit. /f one posits somethin( else, there is a lot of confusion. 2kay1 Now from amon( the four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of actuality, probably one with actuality is a definiendum. /f someone says, 5@0en so, why is it1 What is the definition of one with actuality15 what do you posit1 ! phenomenon which is not di0erse from actuality. /n the same way, one with pot is a definiendum, one with that which is able to perfrom function is a definiendum, one with a bulbous flatB based henomenon which is able to perfrom the functin of holdin( water is a definiendum, all of them are done in this way. /f smeone asks, 5/s actuality which is one with actuality a definindum15 it is not. !ctuality which is one with actuality does not obtain as a definiendum. /f this is a definiendum, one must posit as its definition that which is able to perform a function which is one with that which is able to perform a function. %hese two are different. %hat which is able to perform a function which is one with that which is able to perform a function refers to the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. Jot it1 2n the other hand, actuality which is one with actuality refers to actuality+s re0erse. 2ne with actuality. %hat which is able to perform a function which is one with that which is able to perform a function refers to the re0erse of that which is able to perform a function. %hese two are different, ri(ht1 %hat which is able to perform a function and actuality are different, ri(ht1 /t is different because of bein( a definiendum. 7ou ha0e to say like that. %hus, actuality which is one with actuality does not obtain as a definiendum, a definition of it does not e6ist. Jot it1 !ctuality which is one with actuality is not a definiendum. Now some debate like this, 5/t follows that actuality which is one with actuality is a definiendum because its definition is actulity which is a phenomenon which is not di0erse from actuality.5 %hey debate that the definition of actuality which is one with actuality is actuality which is a phenomenon which is not di0erse from actuality. /t is not so. 7ou can+t point your fin(er at it. !ctuality which is a phenomenon which is not di0erse from actuality does not obtain as the definition of actuality which is one with actuality. %hey debate this. ?o you understand1 *&tudent. / don+t understand., *%he debate (oes like this., C. /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is a

definienduym because there is a definition of it. /t follows that there is a definition of it because the definition of actuality which is one with actuality is actuality which is not di0erse from actuality. *JH. %his is wron(., C. &o what is the be(innin( *of this debate,1 /t follows that actuality which is one with actuaity is a definiendum becase that which is able to perform a function which is one with that which is able to perform a function is the definition of actuality which is one with actuality. *Ha0in( said that, what must you say1, ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function which is one with that which is able to perform a function, is not the definition of actuality which is one with actuality. ?. / accept it. C. Why is it not1 /t follows that it is because *1, there is an ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and a definiendum and *", the relationship of a definition and a definiendum is established. ?. %he reason is not established. C. What is not established1 %he coe6tensi0eness of bein( is not ascertained, ri(ht1 Whate0er is actuality which is one with actuality is necessarily not that which is able to perform a function which is one with that which is able to perform a function. Whate0er is that which is able to perform a function which is one with that which is able to perform a function is necessarily not actuality which is one with actuality. ?o you understand1 /t is not necessarily that. /t is neessarily not that. /t (oes o0er to contradictory. %he two, that which is able to perform a function which is one with that which is able to perform a function and actuality which is one with actuality, are contradictory. %hus, it does not obtain as a definiendum. 7ou ha0e to say it is not. /f it is not that, it follows that the sub4ect, actuality which is one with actuality, is a definiendum because there is definition of it. /t follows that there is because actuality which is not di0erse from actuality is such. /f someone says that, you want to say that it is not s. %he word 5actuality5 is affi6ed ri(ht1 2ne cannot understand the word 5actuality5 affi6ed to a definition of actuality. Ha0in( ascertained by a 0alid co(ni:er actuality which is not di0erse from actuality, one has already ascertained actuality *which is one with actuality,. %he relationship of a definition and a definiendum is not established. 2kay1 %hat which is called the relationship between a

definition and a definiendum is not established. *JH. 2nce the lst word is 5actuality5 you are (oin( to ha0e to (i0e a definition of that. /t will not be sufficient 4ust to (i0e a definition of the 5which is one5 before it and then tack 5actuality5 on to the end of it. 7ou are askin( for the definition of actuality which is one with actuality, and that word 5actuality5 will ha0e to ha0e a definition. 7ou cannot 4ust repeat it itself in the definition. &o it is not a definiendum. 7ou will understand it when you listen to the tape., Now then, actuality is a definiendum, ri(ht1 !ctuality is a triply )ualified imputed e6istent, ri(htL /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality, is a triply )ualified imputed e6istent. / accept it. /t follows that it is not a definiendum. =osit the way in which it fulfills *tshan( tshul, the three )ualities of an imputed e6istent. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, actuality, that it is a triply )ualified imputed e6istent because *1, it is a definiendum, *", it is established in dependence on its illustrations, and 9F, it is not referred to as the definiendum of any henomenon other than that which is able to perform a function. %he way of fulfillin( the three )ualities of an imputed e6istent is like that. %he three )ualities of an imputed e6istent are complete. %hese are the three )ualities of an ob4ect of comprehension and the three )ualities of an imputed e6istent. 2kay1 Now that which is able to perform a function is a triply )ualified substantial e6istent, ri(ht1 /t follows that the sub4ect, that which is able to perform a function, is a triply )ualified substantial e6istent. / accept it. /f someone says that it is not a triply )ualified substantial e6istent and asks you to posit the way in which it fulfills the three )ualities of a substantial e6istent, there are such. 1, it is a definition ", it is established in dependence on its illustrations F, it is not referred to as the definition of any other phenomenon than actuality. %hese three are the way of fulfillin( the three )ualities of a substantial e6istent. %he three )ualities of a positor are complete and the three )ualities of a substantial e6istent are complete. 7ou ha0e (ot this, ri(ht1 Now we ha0e applied this to actuality. Now you ha0e to apply it to ob4ect of knowled(e, pot, permanent phenomenon, and all. /s the sub4ect, pot, a triply )ualified imputed e6istent1 =osit the way in which it fulfills the three )ualities of an imputed e6istent. %here is *a way in which it fulfills these three.,

1, it is a definiendum ", it is established in dependence on its illustrations F,it is not referred to as the definiendum of anythin( other than the bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water. Now is the bulbous flatBbased phenmenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water a trily )ualified substantial e6istent1 / accept it. =osit the say in which it fulfills the three )ualities of a triply )ualified substantial e6istent. %here is *a way in which it fulfills these three, because 1, it is a definition ", it is established in dependence on its illustrations F, it is not referred to as the definition of anythin( other than pot. %his must be applied to all the restBBpillar, ob4ect of knowled(e, impermanent phenomenon, specifically characteri:ed phenomenon, permanent phenomenon. /t is to be applied to all of them. Now you understand, ri(ht1 Now is the sub4ect, a definiendum, a definiendum1 / accept it. Why is the sub4ect, definiendum, a definiendum1 >ecause of bein( a triply )ualified imputed e6istent. /t follows that the sub4ect, definiendum, is not a triply )ualified imputed e6istent. =osit the way in which it fufils the three )ualities of an imputed e6istent. 1, it is definiendum ", it is established in dependence on its illustrations F, it is not referred to as the definiendum of anythin( other than the triply )ualified imputed e6istent Now that is the procedure. Jot it1 /s the sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent, a definition1 / accept it. /t follows that it is a triply )ualified substantial e6istent. =osit the way in which it fulfills the three )ualities of a substantial e6istent. %here is *a way in which it fulfills these three, because 1, it is a definition ", it is established in dependence on its illustrations F, it is not referred to as the definition of anythin( other than definiendum. 2h, you understand, don+t you1 /t is like that. %he way of fulfillin( the three )ualities of a substantial e6istent are like that. Now you ha0e to apply this to all others. /t applies to absolutely e0erythin(. Whate0er it is you can apply o0er the way of fulfillin( the three )ualities of an imputed phenomenon and the way of fulfillin( the three )ualities of a

substantial e6istent. *!lso,, that thou(ht and the coe6tensi0eness of bein( that we did earlier are to be applied to all. %he coe6tensi0eness of bein( is to be applied to whate0er basis. Now the time is finished. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4et, pot+s re0erse, that there is a time when it doew not e6ist. ?. Why1 C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot+s re0erse, that there is no time when it does not e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot+s re0erse, that there is no place where it does not e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. %hen if there is no place where pot+s re0erse does not e6ist, then it follows with espect to the sub4ect, pot+s re0erse, that it is not a phenomenon which has a basis of refutation. ?. / accept it. C. !ma:in(8 /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot+s re0erse, that it is not a phenomenon which has a basis of refutation. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot+s re0erse, that there is no place where it does not e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. 2h, it follows that there is no place where a pot does not e6ist. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that there is a place where a pot does not e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that there is a place where a pot+s re0erse does not e6ist. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that there is because there is a place where a pot does not e6ist. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that there is per0asion because the two, pot+s re0erse and pot,are coe6tensi0e with respect to e6istence *yod khyab mnyam yin,. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. 2h, now it follows that there is a place where a pot does not e6ist but pot+s re0erse does e6ist. /t follows tht at a place where there is no pot there is pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that at a place where there is no pot there is pot+s

re0erse. /t follows that at a place where there is no pot there is the definition of pot. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that at a place where there is no pot there is no definition of pot. /t is the same. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that at a place where there is no pot there is the definition of pot. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that at a place wher there is no pot there is a pot because there is the definition of pot. ?. / accept it. C. 7ou accept thatL !t a place where there is no pot... ?. 2h, at a place where there is no pot1 7es. C. What did you hear1 ?. !t a place where there is a pot. C. !t a place where there is no pot is bein( said. !t a place where there is no pot is there the definition of pot1 ?. %here is not. C. !nd isn+t there ot+s re0erse1 /s there a place where pot+s definition does not e6ist1 ?. &ince it is a permanent phenomenon, there probably is *pot+s re0erse at a place where there is no pot,. C. 2h, probably. &o probably there is pot+s definition *at a place where there is no pot, because of bein( a permanent phenomenon. ?. 7es. C. %herefore, isn+t there a place where pot+s definitoin does not e6ist1 ?. %here is not. We (ot this in identifyin( re0erses. !ll of these are permanent phenomena. the definition of pot, the trily )ualified substantial e6istent of pot, one with pot, pot+s re0erse. What is called permanent phenomena must ha0e e6isted between some earlier time and some later time. %his is what is called permanent phenomena. ;rom an earlier time to a later time it abides without disinte(ratin(. /t is somethin( which does not disinte(rate. Whene0er it is, it does not disinte(rate. ?oes it ha0e to be this way1 *&tudent. Well, there are the occasional or nonBeternal permanent phenomena, ri(ht1, %his is referred to here. =ot+s re0erse and pot+s definition are occasional permanent phenomena. %here are the occasional permanent phenomena. %hus, are they not like that *nonBdisinte(ratin(,1 ?o+t

they sty from an earlier time to a later time without disinte(ratn(1 !re they (oin( to disinte(ate1 When a pot is disinte(ratin(, does pot+s re0erse disinte(rate1 *&tudent. Well, there is a time when pot+s re0erse does not e6ist., 2h, therefore, when a pot no lon(er e6ists, does pot+s re0erse then disinte(rate1 *&. %here is a time when it doe not e6ist., /t disinte(rates, ri(ht1 *&. No, ?oesn+t it1 *&. /s whate0er disinte(rates necessarily an impermanent phenomenon1 %here is no per0asion. a permanent phenomenon is not somethin( which disinte(rates. %here is also no cause of a permanent phenomenon, no cause and condition. a permanent phenomenon has no cause and also no condition. /t does not depend on causes and conditions. %hen does pot+s re0erse depend on causes and conditons1 /s it that it e6ists at some time and not at another because of the power of causes and conditions1 /sn+t it somethin( that e6its when the causes and conditions come to(ether and does not e6ist when those causes and nditions are not brou(ht to(ether1 /s pot+s re0erse somethin( which e6ists when the causes and conditions are brou(ht to(ether *tshon, and does not e6ist when the causes and conditions are not brou(ht to(ether1 /s it like that1 *JH. /s it somethin( which e6ists when the composite causes and conditions e6ist and does not e6ist when the composite causes and conditions do not e6ist1, /s is like that1 *&tudent. =robably., =robably1 ?oes pot+s re0erse ha0e causes and conditins1 *&. /t is like that., /t has somethin( like a cause and condition1 /s pot+s re0erse an impermanent phenomenon, an actuality1 *&. %he causes and conditions don+t come., &ince they do not, it has no causes and conditions, ri(ht1 /t does not need to depend on causes and conditins. /t does not depend on causes and conditions, does it1 *&. /t does need to depend on causes and conditions., 2h, pot+s re0erse does not need to depend on causes and conditions because of bein( a permanent phenomenon. ;or e6ample, the dependence or independence spoken of in the =rasan(ik system is not necessarily causes and effects. /n the &autrantika system, howe0er, the dependence that is spoken of is nothin( e6cept the dependence on causes and conditions. %he Dadhyamika system also is to be known. %he mode of abidin( *(nas tshul, is different, ri(ht1 Now the time is finished. *=robably end of clas on Day C., Class for Day 1", 19#$ /f / e6plain the meanin( with respect to color, then you will understand. !t the be(innin( of color, what was the 0ery first one1

Was it, 5/s whate0er is a color necessarily red1 /f one answers that there is per0asion, then there is a debate, ri(ht1 Now say that there is no per0asion. 7ou ha0e to understand the reason. /f you do not understand the reason, it will not be suitable. %here is no per0asion. Now if someone says, 5/f there is no per0asion, posit it,5 then what do you say1 %he sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch. *%he procedure is as follows., C. /s whate0er is a color necessarily red1 ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /f there is no per0asion, posit it. ?. %he sub4et, the color of a white reli(ious conch. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a wh4ite reli(ious conch, is a color. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, a color1 ?. >ecause of bein( suitable as a hue. *- . Ksually, we can say 5because of bein( suitable s a hue,5 but offer *trul, the ne like yours. @0en so is it 5because of bein( suitable as a hue15 /sn+t it 5because of bein( white15 /n the 0ery first one., >ecause of bein( white. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of white reli(ious conch, is white. ?. / accept it. C. Why is it white1 ?. >ecause of bein( one with the color of a white reli(ious conch. C. /t follows tha whate0er is one with the color of a white reli(ious conch must be white. ?. / accept it. C' Why must whate0er is one with the color of a white reli(ious conch be white1 ?. >ecause the color of a white reli(ious conch is white. *- . Whate0er is one with the color of a white reli(ious conch is necessarily white because whate0er is one with the color of a white reli(ious conch is necessarily the color of a white reli(ious conch. ?o you understand1 /f someone aks why it must be the color of white reli(ious conch, the color of a white reli(ious conch is what1 /f the color of a white reli(ious conch is one with the color of a white reli(ious conch, hy must it be the color of a white reli(ious conch1 >ecause of bein( the definiendum of that which is suitable as a hue of

a white reli(ious conch. /f it is the definiendum of that, then it must be the color of a white reli(ious conch. %his is a little better. ?o you understand1 JH. why is it that somethin( is one with itself, that it has to be that1 /t is contained in this discussion on identifyin( re0erses, ri(ht1, C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, is not red. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, the color of a white reli(ious conch, not red1 ?. >ecause of bein( white. C. /t follows that whate0er is white is necessarily not red. ?. / accept it. C. Why is whate0er is white necessarily not red1 ?. >ecause a common locus of the two, white and red, is not possible. C. /t follows that a common locus of the two, white and red, is not possible. ?. / accept it. C. Why is a common locus of the two, white and red, not possible1 ?. >ecause those two are contradictory. C. /t follos that the two, hite and red, are contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. Why are the two, white and red, contradictory1 ?. >ecause *1, they are different and *", a common locus of the two is not possible. C. /t follows that if *1, they are different and *", a common locus of the two is not possible, then they are necessarily contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. Why is there per0asion1 ?. >ecause phenomena which are *1, different and *", a common locus of them is not possible is the definition of contradictory phenomena. C. Why is it that if somethin( is the definition of contradictory phenomena, then it must be the case that whate0er is it is necessarily contradictory1 ?. /t must be the case that there is per0asion because if somethin( is the definition of contradictory phenomena, then it and contradictory phenomena must be ascertained as ha0in( the ei(ht approaches of per0asion of a definition and its definiendum. *- . /t has to (o that way. Whate0er you say brin(s on somethin( else to say. /t is the same for all. /n the presentation of established bases

what is the 0ery first one1 /s it, 5/s whate0er is an established base necessarily a permanent phenomenon1, C. /s whate0er is an established base necessarily a permanent phenomenon1 ?. %here is no per0asion. C. =osit it. ?. %he sub4ect, an actuality. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, an actuality, is an established base. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, an actuality, an established base1 ?. >ecause of bein( an e6istent. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, an actuality, is an e6istent. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is an e6istent is necessarily an established base. ?. / accept it. C. Why is whate0er is an e6istent necessarily an established base1 ?. >ecause e6istent, established base, and ob4ect of comprehension are synonymous. C. Why are they synonymous1 ?. >ecause *1, a common locus is possible and *", there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion. C. /t follows that if *1, a common locus is possible and *", there is ascertainment of the ei(ht approaches of per0asion, then they are necessarily synonymous. C. Now it follows that the sub4ect, an actuality, is not a permanent phenomenon. ?' / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, an actuality, not a permanent phenomenon1 *- . 7ou ha0e to say this. %his is absolutely the way to (o. /f someone says whate0er is an established base is necessarily a permanent phenomenon, then there is no per0asion. %hen you posit the sub4ect, an actuality, ri(ht1 Now it is an established base, and it is not a permanent phenomenon. 7ou ha0e to say that ri(ht1, ?. >ecause of bein( an impermanent phenomenon. C' /t follows that the sub4ect, actuality, is an impermanent phenomenon. ?' / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, an actuality, an impermanent phenomenon1 ?. >ecause of bein( monentary.

C. /t follows that whate0er is momentary is necessarily an impermanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. Why is whate0er is momentary necessarily an impermanent phenomenon1 ?. >ecause the momentary is the definition of impermanent phenomenon. C. /t follows that the momentary is the definition of impermanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the momentary the definiton of impermanent phenomenon1 ?. >ecause the momentary must be posited as the definition of impermanent phenomenon, that which is able to perform a function must be posited as the definition of actuality, the disinte(ratin( the definition of caused phenomenon, and the created must be posited as the definition of product. ?o you understand1 /t is like that. %he earlier and the later are the same. ;rom the be(innin( of the Collected %opics to the end the mode of procedure is the same. %his is to be applied to identifyin( re0erses or where0er you study. When you debate, you need to (i0e reasons %hen a thou(ht will come from that and ha0in( debated another thou(ht will come. %hen e0entually you will understand the (reater and lesser per0asions. 7ou need to understand the reason. %his is not that becaue it is not ... %his is not that because of bein(... Why is whate0er is the necessarily that1 /f it is this why is it necessarily that1 7ou ha0e to think about and understand the reasons. %hen a(ain you debate. %hink about it. 2kay1 Now there is a little remainder in identifyin( re0erses. What do you say1 How do / do these1 ?id we calculate *di, the three and four possibilities between the phenomena coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse and some other1 We did calculate them, ri(ht1 %here are four possibilities between the phenomena coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse and permanent phenomenon, aren+t there1 %hen what is there1 %here are four possibilities between the phenomena coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse and actuality. %here are four possibilities between the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the actality+s re0erse and definiendum, aren+t there1 %here are four possibilites betwen the phenomna coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse and definition, aren+t there1 We calculated four possiblities between each

of them, ri(ht1 Now what is the difference between the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of permanent phenomenon and actuality1 ?. %hey are contradictory. C. /t follows that they are contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. Why are they contradictory1 ?. >ecause *1, those two are different and *", a common locus is not possible. ;or e6ample, whate0er is a phenomenon which is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of permanent phenomenon is necessarily a permanent phenomenon. %his is it. Now what is the difference between the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of permanent phenomenon and permanent phenomenon1 %here are three possibilities. Now what is the difference betwen the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of ob4ect of knowled(e and permanent phenomenon1 ?. %here are four possibilities. C. 2h, yea. Now he has fi(ured there are four possibilities. /t follows that there are not fur possibilities betwen the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of ob4ect of knowled(e and permanent phenomenon. =osit somethin( which is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of ob4ect of knowled(e but not a permanent phenomenon. ?. %he triply )ualified imputed e6istent of suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness. C. 2h, it follows that the sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, is not a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness, is an actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /s it1 /t follows that ob4ect of knowled(e is an actuality. ?. Why1 C. 2b4ect of knowled(e is not an actuality, is it1 /t follows that the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness is an actuality. ?. Why1 C. !ma:in(. /t follows that such is not somethin( which is coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of ob4ect of knowled(e but not a permanent

phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /f it is not that, ama:in(. Now it is not an actuality. /t is not a permanent phenomenon. /t follows that it is a nonBe6istent. /t follows that the sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of suitable as an ob4ect of an awreness, is a nonBe6istent. ?. Why1 C. /t is not somethin( which is a permanent phenomenon, and it is not an actuality, is it1 ?o you understand1 %hus, you ha0e to understand what per0asions there are between these. 2kay1 ;or e6ample, what is the difference between the two, the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse definiendum and permanent phenomenon1 ;or whate0er is a permanent phenomenon, the phenomena coe6tensi0e with its re0erse and permanent phenomenon will only ha0e three possibilities. /f it is an actuality, then what1 %he phenomena coe6tensi0e with its re0erse and permanent phenomeon ha0e four possibilities. Now this is ascertained. 7ou+0e bot it. /t is like that. !pply this to e0erythin(. !pply it and debate it back and forth. Now posit the four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e. 1,one with the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e ",the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e which is one with the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e F,the definiendum of the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of ob4ect of knowled(e G,the triply )ualified imputed eistent of the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of ob4ect of knowled(e Now posit the four phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of ob4ect of knowled(e. 1,one with the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of ob4ect of knowled(e ",the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of ob4ect of knowled(e which is one with the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of ob4ect of knowled(e. F,the definition of the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e G,the triply )ualified substantial e6istent of the definition of ob4ect of knowled(e Now you must apply this to others. actuality, permanent phenomenon, e0erythin(. 2kay1 !pply it to the others. 7ou

understand, ri(ht1

2ppositeBfromB>ein(B&omethin( and 2ppositeBfromB NotB>ein(B&omethin(

Now the teachin( out of which de0elops *+phral rten, opposite from bein( and opposite from not bein(... *JH. %here are a few remainin( debates in identifyin( re0erses, a few left to be done, ri(ht1, When / ha0e finished teachin( this, then we will debate them. What do you say1 / do not remember those words *in the source )uote,. CharBhar Jeshay does not (i0e the source )uoted does he1 @6cept for the aBdo Collected %opics it is not anywhere else. /n CharBhar Jeshay+s Collected %opics does it say, 5;rom such and such a chaper in ?harmakirti+s Commentary on *?i(na(a+s, 5Compendium of Ealid Co(nition515 /t is not there, ri(ht1 /t does not (i0e the source )uote, ri(ht1 %here isn+t a passa(e from the root te6t of the =ramana0arttika is there1 / ha0e read it. %here is one. Now e0en thou(h we do not ha0e this, it is okay. Now it is like this. Now we will apply it to actuality. 2pposite from bein( an actuality *dn(os po yin pa las lo( pa, and nonBactuality *dn(os po ma yin pa, are synonymous. 2pposite from not bein( an actuality *dn(os po ma yin pa las lo( pa, and actuality are synonymous. 2pposite from bein( a permanent phenomenon and nonBpermanent phenomenon are synonymous. 2pposite from not bein( a permanent phenomenon and permanent phenomenon are synonymous. Ha0e you (ot it1 Now we can apply it to ob4ect of knowled(e. 2pposite from bein( an ob4ect of knowled(e and nonB ob4ect of knowled(e are synonymous. 2pposite from not bein( an ob4ect of knowled(e and ob4ect of knowled(e are synonymous. 7ou will ascertain this. 2ne thin( to be ascertained is this. 2pposite from not bein( a pot andpot are synonymous. 2pposite from bein( a pot and nonBpot are synonymous. 2pposite from bein( a human and nonB human are synonymous. 2pposite form not bein( a human and human are synonymous. %his is sufficient, ri(ht1 %hose two are synonymous. 7ou ha0e to ascertain this. Ha0in( ascertained this for opposite from bein( and opposite from not bein(, there is nothin( left to ascertain. Now then buildin( on this, opposite from not bein( opposite from not bein( opposite from not bein( an actuality is to be understood as an actuality itself. 7ou can put a hundred, a thousand, or ten

thousand of these *)ualifiers 5opposite from not bein(5, and actuality itself is still what is to be understood. /f you put 4ust one *makin( it, opposite from not bein( an actuality, what is to be understood is actuality. /f you add onto this opposite from not bein(, then an actuality is what is to be understood. /f you add onto this oppoite from not bein(, then it itself is to be understood. 2kay1 /f you add on a hundred, a thousand, or e0er how many to opposite from not bein( a permanent phenomenon, permanent phenomenon itself is still what is to be understood. No matter now many you add onto opposite from not bein( an ob4ect of knwled(e, an ob4ect of knowled(e is what is to be understood. /t does not come to en(a(e anythin( else. 52pposite from bein(5 does en(a(e other and they become different. When one is sayin( opposite frm not bein( opposite from not bein( opposite from not bein(, then the thin( itself is what is to be understood. 2kay, ri(ht1 Now opposite from bein( actuality is nonBactuality. When you add two, oposite from bein( opposite from bein( actuality comes back to actuality. 2kay, ri(ht1 Now it is like that. 2pposite from bein( actuality is referred to an nonBactuality. Now it one puts onto this another opposite from bein(, then it comes back to actuality. 2kay1 *=robably demonstratin( the method for countin( back and forth on one+s fin(er in order to reckon whether it is the phenomenon itself or not, -ati inbochay said., %his is actuality. /f one says opposite from bein( actuality, (o here. /f he also says opposite from bein( actuality you arri0e back at actuality. /f you do one, it is nonBactuality. /f you do two, you understand actuality itself. /f three, then (o back o0er. /f four, then you come back here. /f there is an e0en number of them, then you (et 4ust the thin( itself. /f there is an odd number, then you (o o0er to arri0e at nonBit. %here is a difference between the e0en and the odd. *JH. Cha is a pair and ya is only one out of a pair. %his whole business of countin( on the knuckles is 4ust cra:y. 7ou 4ust do two thin(s like this. 7ou mo0e it back and forth., Now you understand this, ri(ht1 Now permanent phenomenon is the same. 2pposite from bein( opposite from the bein( opposite from bein( permanent phenomenon is like when you say opposite from nonBpermanent phnomenon. /f you add onto this one more opposite from bein(, then you arri0e back here at permanent phenomenon. %hen if you add onto this another opposite from bein(, you (o back o0er to nonBpermanent phenomenon. /f onto this you add another

opposite from bein(, you arri0e back here. 7ou understand, ri(ht1 Now if you apply this to e0erythin(BBpermanent phenomenon, actuality, ob4ect of knowled(e, and e0erythin(BBit is the same. %he mode of procedure is the same. 2pposite from bein( a human is nonB human. */f onto this you add, opposite from bein(, then it is human. /f a(ain you add another, it is nonBhuman. /t is like that . 7ou do it indi0idually. 7ou ha0e to (o like this. When someone says opposite from bein( actuality, you mo0e here to the second 4oint of the fin(er,. When someone says opposite from not bein( you 4ust stay there *on the same section of the fin(er,. 2ppostie from not bein( it is understood as it. 2pposite from not bein( actuality is to be understood as actuality. %hen if onto that someone adds opposite from bein( you come back one *that is, chan(e from the former position,. When one says opposite from not bein(, then 4ust stay there. ?o you understand1 %hen if one says opposite from bein( then you (o to the other *section of the fin(er,. %hen if one says opposite from not bein( on to this, then 4ust stay. %hen if he says opposite from bein( you (o back. !nd if he then says another time opposite from bein( you then (o once a(ain to the other. /t is like this. %he procedure is this. 7ou don+t need any more do you1 *He (i0es yet another e6ample., %here is nothin( you do not understand, ri(ht1 *He now re0iews the third debate in opposite from bein( and opposite from not bein(. ;or the sub4ect, it is not necessary to posit the re0erse of pillar. 2ne can posit ob4ect of knowled(e, permanent phenomenon, and so forth. %he re0iew is not different from the translation of this debate. @nds "C.GCH. %he mode of procedure in opposite from bein( and opposite from not bein( is for the reasons to (et lesser and lesser *that is, shorter and shorter,. %his mode of procedure is to be appied to all. /t is the same for all. 7ou understand, ri(ht1 2pposite from bein( and opposite from not bein( are like that. */n the fourth debate it says., Whate0er is somethin( which is only a permanent phenomenon is necessarily a permanent phenomenon. !ctually, this comes. &ince it comes, other people understand this. &ince they understand it, e6cept for (oin( it will not be okay. /f someone says, 5/s whate0er is somethin( which a permanent phenomenon is necessarily a permanent phenomenon15 there is no per0asion. /f he says, 5=osit it,5 then the sub4ect, only a permanent phenomenon. 2kay1 2nly a permanent phenomenon *rda( pa kho na, is somethin( which a permanent phenomenon is, but it is not a

permanent phenomenon. What is only a permanent phenomenon1 /t is somethin( which a permanent phenomenon is. /f someone says, 5/s it a permanent phenomenon15 /t is not. What is the reason that the sub4ect, only a permanent phenomenon, is somethin( which a permanent phenomenon is1 /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, only a permanent phenomenon, that it is somethin( with a permanent phenomenon is because of bien( both somethin( which somethin( is and a permanent phenomenon. >ecause of bein( both somethin( which somethin( is and a permanen phenomnon. When someone says 5both somethin( which somethin( is and a permanent phenomenon,5 refers to 5bein( because it is both somethin( which is it and a permanent phenomenon5 *khyod yin pa khyod yin pa dan( rta( pa (nyis ka yin pa+i phyir,. %his is what is to be understood. *JH. 7ou ha0e to understand khyod put at the be(innin( of that reason. %he play is all on the words. /t refers to 5because bein( it is both somethin( which is it and a permanent phenomenon.5 /f you do not say anythin( but somethin( which somethin( is *khyod yin pa, it is not easy to understand and it is not suitable. /t is a debate on the words, on how one e6presses thin(s. *JH. /t is 4ust on your way of e6planation, on the way you speak. the debate is on a mode of 0erbali:ation., >ecause bein( it is both somethin( which is it and a permanent phenomenon. ;or e6ample, bein( only a permanent phenomenon obtains as both somethin( which is only a permanent phenomenon and *also, as a permanent phenomenon. %his is what is to be thou(ht about. /s there anythin( which is only a permanent phenomenon1 /t is this. /s whate0er is a permanent phenomenon necessarily only a permanent phenomenon1 %her is per0aion. /s ther somethin( which is only a permanent phenomenon1 %here is. /s bein( only a permanent phenomenon an e6istent1 /t is. /t is said like this. /sn+t there somethin( which is onlya permanent phenomenon1 %here are ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible and ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible, ri(ht1 %hat of which the bein( e6ists is this. 7ou ha0e to say that there are ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible, ob4ects of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible, that the bein( of which is possible, and that the bein( of which is not possible. 7ou ha0e to say that onlya permanent phenomenon is somethin( the bein( of which is possible, ri(ht1 &ince only a permanent phenomenon is somethin( the bein( of which is possible you ha0e to say that somethin( which is it is possible, ri(ht1 %his 5possibility5 that

is said here means that it is possible amon( ob4ects of knowled(e. &ince somethin( which is only a permanent phenomenon is possible, somethin( which is only a permanent phenomenon e6ists, ri(ht1 &ince it is an e6istent, it is either an actuality or a permanent phenomenon. /t is a permanent phenomenon, ri(ht1 &ince it is that it is only a permanent phenomenon. 2kay1 What is referred to here is this, 5/t follows with respect to the sub4ect, only a permanent phenomenon, that bein( it is both somethin( which is it and a permanent phenomenon.5 >ein( only a permanent phenomenon is itself somethin( which is only a permanent phenomenon, and it is also a permanent phenomenon. %his is what is bein( referred to here. When it says that it follows that it is so, it says, 5because somethin( is both somethin( which is only a permanent phenomenon and a permanent phenomenon,5 ri(ht1 */t means, bein( it is both somethin( which is it and a permanent phenomenon. /f he says that the reason is not established, 5/t follows that it is a permanent phenomenon because of *1, bein( an e6istent and *", not bein( an actuality.5 /t follows that bein( it is a permanent phenomenon because of *1, bein( an e6istent and *", not bein( an actuality. /t follows that it is not an actuality because a cause of it does not e6ist. %his is how it is established. Whate0er is an actuality must ha0e a cause. /f a cause of somethin( e6ists, then it must be established as related with its cause. /f somethin( is established as related *with its causef,, then if there is no cause of it hthen it necesarily does not e6ist. /f there is per0asion, the it will be said, 5/t follows with respect to the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, that it does not e6ist because ther is no cause of it.5 2kay1 Now probably ha0in( debated... *%o JH., / doubt that they can understand. *JH. %hey will not understand immediately. =erhaps if you put your e6planation into the tape recorder, then we will think about it., *%he te6t says,, 5/t follows that it is a permanent phenomenon because of *1, bein( an e6istent and *", not bein( an actuality.5 /f someone says that the second part of the reason is not establishedBBif someone says that bein( it is an actuality, *it says, 5/t follows that it is an actuality.5 >ein( it is an actuality. When he says, 5/t follows that it is an actuality,5 it means, 5/t follows that bein( it is an actuality.5 /t follows that it is an actuality because of bein( an actuality. /f he accepts it, then, 5/t follows that there is a cause of it.5 What is to be understood is bein( it. 5/t follows that a caue of it *i.e., bein( it, e6ists because it is an actuality.5 /f he accepts it, then, 5/t follows that it is

produced from its causes.5 /t is produced from its causes. /f a cause of somethin( e6its, then it must be produced from its causes because ther is a cause of it. /f it is fulfilled that there is a cause of it, then it must be produced from its causes. /f he accepts it, 5/t follows that it is an effect of its causes because it is produced from its causes.5 /f he accepts it, 5/t follows that it is related with its cause as that arisen from it.5 %here is a relation. We say, 5We are related,5 ri(ht1 Connection. We say, 5We ha0e a (reat relationship,5 ri(ht1 %hose people who do not understand the reli(ious lan(ua(e do not understand the e6planation of relations. What is related and what is not related is somethin( to be known, ri(ht1 %hus, what is called relations are posited as two, phenomena which are related as the same essence and phenomena which are related as the arisen from that. %he relation between causes and aeffects is referred to as the related as phenomena arisen from that. this is the relation of cause and effect. ;or e6ample, you all are related with your mothers as that arisen from them. %he two, smoke and fire, are established in the relation of that arisen from that. *JH. &o there is a causal relationship and a relationship of the same entity. Cause and effect here, like smoke andifre, are causal relationship or you and your mother are causal, not the same entity relaionship. %here are two types of relationship., this is the rlationship of that arisen from that. %hus, now, 5/t is established in the relationship with its cause as that arisen from it.5 /f this is established, if there is no cause of it, it necessarily does not e6ist. /t follows that there is per0asion. /f there is per0asion in this, then it follows with respect to the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, that it does not e6ist because there is no cause of it. %his is 4ust ri(ht, isn+t it1 /f there is no cause of it, then it does not necessarily not e6ist, ri(ht1 /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a permanent phenomenon, that it does not e6ist because there is no cause of it. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, established base, that it does not e6ist because a cause of it does not e6ist. 2ne does not say that there is a cause of a permanent phenomenon, ri(ht1 %his is what is flun(. /f he ways that the reason is not established, it follows that a cause of it does not e6ist because it is a permanent phenomnon. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, that a cause of it does ot e6ist because it is a permanent phenomenon. /f he accepts the basic conse)uenceBBthat only a permanent phenomenon is a permanent phenomenon, it follows that the sub4ect, only a permanent phenomenon, is an e6istent because of bein( a

permanent phenomenon. /f he accepts the conse)uence, it follows that the sub4ect, only a permanent phenomenon, is not an e6istent because actuality e6ists. /f he says that the reason is not established, it follows that actuality e6ists because of bein( selfless. 7ou ha0e to say that for whate0er is selfless actuality necessarily e6ists. >ecasue of bein( selfless. 7ou ha0e to say that for whate0er is selfless actuality necessarily e6ists. /s it the case that for whate0er is selfless, actuality necessarily e6ists1 */f there is no per0asion, then posit it. =osit somethin( which *counters the per0asion, for whate0er is selfless actuality necesarily e6ists. *JH. %his is e6istence not bein(., =osit it. /s it the case that for whate0er is selfless actuality necesarily e6ists1 *&tudent. %here is per0asion., /t follows that there is per0asion. *&. / accept it., /t follows that for whate0er is elfless actuality necessarily e6ists. *&. / accept it., /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a basis of ne(ation of actuality, that actuality e6ist. *&. Why1, >ecause of bein( selfless. *&. %here is no per0asion., /t may not be best to (i0e this debate. 7ou ha0e to say that for whate0er is selfless actuality necessariy e6ists. %his is said. Now probably / am not able to (i0e them debates like this. =robably it will make their heads bi( *with confusion,. =robably ther is a little fault in it. / think to. Now the later ones are easy. / doubt we ha0e to (o o0er the later ones. &ince they are easy, we will not do them. Now there is no per0asion in this. ;or instance, there are the two, suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is somethin( *yin par (yur pa+i blo+i yul tu bya run( pa, and suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not somethin( *ma yin par (yur pa+i blo+i yul tu bya run( pa,. *&ee debate ?.$, ;or e6ample, definiendum is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it and also is somethin( suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it and also is somethin( suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it. /f someone asks why, it is becasue definiendum itself is suitable as an ob4ect of such an awarenssBBone which is a definiendum. %here is an awareness which is a definiendum. %his awareness is a definiendum, ri(ht1 *JH. %here is a mind which is a definiendum, ri(ht1 %hat is what is bein( played on in this ne6t one., ;or instance, it is like this. !wareness and consciousness *are definiendums,. %hey talk about !wareness and Inowers. /n that *te6t, there are those called awareness, knower, and consciousness. !wareness is a definiendum. /f someone asks what its definition is, it is knower. Inower is the definition of awareness. %hus, definiendum is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it

because of bein( suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is sommethin( which is it. Jot it1 ?efiniendum is suitable as an ob4ect of such an awareness. /t is an ob4ect of such an awareness. ?efiniendum is also suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it becase *1, an awareness which is not it is knower and *", it is suitable as an ob4ect of an awreness which is a knower. ?efiniendum is an ob4ect of knower, ri(ht1 /t is an ob4ect of knower. Inower reali:es definiendum, ri(ht1 %hus, since definiendum is an ob4ect of knower, it is suitable as an ob4ect of a knowerBBan awareness which is not a definiendum. %hus, definiendum obtains as both suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it. Now as usual if we carry this o0er, actuality is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it but it is not suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it. /t we carry it to ob4ect of knowled(e, it obtains as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it. Whate0er is an awareness is necessarily an ob4ect of knowled(e, ri(ht1 >ecause there is per0asion, since there is no awareness which is not an ob4ect of knowled(e, there is ob4ect of knowled(e is not said to be suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which isnot it. What do you say1 /t is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it. !ll of theseBBob4ect of knowled(e, established base, e6istentBBare thin(s which are suitable as ob4ects of an awareness which is any of them. !ctuality, impermanent phenomenon, specifically characteri:ed phenomenon, that which is able to perform a function, and so on are all thin(s which are suitable as ob4ects of awarenesses which are any of them. %here is no awareness which is not an actuality, ri(ht1 Now what is consciousness itself1 Consciousness is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it and it is not suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it. Now what about matter, nonBassociated compositional factor, and those1 ;or e6ample, 0isible form, sound, odor, taste, and tan(ible ob4ect are suitable as ob4ects of awarenesses which are not them. %hey are not suitable as ob4ects of an awareness which are any of them. %here is no awareness which is a form, ri(ht1 %here is no awareness which is a sound, ri(ht1 %here is no awareness which is an odor, ri(ht1 %hey are suitable as ob4ects of awarenesses which are not them. %hey are ob4ects of awarenesses which are not themsel0es. &imilarly, there is nonBassociated compositional factor. NonB associated compositional factor is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it, but it is not suitable as an ob4ect of an

awareness which is it. 2kay, ri(ht1 *JH. 7in par (yur means which is the sub4ect. !n ob4ect of the mind which is the sub4ect which was earlier stated. %ake definiendum. there is a mind which is a definiendum, ri(ht1 &o if you said 5the ob4ect of a mind which is a form,5 the mind wouldn+t be a form. 7in par (yur pa was referrin( back to the sub4ect, which is the sub4ect., ?o they understand1 Now for permanent phenomena, permanent phenomenon obtains as somethin( which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awreness which is it. Jenerally characteri:ed phenomenon obtains as somethin( which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awreness which isnot it. %he twoBB permanent phenomenon and actuality... Now whate0er is an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible is necessarily suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which isnot them. 2kay, ri(ht1 %he twoBB pillar and pot, the two, permanent phenomenon and actuality, the twoBBdefinition and definiendum, the twoBB *den( +or1,, and so on are all thin(s which are suitable as ob4ects of an awareness which is not them. Now it someone asks, 5What is the difference between the two, that which is suitable s an ob4ect of an awareness which is it and that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it and that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it15 there are four possibilities. /f you are asked to posit somethin( which is both, the sub4ect, definiendum, or th eusb4ect, definition. 2kay, ri(ht1 With respect to somethin( which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it but isnot suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it, you can posit the sub4ect, actuality, or the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e. With respect to somethin( which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it but is not suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it, you can posit theseBBthe sub4ect, permanent phenomenon' the sub4ect, form' the sub4ect, matter' the sub4ect, sound' the sub4ect, nonBassociated compositional factor. ;or somethin( which is neither you can posit the nonB e6istents. 2kay, ri(ht1 Ha0in( reckoned the four possibilities, you will come to understand. What is the difference between the two, that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it and that which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it1 %here are four possibilities. &omethin( which is both is ob4ect of knowled(e, established base, e6istent, and their ynonyms. 7ou understand, ri(ht1 %hen actuality, impermanent phenomenon, specifically characteri:ed phenomenon, ultimate truth, and there are a lot *of synonyms which

are both of these,, ri(ht1 7ou can posit these. What do you posit as somethin( which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it but is not suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it1 Now do not (et confused. /t seems you are confused. %hin(s that are both are definition, definiendum, and those. !ls, you can posit *as both, ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible or ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible. Now as somethin( which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is it but isnot suitable as an ob4ect of an awarenss which is not it you ha0e to posit actuality, established base, ob4ect of knowled(e, e6istent, that which is able to perform a function, impermanent phenomenon, and these. !s somethin( which is suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it but is not suitable as an ob4ect of an awareness which is not it these are to be positedBBpermanent phenomenon, 0isible form, sound, odor, taste, tan(ible ob4ect, any of these. !s somethin( which is neither nonBe6istents are to be posited. Ha0in( thou(ht about the four possibilities with respect to this, then you will understand. 2kay, ri(ht1 /t is like that. Now this is oposite from bein( and opposite from not bein(. %his is ade)uate for opposite from bein and opposite from not bein(. /f you memori:e this debate, it will (et better. %his one. 5/f someone says, +Whate0er is somethin( which a permanent phenomenon is is necessarily a permanent phenomenon...+5 Demori:e this to the point of where it says, 5/t follows that actuality e6ists because of bein( selfless.5 Just up to there, that part. Demori:e that because it comes somewhere later. /t is somethin( to pay attention to, to take interest in. %here were three %ibetans here the last couple days. When somebody comes like that they will ask this sort of )uestion, 5/s whate0er is somethin( which a permanent phenomenon is necessarily a permanent phenomenon15 *JH. / think we will understand at least the last part of it from the tape 0ery easily., Now opposite from bein( and opposite from not bein( are like that.

/ntroductory Causes and @ffects

C. Now because there is no e6planation of the presentation of cause and effect on the occasion of this passa(e which says, 5Just as much as the nature of a causeL?oes not e6ist, so does an effect not arise.5 ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that there is an e6planation of the presentation of cause and effect on the occasion of this passa(e which says, 5Just as much

as the nature of a causeL?oes not e6ist, so does an effect not arise.5 ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows that it is not so. =osit the definition of cause. ?. %he sub4ect, a producer. *@ither a producer or a helper. =osit either the one or the other but not both. /f you posit both, it is contradictory with the presentation of identifyin( re0erses. We will debate on this tomorrow or the ne6t day. /f you (a0e both it would contradict what we learned in identifyin( re0erses. 2nce we ha0e done causes and effects we will mi6 it with the identifyin( re0erses. ! producer is the definition of a cause, or alternati0ely a helper., C. =osit the definition of effect. ?. %he produced is the definition of effect. !lternati0ely, the helper is the definition of effect. Now the threeBBcause, effect, and actualityBBare synonymous. Whate0er is an actuality is necessarily a cause. /t is to be said that whate0er is an actuality is necessarily a cause. /t is to be said that whate0er is an actuality is necessarily an effect. %hose three are synonymous. @arlier we counted these in *amon( the synonyms of actuality,, ri(ht1 Cause, actuality, effect, specifically characteri:ed phenomenon, ultimate truth, were counted, ri(ht1 %hey are synonymous. Whate0er is an actuality is necessarily a cause. %hen, is the sub4ect, you, a cause1 7ou are. !re you an effect1 7ou ha0e to say that you are. Why is the sub4ect, you, a cause1 *7ou are a cause, becase of bein( a cause of this effect which arises from you. %here is you later arisein(, ri(ht1 7ou say, 5>ecause of bein( an effect of that.5 ;or e6ample, you are a cause, ri(ht1 ;or e6ample, you ha0e a child, ri(ht1 7ou are a cause of that child. >ecause of bein( a father of that child, ri(ht1 Now for e6ample, we say that you are a child, ri(ht1 7ou ha0e to say, 5!re you a father15 /t is like this. *&tudent. / am a father., 7es, because of bein( the father of your child. !re you a child1 7es, because of bein( the child of your father. Now, are you a father1 7es. !re you a child1 7es. %hus, it islike tis. 7ou are both a casue and an effect. 7ou ha0e to say that you are both. 7ou understand, ri(ht1 Jenerally, you ha0e to say that the threeBBcause, effect, and actualityBBare synonyms. /n (eneral. /n (eneral. Howe0er, if you apply it to a basis like a cause of actuality and an effect of actuality, then they are contradictory %he two, a cause of actuality and an effect of actuality, obtain as contradictory. ;or e6ample, whate0er is a cause of actuality must ha0e arisen before actuality, it must be a prior arisin( of actuality. Whate0er is an effect of actuality

ust be arisen after actuality, must be a subse)uent arisin( of actuality. 7ou+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 %hus, they are contradictory. %here is a difference of earlier and later time, ri(ht1 Whate0er is a cause of actuality must be established earlier than actuality ri(ht1 /t must be a prior arisin( of actuality. Whate0er is an effect of actuality must be a later arisin( of actuality. Now whate0er it is you can apply this to it. ! cause of a pot and an effect of a pot are contradictory. %he two, a cause of a human and an effect of an human, are contradictory. %he two, a cause of a human and an effect of a human, are contradictory. %he two, a cause of a pot and an effect of a pot, are contradictory. Jot it, ri(ht1 %he two, a cause of a consciousness and an effect of a consciousness, are contradictory. %he two, a cause of a nonB associated compositional factor and an effect of a nonBassociated compositonal factor, are contradictory. %he two, a cause of matter and an effect of matter, are contradictory. %he two, a cause of form and an effect of form, are contradictory. 7ou understand, ri(ht1 %he two, a cause of sound and an effect of sound, are contradictory. %he two, a cause of color and an effect of color, are contradictory. %he two, a cause of a primary color and an effect of a primary color, are contradictory. %he two, the cause of a secondary color and an effect of a secondary color, are contradictory. Now it is to be said like that. Now if you are asked to posit the definition of a cause of actuality, it is a producer of actuality. !lso, *you can posit, a helper of actuality. 7ou cannot say 5a producer with respect to actuality5 *dn(os po la skyed byed,. 7ou cannot say 5a helper with respect to actuality *dn(os po la phan +do(s byed,.5 7ou ha0e to say a producer of actuality *dn(os bo+i skyed byed,.5 7ou ha0e to say a producer of actuality *dn(os bo+i skyed byed,. Now whate0er it is you can apply it this way. =osit the definition of a cause of a pot. %he sub4ect, a producer of a pot. =osit the definition of an effect of a pot. %he sub4ect, an ob4ect a producer of a pot. =osit the definition of a cause of a pillar. %he sub4ect, a producer of a pillar. =osit the definition of an effect of a pillar. %he sub4ect, an ob4ect produced by a pillar. Now you know how to apply this to all actualities, ri(ht1 =osit the definition of a cause of a human. %he sub4ect, a producer of a human. =osit the definition of an effect of a human. %he sub4ect, an ob4ect produced by a human. /t is like that. Now you+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 Now, for e6ample, if you are asked to posit a cause of actuality, then what do you posit1 %he sub4ect, a prior arisin( of actuality *dn(os po+i sn(a lo(s su byun( ba,. /t follows that the sub4ect, a prior

arisin( of actuality, is a cause of actuality. / accept it. Why is the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of actuality, a cause of actuality1 >ecause of bein( a producer of actuality. !lso, *you can say, because actuality is an effect of it. 7ou can say that. @arlier we said that this phenomenon is a definiendum because this is the definition of it, ri(ht1 ;or e6ample, the sub4ect, you *?an,, are the father of this child because this child is your child. %his is that, ri(ht1 ?o you understand1 7ou are the father of this one because this is your child. 7ou say that, ri(ht1 With respect to the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of actuality, it is a cause of actuality because actuality is an effect of it. !lso, because of bein( a producer of actuality. What is to be said is like that. Now if you are asked to posit an effect of actuality, *posit, the sub4ect, a later arisin( of actuality *dn(os po+i phyi lo(s su byun( ba,. Now these are posited in (eneral. When you posit somethin(, you do not ha0e to posit it in (eneral. /t follows that the sub4ect, a later arisin( of actuality, is an effect of actuality. / accept it. Why is the sub4ect, a later arisin( of actuality, an effect of actuality1 >ecause of bein( an ob4ect produced by actuality is necessarily an effect of actuality. / accept it. !lso, because actuality is a cause of it. /t is an effect of actuality because actuality is a cause of it. %here is not a lot to be understood by this. When you say a prior arisin( of actuality, an effect of actuality1 >ecause of bein( an ob4ect produced by actuality is necessarily an effect of actuality. / accept it. !lso, because actuality is a cause of it. /t is an effect of actuality because actuality is a cause of it. %here is not a lot to be understood by this. Whey you say prior arisin( of actuality, it is understood as actuality is a cause of it. %here is not a lot to be understood by this. Whey you say a prior arisin( of actuality, it is understood as actuality in its earlier moments. 7ou understand actuality in its earlier moments. When you say actuality+s later arisin(, you understand actuality in its later moments. %his is actuality in its later moments of its own continuum. ;or e6ample, from the time that we are born throu(h to the time when we die there is a continuum, bein( put to(ether, ri(ht1 %here is a continuum of the person of yesterday with the person of today, ri(ht1 &o you understand in one direction the prior arisin( of actuality as actuality in all the earlier moments, and you understand the later arisin( of actuality as actuality in all the later moments. Now it is like that. Now for actuality+s causes there are two to be posited, direct cause

of actuality and indirect cause of actuality. Now with respect to actuality+s effects there are also two to be posited, a direct effect of actuality and an indirect effect of actuality. %hose two are to be posited and also two are posited as causes. Now this is to be applied to e0erythin(. Now we should debate on identifyin( re0erses. &o when we debate should you split up into pairs or all debate to(ether1 *JH. We ha0e some )ualms concernin( the identifyin( re0erses., Well, let+s debate them one by one. When we ha0e )ualms to settle, then we can (o one by one debatin(. When we don+t we can split up into pairs. *%wo students debate throu(h C.# 4ust as in the te6t, and then., C. What is the difference between the two, actuality+s re0erse and actuality+s meanin(Bre0erse1 ?. %hey are contradictory. C. /t follows that the two, actuality+s re0erse and actuality+s meanin(B re0erse, are contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. Why are they contradictory1 ?. >ecause *1, the two, actuality+s re0erse and actuality+s menain( re0erse, are different and *", a common locus is not possible. C. /t follows that if the two, actuality+s re0erse and actuality+s meanin(Bre0erse, *1, are different and *", a common locus is not possible, then they are necessarily contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. Why is a common locus of the two, actuality+s re0erse and actuality+s meanin(Bre0erse, not possible1 ?. >ecause *1, whate0er is actuality+s re0erse is necessarily a definiendum and *", whate0er is actuality+s meanin(Bre0erse is necessarily a definition. %here is per0asion, ri(ht1 Whate0er is actuality+s re0erse must be a definiendum, ri(ht1 Whate0er is actuality+s meanin(Bre0erse is necessarily a definition, ri(ht1 *%wo students debate throu(h debate C.H 4ust as it is in the te6t and then., C. What is the difference between the two, actuality+s (eneralBre0erse and actuality+s illustrationBre0erse1 ?. %hey are contradictory. C. /t follows that the two, actuality+s (eneralBre0erse and actuality+s illustrationBre0erse, are contradictory.

?. / accept it. C. Why are the two, actuality+s (eneralBre0erse and actuality+s illustrationBre0erse, contradictory1 ?. >ecause *1, they are different and *", a common locus is not possible. C. /t follows that if *1, they are different and *", a common locus of the two is not possible, then they are necessarily contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. Why is a common locus of those two not possible1 ?. >ecause *1, whate0er is an actuality+s (eneralBre0erse is necessarily actuality+s re0erse and *", whate0er is actuality+s illustration. /sn+t pot which is one with pot a pot1 ?. No, it is not. C. %hen it follows that the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, is not a pot. /t follows that this thin( which is one with pot is not a pot. ?. / accept it. C. !re you not the person who is one with yourself1 ?. 7es, / am. C. %hus, pot which is one with pot is a pot, ri(ht1 Color which is one with color is a color, ri(ht1 %his is somethin( which is one with color, ri(ht1 When you say 5which is one with color5 *this means that it is one with color,. %hus, it is not contradictory with pot. Now, what is the difference between the two, the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of pot and pot+s re0erse1 ?. %hey are synonymous. C. Huh1 /f they are synonymous, you are finished. %hey ha0e not come to(ether. He says they are synonymous. Now it follows that the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, is pot+s re0erse because of bein( a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. *-au(hs., %hen it follows that the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, is one with pot. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is not different from pot. ?. / accept it. C. 2h1 =ot which is one with pot. !ren+t the two, pot which is one with pot, and pot, di0erse1 ?. %hey are di0erse. C. /f they are di0erse, it follows that they are different. /t follows that

they are not one. ?. %hey are different. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is not pot+s re0erse because of not bein( one with pot. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. *-au(hs., Whate0er is pot+s re0erse must be one with pot, ri(ht1 !ren+t the two, one with pot and pot+s re0erse, synonymous1 ?. %hey are synonymous. C. 2h, since they are synonymous, whate0er is pot+s re0erse is necessarily one with pot and whate0er is one with pot is necessarily pot+s re0erse. i(ht1 ?. 7es. C. /t follows that there is per0asion because pot+s re0erse and one with pot are synonymous. ?. / accept it. C. Now it follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is not pot+s re0erse because it is not one with pot. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, is not one with pot because of bein( different from pot. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, is not one with pot. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, is not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, is pot+s re0erse because of bein( a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. *Hesitates., %here is no per0asion. %he reason is not established. C. * eactin( to last answer., /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse because *1, it is different from pot+s re0erse, *", whate0er is it is necessarily pot+s re0erse' and *F, whate0er is pot+s re0erse is necessarily it. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of pot.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is pot+s re0erse because it is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is not pot+s re0erse because it is not one with pot. ?. =lease repeat what you said. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is not pot+s re0erse because it is not one with pot. *!fter lon( hesitation., Ji0e an answer. ?. *Hesitates., What ha0e / not said1 *JH. Well, what do you think is true1, / don+t know. *JH. Whate0er is not one with pot is necessarily not pot+s re0erse, ri(ht1 %hen the reason is established. %he per0asion is established and also the reason is established. %he per0asion is established and also the reason is established, you ha0e to accept it., C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is not one with pot because it is an instance of pot. ?. / accept it. C. *-au(hs., /t follows that the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, is not one with pot. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, is not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is pot+s re0erse because it is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse. *JH. 2h, that is what you are doin( wron(. %his conse)uence is (ettin( back to your ori(inal wron( statement., *&. &o it is wron( to say that there is no per0asion1, *JH. No, it is ri(ht to say that there is no per0asion. 7ou were sayin( that there was per0asion before., ?. / accept it. C. Now what is the difference between the two, pot+s re0erse and the phenomena coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse1 *- . Now we are (ettin( confused at this point. We must practice this a lot., What is the difference1 ?. %hey are contradictory.

C. @6plain how it is that they are contradictory. /sn+t it the case that whate0er is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse is necessarily pot+s re0erse1 /sn+t there per0asion1 ?. %here is per0asion. C. /f there is per0asion in that, then you are finished. Now he says that they are not contradictory. ?. %hey are not contradictory. C. %hey aren+t are they1 /f they are not contradictory, then you encounter a(ain all of the faults. 7ou think about this. What is this. What is the difference between the two, pot+s re0erse and the phenomena coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse1 ?. %hey are contradictory. C. What is the reason that they are contradictory1 7ou ha0e to ha0e a reason why they are contradictory. ?. >ecause of *1, bein( different and *", a common locus is not possible. C. Why is a common locus not possible1 7ou ha0e to e6plain that whate0er is pot+s re0erse is necessarily such and such and that whate0er is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse is necessarily such and such, ri(ht1 %hin(s which ha0e no common locus are like that. %he *nyen ka, of these two which do not ha0e a common locus is like this. 7ou will ha0e to e6plain that whate0er is pot+s re0erse must be such and such and that whate0er is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse must be such and such. ?. >ecause whate0er is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse is necessarily different from pot+s re0erse. C. What is the purpose of that1 /t follows that whate0er is different from pot+s re0erse is necessarily not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot, that it is not pot+s re0erse. ?. %here is no per0asion. C. !ma:in(. /t follows that whate0er is different from pot+s re0erse is not necessarily not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Now posit the reason there is no common locus of the two *pot+s re0erse and the phenomena coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse., *JH. &o he did away with that. &o now he wants a new reason., What is the necessity that there cannot be a common locus1 *e6plains., Whate0er is pot+s re0erse must be one with pot. Whate0er

is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse is necessarily not one with pot. 7ou ha0e to put it to pot. Whate0er is pot+s re0erse must be one with pot. Whate0er is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse must be different from pot. %he reason for this per0asion is that one with pot is a permanent phenomenon. %his is why it must be different from pot. %he definiendum of a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water is a permanent phenomenon. %he triply )ualified imputed e6istent of a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water is a permanent phenomenon. &ince they are that, they arte not one with pot. =ot which is one with pot is somethin( which is an instance of pot. /t also is not one with pot. %he reasons are like that. 2kay, ri(ht1 /f you are asked why the sub4ect, one with pot, is not pot+s re0erse, it is because it is different from pot' because it is a permanent phenomenon. 7ou can say that it is different from pot because it is a permanent phenomenon. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the definiendum of the bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform a function, that it is not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C' With respect to the sub4ect, the definiendum of the bulbou flatB based phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water, why is it not pot+s re0erse1 ?. >ecause of bein( different from pot. C. /t follows that the sub4ect is different from pot. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect different from pot1 ?. >ecause it is a permanent phenomenon. */t is not pot+s re0erse because of not bein( one with pot' because of bein( different from pot' because of bein( a permanent phenomenon., C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water, that it is not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Why is it not pot+s re0erse1 ?. >ecause it is different from pot' because it is a permanent phenomenon. *Now there is one left, ri(ht1, C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is not

pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. With respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, why is it not pot+s re0erse1 ?. >ecause it is not one with pot. C. With respect to the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, why is it not one with pot1 ?. >ecause it is an instance of pot. Now you understand, ri(ht1 =ot which is one with pot is an instance of pot. !ctuality which is one with actuality is an instance of actuality. =illar which is one with pillar is an instance of pillar. Color which is one with color is an instance of color. *=ot which is one with pot, is not a (enerality, it is only an instance. /t is somethin( which is not a (enerality. We will (et to that later. Jeneralalities and instances come later, ri(ht1 2h, it is like that. Now you understand this, ri(ht1 7ou understand the difference between pot+s re0erse and the phenomena coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse, ri(ht1 Now all the rest are the same. %he difference between actuality+s re0erse and the phenomena coe6tensi0e with actuality+s re0erse is the same. ?ebate C.13 C. /t follows that the sub4ect, one with pot, is pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, one with pot, is not pot+s re0erse because of bein( different from pot. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, one with pot, is different from pot because of bein( a permanent phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a pot, that one with it is a permanent phenomenon because it is an established base. *2h, now you ha0e arri0ed at the reason. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, one with pot, that it is not one with pot because it is a permanent phenomenon. 7ou ha0e arri0ed there. /t is there, ri(ht1 2ne with pot is different from pot because of bein( a permanent phenomenon. %his is it. %his is the reason, ri(ht1 2n with pot is not one with pot, ri(ht1 7ou are sayin( it from your mouth. 7ou ha0e to think about it. %he sub4ect, one with pot, is different from pot because of bein( a permanent phenomenon. /t is not one with pot because of bein( a permanent phenomenon. /t is not pot+s re0erse because of

bein( a permanent phenomenon. 7ou ha0e arri0ed here, ri(ht1, ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that if somethin( is an established base, then one with it is necessarily a permanent phenomenon. *JH. 7ou see that is the point this is (ettin( at, ri(ht1 %his per0asion is the bi( point., ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pot, that one with it is a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, one with pot, is different from pot. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, one with pot, is different from pot. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, one with pot, is not one with pot. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, one with pot, is not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, one with pot, is pot+s re0erse because of bein( a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse. *JH. 7ou see that is what is behind all of this., ?. %here is no per0asion. C. /t follows that whate0er is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse is not necessarily pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Now what is the difference between the two, pot+s re0erse and the phenomena coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse1 ?. %hey are contradictory, are they not1 C. /t follows that the two, pot+s re0erse and the phenomena coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse, are contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. Why are they contradictory1 ?. >ecause *1, they are different and *", a common locus is not possible. C. /t follows that a common locus of the two, pot+s re0erse and the phenomena coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse, is not possible. ?. / accept it. C. Why is a common locus not possible1 ?. *- . 7ou ha0e to understand this factor well. ?iscriminatin( this is the essential for identifyin( re0erses. %his is often confused. When

you speak of the phenomena coe6tensi0e with the re0erse of pot, since it has a relationship with pot+s re0erse, if this is not confused then one will not ha0e any trouble at all with pot+s re0erse and the phenomena coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse. %his is debated a lot at the debatin( courtyard. When you speak of the phenomena coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse, you ha0e to think of pot+s re0erse, ri(ht1 %hen they debate it and debate it. %his essential is e6pressed in these debates. He did one. 2ne was established, 5%he sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, it is not one with pot because of bein( different from pot.5 Now you are doin( one, ri(ht1 */t says,, 5/t follows that the sub4ect, one with pot, is not pot+s re0erse because of not bein( one with pot, because of bein( different from pot. /t follows that it is different from pot because of bein( a permanent phenomenon.5 7ou established this one, ri(ht1 Well, you ha0e to understand the difference between a re0erse and the phenomena coe6tensi0e with that re0erse, ri(ht1 Whate0er is pot+s re0erse must be one with pot, but whate0er is a phenomenon which is coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse need not be one with pot, it must be different from pot. %here is no other way of establishin( them indi0idually, ri(ht1 =ot which is one with pot is different from pot. /t is an instance of pot. 2ne with pot is not pot+s re0erse and not one with pot. /t is a permanent phenomenon. the other two are the same *as this last one,. %he definiendum and the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the functionof holdin( water are the same. %his is it. *JH. %hen, when someone asks why it is so, what do you say1 Whate0er is pot+s re0erse is necessarily one with pot. Whate0er is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse is necessarily not one with pot. /s it this1, - . Whate0er is pot+s re0erse must be one with pot, ri(ht1 Whate0er is a phenomenon which is coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse must not be one with pot, ri(ht1 >ecause it must be different from pot. Well then, whate0er is a phenomenon coe6tensi0e with pot+s re0erse is necessarily different from pot. %his carries o0er to all the others as well. /t follows that the sub4ect, one with pot, is different from pot. / accept it. Why is the sub4ect, one with pot, different from pot1 >ecause it is a permanent phenomenon. /t follows with respectto the sub4ect, pot which is one with pot, that it is different from pot. / accept it. /t is so because it is an instance of pot. Now this also (oes for the definiendum of the bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water. %his sub4ect is different from pot. /t is so because it

is a permanent phenomenon. Now it follows with respect to the sub4ect, the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water, that it is different from pot. / accept it. /t is different from pot because it is a permanent phenomenon. %his (oes o0er to these as well. 2kay1 ?ebate C.11 *%wo students debate throu(h C.11 4ust as it is in the te6t, then., C. What is the difference between the two, pot+s re0erse and pot1 ?. %here are three possibilities. C. /t follows that there are not three possibilities. =osit somethin( which is both. ?. %he sub4ect, pot. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, pot, pot+s re0erse1 ?. >ecause of bein( an established base. C. Na, na, na. /t follows that whate0er is an established base is necessarily pot+s re0erse. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, pillar, that it is pot+s re0erse because it is an established base. *- . %here are a lot. %he sub4ect, pot, is pot+s re0erse because of bein( one with pot, because it is pot which is one with pot, because it is the definiendum of the bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water, because it is the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water. /t arises like that., ?. >ecause it is the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water. *- . 2h, now you ha0e understood., C. /t follows that if somethin( is the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the bulbous flatBbasded phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water, then it is necessarily pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is a pot. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, pot, a pot1 ?. >ecause of bein( a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water.

C. /t follows that whate0er is a bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water is necessarily a pot. ?. / accept it. C. Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one but not the other. ?. Whate0er is pot+s re0erse is necessarily pot. Whate0er is a pot is not necessarily pot+s re0erse. %he sub4ect, a (olden pot. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a (olden pot, is not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that a (olden pot is not the re0erse of a (olden pot. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a (olden pot, is the re0erse of a (olden pot. >ecause whate0er is your head is necessarily a head of a human. ?o you say that your head is your head but it is not a head of a human1 ?o you say that your hands are your hands but they are not the hands of a human1 ?. 7es. C. ?o you1 /t follows that your head is your head but it is not a head of a human. ?. / don+t understand. C. ?o our heads not e6ist1 ?on+t you say that your head is an e6ample of a human head1 /sn+t ?on+s head a human+s head1 /t is okay to say that *a (olden pot, is the re0erse of a (olden pot, but it is not pot+s re0erse1 ?. %he re0erse of a (olden pot is not pot+s re0erse. C. /sn+t ?on+s head a human+s head1 !ren+t ?on+s hands the hands of a human1 *%his is probably enou(h., /t follows that the sub4ect, a (olden pot, is not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, a (olden pot, not pot+s re0erse1 ?. >ecause of bein( an instance of pot. C. /t follows that whate0er is an instance of pot is necessarily not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Now posit somethin( which is neither. ?. %he sub4ect, a pillar. ?ebate C.1"

*JH. inbochay, if one put a (olden pot alone as the sub4ect, that would be okay, ri(ht1 /s there any need for positin( an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible as the sub4ect1 /f one did a (olden pot as the sub4ect, that would be okay, ri(ht1 /t follows that the sub4ect, a (olden pot, is pot+s re0erse because of bein( turned away from nonBpot., - . /t would also be okay if he had said a (olden pot. JH. *?a +tha la (ci( +duk, - . /s it that one can say 5because this is contradictory with pot15 Now it is established as different, ri(ht1 %here is no fault in this. 7ou can say of this, 5%his is a pot because of bein( an instance of pot.5 %he sub4ect, a (olden pot. ! (olden pot is different from pot, ri(ht1 JH. /t is different from pot, but if someone said that it was contradictory with pot. - . /t does not come that way. No. 7ou can say that the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper potBBare different from pot because of bein( contradictory with pot. JH. !ren+t the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper potBBcontradictory with pot1 - . %he twoBBa (olden pot and a copper potBBare contradictory with pot. JH. !nd is a (olden pot not contradictory with pot1 - . No, it isn+t. JH. 2h, a le. %hen is this the reason for puttin( an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is not possible as the sub4ect1 - . 7es, it is. JH. %hen what is the reason that the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper potBBare contradictory with pot1 - . Now somethin( which is a pot and also is the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper potBBdoes not e6ist, ri(ht1 JH *to class,. &o the final reason he says is because of bein( mutually e6clusi0e with a pot. %his is because there isn+t anythin( which is a pot and is a (olden pot and a copper pot. &tudent. ?oes the fact that the debate says that the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper potBBis contradictory with pot contradict the fact that at the end of the route de0elopin( from sayin( 5Why15 to the basic conse)uence the debate says that the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper potBBis a pot1 JH. No. 7ou ha0e to ha0e somethin( that is a pot and is the other. 2kay1 &omethin( that is a pot and is these other two thin(s whereas

what you are talkin( about is these two thin(s bein( pots. JH *to - ,. We ha0e a )ualm. */f asked, 5/t follows that the sub4ects, the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper pot, are pots,5 then you accept it, ri(ht1 - . 7es. JH. /f the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper potBBare pots, then how is it that they are contradictory with pot1 7ou ha0e to ha0e somethin( which is both, ri(ht1 - . Now from what is called contradictory and nonBcontradictory, if they are nonBcontradictory, then on one hand you must posit the twoBB a (olden pot and a colden potBBand on the other hand you must posit a pot. %hen you need a common locus of the two. JH *to class,. 7ou need somethin( that is a common locus of those two thin(s. Not 4ust the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper potBBwhich are pot, ri(ht1 >ut you need somethin( which is a common locus with both of those, and there isn+t anythin(. *%wo students debate throu(h C.11 as in the te6t, then., C. Now what is the difference between the two, that which is turned away from nonBpot and pot+s re0erse1 ?. %here are three possibilities C. /t follows that there are not three possibilities. =osit somethin( which is both. >ecause1 >ecause1 *- . !re you sleepin(1, ?. %he sub4ect, pot. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is somethin( which is turned away from nonBpot. *- . Now you ha0e to think of this as with opposite from bein( and opposite from not bein(. %hink about this. turned away fromnonBpot and opposite from not bein( pot. 7ou can say it is turned away from nonBpot because of bein( a pot, ri(ht1 Ksually, you can say that somethin( is opposite from not bein( a pot because of bein( a pot, ri(ht1 i(ht1 %his is the same. %his is turned away from nonBpot because of bein( a pot. /f you say that it is turned away from nonBpot because of bein( opposite from not bein( pot, that is okay. @0en so, it is because it is a pot., ?. >ecause of bein( opposite from not bein( a pot. C. /t follows that whate0er is opposite from not bein( a pot is necessarily turned away from nonBpot. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, pot, is pot+s re0erse.

?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, pot, pot+s re0erse1 ?. *- . %here are four reasons you can (i0eBBbecause of bein( one with pot, because of bein( pot which is one with pot, because of bein( the definiendum of the bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water, and because of bein( the triply )ualified imputed e6istent of the bulbous flatBbased phenomenon which is able to perform the function of holdin( water. %here are four thin(s which are synonymous with it, ri(ht1 !ll four thin(s which are synonymous with it, ri(ht1 all four are applicable as the reason. %here are four which are synonymous with pot+s re0erse, ri(ht1 %here are the four coe6tensi0es, ri(ht1 %hese four are applicable as the reason., >ecause of bein( one with pot. C. /t follows that whate0er is one with pot is necessarily pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one but not the other. ?. Whate0er is pot+s re0erse is necessarily turned away from nonBpot. Whate0er is turned away from nonBpot is not necessarily pot+s re0erse. %he sub4ects, the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper pot. C. /t follows that the sub4ects, the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper pot, are turned away from nonBpot. ?. / accept it. C. Why are the sub4ects, the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper pot, turned away from nonBpot1 *JH, after (ettin( the Challen(er to speak loudly. /t is funny how whene0er we assert oursel0es we drop off at the end as if we were ready to fall into a... 7ou ha0e to do it as if you were ea(er. / think this point is that if you are (oin( to build up the power of wisdom, it has to be stron(BBwe hae to be stron(. 7ou are e0en )uieter than normal. 7ou do. /t is like you turn the 0olume control down so that no one will hear you in case you are wron(. When you ask for a reason you whimper. 7ou ha0e to be like him., *- . When you debate, you ha0e to do it as if you were an(ry. 7ou appear to others as if you were an(ry. Io ra dan( (yi +du(. Now she said, 5Why are the sub4ects turned away from nonBpot1 Ha0e you (otten this1 %he two, turned away from nonBpot and opposite from nonBpot, ha0e the same meanin(., ?. >ecause of bein( opposite from nonBpot.

*- . /t is turned away from nonBpot because of bein( a pot. 7ou are to think of it that way., *JH. 7ou see, he is (i0in( you synonyms so that you will think of somethin( else. He keeps (i0in( you the synonyms and you keep (i0in( them. He wants you to think on the basis of that. %urned away from nonBpot means opposite from nonBpot and that ou(ht to be enou(h to clue you in as to what to say to her., >ecause of bein( a pot. C. /t follows that whate0er is a pot is necessarily turned away from nonBpot. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ects, the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper pot, are not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. >ecause of not bein( turned away from different from pot. ?. /t follows that whate0er is not turned away from different from pot is necessarily not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Now posit somethin( which is neither. ?. %he sub4ect, uncaused space. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, uncaused space, is not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, uncaused space, not pot+s re0erse1 ?. >ecause of not bein( a pot. C. /t follows that whate0er is not a pot is necessarily not pot+s re0erse. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, uncaused space, is not turned away from nonBpot. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, uncaused space, not turned away from nonBpot1 ?. >ecause of bein( turned away from pot. C. /t follows that whate0er is turned away from pot is necessarily not turned away from nonBpot. ?. / accept it. C. Now there are three possibilities. *JH. Now it seems the time is finished., @nd of class for Day 1", 19#$. Class on Day 1G, 19#$

Now we talked about direct causes, ri(ht1 ;or e6ample, if the causes of actuality are di0ided, there are two. direct causes and indirect causes. /f you are asked to posit the direct caue of actuality, *posit, the sub4ect, the prior arisin( of actuality. /f is a direct cause of actuality because of bein( a direct producer of actuality. ! direct producer of actuaity is the definition of a direct cause of actuality. %hus, the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of actuality, is a direct cause of actuality because of bein( a direct producer of actuality. Whate0er is a direct producer of actuality is necessarily a direct cause of actuality. Now if you are asked to posit an indirect cause of actuality, *posit, the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality. %he prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality is an indirect cause of actuality. ! prior arisin( of actuality is a direct cause of actuality. Now it follows that the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality, is an indirect cause of actuality, / accept it. Why is it an indirect cause1 >ecause of bein( an indirect producer of actuality. /f follows that whate0er is an indirect producer of actuality is necessarily an indirect cause. / accept it. Now this is to be applied to allBBpot, pillar, matter, consciousness, nonBassociated compositional factors, and so on. /t is to be applied to the complete collection of actualities *yon(s tsho(s,. Whate0er you say is an actuality is to be applied to this. %his is to be applied to e0erythin( you say is an actuality. 2kay1 Now there are two types of effect. @ffects of actuality are the two, direct effects of actuality and indirect effects of actuality. /f you are asked to posit the direct effect of actualty, *posit, a later arisin( of actuality. /t follows that the sub4ect, a later arisin( of actualty, is a direct effect of actuality. / accept it. Why is the sub4ect, a later arisin( of actuality, a direct effect of actuality1 >ecause of bein( an ob4ect which is directly helped by actuality. >ecause of bein( an ob4ect which is directly produced by actuality. &ay it like that. Now then if you are asked to posit an indirect effect of actuality, *posit, the sub4ect, a later arisin( of a later arisin( of actuality. /f follows that the sub4ect, a later arisin( of a later arisin( of actuality, is an indirect effect of actuality. / accept it. Why is the sub4ect, a later arisin( of a later arisin( of actuality, an indirect effect of actuality1 >ecause of bein( an ob4ect produced indirectly from actuality. >ecasue of bein( an ob4ect indirectly helped by actuality. /t is like that. Now this is to be applied to e0erythin(. ;or e6ample, there are

pot+s direct cause and pot+s indirect cause. /f you are asked to posit pot+s direct cause, *posit, a prior arisin( of pot. /t you are asked to posit pot+s indirect cause, *posit, the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of pot. /f then you are asked to posit a direct effect of pot, *posit, the sub4ect, a later arisin( of pot. /f you are asked to posit an indirect effect of pot, *posit, a later arisin( of a later arisin( of pot. /t is applied that way. Now this is applied in th same way to the othersBB matter, consciousness, nonBassociated compositional factor, whate0er you say is an actuality. 7ou+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 %hey are the same. Now for e6ample, what is called a prior arisin( is probably not understood. ;or e6ample, when you speak of a prior arisin( of actuality, it does not refer to 4ust whate0er came before actuality. ;or e6ample, it is like this. ;or e6ample, we do not say that whate0er came before us is a cause of us, ri(ht1 ! lot came before us, ri(ht1 i(ht1 When you speak of a prior arisin(, it refers to what arose as a helper of it. *JH. 7ou cannot take thin(+s prior arisin( s 4ust e0erythin( that arose prior to it because there are thin(s unconnected, but that which helped it., When you speak of a laterarisin(, it refers tot hat factor which is helped by actuality itself. *JH. What is helped by it, what is helped by thin(BBthin(+s subse)uent arisin(., %hat which follows after actuality itself and is helped by it. Now it+s okay, ri(ht1 /t is like that. Now if you do it in (eneral it is like that. Now when you are asked to posit a direct cause of actuality, you do not ha0e to posit a prior arisin( of actuality by itself. *7ou can posit, the sub4ect, a pot which is a prior arisin( of actuality' the sub4ect, a pillar which is a prior arisin( of actuality' the sub4ect, a consciousness which is a prior arisin( of actuality' the sub4ect, a person who is prior arisin( of actuality. 7ou can posit these. /f you are asked to posit an indirect cause of actuality, you can posit the sub4ect, a pot which is a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality' the sub4ect, a pillar which is a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality' the sub4ect, a consciousness which is a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality' and the sub4ect, matter which is a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality. 7ou can posit thin(s like that. %here are pots, pillars, and e0erythin( which are indirect causes of actuality. /n the same way, if you are asked to posit a direct effect of actuality you can posit the sub4ect, a pot which is a later arisin( of actuality' the sub4ect, a pillar which is a later arisin( of actuality' the sub4ect, a human who is a later arisin( of actuality' and the sub4ect, a

horse who is a later arisin( of actuality. 7ou can posit thin(s like that. /f you are asked to posit an indirect effect of actuality, you can posit the sub4ect, a pillar which is a later arisin( of a later arisin( of actuality' the sub4ect, a pot which is a later arisin( of a later arisin( of actuality. 7ou can posit such thin(s. Now you+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 *?a +di kha do( la +dan de yod pa red., Whate0er is a prior arisin( of somethin( is necessarily a cause of it. ;or whate0er is a caused phenomenon, a prior arisin( of it is necessarily a cause of it. ;or e6ample, the meanin( of htis is, 5/t follows with respect to the sub4ect, actuality, that a prior arisin( of it is a cause of it becasue it is a caused phenomenon.5 7ou can say, 5/t follows with respect to the sub4ect, a pot, that a prior arisin( of it is a cause of it because it is 5an actuality.5 %he meanin( of this also comes to be that a later arisin( of it is an effect of it because it is an actuality. Now, it is okay, ri(ht1 Now if you do this in (eneral, for whate0er is an actuality, a prior arisin( of it is necessarily a cause of it ;or whate0er is an actuality, a later arisin( of it is necesarily an effect of it. /f is like that. %he procedure for thin(s like this is done this way. %here is a lot to be debated with respect to this. /f the meanin( is not appearin( to you, then the meanin( will come in the section that is called the (reater presentation of causes and effects. %his is better. %here is somethin( called the (reater presentation of causes and effects. %here will be a section of causes and effects whi(h is (reater. *Ihyad ran( kha do( la btan( de tsam s(o sdas (yi na red., 2kay1 Now then there are two types of direct causes and a(ain, there are two types of causes. %here are also two types of causes of actuality and two types of direct cause of actuality. %here are two for each %here are two disimilar types of causes of actuality. substantial cause of actuaity and cooperati0e condition of actuality. ?o you understand1 Cause of actuality has the two. substantial cause of actuality and cooperati0e condition of actuality. Now if we apply this to an e6ample, if we apply it to a sprout, then a seed is th esubstantial cause of a sprout and the earth, water, air, wunli(ht, the person who brin(s the water, and so on are the cooperati0e conditions of a sprout. %he seed itself is a substantial cause of the sprout. /t is like that. 7ou ha0e (ot it, ri(ht1 Now if we apply this to oursel0es or, rather, to bodies like ours, the substantial cause of this body is the blood and semen of the mother and father. %he father and mother are cooperati0e conditions. 2h, it is like tht. ?o you understand1

Now when you speak of the substantial cause of actuality, then somethin( which is a cause of the entity of actuality is the substantial cause of actuality. When this cause which is a cause of the entity of actuality produces actuality then those thin(s which (o alon( with it and help it are cooperati0e conditions of actuality. %hey assist it. /t is like that . %hese are the substantial cause and cooperati0e conditoin of actuality. Now if you are asked to posit a substantial cause of actuality, you can say actuality which is a prior arisin( of actuality. /f you are asked to posit a cooperati0e condition of actuaity, posit the sub4ect, a person who is a prior arisin( of actuaity, or the sub4ect, a pillar which is a prior arisin( of actuality. @0en so, these are debated a lot. %here is somethin( to be debated here. 2h, you can posit these. %hese are to be posited as cooperati0e conditions of actualityBBa pot which is a prior arisin( of actuality and a pillar which is a prior arisin( of actuality. Now you understand that there are two types of causes of actuality. substantial causes and cooperati0e conditions. Now there are also two types of direct causes of actuality. %here is a direct cause of actuality which is a substantial cause and one that is a cooperati0e condition. %his is for direct cause itself. %here is a substantial cause of actuality which directly produces actuality. !ctuality which is a prior arisin( of actualty is a direct substantial cause of actuality ! pot, a pillar, or so which is a prior arisin( of actuality is a direct cooperati0e condition of actuality, a direct helper of actuality. !ctuality which is aprior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality is an indirect substantial cause of actuality. ! pot, a pillar, or so which is a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality is an indirect cooperati0e conditoin of actuality. Now you+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 %here is no e6ception to this. Ha0in( applied it to actuality, you can then apply it o0er to the other. for e6ample, if you apply it to somethin( like a pot, there are the thin(s out of which a pot is made such as mud, copper, iron, brass, sil0er, (old, and so forth. ! prior arisin( of one of these which is a cause of pot is a substantial cause of pot. ! person who is a cause of a pot is a cooperati0e condition of a pot. %here is a person who prepares a pot. Now the direct substantial cause and the indirect cooperati0e condition of this as well as the indirect substantial cause and the indirect cooperati0e condition are to be done for these. When you ha0e applied it to all the others, you will understand. Jot it1 %here are two types of substantial causes of a pot, the direct substantial caue of a pot and the indirect substantial cause of a pot.

%here are two types of cooperati0e conditions of a pot. a direct cooperati0e condition of a pot and the indirect cooperati0e condition of a pot. 7ou ha0e to posit such. 7ou ha0e to posit such as the indirect cooperati0e conditions. Now this is to be posited in the same way to pillar. /t is somethin( to be posited. Now this sort of thin( is to be posited for the effect. When you apply it to an effect, there are two types of direct effects of actuality. a direct substantial effect of actuality and a direct cooperati0e effect of actuality. 7ou+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 %here are the two, the direct substantial effect of actuality and the direct cooperati0e effect of actuality. %here are the two. the indirect substantial effect of actuality and the indirect cooperati0e effect of actuality. When you posit these, if you are asked to posit the direct substantial effect of actuality. Now think about the moments of actuality. When you speak of actuality which is a later arisin( of actuality, thereis not limit to the later continuum of actuality. %he sub4ect, actuality which is a later arisin( of actuality, is a direct substantial effect of actuality. Now if you are asked to posit a direct cooperati0e c6ondition of actuality, there is such a thin(, for the sub4ect, a pillar which is a later arisin( of actuality, *is such,. 7ou can posit such a thin(. ! pillar or a pot which is a later arisin( of actuality. 7ou+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 Now if you are asked to posit an indirect substantial effect of actuality, *posit, the sub4ect, actuality which is a later arisin( of a later arisin( of actuality. /f you are asked to posit an indirect cooperati0e effect of actuality, there is such *for you can posit, the sub4ect, a pot, a pillar, a consciousness, a nonBassociated compositional factor, or such which is a later arisin( of a later arisin( of actuality. Now in this way this is to be applied to pot, pillar, and e0erythin(. /t is to be applied to the collection *yon( tsho(s, of actualities. 2kay1 7ou know it, ri(ht1 Now if you think about it, apply it to the collection of actualities. 7ou know it well, ri(ht1 Now a detailed e6plaination of the presentation of causes and effects will come later in the (reater presentation of casues and effects. Now for e6ample if you apply this to the 0arious thin(s, if you apply it to a sprout, what is the seed1 /t is a substantial cause of a sprout. %he water, air, earth, and all those thin(s are cooperati0e conditions of a sprout. Now think about his and apply it to others. 7ou+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 ;or e6ample, if you apply it to fire, then the fuel is the substantial cause of fire. /t is the substantial cause of fire. %he stones which are at the place where the fire is are an e6ample of the

cooperati0e conditoins of fire. /t is like that. Now fire is the substantial cause of smoke. %he fuel and such is a cooperati0e condition of smoke. /t is like that. %hose thin(s from which somethin( is made are the substantial causes of that thin(. ;or e6ample, the substantial cause of this table is the wood which was a prior arisin( of this table. /t was the substantial cause of this table. Now let+s do 4ust a couple of the debates, then you will understand. ?id we do the final debates in the section on established bases1 We did not do the section despellin( ob4ections did we1 *&tudent. 7es, we did., *JH. We did the first one., Now in the chapter on causes and effects, if you debate it you will come to understand it. JH. /s a direct cause counted by moments1 Dust one reckon it in terms of moments1 ?o you need to count it moment by moment1 With respect to a direct cause, for e6ample... - . %he direct cause is like this. it and its direct cause do not abide but for one moment between them. JH. &o the direct cause is only for one moment. - . /t does not stay for another moment. JH. ;or e6ample, when you speak of a prior arisin( in (eneral, before this... - . 2h, for e6ample, when you said that a direct cause is not for more than one moment, it is not like that. %his is the complete collection of the direct cause *dn(os r(yu tsho(s pa tshan(, *that is like that,. ;or a complete collection of the direct causes, this has only one moment. JH. 2h, for the complete collection... - . %his is the direct cause which has all the number of the causes *dn(os po+i (ran(s tshan(,. Ha0in( completed all of the number, its potency is unobstructed, ri(ht1 /t is somethin( the potency of which is unobstructed. JH. Ha0in( done this, how many moments are there for this1 %here is not 4ust one is there1 - . ;or a direct cause which has all the number, there is not but one moment, ri(ht1 JH. /s that ri(ht1 - . 7es. When it produces the effect, now what do / say1 %hat cause which is a direct cause which has all the number111 7ou ha0e to ha0e a direct cause which is complete with all the number, ri(ht1 / don+t know whether or not whate0er is a direct cause is necessarily a direct cause which has all the complete number and a potency which is unobstructed.

JH. When you speak of ha0in( a complete number... - . No matter how many causes there must be, the complete number of them is complete. %his is called a direct cause which has the complete number. JH *to class,. %hat which has all the number of the causes and its potency is unobstructed for brin(in( out the effect. %hat last moment is the direct cause. *to - ,. ;or e6ample, when you speak of a prior arisin(, is it only the direct cause1 - . /t is the direct cause. /t will refer to anythin( which is complete with all the number. JH. ;or e6ample, when you speak of a prior arisin( in (eneral, it refers to al the prior arisin(, ri(ht1 - . 7es, but e0en so when you speak of a prior arisin(, its own nan( tshi( has many moments, from the point of 0iew of its selfBre0erse it will be a direct cause. %he prior arisin( itself is a direct cause. JH. Ha0in( said that, then this thin( called a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( is the second moment prior, ri(ht1 - . /t is the earlier one, ri(ht1 JH. /f it is the thire one... - . Now you ha0e to put three, ri(ht1 /t is that called the prior arisin( of the prior arisin(. %here are two after it. JH. /f you do it in (eneral, the prior arisin( refers to all the earlier. - . 7es. JH *to class,. &o in (eneral prior arisin( is anythin( in the past. /t seems the other way at first. >ut then it is specific once you specify. %hen prior arisin( has to be the direct cause, the prior arisin( of the prior arisin( has to be the one 4ust before that, and if you want to refer to one 4ust before that you ha0e to add on another. - . Now for e6ample, it is like this. ;or whate0er is a caused phenomenon such as a pot, its substantial causes are infinite. /f you look at its continuum of causes, it is infinite. JH. !re the moments of the direct substantial causes infinite1 - . %hey are infinite. When you count up the substantial cause of this and thesubstantial cause of this and so on, the continuum is infinite. JH. /s it infinite1 - . %here is no limit to them. Now this would not come, ri(ht1 7ou could not understnd an effect that did not ha0e a cause ri(ht1 &o if you did not posit an infinite continuum of causes, you would ha0e to posit an effect which did not ha0e a cause. /t is not suitable to say

that somethin( does not ha0e a direct cause, ri(ht1 2h, if you do not posit an infinite continuum... it is like oursel0es. !ll of them. %he whole collection is the same. JH. *to class,. @0erythin( has an infinite series of substantial causes. %he substantial causes of anythin( are infinite. /t would ha0e to be. - . ;or e6ample, if you apply it to somethin( like this, for the makin( of it you need a pile of clay. %he cause of this is earth. %hen there is a cause of the earth, and a cause of that, and a cause of that. %here isno limit to the continuum. /f you could *posit one without a limit,, then a causeless effect would ha0e to (o. /f there were a limit, then there would ha0e to be one which was causeless, ri(ht1 Now if they debate, they will (et better.

*%wo students debate throu(h @.1 4ust as it is in the te6t, then., C. What is the difference between the two, established base and either of the twoBBcause and effect1 *- . >efore you debate you ha0e to imply the meanin( of the debate to her a little. /t is not suitable to 4ust ha0e somethin( to debate. 7ou ha0e to debate in a way that will put the meanin( in mind. ?o you understand1 7ou ha0e to think of the meanin( as you debate it. /f you do not understand, ask. Now do you understand1, ?. %here are three possibilities. C. /t follows that there are not three possibilities. =osit somethin( which is both. ?. %he sub4ect, an actuality. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, an actuality, is an established base. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, an actuality, an established base1 ?. >ecause of bein( an e6istent. C. /t follows that whate0er is an e6istent is necesarily an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, an actuality, is either of the two, a cause or an effect. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, an actuality, either of the two, a cause or an effect1 ?. >ecause of bein( a prior arisin( of the later arisin( of an actuality and...

*- . 2h, this is a (eneral point. 7ou do not ha0e to state the prior arisin(. When it is a (eneral point, you ha0e to e6plain it in a (eneral way. He said, 5Why is it either a cause or an effect, ri(ht15 He is not askin( why it is a cause or an effect. What do you say then1 *!nother student says. >ecause of bein( an impermanent phenomenon., *- . Why is it what whate0er is an impermanent phenomenon is must be either a cause or an effect1, *&tudent. Whate0er is an impermanent phenomenon is necessarily either a cause or an effect., *- . Why is there per0asion1 What is the thou(ht1 What is it1 Whate0er is an impermanent phenomenon is necessarily a cause. Whate0er is an impermanent phenomenon is necessarily a cause. Whate0er is an impermanent phenomenon is necessarily an effect. /t comes to be both a cause and an effect. /s it not so. %he sub4ect, an actuality, is either a cause or an effect because of *1, bein( a cause and *", bein( an effect. >ecause of bein( both a cause and an effect. 7ou would be thinkin( of somethin( entirely different if you said that it has a cause or it has an effect, this is askin( is it a cause or is it an effect. When you speak of whether or not it is either a cause or an effect, this refers to bein( either a cause or an effect. /t is a cause and it is also an effect, ri(ht1, C. Why is the sub4ect, an acutality, either a cause or an effect1 ?. >ecause of *1, bein( a cause and *", bein( an effect. C. /t follows that whate0er *1, is a cause and *", is an effect is necessarily either a cause or an effect. ?. / accept it. C. Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one but not the other. ?. Whate0er is either a cause or an effect is necessarily an established base. Whate0er is an established base is not necessarily either a cause or an effect. %he sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, is an established base. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, an established base1 ?. >ecause of bein( established by a 0alid co(ni:er. C. /t follows that whate0er is established by a 0alid co(ni:er is necessarily an established base. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, is neither a cause

nor an effect. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, neither a cause nor an effect1 ?. >ecause of not bein( an actuality. C. /t follows that whate0er is not an actuality is necessarily neither a cause nor an effect. ?. / accept it. C. =osit somethin( which is neither. ?. %he sub4ect, uncaused space. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, uncaused space, is not an established base. ?. ...*@nd of debate and end of tape side "#, *%wo students are doin( the limits of per0asion betwen the two principles of debate @.", cause and nonBeffect, which are contradictory. %he debate picks up in the middle., C. /t follows that a common locus *of the two, cause and nonBeffect, does not e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. Why is a common locus of the two, cause and nonBeffect, not possible1 ?. >ecause *1,whate0er is a cause is necessarily also an effect...*- . 7ou do not need to say 5also.5 &ay, 5Whate0er is a cause is necessarily an effect., >ecause *1, whate0er is an effect is necessarily an effect and *", whate0er is an effect is necessarily a cause. C. /t follows that if *1, whate0er is a cause is necessarily an effect and *", whate0er is an effect necessarily a cause. /t follows that a common locus of the two, pot and actuality, does not e6ist. ?. Why1 C. >ecause *1, whate0er is a cause is necessarily an effect and *", whate0er is an effect is necessarily a cause. - . 2h there is this. 7ou could say with respect to an uncaused phenomenon that its effect e6ist because a later arisin( of it is an effect of it. /f he says that the reason is not established, *you can say, 5/t follows with respect to the sub4ect, an actuality, that a later arisin( of it is an effect of it because it is a caused phenomenon.5 Ksually it caries o0er that way. !lso, it follows with respect to the sub4ect, an actuality, that it is an effect becase there is a cause of it. /t follows

that there is a cause of it because its prior arisin( is its cause. /t follows that its prior arisin( is its cause because it is an actuality. %here is this, ri(ht1 7ou ha0e to apply it in this way to whate0er there is. Now what is the ne6t one1 */n relation to direct causes and indirect causes., /t is not said that *whate0er is a direct cause is necessarily not an indirect cause,. /n (eneral, cause and effect are synonymous, ri(ht1 %he two, direct cause and indirect cause, are in (eneral synonymous. Whate0er is a direct cause is necessarily an indirect cause. Whate0er is an indirect cause is necessarily a direct cause. %he two, direct effect and indirect effect, are in (eneral synonymous. Whate0er is a direct effect is necessarily an indirect effect, whate0er is an indirect effect is necessarily a direct effect. %he two, indirect effect and direct effect, are synonymous. %his is in (eneral now. Now if you apply it to a basis, if you speak of them as applied to a basis, such as speakin( of a direct cause of actuality, an indirect cause of actuality, a direct effect of actuality, an indirect effect of actuality, then they are contradictory. Now direct cause and indirect cause are not contradictory. ?irect effect and indirect effect are not contradictory. %hey are synonymous. Whate0er is a direct cause is necessarily an indirect cause. Whate0er is a direct cause is necessarily an indirect cause. What is an actuality is necessarily a direct cause. Whate0er is an actuality is necessarily an indirect cause. /f someone asks what the thou(ht is here, whate0er is an actuality is necessarily a direct cause because whate0er is an actuality is necessarily the direct cause of its own later arisin(. Whate0er is an actuality is necessarily an indirect cause because whate0er is an actuality is necessarily an indirect cause of its own later arisin(+s later arisin(. 7ou+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 Whate0er is an actuality is necessarily a direct effect because whate0er is an actuality is necessarily the direct effect of its own prior arisin(. Whate0er is an actuality is necessarily a direct effect of its own prior arisin(. Whate0er is an actuality is necessarily an indirect effect because whate0er is an actuality is necessarily an indirect effect of its own prior arisin(+s prior arisin(. /n (eneral, those are synonymous. 7ou will come to ascertain this. Now please debate it. *%wo students debate throu(h debate @.F as in the te6t, then., C. /t follows that a common locus of the two, direct cause and nonB indirect effect, is not possible. ?. Why1

C. >ecause that is your own position. *JH. 7ou said that they are *1, different and *", a common locus is not possible, ri(ht1, ?. %he reason is not established. C. Now it follows that they are not contradictory. ?. / accept it. *JH. 7ou don+t ha0e to start lyin( now., *&tudent. / am not tryin( to lie., *JH. 2h, you think that is ri(ht, huh1, C. /t follows that on the way here today you drank a bottle of li)uor. ?. -au(hs. C. /t follows that the two, direct cause and nonBindirect cause, are synonyms. ?. Why1 C. /t follows that they are contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. Why are the two, direct cause and nonBindirect cause, contradictory1 ?. >ecause of *1, bein( different and *", a common locus is not possible. C. /t follows that a common locus of the two, direct cause and nonB indirect cause, is not possible. ?. / accept it. C. Why is a common locus of the two, direct cause and nonBindirect cause, not possible1 ?. *- . %his is the same as the other one, ri(ht1 /t is the same as that one in which it was said that whate0er is a cause is necessarily not an effect, ri(ht1 7ou ha0e to say that it is because *1, whate0er is a direct cause is necessarily an indirect cause and *", whate0er is an indirect cause is necessarily a direct cause., &ince this per0asion is complete, there will not come to be a common locus of the two, direct cause and nonBindirect cause, ri(ht1 %here will not come to be somethin( which is a direct cause and a nonBindirect cause. Whate0er is a direct cause is necessarily an indirect cause. &ince there is this per0asion, is there somethin( which is a direct cause and also a nonB indirect cause1 /s there1, *&tudent. %here is., *- . What do you posit1, *&. ! later arisin( of actuality., *- . /t follows that the sub4ect, a later arisin( of actuality, is not an

indirect cause., *&. / accept it., *- . /t follows that the sub4ect, a later arisin( of actuality, is an indirect cause because of bein( an indirect cause of its own later arisin(+s later arisin(., *JH. We+re establishin( that direct cause and indirect cause are synonyms, so how could anythin( be a direct cause and not be an indirect cause1 7ou ha0e been sayin( that all alon(., *&. &o they are synonymous., *JH. 7es. Now that is direct cause and indirect cause that are synonymous, not direct cause and nonBindirect cause. 2kay1 ?irect cause and nonBindirect cause are mutually e6clusi0e. Why1 >ecause direct cause and indirect cause are synonyms, are mutually inclusi0e., >ecause direct cause and indirect cause are synonyms. C. /t follows that if the two, direct cause and indirect cause, re synonymous, then a common locus of the two, direct cause and nonB indirect cause, is necessarily not possible. ?. / accept it. *%wo students debate throu(h @.G as in the te6t, then., C. What is the difference between the two, direct effect and nonB indirect effect1 ?. %hey are contradictory. C. /t follows that the two, direct effect and nonBindirect effect, are contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. Why are those two contradictory1 ?. >ecause those two are *1, different and *", a common locus is not possible. C. /t follows that if those two *1, are different and *", a common locus is not possible, then those tow are necessarily contradictory. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that a common locus of the two, direct effect and nonB indirect effect, is not possible. ?. / accept it. C. Why is a common locus of those two not possible1 ?. >ecause *1, whate0er is a direct effect is necessarily an indirect effect and *", whate0r is an indirect effect is necessarily a direct effect. C. /t follows that if *1, whate0er is a direct effect is necessarily an

indirect effect and *", whate0er is an indirect effect is necessarily a direct effect, then a common locus of the two, direct effect and nonB indirect effect, is not necessarily possible. ?. / accept it. *%wo students debate throu(h @.C as in the te6t, then., C. What is the difference between the two, a cause of actuality and a direct cause of actuality1 ?. %here are three possibilities. C. /t follows that there are not three possibilities. =osit somethin( which is both. ?. %he sub4ect, a prior arisin( of actuality. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of actuality, is a cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of actuality, a cause of actuality1 ?. >ecause of bein( a producer of actuality. C. /t follows that whate0er is a producer of actuality is necessarily a cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that whate0er is a producer of actuality is necessarily a cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of actuality, a direct cause of actuality1 ?. >ecause of bein( a direct producer of actuality. C. /t follows that whate0er is a direct producer of actuality is necessarily a direct cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. Now which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one but not the other. ?. Whate0er is a direct cause of actuality is necessarily a cause of actuality. Whate0r is a cause of actuality is not necessarily a direct cause of actuality. %he sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality, is a cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality, a cause of actuality1

?. >ecause of bein( an indirect cause of actuality. C. /t follows that whate0er is an indirect cause of actuality is necessarily a cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prio arisin( of actuality, is not a direct cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality, not a direct cause of actuality1 ?. >ecause of bein( an indirect cause of actuality. C. /t follows that whate0er is an indirect cause of actuality is necessarily not a direct cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. Now posit somethin( which is neither. ?. %here is somethin(. %he sub4ect, an effect of actuality. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, an effect of actuality, is not a cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, an effect of actuality, not a cause of actuality1 ?. >ecause of not bein( a producer of actuality. C. /t follows that whate0er is not a producer of actuality is necessarily not a cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, an effect of actuality, is not a direct cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. Why is the sub4ect, an effect of actuality, not a direct cause of actuality1 ?. >ecause of not bein( a direct helper of actuality. C. /t follows that whate0er is not a direct helper of actuality is necessarily not a direct cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. %here are three possibilities. *%he two principals of debate @.$, a direct effect of actuality and an effect of what is produced directly from actuality, are contradictory., %he two, a cause of actuality and an effect of actuality, are contradictory. %he two, a cause of actuality and actuality, are not contradictory. %he two, a cause of actuality and actuality, are

established as three possibilities. /n the same way there are three possibilities between the two, a cause of actuality and a direct cause of actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, a cause of actuality and an indirect cause of actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, a cause of actuality and a substantial cause of actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, a cause of actuality and a cooperati0e condition of actuality. %hey are established as three possibilities, three possibilities, and three possibilities. /n the same way the two, an effect of actuality and actuality, are not contradictory. %here are three possibilities. %here are three possibilities between the two, an effect of actuality and actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, a direct effect of actuality and actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, an indirect effect of actuality and actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, a substantial effect of actuality and actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, a cooperati0e effect of actuality and actuality. /t is like that. 7ou understand the dissimilar types of effects, ri(ht1 /t is like that. Now in the same way you ha0e to apply this o0er to other thin(sBB pot, pillar, and so forth. %he procedure is the same. !ll of the actualities the bein(s of which are possible are the same. %he procedure is the same for all actualities the bein( of which is possible. Well, actualityBwhichBisBoneBwithBactuality is a little unlike the others. %his is not so for the two, actualityBwhichBisBoneBwithBactuality and a cause of actualityBwhichBisBoneBwith actuality. %here are not three possibilities. %hey are contradictory. @0en thou(h it is an ob4ect of knowled(e the bein( of which is possible. !ctualityBwhichBisBoneBwith actuality is an actuality the bein( of which is possible, ri(ht1 @0en thou(h actualityBwhichBisBoneBwithB actuality is an actuality the bein( of which is possible, if you are asked whether it and its causes ha0e three possibilities, it does not. %hey are contradictory. Whate0er is actualityBwhichBisBoneBwithBactuality is necessarily oneBwithBactuality. Whate0er is a cause of actualityBwhichBisBoneBwithBactuality is necessarily different from actuality. %hese will not come to(ether. %hey are contradictory. /n the same way the two, potBwhichBisBoneB withBpot and a cause of potBwhichBisBoneBwithBpillar and a cause of pillarBwhichBisBoneBwithBpillar, are contradictory. Now for actualities the bein( of which is not possible, the two, it and its cause, are contradictory. %he two, the twoBBa pillar and a potBB

and the cause of the twoBBa pillar and a pot, are contradictory. %he two, the twoBBa pillar and a pot and an effect of the twoBBa pillar and a pot, are contradictory. %he two, the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper potBBand a cause of the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper pot, are contradictory. %he two, the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper potBBand an effect of the twoBBa (olden pot and a copper pot, are contradictory. ;or e6ample, there is nothin( which is the twoBBa pillar and a potBBand also is a cause of the twoBBa pillar and a pot. %here is nothin( which is the twoBBa pillar and a pot. /t is like that. Now posit this to the others. Now for the permanent phenomena there is nothin( to call their causes and effects. ;or e6ample, there is nothin( to posit as a cause of ob4ect of knowled(e and there is nothin( to posit as an effect of ob4ect of knowled(e. %here is nothin( to posit as a cause of permanent phenomenon or an effect of permanent phenomenon. %his that is called causes and effects is posited only for actualities. %here is none for a permanent phenomenon. /n the system of the &autantikas such does not e6ist, but in the system of the Eaibhashikas there is somethin( to be posited. /n the system of the &autrantiaskas there is nothin( at all to posit. %his is for the &autrantikas and abo0e. %he &autrantikas, the Chittamatrins, and the Dadhyamikas do not posit a cause or effect of a permanent phenomenon, but the Eaibhashikas do posit one. We will for(et about this and set aside the Eaibhashika system. ;or the &autrantikas and abo0e they do not e6plain a cause or effect for a permanent phenomenon. %here is not one. Now this is a nonBe6istent. Now then the two, actuality and a cause of actuality, are different substantial entities *rd:as tha dad,. %here is a relationship between them, but they are different substantial entities. %hey are somethin( which is related and they are different substantial entities. ;or e6ample, there are two types of different substantial entities. those that ha0e a relationship and those that do not ha0e a relationship. %here are the two, different substantial entities which are related and different substantial entities which related and different substantial entities which are unrelated. %he two, actuality and a cause of actuality, are different substantial entities which ha0e a relationship. %hey are different substantial entities and they ha0e a relationship. 2kay, ri(ht1 %he two, actuality and an effect of actuality, are different substantial entities and ha0e a relationship. /f someone asks what the relationship is, it is the relationship of bein( arisen from that *de +byun( +brel,. %his is the relationship of causes and effects. /t is called

5arisen from that.5 %he two, actuality and a cause of actuality, ha0e a relationship, the relationship of bein( arisen from that. %he two, an effect of actuality and actuality, ha0e a relationship, the relationship of bein( arisen from that. Now in the same way you can apply this o0er to other causes and effects. 2kay, ri(ht1 ;or e6ample, the two, you and your mother, ha0e a relationship, the relationship of bein( arisen from that. %he two, you and your father, ha0e a relationship, the relationship of bein( arisen from that. 7ou understand, ri(ht1 Now is someone asks whether or not the two of you *?on and ?an, ha0e a relationship, there is none. %his is the different substantial entities which do not ha0e a relationship. %his is the unrelated. /t is like that. 7ou two are different substantial entities. %he two, a pillar and a pot, are different substantial entities. %his is called unrelated and factually other *+brel med don (:han,. ;actually other thin(s which are unrelated. %his is what is called different substantial entities which are unrelated. &omethin( like the twoBBa pillar and a pot, the twoBBthe eastern direction and the western direction, the twoBB the abo0e and the below. %hese are all unrelated and different substantial entities. %his that is called the same substantial entity and different substantial entities are not said for permanent phenomena. What is called a permanent phenomenon is not established as a substantial entity. Whate0er is established as a substantial entity is necessarily an actuality in the system of the &autrantikas. %his too is different in the system of the Eaibhashikas. /n the Eaibhashika system there are two, impermanent phenomena which are to be posited as substantially established and permanent phenomena which are to be posited as substantially established. /n the systems of &autrantika and abo0e since they assert substantial establishment they understand only caused phenomena in this way and it does not (o to others. /n the =rasan(ika system substantial establishment is not asserted. ;or those that do assert substantial establishment in the systems of &autrantika and abo0e, they understand only caused phenomena and do not understand others. @6cept for actualities there is nothin( else to posit. When you speak of that which is substantially established, substantial establishment is not posited for permanent phenomena. Now okay, ri(ht1 >ein( the same substantial entity or different substantial entities is not said for anythin( e6cept actualities. 2kay1 %here is nothin( to be understood as permanent

phenomena which is the same substantial entities or different substantial entities. ;or permanent phenomena when you are speakin( of all phenomena, what must be e6plained is bein( the same essence or bein( the same entity. %his per0ades all phenomena. /t is like that. /f you apply this to the basis of caused phenomena, if they are the same entity, then they are necessarily the same substantial entity. /n reference to the basis of caused phenomena, those which are the same entity are called the same essence. %hose which are the same essence are called the same substantial entity. When these two, the same entity and the same essence, are applied to a caused phenomenon they become the same. /f you apply it o0er to a permanent phenomenon, an uncaused phenomenon, they become separate. ;or instance, the two, permanent phenomenon and (enerally characteri:ed phenomenon, are said to be the same entity, but they are not said to be the same substantial entity. %hey are not the same substantial entity because of not bein( substantially established. Now you+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 /t is like that. ;or that which is called the same substantial entity, there is nothin( e6cept caused phenomena to posit. >ut that which is called the same essence is applied on to other thin(s. %hat which is called the same entity is to be applied to all ob4ects of knowled(e. 7ou+0e (ot, ri(ht1 Now the same substantial entity and different substantial entity is not to be applied to anythin( other than this. Now since they are causes and effects, they are necessarily different substantial entities. &ince they are unrealted and factually other they are necessarily different substantial entities. ;or that which is unrelated, factually other, and actualities they are different substantial entities. Now when you speak of bein( the same substantial entity, the two, product and impermanent phenomenon, are the same substantial entity. Now earlier we spoke of a lot of phenomena synonymous with actualityBBactuality, product, impermanent phenomenon, the momentary, specifically characteri:ed phenomenon, manifest phenomenon, ultimate truth, that which is able to perform a function. %hese are all the same entity. ;or e6ample, the two, product and impermanent phenomenon, are the same entity, the same essence, and the same substantial entity. /t is like that. Now then there is this. %his *product and impermanent phenomenon, is called the same substantial entities without there

bein( a (reater and lesser per0asion. %hey are the same substantial entity without there bein( a (reater and lesser per0asion. ;or thin(s which are the same entity and thin(s which are the same substantial entity, one must posit the two, those which ha0e (reater and lesser per0asions and those which do not ha0e (reater and lesser per0asions. %he two, product and impermanent phenomenon, are the same substantial entity, the same entity, and the same essence which do not ha0e a (reater and lesser per0asion. %here are all of those that are synonymsBBproduct, impermanent phenomenon, actuality, ri(ht1 %hese are all the same substantial entity, the same entity, and the same essence which do not ha0e a (reater and lesser per0asion. *JH. %here is no difference in their e6tent. /f you draw a circle, the circles would be of the same si:e., Now for e6ample, pot is a phenomenon which is the same entity as actuality. =ot is a phenomenon which is the same essence as actuality, the same substantial entity as actuality, and the same entity as actuality. ?o you understand1 !ctuality is a phenomenon which is the same entity as pot, the same substantial entity as pot, and the same essence as pot. %hey are phenomena which are the same substantial entity and ha0e a (reater and lesser per0asion. %hese are somethin( which has a (reater and a lesser per0asion. 2kay, ri(ht1 %here are those who assert that actuality is not a phenomenon which is the same entity as pot, but pot is a phenomenon which is the same entity as actuality. %here are such asserters. @0en thou(h there are such persons when you debate this, if they accept this then what do you ha0e to say1 /f you assert a (enerality which is factually other than its instances, then you ha0e asserted a (enerality which is a substantial entity other than its instances, it is an entity other than its instances, and it is an ob4ect other than its instances. /f you assert that there is a (enerality which is factually other than its instances, then the instances are factually other than the (enerality. *JH. /f you say that pot is the same substantial entity as thin(, but thin( was not the same substantial entity as pot, then e0entually you would ha0e to say that it was a different substantial entity from all of its instances in which case it would then be like a nonB>uddhist permanent, partless one., 2kay, ri(ht1 !ctuality is a phenomenon which is the same entity as pot, as pillar, as matter, as consciousness. 7ou ha0e to say that it (oes down to them like that. %hen matter, consciousness, pillar, the twoBBa pillar and a pot, and so on are phenomena which are the same entity as actuality. 7ou ha0e to say they (oes up that way.

%his is it. Now for e6ample, actuality (oes up as a phenomenon which is the same entity as ob4ect of knowled(e, but it is not the same substantial entity. !ctuality is a phenomenon which is the same entity as ob4ect of knowled(e, pot is a phenomenon which is the same entity as ob4ect of knowled(e, pillar is a phenomenon which is the same essence as ob4ect of knowled(e. When you (o up, you say it like that. Now there is somethin( which comes later. /s it to be said that whate0er is an instance of actuality is necessarily a phenomenon which is the same entity as actuality and a phenomenon which is the same substantial entity as actuality. Whate0r is an instance of ob4ect of knowled(e is necessarily a phenomenon which is the same entity as ob4ect of knowled(e and a phenomenon which is the same essence as ob4ect of knowled(e. /t (oes up like that. Now this will come later in (eneralities and instances. /f you put this in mind, it will be (ood, ri(ht1 %hey (o up like that. 7ou+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 Now then that will come later. Ksually, the meanin( of bein( the same substantial entity is posited this way. ;or e6ample, blue appears to a direct percei0er and what does not appear as separate from the blue to a direct percei0er, that which appears to a direct percei0er and does not appear in this way, then those two are the same substantial entity. *JH. &o we are talkin( of what is the meanin( of one substantial entity. /f a blue is appearin(, from what / understood, if a blue is appearin( to a sense direct percei0erBBto the eye consciousness, are the thin(s in )uestion appearin( like that or not1, /t is like this, the meanin( of bein( phenomena which are the same substantial entity, is that *1, they appear to a direct percei0er and *", they do not appear separately. /t must appear. Whate0er does not appear separately to a direct percei0er is not necessarily the same substantial entity. %here is the horn of a rabbit and the permanent phenomena, ri(ht1 *JH. %here is nothin( said about blue. /t appears to the senses and does not appear as separate. /t appears to the sensesBBa sense direct percei0erBBand does not appear as separate. He did not (i0e any e6ample., %his will not obtain as the definition of bein( the same substantial entity. /t is not able to per0ade. ;or e6ample, it is to be applied to form, sound, and so forth. What is to be applied in (eneral is this. that which *1, appears to a direct percei0er and *", does not appear as separate. %his is to be put in (eneral. %his comes as that which is to be posited as the definition of the same substantial entities. %hat which *1,

appears to a direct percei0er and *", does not appear separately. /t appears to a direct percei0er and it does not appear as separately. /n (eneral it is applied with respect to a direct percei0er. /f you apply it to the sense direct percei0ers, there are a lot of actualities which are not ob4ects of the sense direct percei0ers. /t is not able to per0ade. *JH. &o we mi(ht say that when e6plainin( it, but when (i0in( the definition we 4ust say that which appears to a direct percei0erBBnot specifyin( a sense direct percei0erBBand does not appear to be different., Now if this appears to a direct percei0er, what is called the same substantial entity is produced from its cuases and it is produced as the same entity, it is referred to as the same substantial entity. When it is produced from causes. *JH. &o if when it is produced from its causes, it is produced as one entity then it is one substantial entity., /f two which are the same entity are produced from causes, these two which are the same substantial entity are produced from causes, then they are the same substantial entity. %hus, one posits a difference between the two, the same substantial entity and the same substantial type *rd:as ri(s (ci( ba,. *JH. &o they make a difference between one substantial entity and one type of substantial entity., Whate0er is the same substantial type is not necessarily the same substantial entity. ;or e6ample, there are the two, a lar(e and a small barley seed produced form a sin(le head which is their substantial cause. %he two, a lar(e and a small barley seed produced from a sin(le head which is their substantial cause, are the same type of substantial entity. %he two, the substantial entity of the lar(e seed and the substantial entity of the small seed, are the same type. %hese two are not the same substantial entity. /t has arri0ed, ri(ht1 %hese two are not the same substantial entity. %hese two appear as that, ri(ht1 %hey appear to a direct percei0er and then the two, a lar(e seed and a small seed, appear as that, ri(ht1 %hus, this is the reason they are not the same substantial entity. %hey are produced from causes but they are not the same entity. %hey are the same type of substantial entity, but they are not the same substantial entity. /n the same way there is a difference between the two, the same type *ri(s (ci( pa, and the same essence *bda( nyid (ci( pa,. ;or e6ample, we are the same type. >ein( humans we are the same type, ri(ht1 %he two, a black and a white horse, bein( horses are the same type, ri(ht1 ;or e6ample, whate0er is an o6, these black and white o6en, bein( o6en are the same type, ri(ht1 @0en so they are not the same essence. %hey are the same type. %hey are not the same

essence. %hey are not the same essence. 7ou+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 %here are a lot of thin(s which you can say are the same type. ;or e6ample, *(i ri(s (yi mi, people of one caste and *tran( (i ri(s (yi mi, and people of another caste are the same type as bein( humans. @0en thou(h they are the same type as bein( humans they are not the same type as bein( caste members. 2ne is one caste and the other is another caste. *JH. /f you (o up to people of different castes and ask them are they the sameBBit is the same wordBBcaste, the same type, they answer yes as bein( humans but not as bein( of this other type of type., With respect to bein( the same type, there are a lot to sayBB bein( the same type as bein( humans, the same type as bein( common bein(s, the same type as bein( sentient bein(s, the same type as ha0in( the same lot, the same type as not ha0in( the same lot, the same type as bein( dull, the same type as bein( bri(ht. %here are a lot of thin(s which are the type. Whoe0er is a monk is the same type as bein( a monk. Whoe0er is a %ibetan is the same type as bein( a monk. Whoe0er is a layman is the same type as bein( a layman. /t is said like that. ;or thin(s which are the same type there must be se0eral. %here is nothin( to posit that is one. 7ou ha0e ascertained it, ri(ht1 %his which is called the same type is like that. ;or e6ample, we are all the same as bein( sentient bein(sBBhorses, o6en, bu(s, and so on. /f someone asks if we are all the same type, you ha0e to say that we are not. We are the same as bein( sentient bein(s but we are not the same type. Now you+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 When this is said, there is a sli(ht harmer. ;or instance, if someone asks if you two are the same type and you say no, then he says the two, a black and a white horse, are not the same type. /f you say that it is not, this was clearly said, ri(ht1 Whate0er is the same type is not necessarily the same essence. /f you ask why, it is because of it says the sub4ect, the twoBBa black and a white horse. /n (eneral, they are posited as the same type, ri(ht1 /f this is so, then you two are the same type. /f this is so, then it may be said that the two separate castes are the same type. /t is a little uncomfortable. What is the same type1 /f they are the same type, then what is the type1 %hey are the same type as bein( humans. ;rom one point of 0iew you can say that they are the same type as bein( humans but in (eneral the two separate castes are not the same type, but it is 0ery difficult to (i0e an answer. /n the !bhidharmakosha such an answer is (i0en. *- recites )uote from Iosha. ?e0elopin( from this )uote he speaks of four types of answers. (o cik ba+i len, rnam pa dri nas len, dri ba+i len, shak pa+i

len, *JH. &o the second one was differentiatin( type and if you ask, 5/s this person superior15 then you ha0e to ask in relation to whom. &o it in0ol0es )uestionin(, intera(ation. !nswer upon intera(ation. *JH. /n dependence on somebody abo0e you, you are below. /n dependence on somebody below you, you are abo0e. &o you ha0e to ask what the frame of reference is., ;or e6ample, if someone asks whether you are (reat, *you ha0e to ask, in relation to whom. Now there are many (reater than you, ri(ht1 %here are those (reater and taller in body, ri(ht1 /n 0iew of them / am small. ;rom their point of 0iew they are lar(e. 7ou can (i0e that sort of answer. ?o you ha0e it1 *JH %ranslatin(. !nother type of answer is not to answer. 7ou 4ust lea0e it. %hat is for the fourteen ine6pressible 0iews. %hese >uddha did not answer because there would be fault if he said yes and fault if he said no., ;or e6ample, such thin(s come, ri(ht1 ;or e6ample, if a person had committed robbery and murder and we know who did it when it happened we were with him. When a policeman comes and asks if he is the thief, if we answer yes it is not suitable. /f you say he is, it will brin( harm to the person. /f we say he is not, it is not suitable because it is a lie. He is the thief, ri(ht1 %hus, you keep your mouth shut. *JH %ranslatin(. &o one amon(st us committed robbery and murder and the police came in and said, you know, is this the person is this the one. @0en thou(h you knew if you said the person is the one, then it would harm the person. /f you said it wasn+t, then it would harm the police. &o you 4ust remain )uiet., %here a lot like that. %here are a lot of that type. %here are four ways of (i0in( answers. Now how did we start talkin( about this1 2h, ha0in( to do with the same type. When someone says it is the same type or not, you can (i0e any of the four types of answers. *JH. %he first type of answer was a direct answer. / (uess when you immediately be(in debatin( or somethin( like that., Now you (ot it, ri(ht1 Now if we do not reckon the three and four possibilities on causes and effects some, it will not be set in mind. 7ou will remain confused. %here are three possibilities between the two, actuality and a cause of actuality. 7ou (i0e the points. How do you (i0e them1 How do you (i0e the possibilities between the two, actuality and a cause of actuality1 What do you posit as both1 How do you posit which is necessarily the other, which is not necessarily the other, and somethin( which is one and not the other1 What do you posit as neither1 2ne of you do it. &ay it. *JH. / hope someone can because / can+t., *&tudent. %here are three possibilities between the two,

actuality and a cause of actuality., - . What do you posit as both1 Jo around and each of you posit a sub4ect. &tudents. %he sub4ect, a prior arisin( of actuality' the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality' the sub4ect, a substantial cause of actuality' the sub4ect, a person who is a cause of actuality' the sub4ect, a cooperati0e condition of actuality' the sub4ect, mud which is a cause of actuality. - . 7ou are thinkin( of a pot. /t is not pot, it is actuality. /s actuality made of mud1 &tudent. &ome are. %here probably is. %here is a pot which is a cause of actuality. %here of a pillar which is a cause of actuality. %here could be mud which is a cause of actuality. %here could be. Now say what yours is. &. %he sub4ect, a pot which is a cause of actuality. Now which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one but not the other. &. Whate0er is a cause of actuality is necessarily an actuality. Whate0er is an actuality is not necessarily a cause of actuality. =osit it. =osit it. =osit it. &. %he sub4ect, the flame of a buter lamp in its final moment. - . What is this1 2f course, it is okay. What is the need for positin( the flame of a butter lamp in its last moment1 What is your thou(ht1 /t certainly is okay, but what is your thou(ht1 !re you thinkin( that since it is final it will not ser0e as a cause of actuality1 /s it1 /f you posited a pot, would it be okay1 Would it be okay or would it not1 &. /t would not be okay. - as Challen(er. 2h, it follows that if one posited a pot, it would not be okay. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a pot, is a cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a pot, is not a cause of actuality because of not bein( a different substantial entity from actuality' because of bein( an instance of actuality. *- . Whate0er is an instance of actuality is necessarily not a cause of actuality. Whate0er is an instance of actuality is necessarily not an effect of actuality. /t is the same essence as actuality, ri(ht1 @arlier we spoke of that which is the same essence as actuality and that which is the same substantial entity as actuality, ri(ht1 >ecause a pot is the same substantial entity as actuality' because a pot is the same essence as actuality. / thou(ht when you said, 5%he sub4ect, the flame of a butter lamp in its final moment,5 that you were thinkin( crookedly

and you were. Now what do you posit1, JH. He is throwin( a real cur0e at us, a hu(e cur0e. - . 7ou can posit any of theseBBpot, pillar, (olden pot, person, matter, or consciousness. ?o you understand1 &. / do not understand. - . 2h, whate0er is a cause of actuality is necessarily an actuality. Whate0er is an actuality is not necessarily a cause of actuality. %he sub4ect, a pot. %here is a pot which is a cause of actuality, but a pot is not a cause of actuality. 7ou ha0e confused this now. ! pot which is a cause of actuality is a cause of actuality. ! pot is not a cause of actuality. 7ou ha0e to split them that way. / wonder if you understand1 &. / understand. - . 2h, there is a pot which is a cause of actuality, there is a pillar which is a cause of actuality, there is a person who is a cause of actuality. ! pot which is the cause of actuality is a cause of actuality. /s a pot a cause of actuality1 /t is not. ! pillar which is a cause of actuality is a cause of actuality. /s a pillar a cause of actuality1 /t is not. %here is a pot which is an effect of actuality. /s a pot an effect of actuality1 /t is not. ! pillar which is a cause of actuality is a cause of actuality. /s a pillar a cause of actuality is a cause of actuality. /s a pillar a cause of actuality1 /t is not. Now it is to be posited in that way. Now is your head bi(1 ?o you ha0e it1 Now whate0er is a cause of actuality is necessarily an actuality. Whate0er is an actuality is not necessarily a cause of actuality. Now posit it. %hen posit them one by one. C. Now posit it. ?. %he sub4ect, a later arisin( of atuality. *- . 2h, if you say that, it too is okay., C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a later arisin( of actuality, is not a cause of actuality. ?. / accept it. C. Why is it not1 ?. >ecause of bein( an effect of actuality. C. 2h, that is okay. Now you *another student, posit somethin( which is an actuality but noit a cause of actuality. ?. %he sub4ect, an effect of actuality. %he sub4ect, a direct effect of actuality. *- . 7ou do not ha0e to specify an effect. 7ou can say the sub4ect, a pot' the sub4ect, a pillar' and so on.,

*JH. 7ou are on the wron( track a(ain, thinkin( that you ha0e to specify an effect. None of us has understood why any of this is. None has, / doubt., - . @6plain your thou(ht. &. Whate0er is a cause of actuality is necessarily an actuality. / understand this. Whate0er is an actuality is not necessarily a cause of actuality. / do not understand this. - . Whate0er is an actuality is not necessarily a cause of actuality. %he sub4ect, a pot. %he sub4ect, you. 7ou are not a cause of actuality. 7ou are not a prior arisin( of actuality, are you1 ?o you understand1 &. / understand. - . ! pot is not a prior arisin( of actuality. ! pot is not a cause of actuality. /f a pot were a cause of actuality, then the two, a pot and actuality, would ha0e to be different substantial entities. %hen actuality would ha0e to be a later arisin( of a pot. ?o you understand1 7ou ha0e to say that a pot is not a cause of actuality. 7ou ha0e to say that there is a pot which is a cause of actuality. %his is not to be confused. Now posit it. ?. %he sub4ect, a pot. C. =osit somethin( which is an actuality but is not a cause of actuality. ?. %he sub4ect, a chair. C. %he sub4ect, a chair1 *-au(hs, Now you posit somethin( which is an actuality but is not a cause of actuality. ?. %he sub4ect,a person. C. What do you posit1 ?. %he sub4ect, a table. C. Now of you two one has posited a chair and one has posited a table. 7ou will ha0e to put the chair with the table. Now this is okay. %here are three possibilities between the two, actuality and a cause of actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, actuality and an effect of actuality. What do you posit as both1 ?. %he sub4ect, a later arisin( of actuality. C. Now what do you posit as an actuality and an effect of actuality. =osit somethin( which is both. ?. %he sub4ect, an effect of actuality. C. %hat is also okay. JH. inbochay, this pillar is a cause, ri(ht1 - . 7es. JH. /t is the cause of an actuality, ri(ht1 /t is not the cause of a permanent phenomenon, ri(ht1 *He specifies that it is the cause of a

or one actuality., - . No it is not. /t is not. JH. /t is the cause of an actuality, ri(ht1 - . /t is the cause of an actuality. JH. %hen is it not a cause of actuality1 - . No, it is not. JH. Why is this1 - . /t is a cause of that actuality which is called a cause, ri(ht1 kyod ran( * (yu yin ser (yi dn(os po +di (yi r(yu red (yi yod pa red pa., /t is not a cause of actuality. %he two, actuality and it, are the same substantial entity, ri(ht1 %hey are not different substantial entities, ri(ht1 /t is not established as a prior arisin( of actuality, ri(ht1 JH to class. %hat is all he keeps sayin(BBis that actuality is of one entity with this and that if it was (oin( to be the cause of anythin(, then it would ha0e to be a different entity from it. - . When you say that it is a cause of an actuality, you are thinkin( that it is a cause of an actuality which is a cause, ri(ht1 /f you asked if it is a cause of actuality, this refers to whether or not it is a cause of actuality. JH. He says you are thinkin( of like actuality in (eneral. &ince this cup is one entity, one substantial entity, with actuality it cannot be the cause of that atuality althou(h it can be the causeof an actuality. C. Now posit somethin( which is an actuality and is an effect of actuality. %here are a lot. %here are really a lot. =osit it. ?. %he sub4ect, a prior arisin( of actuality. C. %hat has been posited. ?. &omethin( which is an effect of actuality and is an actuality1 C. 7es. -ike we posited as causes of actuality. %here are a lot. %he sub4ect, a pot which is a later arisin( of actuality. %he sub4ect, a pillar which is a later arisin( of actuality. %he sub4ect, a person who is a later arisin( of atuality. %he sub4ect, a nonBBassociated compositional factor which is a later arisin( of actuality. %he sub4ect, a consciousness which is a later arisin( of actuality. !ll of these are to be posited. %he sub4ect, a pot which is an effect of actuality. %he sub4ect, a pillar which is an effect of actuality. !nd also the sub4ect, a pot which is a alter arisin( of actuality. %he sub4ect, a pillar which is a later arisin( of actuality. -ike these. %hese are all to be posited. 2kay1 Now do not be confused. %hat is okay. Now what is the difference between the two, actuality and a direct cause of actuality1

%here are three possibilities. Now posit somethin( which is both. ?. %he sub4ect, a prior arisin( of actuality. C. Now you posit one. ?. %he sub4ect, a pot which is a prior arisin( of actuality. C. Now you (i0e one. ?. %he sub4ect, a person who is a prior arisin( of actuality. C. 2kay. ?. %he sub4ect, a pillar which is a prior arisin( of actuality. %he sub4ect, a flower which is a prior arisin( of actuality. %he sub4ect, a table which is a prior arisin( of actuality. %he sub4ect a path of seein( which is a prior arisin( of actuality. ... C*- ,. Whate0er is a prior producer of actuality is necessarily a direct cause of actuality. Now how do you posit which is necessarily the other, which is not necessarily the other, and somethin( which is the one and not the other1 ?. Whate0er is a direct cause of actuality is necessarily an actuality. Whate0er is an actuality is not necessarily a direct cause of actuality. C. =osit it. ?. %he sub4ect, a pot. C. Now e0eryone posit their thou(hts on this. ?. %he sub4ect, a person. %he sub4ect, a pillar. C. Now you only ha0e one thou(ht on this. 7ou can also think of the sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality. 7ou can also think of a later arisin( of actuality. 7ou can also think of that which is simultaneous with actuality itself. %here are se0eral dissimilar sub4ects. What do you posit1 ?. %he sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality. C. 2h, there is like that too. Now what do you posit1 ?. %he sub4ect, a pot which is a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality. C. What do you posit1 ?. %he sub4ect, a rosary which is a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality. %he sub4ect, a wisdom consciousness reali:in( selflessness which is a prior arisin( of actuality. C. What is that1 ?. %he sub4ect, a wisdom consciousness which is a prior arisin( of actuality.

C. /t follows that the sub4ect, a wisdom consciousness which is a prior arisin( of actuality, is not a direct cause of actuality. ?. Why1 C. !ma:in( ?. %he sub4ect, a wisdom consciousness which is a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality. C. 2h, those llke that work, ri(ht1 Whate0er is a direct cause of actuality is necessarily an actuality. Whate0er is an actuallty is not necessarily a direct cause of actuallty. %he sub4ect, a pot. %he sub4ect, a pillar. %he sub4ect, a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality. %he sub4ect, a later arisin( of actuality. %he sub4ect. a later arisin( of a later arisin( of actuality %here are a lot of sub4ects. 2kay1 /n the same way, there are three possibllities between the two, actuality and indirect cause of actuality. =osit somethin( which is both. ?. %he sub4ect, /. C. What do you posit1 ?. %he sub4ect, the color of a white flower which is a later arisin( of a later arisin( of actuality. C. Now you posit somethin( which is both. ?. %he sub4ect, a person who is a later arisin( of a later arisin( of actuality. C. Now which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whate0er is an indirect cause of actuality is necessarily an indirect cause of actuality. %he sub4ect, a pot which is a prior arisin( of actuality. C. Now then there are three possibilities between the two, a cause of actuality and direct cause of actuality. =osit somethin( which is both. What do you posit as a cause of actuality and a direct cause of actuality1 ?. %he sub4ect, the color of a ruby which is a prior arisin( of actuality. C. What is that1 /t is a direct cause of actuality and it is a cause of actuality. Why is it a direct cause of actuality1 ?. >ecause of bein( a direct producer of actuality. C. Why is it a cause of actuality1 ?. >ecause of bein( a producer of actuality. C. 2r you could say, 5because it is direct cause of actuality.5 Which is necessarily the other1 Which is not necessarily the other1 =osit

somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. Whate0er is a direct cause of actuality is necessarily a direct cause of actuality. Whate0er is an actuality is not necessarily a direct cause of actuality. %he sub4ect, the color of a white flower which is a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality. C. Now that is okay. Now is the difference between the two, indirect cause of actuality and cause of actuality1 Now you can do this, ri(ht1 ?. %here are three possibilities. C. 2h, there are three possibilities. =osit somethin( which is both. Now posit ri(ht away somethin( which is both, which is necessarily the other, which is not necessarily the other, and somethin( which is one and not the other. ?. %he sub4ect, a tele0ision which is a prior arisin( of a prior arisin( of actuality, is somethin( which is both. Whate0er is an indirect cause of actuality is necessarily a cause of actuality. Whate0er is a cause of actuality is not necessarily an indirect cause of actuality. %he sub4ect, a tele0ision which is a prior arisin( of actuality. Now it is like that. 7ou can fi(ure such as these for the effects of actuality. %hink about them indi0idually and fi(ure the three possibilities and the four possibilities for each of them. !pply it to a pot. !pply it to a pillar. !pply it to actuality. Now there are three possibilities between the two, substantial cause of actuality and cause of actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, substantial cause of actuality and actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, cooperati0e condition of actuality and actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, cooperati0e condition of actuality and cause of actuality. %here are three possibilities between the two, substantial cause of actuality and direct cause of actuality *11,. %here are three possibilities between the two, substantial cause of actuality and indirect cause of actuality *11,. %here are three possibilities between the two, cooperati0e condition of actuality and direct cause of actuality *11,. %here are three possibilities between the two, cooperati0e condition of actuality and indirect cause of actuality *11,. %here are three possibilities, three possibilities, three possibilities. %hink about these and fi(ure them out. /n the same way this is to be applied to pot, pillar, and whate0er. 2kay, ri(ht1 /s it to be applied o0er to them. Now you understood about substantial cause and cooperati0e

condition earlier, ri(ht1 ;or e6ample, if it is done for a sprout, what is a seed1 %he seed that is planted. /t is the substantial cause. *JH. !nswer if you know. /f you do know, answer. ?on+t sit there ..., /f we apply it to a flower, you will understand. What is the seed that is planted1 /t is the substantial cause of a flower. What are the earth, water, and air1 %hey are the cooperati0e conditions. *JH. !nswer as loud as you can., ;or e6ample, if we apply this to oursel0es. /f it is posited for you, what is the substantial cause of your body1 /t is the semen and blood of your father and mother. %he accumulated action in a former lifetime, the action which ser0ed as a helper for your body is a cooperati0e condition of your body. Now what do you posit as the substantial cause of your mind1 %he former mind. ;or e6ample, the substantial cause of your mind of today is your mind of yesterday. When you posit the substantial cause of your mind of yesterday, it is the mind of day before yesterday. %he substantial cause of your mind of this lifetime is posited as your mind of the former lifetime. %he substantial cause of the mind of the former lifetime is the mind of an earlier former lifetime. %he cooperati0e conditions of the mind of this lifetime are the action of a former birth the twoBBone+s father and mother. %he twoBByour father and motherBBare cooperati0e conditions of your body. /n this life there are the ationms of mi che ya (yi las, ri(ht1 %hese too are cooperati0e conditions of your body and cooperati0e conditions of your mind. /t must be applied in this way. /t is somethin( to think about. 2kay, ri(ht1 ;or e6ample, for somebody who is (oin( to become a >uddha before he is >uddhified he must establish the causes of producin( a >uddha+s body. %his is the substantial cause of the body of a >uddha. %here is a cause of establishin( a >uddha+s body. 2ne must accumulate a (rat deal of merit. %his is all a cooperati0e condition of the body of a >uddha. 7ou+0e (ot it, ri(ht1 ;or e6ample, if we establish the altruistic attitude in our minds, that is a substantial cause of bein( able to become a >uddha. /t (oes up like that. /t (oes down too. ;rom where0er it comes. Now think about this and you can apply it anywhere. !pply these direct cause, indirect cause, substantial cause, and cooperati0e condition to wood, flowers, a house, and whate0er. %hink about it. %hen you will understand well. %hink about the three possibilities, and four possibilities one by one. 2kay, ri(ht1 =robably that is that. @arlier we (ot the one about bein( and

permanent phenomenon, ri(ht1 %he one that said, 5>ecause of bein( both somethin( which somethin( is and a permanent phenomenon.5 Ha0e you ascertained it1 /t is at the end of opposite from bein( and opposite from not bein(. 7ou debate it. ... *recorder stopped for a moment, C. /t follows that it is both somethin( which somethin( is and a permanent phenomenon because bein( it is a permanent phenomenon. /t follows that bein( it is both somethin( which is a permanent phenomenon and a permanent phenomenon because bin( it is a permanent phenomenon. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows that bein( it is a permanent phenomenon because of *1, bein( an e6istent and *", not bein( an actuality. ?. %he second part of the reason is not established. C. /t follows that it is an actuality because of bein( an actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that there is a cause of it because it is an actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is produced from its cause because there is a cause of it. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is the effect of its cause because it is produced from its cause. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is related with its cause as arisen from that because it is produced from its cause. *7ou can say either 5because you accepted it5 or 5because it is produced from its causes.5, ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that if its cause does not e6ist, then it necessarily does not e6ist because it is related with its cause as arisen from that. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, that it does not e6ist because its cause does not e6ist. ?. %he reason is not established. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, that its cause does not e6ist because it is a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that if somethin( is a permanent phenomenon, then its cause necessarily does not e6ist.

?. / accept it. C. /t follows with respect to the sub4ect, ob4ect of knowled(e, that its cause does not e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not the case that if its cause does not e6ist, then it necessarily does not e6ist. ?. / accept it. C. /f there is no per0asion, then it follows that it is not related with its cause as arisen from that. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not produced from its cause. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not an effect of its causes. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that it is not produced from its causes. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that a cause of it does not e6ist. ?. / accept it. it is an actuality because of *1, bein( an and *", not bein( a permanent phenomenon. C. /t follows that it is a permanent phenomenon because of *1, bein( an e6istent and *", not bein( an actuality. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, onlyBaBpermanentBphenomenon, is a permanent phenomenon. ?. / accept it. C. /t follows that the sub4ect, onlyBaBpermanentBphenomenon, is an e6istent because of bein( a permanent phenomenon.