There are actually, as I mentioned, more than one kind of wisdom, one kind of understanding. The proposal in this class is that the highest wisdom, the supreme wisdom, is the wisdom which understands what we call emptiness. The wisdom which understands the way things ultimately are, ultimately and always are. And this wisdom is considered supreme because it is the wisdom that the Buddhas depend on. It relieves all suffering. It liberates beings from suffering. So we all depend on emptiness because it's our ultimate nature.

[01:09]

And Buddhas also depend on emptiness as their ultimate nature. But in our daily life we may not actually depend on perfection of wisdom because we have not yet attained it in some cases. But Buddhas are depending on perfection of wisdom all the time. So last week we actually got right in to discuss what's the meaning, what we talk about when we're talking about the emptiness, the emptiness of all things, of all phenomena. And so we've heard that all phenomena are dependent co-arisings.

[02:11]

All phenomena exist dependently. There are some things which are imagined to exist which are imagined to exist as not dependent. In other words, we can imagine something that's not dependent on anything, but such a thing does not exist. All things that exist, exist dependently. Because they exist dependently, they don't exist independently. Because they don't exist independently, they lack independent existence. That lacking independent existence is their emptiness, their empty of independent existence. Everything's that way and everything is also existing dependently. So these two things are very closely related, that things exist dependently and that things do not exist independently, right?

[03:25]

that things exist dependent in particular on mental imputation is very intimate with the fact that they're empty of existing independently of mental imputation. Everything that exists exists in dependence on mental imputation. I want to not say too much because there's some questions hanging out from last week, but I just wanted to... I thought of many different ways of putting this. And just as a little exercise, see if you can ride this pony. You might say Reb's hobby horse. So all phenomena exist independence on mental imputation. an object of knowledge, something you know, a phenomena, being mentally imputed, being merely a mental imputation, and its being empty of existing independently of mental imputation are basically the same thing.

[04:52]

A phenomena being merely a mental imputation is the same as the phenomena being empty of existing apart or independently of mental imputation. Is the same as it being empty of inherent existence. Is the same as what we mean by it being empty. when we say empty in the bodhisattva teaching. Now, did those things register? No? So it just went right by Tracy. Are you a little sleepy tonight? Got wise. Ready. It's what? It's gone beyond. By the way, the gate, gate, pata, gate, patasam gate means gone, gone, gone beyond, gone completely beyond.

[05:57]

Bodhi means enlightenment, welcome. Gone, gone, gone beyond, gone completely beyond, enlightenment, welcome. That's this class. So this teaching of emptiness is introducing you to something which is not the way things usually appear to people. The way things appear to us naturally, instinctively, is they appear to inherently exist. Now you're hearing a teaching which says things don't actually, ultimately, [...] they don't exist the way they appear to you. How do they appear? Well, now you're hearing about it, but it's going to be hard to hear about it because it's not anything you have ever seen before. And yet you're hearing about it. But anyway, here we go, a little further.

[07:04]

All phenomena depend on being imputed by mind. A thing having an imputational character is that the thing is dependent on imputation. Things have an imputational character. Everything that exists has an imputational character. Everything that exists has an imputational character because everything that exists exists depending on imputation. a thing or a phenomena having an imputational character or a phenomena being an imputational character is the same as the phenomena is the same as the phenomena is non-existent apart from that upon which it depends for its existence.

[08:24]

Right? Right? A thing is non-existent apart from that upon which it depends for its existence. That's kind of circular, but it's good to follow that circle. Things are non-existent apart from that which they depend on for their existence. Now here comes another... No, this gets a little bit trickier now. And this isn't the last time you'll hear this. These are synonyms. Emptiness, suchness, thoroughly established character, selflessness, the way things are, is that they have a thoroughly established character. Their thoroughly established character is called emptiness. Their thoroughly established character is the way they actually are, how they actually suchly are.

[09:34]

And also the way they are is that all things are selfless. This emptiness or this suchness, the thoroughly established character of everything in our life, is the absence of what? Absence of self, you say? Absence of... Inherent existence. Absence of existing apart from reputation. Emptiness is the emptiness of... independent existence of dependent things. What kind of things do we have in our life? Dependent things. Dependent things have an ultimate nature, which is that they're not independent.

[10:41]

That makes sense, doesn't it? Emptiness is the lack of independence of dependent things. Emptiness is the absence of imputation in the things which depend on imputation for their existence that's a new one emptiness is the absence of imputation in the things which depend on imputation for their existence Emptiness is the absence of imputation, independent things, which depend on imputation for their existence. This is a new twist.

[11:43]

So, anything that exists depends on imputation. Without imputation, it doesn't exist. But it does exist through independence on imputation. However, the imputation, that which is imputed, is not in the thing. Mental grasping, mental apprehension. All things exist in dependence on mental apprehension, mental grasping. Without mental grasping, nothing exists. Before I get more questions, I'll say a couple more things. We'll come back to this again, but I just wanted to say this. Emptiness is the absence in a thing of what is grasped as the thing. Even though the existence of that thing depends on the grasping of it as that thing.

[12:47]

Emptiness is the absence in a thing of how it is grasped. Emptiness is the absence in a thing of what it is grasped as. However, all phenomena depend on this imputation. Without imputation, they don't exist. However, even though they exist depending on imputation, and their emptiness is the fact that they do not exist apart from the imputation, also they do not exist with that imputation in them. So you can be dependent on something, like very intimately dependent on something for your existence, but that doesn't mean that the thing you depend on is in you, that you are actually as you're being grasped, which makes you be. So those, I will say those again many times. I just wanted to get that out there on tape and so on, and we'll go over it more later.

[13:48]

So there were a bunch of questions from before, and Michael has a question now. Yes, Michael? What are synonyms for independent? Independent existence. Actually, I often deal on acronyms when I'm taking notes and I'm using the blackboard. An acronym for independent existence is IE. Also, inherent existence acronym is IE. So inherent existence, independent existence, In other words, the imagination that something can exist by itself, independent of the conditions which we know things depend on, and independent of mental imputation. So, is that enough synonyms? However, so independent existence is not a phenomena, by the way.

[14:49]

Although our minds grasp independent existence, okay? In that case, we're grasping something which doesn't exist at all. Because independent existence, of course, doesn't depend on anything. The only things that exist are things that exist dependently. But independent existence says, I don't depend on anything, so see you later. So we can imagine things and grasp them with our mind that don't exist. And we do quite regularly grasp things that don't exist, namely, inherent existence of everything we run into. It looks that way and we grasp it. Things don't exist independently, they exist dependently. They don't exist inherently They exist dependently. Is that enough for now? And then Barry had a question last time.

[15:52]

It was the bell and the avocado example. Turnips. Can I use the avocado? And you can do turnips later if you want to. So he said, if the bell and avocado lack inherent existence, I thought you said, how can you tell the difference between them or something like that? Is that what you said? Okay. So, a bell is something which exists. I sort of got into this last time. Bell exists how? How does it exist? What? It exists dependently. Avocados, I don't happen to have one, unfortunately, but if anybody has one, I'd be happy to accept it. Anyway, avocados also exist dependently. What do avocados depend on? What? Mental imputation, what else? Avocado tree, what else?

[16:54]

Soil there, yeah. So they depend on certain conditions and mental imputation, right? And they also depend on their parts, avocado parts. Bells also depend on certain conditions and on mental imputation. In terms of mental imputation, their dependency is the same, in the sense that they both depend on mental reputation, but their conditions are different. So the way you tell the difference between the avocado and the bell is not because of the bell having some nature that's different from the avocado, which it doesn't, but because the bell has different conditions from the avocado. That's how we tell the difference between phenomena, is by their conditions. Now you want to... Does that make sense? Barry? It does. It does, sort of? It does completely.

[17:57]

It does completely, okay. I have a question that I think is related... Go ahead. ...to what you said today about things not existing apart from mental education. Yes. That seems to apply to me That's right. No. Mental imputation is not sufficient for things to exist. They also depend on conditions. Mental imputation is not the only thing that makes things happen. They depend on mental imputation? They don't. That's right.

[18:57]

But they don't exist, though. The conditions only come into existence when they have mental imputation upon them. For example, a condition for something that has not yet come into existence doesn't exist. As soon as the condition for one condition or two conditions for avocado, if you have conditions for avocados but no conditions, but no avocado, you don't have conditions for avocado. So the conditions for avocado, as soon as they're there, you have avocado with mental imputations. But the mind which did what you just did is the mind which we've got, which can then search out and find some inherent existence someplace else.

[20:09]

If I took it away over here, you can find it over there. But you do the same analysis on the inherent existence you thought you discovered. Did you think you found some, didn't you? Do the same analysis on that, and that too you will find that you have imputed something to the conditions for the avocado, which is actually non-existent. Because that too you said that was independent of mental imputation. And then therefore it exists independently. But when you bring it back into existence, then you've got mental imputation again. But it is possible that some things do not exist. Those are the things that exist independently. They don't exist. As soon as something depends on something like mental imputation, then it can exist. But then it's not independent anymore.

[21:14]

Plus other conditions also kick in sometimes. Mark, and then Vera. Were there other questions from last time? Sonia? Yes? And Michael? Yes? So, I guess I was wondering, why? Why does mental safety play the special role that everything that exists in the following? Why not something else? What's so special about mental safety? I don't know. I think that one of the things that first comes to mind is that one type of mental imputation that's very important is the grasping things, grasping a self. So this grasping of a self is why

[22:17]

or grasping inherent existence or grasping independent existence, this mental grasping which we do to things, we have to stop believing that. We do it already. Our mind knows how to create appearances of inherent existences which we then grasp and believe and agree to. So, mental imputation is part of our life. Other things are too. But we have to stop believing that mental imputation is real. we have to stop believing the mental imputation of inherent existence. So we have to learn about mental imputation in particular so it stands up. So I talked before, earlier, another take on this process.

[23:23]

There's different ways of working this teaching, but another take on it is that all phenomena have three characteristics. They have the imputational character, They have other dependent character and they have a thoroughly established character. Thoroughly established character. Thoroughly established character. Thoroughly established character. Yeah, that's the third character. Second character is they have other dependent character. In other words, they're dependent on things other than themselves. They're dependent but not dependent on themselves. They're dependent on things other than themselves and they have imputational character. The other dependent character is the basic way things exist. They exist dependently. One of the things they depend on is mental imputation, but they also depend on other conditions besides themselves. Things are not mental imputation, except for mental imputation.

[24:27]

You are not mental imputation, but you have an imputational character through which you exist. Without imputational character, you don't exist. You do have imputational character. You do depend on it. You do exist, but you also depend on other things. And the imputational character stands up. Each of you is dependent on many conditions. But this imputational character is highlighted because the thoroughly established character of the way you are is the absence of the imputational character in the way you are dependently. The way you are dependently, the way you actually are as a dependent phenomenon, is beyond. completely beyond all the time. It's free of the imputations that are necessary for you to exist. So again, you depend on a mental imputation to exist.

[25:32]

However, your natural dependent nature is not touched by the mental imputation. That's why you can't just imagine something and have it happen. But that doesn't mean that this thing that you can't just imagine is independent of the mental imputation, it means that it just doesn't exist. As soon as it exists, it does depend on mental imputation. So for example, to imagine that Bernard's flying around the room, doesn't make him fly around the room. So you could say, Bernard flying around the room is independent, has an inherent existence or independent existence from my imputation of him flying around the room. Yes, that's right, except there's no such thing. You can say all kinds of fabulous things about things that don't exist. That's one of them. There's more than two examples of these types of things.

[26:33]

Imaginary things. So that's why the imputational character is so important is because that's the one that we believe actually characterizes our other dependent nature. Only in a very important way does it characterize it. But in two important ways. One is that existence depends on mental imputation and two is that we naturally impute or grasp inherent existence in things which they don't have. So that's why we highlight it. Because that's what we have to understand and then find the absence of it in our life and become more convinced that it's actually not present even though we depend on it. Because, you know, we're dependent on it but it's not actually present in our dependent nature.

[27:40]

But nothing else is either. None of the conditions are actually in us We just depend on them. And I haven't forgotten Carmen's question about things existing maybe without mental imputation, this idea that something could exist. You know, without mental imputation, we can deal with that, try to think of that some more. Okay, I see Andy's hand, but then there's also Michael and Vera and Jeff. Let's see, Michael and Vera, and now we have new people, Jeff and Josh and Andy. Michael, I think you were from last week. How do you spell it? I-M-P-U-T-A. Huh? I am. I am. Right.

[28:41]

Right. I am. But I am is not really an imputation that we have to forget about. Just I am independent is the imputation we have to forget about. Could you turn the light on, Joel? Could you turn the back light on, please, Joel? Yes? No. My question was about the... Isn't the idea behind it that you can carry these two ideas simultaneously in your life, recognize... What are the two ideas? That there's dependency, independency... Definitely, that is right. So, again, that's... That we exist in dependence on mental imputation is how we exist conventionally. We do exist conventionally, and the way we conventionally exist is how we mentally are grasping ourselves and others.

[29:49]

We do exist imputedly. That's our conventional existence. But we also exist in ultimate mode or we have an ultimate mode of being which is what? it's an absence of independent existence it's an absence of existing independent of imputation those two exist together and one protects us from believing in permanence, inherent existence and the other protects us from believing in annihilation or that things don't exist at all. So things exist, what is it? Things exist in the middle way, which means they exist, they do not have inherent existence, but they do have imputed existence.

[30:57]

We do have imputed existence. We do have existence, dependent existence, which depends on imputation. We do have that kind of existence. We do. But we don't have inherent existence. That's the middle way. We need to learn how to carry these two together and see how they work so we avoid the extremes and we actually are living with the natural middle way. And the middle way is how we're empty of these extremes, these two different styles of self. that things either inherently exist, or if they don't, then they don't exist at all. If I'm not really here, then I'm not here at all. If I'm here, I'm here inherently. Those are extremes. So we are trying to learn how to, in a sense, not exactly carry them. We're trying to carry these two truths so we don't have to carry these two extremes.

[32:02]

These two truths help us avoid these extremes. There's different levels, right? This Prajnaparamita continues to evolve. There's no end to its deepening. It gets deeper and deeper. Like it says at the beginning here, this one says, when deeply practicing the Prajnaparamita, You know, you can practice it superficially, deeply, and then deeper and deeper and deeper and deeper. It keeps evolving forever. In every new situation is a new opportunity to integrate it with the world. So the idea is that this wisdom will... keeps trying to get integrated with this constantly evolving world. So the wisdom is trying to keep up with this world, you know. You got the world, right?

[33:04]

Wisdom is like trying to keep up with this. How do we keep up with current events? So there's no end to the challenges in growth and wisdom or the challenges by which the wisdom grows. So emptiness is the is really the object of perfection of wisdom, but the opportunities to realize emptiness are the infinite new comings of events. Okay? Vera? You can ask a new question. Getting back to the avocado. Back to the avocado? What if it has just the conditions but not the mental imputation yet?

[34:12]

What if it's with the conditions but without any mental imputation? Let's kind of like this cup for you. Do you know what I mean? Do it the other way around. Imagine the cup, okay? Can you make the cup appear by imagining it? It can't, right? I can't either. So I'm imagining the cup and now some of the conditions for the cup come together with my imagination, so now I have a cup. Now you have the idea of a cup, so now I'm taking away some of the conditions we usually have a cup, like that you can see it or touch it. You got the mental imputation, right? But you don't think you have a cup, do you?

[35:17]

Do you think you have a cup? Is that what you said? Don't be afraid. Go ahead. It's a free class. The idea of a cup. Yeah, the idea of a cup. That's a mental imputation. I mean, I should say the existence of the idea depends on the imputation of the idea, but also you can have a grasping for a cup, but you don't think that's the same as a cup, do you? Right? So you can feel what that's like. But you know that's not a cup. For there to be a cup, there has to be these other conditions, which you now have. Okay, so like before, and this sort of relates to Carmen's question, so is there a cup back there if there's no amputation? If I forget about the cup being back here,

[36:20]

and lean it, take my hands away and lean against my back. It's getting kind of dangerous because there's still tea in there. I forget about it and it spills and so on. But anyway, if I forget about the tea cup, is the tea cup there? And how would you find out if it's there? How would you prove it? You've got the idea that it's there, right? In order to prove it, you're going to have to do something more than you've done so far. You can say yes is there. But anyway, the teacup for you, at this point, for most of you, except for Suze is peeking around behind me, the teacup is an idea for you. Now, people could, I'm not one of them, but play a little trick on you, and put the cup back there and have you come and look for it and it wouldn't be there.

[37:24]

But that really, you know, that's only just kind of a hint. It doesn't mean that the tea cup doesn't exist again. It doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just means it exists dependent on imputation, on mental imputation. And we think that it doesn't depend on mental imputation, don't we? And I'm trying to show you that we do, but I'm going against a much better established attitude in that it does exist, therefore putting it behind my back is not gonna take away your ability to think that it really does exist, separate from your imputation. So if you stop thinking about it, it's still there, right? And you do know, however, that if you do think about it, that's not the same as it being there, right?

[38:31]

But you think when you're not thinking about it, it really is there. But it doesn't exist independent of you thinking about it. You say, well, what about if somebody else thinks about it? Well, then it exists for them. What if they tell you about it? They had a cup. He said, fine. But the one who's telling you about it, they used mental imputation to have their experience of it, didn't they? I see your hand, Carmen. You are now in a queue. And then Josh and Andy and then Jeff and Sonia. I don't know who's first, and now Diego, okay. Josh, Andy, Jeff, Sonia, Carmen, Diego, that should take care of us. Yvonne, that's pretty much the rest of the evening, yes? Yes, yes, Josh.

[39:35]

No, death isn't a mental beautician. No. Death is either, death is a word, death is a word, okay? And it's also a phenomena. But the existence of that phenomena depends on mental imputation. Right. Sorry. So if someone were to die now on this earth, it would be all kind of chaos. It's very disturbing. I wish we could have done something. Maybe. It depends. If I died, you might, you know, not to say if I died, but let's just say if I died since I'm here. If I died in a certain way, you might all feel like, wow, this is like really cool. Did you see how he did that? Especially you, you might have thought, I would have thought that if he died, it would have been very chaotic, but actually it was like, I feel totally relaxed. I mean, accent free of all suffering. Bodhisattva. We don't know what's gonna happen, but anyway.

[40:39]

That was one of my questions. Yes. There was a bodhisattva in the room and fully understood this teaching. Pardon? How would you react? Basically, the bodhisattva would be surprised when they came in the room to the class. And as they walked, for example, if they walked... counterclockwise up to the front of the room to greet you, the Bodhisattva would be surprised every step of the way by what's happening. And if the Bodhisattva felt the conditions for death accumulating, the Bodhisattva would be surprised by that. And the Bodhisattva would play with these conditions of the coming together of death, and we would be able to watch the Bodhisattva, and if we could be surprised by the way the Bodhisattva was surprised with the death, we would be like the Bodhisattva.

[41:40]

Although we might not die, we would have entered the same realm of perfect wisdom with the Bodhisattva. We don't know what the Bodhisattva would do, we just know how the Bodhisattva would feel about everything that happened. Namely, they would just find everything very surprising, totally astounding, just, you know, bodhisattva. You know, they would just be like, that's the way it is for them. They're like this sutra. They're like looking at this stuff, seeing emptiness left and right, seeing suffering, being relieved by this vision. They're in this very happy state of perfect wisdom. They're showing it to us by the way that they're responding to the situation. But how they respond, we can't say. They're going to be surprised by what they do. We may not be surprised by what they do, but they're going to be surprised. So if they're going to be surprised, maybe we'd be surprised too. Since they don't know what they're going to do, perhaps they would do something that we wouldn't have expected too.

[42:41]

But you might see a bodhisattva walk in. They're totally surprised. They didn't know what they're doing. You think they're doing just exactly what I thought a bodhisattva would do. You might say that, but you might not. You might be surprised. That's part of what the perfection of wisdom is about, is that the idea is really that other people start getting surprised too. That's why I said that earlier translation was, That translation I don't think is so good. It's like seeing it relieve suffering. So when you see the suffering, when you see the suffering actually, in its emptiness, when you see the five skandhas of an experience, and you see them in this very surprising, empty way, in fact, that starts to spread the surprise. That's the idea. So everybody starts getting surprised.

[43:44]

So the wisdom starts to infect the group. That's the point. It's not supposed to be just the one bodhisattva seeing it. It's the one bodhisattva seeing it and it's spreading in the group. But one of the ways it spreads is by people being surprised by what they're experiencing, which might be surprised by the way the bodhisattva is acting, but also might be surprised by the way you feel about what the bodhisattva is doing. And also the way you feel surprised by how you feel about other people, too. Because you start, in that surprise, you're starting to open up to dependency. So we don't know what will happen ever, actually. And that's our, one of our doors to salvation. Handy? Handy? Rocks cannot perceive.

[44:52]

They don't have that little... Rocks cannot perceive. That's why we call them rocks. Rocks that can perceive, we call crabs. Or snails. There's a planet. There's billions of planets. There's a planet and it's all just filled with rocks. then without anyone to perceive anything or anything to perceive it, that human rock that even wanted to not exist. The conditions are there for that particular rock. Unless you're sitting here on Earth thinking about it. I'm not thinking about that particular rock that is sitting there. I wouldn't say it doesn't exist. I wouldn't say that. I would say it exists in a middle way.

[45:53]

That's what I would say. You exist in a middle way. Little rocks that we do not know about right now on some planet that we do not know about. They exist. But they could exist with a little mental imputation. Because we've got the conditions, you just set the conditions up, at least theoretically. With some mental imputation, they would exist. However, the fact that things exist independent, the fact that all phenomena, phenomena again means something that's happening to a sense, phenomena are things that a sentient being is aware of. Okay? A rock bumping into a rock for the rock is not a phenomena. But when we see rocks bouncing, it's a phenomena for us because we see it. Phenomena do exist imputedly. They do.

[46:57]

They don't not exist at all. But things that, things that are, are anything that we don't know about yet, we don't put that in a category called non-existent. Non-existent at all. We don't do that. Things don't exist that not existing at all way. They also don't exist inherently. That's the way they exist. That's the way that rock on that planet exists. In the middle way. Namely, it's empty of inherent existence. It doesn't last and it isn't totally annihilated or not exist and never even arose. See, who's next? Sonia, maybe? Who knows? Sure. I have a question about...

[48:03]

A little change of energy, I don't know, but you mentioned that how we keep off the current events. Yes. And then the story I had with a student, right now, the current situation, right now, a student in New York. You have a student? In Iran. Yes. 5,000 students are in the jail at the time. Yes. And 9 lessons are supposed to be 10. Yes. Because of students, they were conditioned not to raise their words. So, how can I get this... existence of students and the dependence on whether it's the rule or whether it's happening, how I can translate this situation to relieve myself or to be healthier.

[49:17]

The situation you're describing exists imputedly. Right? For you, and now we hear about it, so in different ways it exists imputedly for all of us. I can't get to relieve them. Well, you start by not so much relieving them or you, but the process of liberation in this teaching is through developing and understanding that whatever phenomena you're talking about exists imputedly and does not exist inherently if you could understand deeply that the situation that you feel that you're feeling the existence of if you could understand deeply that this situation lacks inherent existence the process of relief of suffering would be initiated that can happen with meditation

[50:42]

This is meditation that I'm describing. He's meditating deeply on the perfect wisdom. In other words, he's meditating deeply on these teachings so that she can see, so that she can understand that phenomena, like sick people, like people who are in danger, of being killed or of being poisoned or of committing crimes and going to prison. All these endangered beings all over the planet. This wisdom is to relieve suffering of the meditator and the beings that are meditated upon. Practically speaking, it would be difficult at a distance to teach this teaching.

[51:47]

Anyway, I'm just saying, it may be difficult, this teaching, because it's difficult to understand, you know. But the point is, whatever situation we have, we work with it as best we can now. Some people may die before we finish the sentence we're saying to them. That may happen. We may die before we finish the sentence that's happened. But if the sentence could be finished someday, and it could be understood, then suffering could be relieved. And then we can go through these phenomenal changes of being born and dying, of being sick and healthy, of being treated kindly and being treated cruelly, of being murdered, of being born, of being murdered and being born. We can go through these processes and express wisdom and compassion right through it.

[52:53]

That's what this is being proposed here. is that if Avalokiteshvara was being murdered while doing this meditation, Avalokiteshvara would see that the phenomena of being murdered lacked inherent existence and suffering would be relieved while being murdered. That's what's being proposed here. And the beings who see a bodhisattva being killed could be liberated by the way the bodhisattvas dying or being killed. Because the bodhisattva has this wisdom, they are free. from all extreme views and therefore free of suffering. And this is the way they could teach under extremely horrific conditions. That's the idea. That they together with beings would be free. And this wisdom is the key to realizing this compassionate dream.

[53:55]

If I ask you to give a message, right now you're talking to those students. Yes. I want to give you two sentences today. Two? Two sentences. Here, you're Reverend Anderson, and I want to interview you and give a message to the, like, 12 million students. 12 million. 12 million students. You want something else? What do they want?

[55:03]

So I say, what do you want? So 12 million students are going to tell me what they want? Is that what the 12 million people are going to say to me? I don't hear 12 million people saying that to me. Yeah, but I don't hear them saying that to me. Honestly, I don't hear them. So you can say what you want, but I don't hear them saying that they want freedom. can I help you to hear them? yeah how can you help me to hear them?

[56:06]

how about helping me hear you? I can hear you but I can't actually hear them and even sometimes if I some people I do hear when I hear them I don't think they want to hear anything from me so I don't say anything But when you talk, sometimes I think you want to hear something. So then I answer you. But I can't hear 12 million people in Iran. I'm sorry, I can't. But I can hear one person at a time, or I can hear 50 people at a time, but when I hear 50 people at a time, it's not clear to me exactly what they want me to say, but I still may say something like louder.

[57:09]

All I know how to do is work with what's happening, you know? And so if you're talking about 12 million people talking to me, I don't have an experience of that. If someone could tell me, well, 12 million people are talking to a Reb, well, it's not a phenomenon for me. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, okay? And I'm not saying it inherently exists. I'm just saying it doesn't imputedly exist for me. I don't know how to practice with it. But I do know how to practice with what's happening in the room. Yes. It's so a different experience for me because it's just like a feeling that I'm over for 20 years. Yes. And then I know how compassionate. It's just not the word. But I have a feeling right now to have no compassion.

[58:16]

Right. So are you surprised? Yes. No, I'm not. You're not surprised. No, I'm not surprised. I don't know. You're not surprised? You want to take me to someplace, and I don't know how to go to that place. That's the way we're playing right now, take us someplace. That's good. Thank you. No. So I don't know where to go because I know it's not the way you're going to answer. Okay, who cares? If you don't hear that voice, then I'm not going to say any more. I'm not compassionate with the whole race. That's good enough. Yeah, I could imagine that. That my response didn't seem compassionate. I'm not saying well, but it really is.

[59:17]

Jeff? If a mind really has no, without apprehending anything, without grasping, trying to understand what to say, Daddy. A mind without grasping? I would think a mind without any grasping is like being in deep, dreamless sleep. You're alive. You're conscious. You're swimming, independent core rising. but your mind's not apprehending anything, therefore nothing exists. Nothing's like being brought into existence. Even, there's not even a conventional existence for you in that space. So we do spend part of our life in this realm.

[60:28]

Like when you're in, when you go into deep, dreamless sleep. You're alive, you know, your nervous system's keeping your heart going and all that. You're actually getting a really good rest Your chakras are getting real lined up. Your fatigue is dropping away. You're like in bliss, actually. However, I say you're in bliss, but I'm looking at you from awake dreaming. I'm dreaming of you in bliss. But you are not in the realm of things existing. What's happening? What? Rehearsal of a play? What play?

[61:32]

Okay. Well, yeah, the reason why I asked that was because, you know, of course... I don't want to say of course... But the person, the person in this soup, for them, there's no phenomena. They're just dependently co-arising. But it's not, they're not aware of this, you know. It's like there's no, things aren't located or identified, but they're alive. We do live that way. Actually, all the time, you are living that way. Actually, every moment, you're living in an unidentified way. unlocated life state. That's not the middle way exactly. The middle way is that that state, in that state there's an absence of any projection of self. That's the middle way. The middle way is not just the way you are.

[62:40]

It's the way you are which avoids the extremes. It's the way you are so that somebody carts in extremes, you say, no, thank you. So you can actually live in the world of extremes without clinging to them and then liberate suffering. So the middle way isn't just our natural state. It's our natural state in the way that avoids extremes, which cause suffering. It's our natural liberating state. rather than just our natural non-thinking state. We do have a natural non-thinking state, though. But we need more than non-thinking state. We need wisdom. So just the state of not apprehending things is, we got it already, it's not sufficient. And there is emptiness there, but we need to understand it in order to stop believing but things that come to exist through our imputations.

[63:43]

And you're right on the verge of it now. Yes, Jeff? A little extra one. Is that okay with you, Diego? Is it okay with you, Elena? Any other questions outstanding? Yvonne, is it okay with you, Yvonne, if Jeff gets another one in there? Yeah, go ahead, Jeff. That's a spirit. For liberation, I get the impression that what's needed is to experience the Septuius. Yes. And that's because we're like on a stage of like Roger, we could do something like that. You can experience things two ways, though. One way is indirectly and the others directly. Even in the indirect way is the one you're preparing for right now through this class.

[64:48]

But the direct way will be... As part of the Bodhisattva career, I said at the beginning of the class, part of the thing about this text is the motivation to actually attain Buddhahood. which would include that you would have a direct experience of emptiness in order to most fully enable yourself to benefit beings. But before we get to direct experience, we get to indirect experience, which comes through our study together. That's wisdom, too. It's just that it's not as profound as the direct. But it is an experience. And that experience, I think, has to be independent of having hands on it or something. The experience has to be independent? The understanding of emptiness. I think it doesn't involve my mind in the way that you've been speaking of it. Well, in a sense... I'm trying to understand how is that possible to experience emptiness.

[65:54]

Once again, just to say these three characters, you know, the other dependent character of things, okay, it actually, in a sense, it is dependent on the imputational character because the imputational character is, you know, its partner. It's just that the imputational character should not be taken as the other dependent character. So if you have this phenomena called wisdom, the actual other dependent character of the wisdom shouldn't be confused with any ideas you have about what wisdom is. And in this particular case, the kind of wisdom we're talking about is understanding that any kind of conceptual grasping is absent in the actual other dependent nature of your wisdom. There's something there.

[66:59]

But independent is not correct. It isn't that the other dependent is independent of the imputation of independence. It's not independent of it. It's actually dependent on it. It's just that things that you're dependent on, they can be absent in you. You can depend on things which are absent in you. And your other dependent character is dependent on various kinds of conceptual grasping, which are not in your other dependent character. I have a feeling, whatever it is, intuition or something, that what you're talking about is not something you conceptualize, and it has to be realized experientially. So how's that? Part of the, what do you call it, part of the conditions for certain kinds of wisdom are conceptual training.

[68:02]

But the wisdom is not a concept, is not conceptualization. That's in that, sort of that, where else? Just like, pardon? Where's the intake now for that? So what, what? What's the entity then? It's like we talked about mind and while we're saying, well, the mind's not something to, I don't know, don't be fooled by it. Don't be fooled by the mind? Uh-huh. So, there must be something else that is able to perceive that's not the mind. Something other than the mind that's able to perceive? I don't know about something other than the mind. Perfect wisdom is a kind of mind. It's a mind that understands emptiness. It is a mind. But it's a mind which understands that things, the dependent phenomena actually, that they're empty.

[69:15]

of any imputation even though their existence depends on imputation and actually because their existence depends on imputation that's also part of the reason why they're empty of imputation they're empty of existing apart from imputation which is the same as saying that they're empty of imputation there's an experience that informs our conclusion pardon? there's an experience that informs our conclusion Well, yes, this has to be based on an experience. There is an experience that's the basis of verifying that the experience actually has a character of being dependent in which there is not a self. And that experience, if it's not, if you experience something that's not in the mind, is that not conventional reality or that It's not really that you're experiencing something that's not in the mind because that's another thing is that you don't have experiences which are like independent of the mind.

[70:21]

It's another little twist on this. That's also another approach to this is to realize that the selflessness of things is that things are not out there separate from the mind which knows them. That's another take, another way to approach this. is that that's an illusion that there's really a substantial separation between the mind and what it knows. It's another road to this perfect wisdom. Another road to realizing emptiness. Diego? I'm not sure. What I was going to say, you kind of, talked about, you know, I know that I wanted to take more time, but one thing that came up is, like, a synonym of inherent existence, I thought, was separation. Yeah, but, you know,

[71:23]

For something to have an inherent existence, it would have to be separate, and there isn't anything that's separate. I don't think that separation is quite a synonym for inherent existence. It's rather that a separation between things that depend on each other is a synonym for inherent existence. I'm just saying that separation doesn't quite do it for me as a synonym for inherent existence. It's rather separation between things that depend on each other. That would be inherent existence. So when there's a dependency and you nullify that dependency by separating these things, then you're saying this exists independent of that. So mind Knowing and known depend on each other. When you separate them, then you say the known exists independent of the knowing.

[72:28]

So then you say it has an inherent existence. Just separation between things wouldn't necessarily be inherent existence, because you could have a separation without, like, we could say there's a separation between you and me, but not see that as, you know, nullifying our dependency. You know, I could say, I really, I totally depend on you, you totally depend on me, and we're separated by eight feet. That doesn't necessarily set up inherent existence. Vivan? Emptiness is not impermanent. Correct. So you want to bring that up at the beginning of that class? Okay.

[73:29]

So just your mind to discuss it. It's somewhat important to deal with this issue of that issue. Elena, you want to name your thing? I was very affected in this way by your assertion that we don't know what will happen and that that's one of the doors to our salvation. And I would like to talk to you about that. Okay. All right. Well, Thanks for coming to class tonight. And wisdom work is difficult. because it's opening up, you know, a totally different way of seeing the world, little by little.

[74:34]

So it's hard. And I appreciate you coming to try to train your body and mind to a new way of understanding life. So we'll continue, I guess. At least I'll be here next week if I can make it.

[74:56]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_89.91