But in this book here, a little bit of emptiness is applied. And a lot of criticism of this, of the Abhidharma, has been talking about something which is actually just, you know, not necessary even to say. For example, you don't have to specify the nirvana thing. Because nirvana is actually just a bunch of other stuff that's not there. and so on. So this system of Bausaka says that each one of these 75 dharmas are real things that actually have some substance to them and you can't, you can actually get a hold of them. And then the next word, the next karaka is sometimes with possession.

[01:04]

And here's trying to distract the point. This character is usually means to acquire or obtain. In the heart, it just says, there isn't any of this. In emptiness, there isn't any of this. There's no property. In this system, all these drājas can be prompted. D-R-A-V-Y-A, Dravya. Dravyas can be acquired.

[02:24]

That's what you can actually get a hold of in avidharma. Propti, the gerund. Jaren is going to act like an adjective. Can you say a running horse? So you can say a property driver. A property driver.

[03:28]

Do you understand this point? This is kind of a fundamental thing. This school. That these real things you can get a hold of. You can't get a hold of unreal things. You can't get a hold of it. You don't actually get a hold of Cadillacs. You say you do. But really you don't. But you actually, that's a whole bunch of, you gain a hold of something like that. It's actually just you say you do that. In other words, you designate that you do that. For lack of a better description, you say that, you talk like that. But actually that experience you're talking about is a whole bunch of other experiences that really happen. He's just saying you have to do something.

[04:30]

Well, he's talking about that way for convenience called prajñāpti. So prajñāpti is good. It impacts concentrating your jāvya. We're talking about possession of... Both possession and acquisition. Possessive. Okay. So, practically, ours applies to a personal stream. Intercept. but they're personal stream, personal series.

[05:30]

So the properties are pulling their personal series. It does sound like, it does sound like a self. And I found that a number of other people pointed out that it looks like a property actually secretly or surreptitiously replaces the self. Draghi means substance, real substance. Right. Among the conditioned dharmas, those that are integral to living beings are generated necessarily with profit.

[06:38]

that is related to each one of them. For others, there is no property. That is why the stanza says sometimes. So not all dharmas have properties. But only dharmas can be property. Some dharmas don't go into personal series, property doesn't apply to them. There can be no acquisition of them. No acquisition into a personal series. But in fact, if they can't be acquired into a personal series, then it's not important. We only care about what can be acquired into a personal series. It isn't or it is?

[07:55]

Is it clear to somebody? Yes. I have a question. She said, what dharmas aren't equal in interpersonal series? Is there a class? Is that what you said? Well, any dharma could not be included into a personal series. And if it isn't, then it doesn't have a property. So all these dharmas, if they aren't included into a personal series, they don't have a property. Now, are there some dharmas which are never included into a personal series? Would there be some diamonds that are never included into a personal series?

[08:58]

Can you think of any diamonds that would never be included in a personal series? What do you think? Do all sorts of diamonds never included into a personal series? What do you think? say so, but do you think that they are? What? But can they not be included in a personal series? What, but they cannot be? Well, I mean, cannot be is not ye away. Do you think that it's not, or do you think it is?

[10:03]

Well, in Buddhism we say, actually, that vāna can't be attained by human beings. There's not a person there because there's no, you know, but it's a personal series. In other words, a person, a person attains it, you can see the person attaining it, like Buddha attained it, right? Well, there's still a human being left for a while. If he attains it, what definition? Yeah. Well, I don't know exactly.

[11:23]

It literally says living being, right? And... It says sattva kya. So maybe better to use that word right now. And sattva kya means that there's javita indriya, that there's life. So for living beings, what is brought into the stream of a living, that's what property is related to it. And so according to this system, they say that there is a property for nirvana. There is a property for nirvana.

[12:26]

Nirvana can be attained by a living being. But I haven't heard what they say about space. I never heard space being attained but Nirvana of course they want to be able to attain it for the Arhat to attain it so the Arhat can possess it the Arhat doesn't make it you don't produce Nirvana but you can possess it in fact Nirvana is not made but can be possessed It's non-existent, but you can merge with it. It's non-existent, but you can merge with it. It's not non-existent either, and you can attain it.

[13:30]

It's not called in either of those two categories. It doesn't burn and it doesn't go away, but it can be attained. Because after all, it just means freedom. You can attain freedom, it says. Freedom from the other kinds of stuff that comes and goes. You can bring freedom into a personal series that seems to be made of things that come and go. You see, you can bring something that's free of coming and going or birth and death into a system that's, you know, involved in birth and death. So you don't have to make birth and death non-existent in order to attain that which is free from existence and non-existence.

[14:34]

In fact, non-existence Although at the moment you attain non-existence, you're free. Still non-existence after it's attained is not free. So when you first become non-existence, at that moment you become free of existence. In a sense, because of that you attain nirvana. But then when there is non-existence, non-existence is vulnerable. to becoming existence again. So non-existence is not nirvana. If there's existence, then liberation from existence is nirvana. If there's non-existence, then liberation from non-existence is nirvana. And nirvana is actually existence. It's freedom from both. And it can be attained. And then...

[15:45]

there can be apparent alternations between existence and non-existence and nirvana, and there's no significant change. And this fact, this way of existence and non-existence, which is free of existence and non-existence, can be attained. According to this, school is not teaching that an emptiness has no attainment. This school is teaching that in the case of liberation from arising and falling in dharmas that you attain nirvana in that case and that's a function of wisdom wisdom sees the arising and falling in dharmas in such a way that it's free of that arising and falling and that makes possible the acquisition of this thing called nirvana Yes?

[16:48]

Of attaining without possession? Anything that's generated that's not included in a personal series or acquired by, included in life in a living being's world. Okay. For example, this is a realistic school, right? So, those kind of, one division in the world is between what's called the receptacle world and the world of being. The world of being is this thing down here, that Thatvakya, do you hear that? Thatvakya. The other one's called Bhajana Loka. And those two the world of being and the receptacle world, the external physical world, like mountains and stuff, that sometimes are not included in the personal series.

[17:56]

They exist. They follow the same rules. These two kinds of rules that exist in things follow. They're impermanent. They're ill. They're not self. They have a rising duration, deterioration and extinction. but they're not included in a person's series. Therefore, they have no property. But they could be property. But everything that's not acquired into some person's series at that moment does not have property. And some things are generated. According to this, that means something happened. Are generated and are not included. That means they happen to go away. postulates existence that has no relevance. But it still may be so.

[18:58]

So our system is going to be created and if they happen fast enough nobody will know about it. How do you practice non-acquiring? Buddhism is the practice of non-acquiring.

[20:16]

But non-acquiring of what is the point? non-acquiring of the characteristics of a, what we call, protagena, is what we're trying to do. Protagena. And you want a non-acquire, You want to not acquire these qualities. This is the qualities of the common person. And you need, at the same time, you can not acquire these. You acquire characteristics of the Aryan, except like

[21:27]

entering the Buddhist path he acquired these qualities which means he dropped these qualities but it doesn't mean that you don't still you have perception and feeling and a number of the other dharmas that we will discuss so dharmas accounts for me being acquired and dropped and non-acquired, possessed and not possessed. And the pattern of, and one of them, by the way, is greed, or lust, attachment, craving. So, it's not just that we want to sort of non-acquire everything, because that would be non-existence, and that wouldn't do us any good. that's vulnerable to acquiring some other stuff too so that's why I don't know what do you call it wholesale wiping out is not recommended because what happened as a result of that is wholesale grabbing later and once you grab later maybe a worse system than the one you just dropped probably it will be

[22:53]

So join a program that will produce a full-scale wipeout. Your desire to do that would get you in big trouble. Not to mention anybody else who's in the program. So if you excuse the examples, you have some current examples that the country's worried about, right? do Jones thing. There was some big wipeout there, but what came back in place of that was probably worse than before. Part of it's good, maybe, you know. You sweep away a lot of garbage. A person can do A, B, and C that they couldn't do before that are really nice. But since it's the

[24:00]

It's a made-up system, sort of on the spot. There's all these big holes. And when it comes to coping with the intricacies of life, which we've carefully learned how to do over the years, you have sort of a wild person in those areas. Do you know what I'm talking about? His ego system was put together very carefully by trial and error. And it sort of works. It works for days and days and years and years with no major terrible lapses for most people. And in fact, the people who do have the major lapses are often people who, not that they're such bad people, but

[25:01]

They're usually people who either didn't have the opportunity to or had too much energy to take on a full-fledged system. So it's not that they're so bad, but just that they come up against some situation and they want something and they just don't have any alternatives than to just do whatever's necessary to have that thing like a child. Until you do it, but since you're adults, it can be very serious. Anyway, that's why we don't want it sort of being just the practice of wiping out stuff. That's not the point. Of non-acquisitionist things. The opposite of property in a general way. So generally what we do is we try to acquire good dharmas, which will simultaneously mean the dropping of other ones.

[26:12]

So we try to build an effective meditation system, which in fact drops a bunch of other stuff, which isn't necessary once you have these things. But then just knock stuff out. Once it's knocked out, who knows what will come in its place. Okay? That's generally the point of view. And if someone's got a strong system, then sometimes things are knocked out. Whatever, you know, just all you've got to do is make a hole, and it'll be helpful. But that's in someone who's got a very strong ego structure. That's good for them. Any other questions on propthi? Propthi will be discussed in detail later under the Otham scriptodermis.

[27:16]

Propthi is not associated with mind. It's not a mental function. It's rather a function by which the mind works. It's not a mental function itself, but rather a function by which the mind works. It's something that explains how the mind works. Did I say aslamskripti? No, it's chitta samprayukta, right? Like these, these samskara lakshinas are not mental functions, but they're characteristic of the mental dharmas and all the dharmas. And in fact, if the dharmas didn't work like that, uh, well, I don't know, you could say, you could make up all kinds of silly things, like you'd have all the perceptions building up, you know, in a big pile.

[28:21]

You know, and you'd just experience it would get thicker and thicker. You'd have all the feelings you ever had would still be hanging around. When you're new to it, you could just sort of be one more feeling in a big pile. But because of, because of that, that dharmas have this characteristic, all of them, actually you're fresh, every moment you have fresh things set, the mental experiences, new feelings, new perceptions, new desires. But those, those characteristics are not mental characteristics. Even though the characteristics of mental phenomena, They're not particularly associated with the mind. They're associated with also these, you know, so-called external objects. Mountains also follow the same rule and colors and so on. Yes? Sir, last part, beginning at the end of what we were talking about, like, fishing equipment, and

[29:32]

Well, you grab that cup, so it made me think that you have a property for that cup. you make that cup coming into your system, into the life system there, all right? Yeah. But the wall behind you isn't, or it is for me, because I can see it. And in fact, not only do I see it, but I take it in, in this particular case. I wouldn't have to, though, and you wouldn't have to see the cup. So, what point is it? at the moment well there's past, present and future properties too but in particular if function as an ingredient in your experience is when the property is in the present when actually it is then the property is in the present and you have acquired it you've attained it plus you possess it well it may not be an object of consciousness

[31:06]

For example, anger may not be the object of your consciousness, but you may be angry. At the moment you're angry, you may not be conscious of it, but it is part of the nature of your consciousness. In other words, it may not be an object of your cognition, but it may be an element of your cognitive totality. We've run over that in this class, The cognitive totality is one thing, and the field of perception is a small section in that. Okay? So, anyway, I'm just saying you don't necessarily know it. Just because something's property doesn't mean you know it, in a sense of that it's object of perception. But... In some sense, it's related to mind.

[32:10]

I would say that at any given moment, there's a whole complement of physical objects, supposedly an existent world, physical world, right? And at any given moment, only a certain part of it has a property for you. Only a certain part of the physical world is infringing upon you, or maybe not any of it. It's possible to be in certain meditations where none of it, you don't have a property for any of it. So the Dharma arises with these characteristics. If you're in the arupia jhanas, the world supposedly exists. It's basically coming up and going away like this. And you're sitting in meditation. But there's no property for that world for you. And if everybody in the world was in that trance, then the mountains would come up and go away.

[33:14]

Although maybe mountains isn't a good example. It was better to fix something that happens faster. But certain things would come up and go away, and no one would know about them. They wouldn't come into anyone's personal series. When they do come into personal series, then they're acquired. Not necessarily cognize, because you can't cognize. Certain things can't be cognized. I'm still trying to find a point. Even some things Some of the awesome script of dharmas, although they're not associated with mind, can be brought into personal series. You can't cognize them. For example, life force. Well, actual life force is not something you cognize.

[34:18]

It's not part of the mind. But it comes in your personal series. So what you're trying to do works part of the time. In other words, sometimes the things that are prompted are brought into a personal series or into a life series. And sometimes they're known to consciousness and sometimes they're known to consciousness in a particular way called perception. So the smallest section of what we're talking about is those things which you're perceiving at the moment. That's just one thing. There's a whole bunch of other things which you're conscious of in a sense that they are the shape of your consciousness. But there's some other things which you have properties for which aren't that shaping your consciousness, like life force. And there's some other things which are existent, which have come up, but you don't have properties for. But those things, okay, got that?

[35:22]

Now, some of those things which you don't have properties for could be known to you, or could even be objects of perceptions, but they aren't right now. So does that certainly make sense? No. Let's see. This is a big thing here called this hot, but yeah, I don't know. Sattva Kyaan. Sattva Kyaan is not totally filled by consciousness.

[36:25]

So inside of here is the mind. Javina Luria is not, quickly speaking, part of mind. But it's part of the living series. You have to have it for your life. It's something that the mind can figure out is there. We can use it in order to make the whole thing make sense. But part of this system, it's not something you think about. You think about it, but it's not something with your mind that you know. And then there's an external world, which is brought by .

[37:31]

Just call those sound, spells, and taste. That's external. And then there's a world of OF ORDANS, ALSO NOT MINE. AND THEY HAVE SOME LOCATION. YOU COULD PUTTING RIGHT HERE, PEOPLE. YOU COULD PUT THEM ON THE FRONTIER OF THE LIVING SYSTEM. they do on the location. But you can't, but they're not, they're not, they're not like, they don't just put on it here, though.

[38:44]

See, in the sense, in the sensitive tissue that you could have surrounding the living system, but it's not the cell on the outside, but the cell on the outside. Because, but it could be right on the inside, too. Somehow, anyway, it relates to the, to the other, to the external. But actually, external might be in the middle here in some place. The external might be located in the center. See, it might have all the external place in the middle here, and then have a sensitive tissue on the outside here, and then it relates out to the mind, which surrounds it. Or it might not be a certain sayings because they're outside, geographically speaking, but only logically speaking. So but if now I put it out here, the origin is the ability for the consciousness to relate to this world here of material things which could be its objects, this material spirit which could be its objects.

[39:59]

Yes. Is that the circuits in your mind? No, I just said you could put whatever you want to. I just wanted to say something other than mind in the personal series called Life Force. But actually, it's confusing the whole area. I drew it that way to show that the mind is not something in between, but the mind, that the totality of the Life Force, I mean, the Push series. part of the system, because there's some things that, in a personal series, must be empty. They're not associated with the mind. And there's a property to that. It brings that life force into a personal series. Without that life force, there's no personal series. There's no living being. Are you seeing property in the sense that you want people? Acquisition of life cares?

[41:10]

Ah, propti would mean that you acquire a certain desire. You acquire a certain state of consciousness by which you're born. See, propti only gets done, gets draught, right? And there's no draughty called birth. There's this birth, the birth of dying. The birth of a person is a complex totality called a moment of consciousness. It's a whole moment of consciousness in a certain shape. All the dharmas that compose the shape of that moment of consciousness, each one of them is acquired. We acquired this one that would write little combinations of defilement, and perception, and various impulses, and so on. A certain type, at a certain time, between births and deaths and so forth.

[42:19]

That consciousness itself is also proctored, is also acquired. But just acquiring a consciousness with the desire to be born, you have to be in an immediate realm and so on to get born. So we're not talking about proctored. talking about the acquisition of dharmas. With many of these acquisitions, you have a full moment of consciousness or a whole moment of experience happening. But a moment of consciousness is just a moment of life. A moment of consciousness, we say moment of consciousness, but a moment of consciousness does not mean that everything that happens is conscious. So maybe we say a moment of existence or a moment of experience. Some of that experience is conscious, and some of it is perceptual.

[43:24]

So this circle here will say, this is the conscious extent of moment of existence. And within that is the realm of perception. A small section will be the realm of perception. Perception is that activity in the totality of consciousness and in the totality of life and existence, which is the ability of this conscious sphere to relate to one of these objects out here or one of these objects in here. And that's through the capacity of the organ. So if it's one of these objects out here, this conscious sphere Relating to this and using one of the other things in here called perception to mark it.

[44:27]

Another one called sparship to have contact between this cognitive sphere, organ here, and the object. That combination is this little part here of what's going on. And there'll be property of this. There'll be property of this. There'll be property of the whole Consciousness, that would be property of perception, that would be property of contact, and that would be property of that's all. See, require the object, even though there's a whole bunch of other objects out here that will come up. Require this order. Require the consciousness. Require the perception. And that section of the acquisitions that you have is this event here. But also, there's a whole bunch of other emotions that may be going on, which are also quiet. Like that with concentration, directing the mind in certain ways.

[45:33]

Those are also quiet. And then there's a number of things which are not objects. which don't exist in the object realm. They aren't known to consciousness as perceptual objects that they never are. Except as concept, but when they're concepts, we don't mean by these, we don't mean them as concepts. Probably now we're talking about it as a concept. That's not what we mean by prompt. We mean that actual function when it happens. Just like the rising, the relation, and falling of the dharma is a concept we could talk about, but that's not the dharma they're talking about. They're talking about when it actually happens. There's something besides, they say, there's something besides just the idea of it.

[46:37]

But they figured out by their ideas that it exists, that it happens. And I think that doesn't exist aside from ideas. I have this feeling like you don't understand what we taught you. Gee, any questions about this drawing? Okay, well, this is the first major experience of prapti. And there it is, and it happens, if you see there, on Karaka 37b,

[47:46]

you'll run into it again, right? There is property, good, bad, and so on, for good, dumb, and so on. So, we will, when we get to the, I took the Vipra Yuta Samskars, have occasion to deal more with this, not to mention in the meantime, does anybody have a, a, Reading list. OK. Well, this section on the Chitta Thamskaras, Do you want me to mark here?

[48:53]

What basically is happening here, the most important thing that happens in this section here, you'll learn what the far action is, what the definitions of these dharmas are. How many are there? How many are there? What? Now how many chaita dharmas are there? Are there 34 or 36? 36. 36. So 36 diamonds here. And so basically you get the file options are given to you in these next 12 characters. And in some cases, like, for example, for character 24, you referred back to chapter 1, 14, which is also talked about there. So you can get more on them later on there. But still, these are rather brief.

[49:54]

We can talk about them in class, but you can also read about them. And the places that I would recommend that you read about them to find out their svalakshin is, more about their svalakshin is, are Styrbatsky, Central Conception of Buddhism. book which I don't see on this list which should be on here it's uh what is it called mind and Buddhist psychology now that book has had a little bit of a problem in it because the terms are in Tibetan but maybe you can figure out maybe you can exercise when you try to figure out what the Tibetans referring to and uh if you want aid in doing that do we still have do you have some people have those uh

[51:02]

those which you have English, Sanskrit, Pali, Tibetan, and Chinese. You know what I mean? We were selling for 25 cents a while ago. Or 75 cents. Do we have some available? Some should be in the reading room. Anyway, you can use that to read this book called Mind and Buddhist Psychology. Basically, He goes through there. Another good book is under the Theravadans, the Abhidhammata-sangaha of Anuruddha. He goes through there. Another book is Gunther.

[52:03]

philosophy and psychology of Abhidharma. Another one is Jnanapanakatera Abhidharma studies. Another one is Bisthutimloga on the chapter on skandhas. So in the chapter on skandhas he talks about the dharmas that go on the Thamskaraskanda. Under that heading almost all these diamonds which you, except for Vedana and Samna, will be included there, because they're all going to Samskar Skanda. Now the terms will be in Pali, but in Pali you should be able to, you know, you might as well start now trying to learn how to transmute Pali into Sanskrit or Sanskrit into Pali. They're not too difficult. So Visiri Magha, Abhidamata Sangha, Stavatsky, Central Conception of Buddhism, Gunther, Philosophy and Psychology of Abhidharma, Gunther, Mind and Buddhist Psychology, and what?

[53:14]

Abhidharma Studies. And then also, there's a book called Buddhist Dictionary, which, it's a little book, we have that in reserve, too. You can look them up in there. So anyway, with the aid of with the Abu Dhabha Kosha itself and with these various other books, also Kansa, Buddhist thought in India. With all those books, you should be able to basically figure out most of these yourself. So maybe we can go through it rather quickly in class. And if you read these other books, I think you understand fairly well on your own. So next time we'll just continue through this section. of chapter three. Thank you.

[54:59]

That meant the state sound meant the state symptoms. That actually meant the crime is taken from the idea of the person's screen. All that was good, folks. What you said is more general than what we said. What? One person asked me a question after class and made me think that he almost understood it.

[56:28]

So what we learned last time was that property relates to dravia diamonds. According to the Sarvastavadan, the 75 dharmas are all real things. And Blasavandi's point of view is that some of them are, some of them aren't. And we later had to deal with acquiring which is out and grabs it.

[57:53]

It passes it into the world called . The world of the sockets. The world of the beings. What proxy grabs to draw the adornments across the real thing and puts them in, brings them into, acquires them for a realm called , which is the realm of . Well, first of all, you get this. Write this down. Write this down.

[59:02]

OK. Now we'll talk about . The beak. Now this circle is called satsakya. And inside this circle, in a small circle. And this circle is called chitta chitta. I take this right chitta. Because you know that chitta necessarily arises with that character, right? If this is chitta circle, it's also chitta circle. Chitta can be considered the circumference and the chitta in a sense. What?

[60:03]

Chitta can be considered as inside of it. Chitta has an embracing aspect. But that's just a way of talking because we just let them come up together so in a sense they embrace each other. But it's easy to draw. It's hard to draw a picture of one of the mental dharmas including all the other ones. the language of Abhidharma doesn't talk about like to take Veda and to draw a circuit called Veda and put Chitta inside of it and perception of Thamni inside of it and Chaitanya inside of it and Shraddha inside of it or Shrabdi inside of it doesn't make sense so it goes against the language of the Abhidharma but to draw a circle called Chitta and to put these mental Dharmas inside sort of it goes along with the language of the Abhidharma chitta and these other ones.

[61:03]

So chitta, part of the meaning of chitta is that it's a category for all these other functions. So you can draw a circle that way, but in some sense it doesn't make sense to call it a circle because it's also one of the things in the circle. It's its own function too. Anyway, so that's the world of my human state. So there's an area here which is living beings but not mind and mental states. And then there's an area out here which is not living beings. And one thing that's out here, so can you think of things that are out in here that are living beings but not mind and mental states? What's out here that has to do with living beings, but not minding themselves, fingers and fingers?

[62:12]

Prakti? Yeah, right. Do you need any injuries out here? Prakti? Prakti? I don't know where property is, but property definitely relates to it. Property fills this space. I don't know if you can say property is in this space, but property has intimate negotiations with this space because property makes this space. Property makes this whole space. It also makes this space. So property is here and here. So property fills this whole thing, so property also has a relationship here. So if someone's involved here, So you need an area, one, and then the sense faculties that you sense an area, right?

[63:24]

Eye organ, eye area, ear area, nose area, and so on. Why are they out here? Anybody know why they're up here? They're not a mental state. They're a root one, right? So they don't belong in there. Why are they in here, not up here? They're part of the personal street. They're part of the personal street. Anybody not understand that? Yes? So, in this sense, there's an external world, you know, there are rocks and trees, not trees, tree-building beings, too, in this sense.

[64:34]

But I guess trees are the objects. All the rupas go out there. All the rupas, all the vishayas. The vishaya of the English go about there. The field of activity of the sense faculty goes in. It's outside . Not direct to property, does that make sense? Does that make sense in terms of property? Because property requires objects for personal series. But these objects are not for personal series that are shared. Everybody has access to this round.

[65:36]

This round is called Pajama Loka. Pajama Loka. The receptacle world. And it doesn't go into personal theory. It doesn't belong into personal theory. And it's not due to personal karma. Although I contributed to it, and I have access to it, it's not all my duty. We all contributed to it. We all have access. So we don't have a problem to play that scale. Is it in relation to particular leadership? a particular individual? Well, there's not really an individual, but there is a particular person still in mind.

[66:44]

There isn't really a thing that, you know, in a different mind that does not affect personality personally. But over time, You could see a series, and you could see a series somehow. You could do that. You could see a lineage of the doctor's coming. The doctor related to the fact that you're going to see a lineage of eye, eye organ, eye object, eye organ, sense, object of the lung, visible, and visual That's what they call it. That's what they call it. Finds a doctor with . See, you can see it one.

[67:46]

Probably relate to one reason. Another one, a very second one, you see it. You see it very tricky, but you can take it yourself. Sometimes talk to you, sometimes people say talk to you in a way to do all the work that a self would do. Actually, this theory is not a self. You don't have to think of it that way. You can see it, but not take it that way. When you have a system that relates to the stream, it's not a self. Prakti is a dharma in this system which tries to make sense of our theory in the face of permanence.

[69:09]

What does he have a special? Well, because karma is not dharma. Karma is a whole. Karma means acts. That's all our actions. Our actions are the whole of dharma. This is kind of like the microscopic level of action. You can see some unentendings of action in this Dharma. Later, when you study karma, you'll see the kind of thing. Something like this would be one of the lines of thought by other people. It's true that the more basic and real thing is interacting that way. as to render themselves, or be able to estrue as action, as content.

[70:42]

So, what Vasubhanda says, this is not the argument. Who's looks like you? You don't understand what? You don't understand what you're talking about. I understand what you're talking about. Profty talked about the mechanism by which dhammas are brought into this. This is a realm called living, right? Into the esophage. Profty brings a real thing into this realm. On the things of the dhammas. Into the realm of...

[71:44]

Can you hear me? But they're not. They don't all, they're not there all the time. So we'll bring up today's question. David, what Richard and Jay brought up was, I said, all diamonds will ride with their lobsters, right? So at any given moment, we'll go to diamonds. So all diamonds will ride with their lobsters. There's some with property, okay? So let's just say, if this is a gojag here in this diagram, just say that all this stuff out here are diamonds, OK?

[72:52]

These are diamonds, these little squiggled. So these diamonds come up, OK? So all diamonds come up, they're watching with everything on this board except the circles. All little squiggled words and stuff, they're diamonds, OK? And they all come up with their loxians. Each one of them have loxians. All right? They all have their general loxians, and they all have their own specific loxians. Is that OK? That's the part? Then, some have property. OK? Which ones have property? Which ones on the board have property? These and these have property. Do you understand that?

[73:54]

These have property and these don't. There are different numbers. This is, for example, this is blue. This doesn't have property. This is the eye organ. This does have property. This is the, this is one of the lakshnas, one of the viprayu samskaras out here. This one here, let's see. Of the lakshna, the viprayu samskara dharma called arising, okay? That's out here. Okay? It does not prompt you. Because it's, it's the characteristic of all dharmas, not just personal series dharmas. It doesn't strictly belong in personal series. So you could say it's out there. So it doesn't have prompt. Yeah, prompt is a mechanism by which some diamonds get brought into the little world of beings.

[75:00]

But then Jay's question was, is that another way to say that not all diamonds arise in a given moment? Okay. Did you hear that? He said, is what Richard said about As some are, as Shropkin, some are inside the world of beings. That's the same thing. Not all diamonds arise at any moment. It's a little bit different. No. No. No. Only the ones that could go in the world of living beings doesn't probably bring into the world of beings.

[76:04]

But there's some that can exist in the world of living beings. that don't exist in the world of living beings sometimes. That's sort of part of what you're thinking about. Not all diamonds of candles to the world of living beings are put into the world of living beings every moment. Only some are available. And property is a mechanism by which they describe the fact that only some are brought into the world of living beings at a given moment. You forgot it? It's not relevant anymore? What I understand is, in order to say that it's specific, you have to be talking about a specific living being, or are you talking about a something, which is... See what I mean? Probably relates to a particular living being, but you could say in general what kind of things would go into living beings.

[77:10]

Okay. So, like we can say, for example, that Chaitana only makes sense for mind, and mind only makes sense for living beings. There's no mind aside from living beings. If there's no Javita Indriya, we don't have consciousness. There's no lightless consciousness, it turns out. When you die, you lose Javita Indriya, okay? But according to this system, then there's another thing that you can see in this series later, which is another form of existence, which also has Javita injury. So I know of no consciousness without Javita injury. In other words, there's no lifeless consciousness. In other words, according to this consciousness, it's biological. on the next day.

[78:14]

But we saw that too, right? Consciousness arises out of materiality. The organ and the operation of the organ in the field of the organ gives rise to the consciousness. Now you can have mental consciousness, it's true. But mental consciousness also needs life force. So you can die, but if that's it, that's it, that's fine. But there may be a theory. There's still some karmic effect, some projected power from the karmes that are done with this, in this sadhpa kyaa here. By the way, there's many sadhpa kyaa, right? This sadhpa kyaa, many people could be in this sadhpa kyaa, right? But probably, so maybe another to carry, to make it a little bit more complicated, And you have, you have like this.

[79:18]

These are different kinds of beings, okay, within this realm. This is a whole, this is a whole universe that's true. But property will bring dharmas into the mind or into the body. of individuals, but they all share the same misophage aspects. Then if one of these beings dies, they may die and they lose your being injured. But as far as I know, when they lose your being injury up here, they also lose consciousness here. However, however they have done, while being a living being projects. And then you can see a series where another being will be born, which is related to the being in some way, by a comic track.

[80:29]

And this is a little bit sort of off the track where we're talking about. But I just wanted to understand it a little bit better now, this topic and property and stuff. Later, again, we'll study property in Part 37 of the chapter. So we'll talk to you more. Any other questions on this topic at this point? Pour out. It has, it must have the samanyal lakshinas. It must have, it must have those lakshinas. Those, excuse me, I'm not going to call those samanyal lakshinas. I'm going to call those the asamskripta.

[81:33]

It must have the asamskripta lakshinas, right? The vipayuta samskara is called the asamskripta lakshinas. Do you know? The arising, decay, and destruction. Do you see those? Those must be out there. They don't belong to living beings only. So those must be out there. At least share it. They must be out there and in . Well, awesome scriptural dharma is based on space, I think, to go out there. Awesome scriptural dharma would certainly, in a sense, be out there because they don't arrive, you know, but they're always there. And if you don't experience nirvana, you don't have a property for it.

[82:36]

If you haven't acquired nirvana, they're outside the personal series, too. If you don't experience in your body and mind nirvana, then nirvana is outside you, too. But it could be inside you. So nirvana could be brought into the personal series. The other sense objects were into the personal series. The same with nirvana. What? Well, it seems like there's... I was putting something else. You have five sense objects outside there. The personal series... Even if you say you bring sense objects in, you only bring one. And the rest of them, that's a very small percentage. Like right now, we can't see Siberia. But we can call somebody up to the telephone and hear something they can describe and say, yes, we have quite a bit of snow here. So the Tavastavadan system is a realistic school. So they say there actually are things out there, even if we're not pulling them in.

[83:44]

There is a real world. that exists independent of our mind, but once again, exists independent of our mind and in the category of rupa. I can think of Siberia now and then I have a mental object, but I can't see it. Are you adopting rupa or are you adopting consciousness? And you said you couldn't prompt it in the internal looker? Well, sense consciousness really is all three. I mean, there's no meaning of sense consciousness aside from its activation by the organ and object being in contact with it. So when you have, if this is a sense consciousness of an external object, a color, for example, then I think you could say that you have that object has been brought into the world of beings at that time.

[84:53]

But then we're sort of saying in this system, they're saying there's a world out there, outside of the world of living beings, that has an existence. And then all those things can be brought in at some point. They're created by us, and we can bring them in. If there were enough beings, the whole thing could be inside the sattva-chattva in time, possibly, you know? This being could bring in that, this being could bring in that, this being could bring in that. But it's unlikely that the whole eternal universe could be brought into the realm of being at one time because the nature of karma is that karma has to... sort of a boundless expanse of mind, you know. Karma can create more than to cope with at a given time. So to physically bring in the whole universe is almost impossible to the world of being because the world of being conceives that it created the physical universe part of its boundlessness of its mind, you know.

[86:07]

So we've made it same, which is bigger than we can all experience at one time, which is, that's our experience, that we can't, we don't think we can get the whole galaxy galaxies upon galaxies into our collective consciousness at one time. We don't think we can do that if we think this way. If we think there's something out there aside from ourselves, then we don't think we're going to experience it. But we do think that we can experience the nature of the whole universe. Even one of us can feel the nature of the whole thing that's been created. Maybe it's illusion. If you thoroughly know the illusion by which the external thing is created, then we know the whole thing. But the individual... complexities, complex actions that gave rise to the external universe. You know, we can see that that's made in such a, you know, three times in ten directions. So we can't in one moment do what we can see we did over endless, you know, boundless culpas. Not to say that there were some other time, but mentally we think that way, so therefore we can't bring it in.

[87:11]

So that's why the external world couldn't be brought in, but we can bring in still an immense amount of it if there were a lot of us, or if somehow we had much more beings than we used to have. You increase the number of beings greatly, and you just find, you know, as many beings as there ever were referred to, you know, 1850, and as many beings as there ever were to 4 billion BC and so on like that, then that way, if you multiply the number of beings that there are times, the number of moments that there have been, and that was the number of beings that we've had, which would be much greater than the number of beings we ever had before. Organize it that way, don't we? The whole universe into the sattva kya, you know, mathematically could be possible. But you don't have to worry about it, because you individually wouldn't know that anyway. But you'd feel comfortable that the world of being was very dense, but anyway, whether they were bringing that stuff in or not, or whether it was organized, you'd feel there's a lot more people around than there was before.

[88:16]

There would be a lot more people. And then, once again, how would you know about those people? Because they'd be external to you. So if I could think of some other dominance that would be out here. I think properties out there are properties out here. See, our property is always out here. Our property is never in here. If our property is always pulling things out of personal series, our property creates this, in a sense. Our property is what takes stuff away from you, puts them outside around you. And then you can debate whether these are some of these transits that These three trances, the asamnika, asamnika, somapati, and neurotosomapati, these trances are inside but outside mind and mental states.

[89:21]

So they go out here with the organs. Let me at the mouth. of things that would be outside. Any other questions that we discussed? ... [...]

[90:56]

But now... And as I just said, some of these trance about human beings, it's human beings, they're alive, but you can't clearly say that they have money at that point. It's not exactly because they function in the sense because they have this... Because they've attained its trance, in some sense, they put themselves out of their ordinary... And to what extent Maybe a little off track I would talk about to what extent other forms of light do or do not have a mind. But they do have the nature. They do have warmth. Okay? They may not be as warm as human beings, but they have some warmth due to their light processing. I mean, what would make sense? I'm saying I don't feel right now that we can talk about what plants and animals do or do not have them on.

[92:08]

I don't want to say that. We're just talking about... What? About five o'clock. I don't know. [...] ... ... ... [...]

[93:27]

is operating and every mind every mind will tap into this world because every mind has some perception but there's a lot of a lot of mental activity that's outside the realm of perceptions most of the mental activity outside the realm of perception and this is the world that most people think is this is what conscious world what's human conscious world It's a realm of perception. Other realms are depending on their training where psychologists or musicians are meditating. They may be more or less aware of these other realms, but a lot of people only think this is the world. Everything else is just trouble, interfering with that world. This is the world. They want to be happy in this world. They want things to grow, their concerns are in this world.

[94:29]

So from that point of view, if there's anger out here, and anger should happen to promote their goals and aspirations in this world, that anger is something that they would consider probably as some kind of lucky force, unknown lucky force. Like if they're in a fight and all of a sudden Anger came in when you fight, and they wanted to win the fight, and they would say, gee, they wouldn't necessarily have known that they were angry because they aren't so much aware of things outside. Just because anger wasn't perceiving. On the other hand, if they were talking to someone, and anger came in and interfered with the conversation, and they would sort of say, gee, that conversation, what kind of bad? We're talking, and all of a sudden, they walked off. I wonder what happened. Maybe someone would say, well, something seems to have interfered. Your tone of voice changed and started talking very strangely.

[95:38]

Because you were actually doing a mathematical proof and all of a sudden you started saying all these nasty things and people in the class. They couldn't understand what you were saying. But, of course, that makes perfect sense if you see that just what What happens in this realm is just part of the whole picture, you know? If you're raging around and doing things like that, it may be that in this realm, this realm would be severely influenced. And so you'll notice things may go rather strange. I think that's all that's happening. Very mysterious horses will affect. So a lot of people think it's funny that they get used to like if they don't. And Bury said, how come people are talking and they say different things from what they intended to say? Strange. Why should that be? So to a certain extent, he's unconscious. We don't have an unconscious here, except for this unconsciousness, Samadhi, which is not really an unconscious.

[96:44]

It's just a lot of what in West is called unconscious. It's what we've done with Buddhist psychology called outside the realm of perception, which is toward the conscious, and that's actually most of what we're doing and most of what we're concerned with. Although we don't put down the world of perception at all, it's very important and particularly important to human identity and personality. But still, it's a small part of what's going on. So we orient towards a big picture, even though it's outside perception. But even though the world of perception is very small, can it embrace any custom ,, even without also without

[97:52]

perception. So I saw a lot that Sonia is still gravid. Alzheimer's can be public to perception. But these, for example, these trances that don't really have minor mental states, the trance doesn't. And that's why they're not associated with mind. So at the moment that you're having a trance, you can't perceive that. You can't perceive the trance, because that trance is called perception is too weak to perceive itself. Perception is not really operating at that time.

[98:52]

So that's why the trance is not considered to be part of the mind. So in what sense is the trance part of what we're talking about? It's worth talking about in terms of something that's possible. It's an important theoretical construct. And that can be perceived. But then, when it's perceived, it's not the thing. It's a construct of it. So when a thing turns out to be something that happens, but doesn't exactly happen to anybody, because nobody's really home exactly, except there's somebody alive there. So it doesn't happen to the mind, but it happens to the living being. So it's not associated with the mind, but it is associated with the living being. So you can't actually perceive the one that's happening, even though it happens to a living being, who sometimes has perception, but not right now. Some other time that living being can talk about that, can know about that, because of various other experiences that you have.

[99:58]

For example, you sit down and you wake up a second later and you have a beard. So you construe, and with other people's help anyway, such a thing happens. But it's not exactly associated with, the thing itself is not associated with mind. Mind isn't associated. The thing has a mental construct. a thing on the abdominal list, then it's in the realm of perception. Right now it's in the realm of our perception. The thing that's in the realm of perception is a construct that's talking about that event. That event we can't know is perceptual. So that thing can't be known as a perceptual thing. But that's what it says, is that things out here can't actually be... Can Samia grab that? Yes. I guess what I don't see is that Samia itself always has to be in the shifted circle.

[101:07]

But the object, does he touch the net circle? Well, when the object is the object's perception, the sense it's in the circle, that won't. Now, this is a drawing of mind. The mind actually doesn't have locations. But still, I made a drawing which had locations. These have locations. These external objects of the sense consciousness have location. And yet, consciousness which doesn't have location can relate to them. For these also have location. So organs have location. And the field of action is going to have location. And in that location, out of that two located things, consciousness arises, which doesn't have location. And what consciousness arises, which doesn't have location, but is related to those things which do have location, then you can have perception.

[102:13]

They have two things that have location, and consciousness arises somewhere. Maybe over there. Maybe right on top. But when consciousness arises, based on these two things, action, these two things, in a sense, are swooped up into living beings and also swooped up into mind. Because they're touching. They're not being touching. They're the origin. But before these two are interacting to a sufficient energetic level, these things are just out there existing, they say. There's this capacity. There's that capacity. There's this field of activity. There's that field of activity. But then various consciousness erupt or evolve out of this field of activity. Part of this primordial, located gook. Consciousness is people are all out of it.

[103:16]

And they can go out and have their own life without it later. But they do arrive up some actual stuff, some matter, stuff that you can find to have this in dress. That color's over there. That color's over there. That smell's over there. That tip's over there. And this thing's constantly going, poop, poop, poop. It's changing all the time, too, you know? It's not just a dead flat thing. It's always changing. And it's all giving rise every time. It comes up new every moment. And then every moment, consciousness can come up. The consciousness can move around. They don't stay right on top of everything. But the consciousness isn't necessarily right on top of it. It doesn't really have a location. But it's dependent on location. And when it arises, then those things are, in a sense, related to a living system. The living systems are connected to non-living systems.

[104:18]

And the The non-living systems that living systems are connected to tend to be the most energetic, relevant ones to that living system. And different living systems would, by their karma, they gave rise to their current existence, choose other current existence and take the point of partnership to create their consciousness. Some have been able to select what they consider to be the most energetic possibility. Or rather, those that they select be defined as the most energetic, called highest energy. It's considered to be the one you've chosen. So this is a little bit, once again, a little bit off track. But maybe it gives you some background in the world of mind and the world of being. and what prompt he has to do with and how various different types of conscience can arise.

[105:22]

Will your question apply to the next character, too? I don't know. What's the question? I was only one, but they actually met me . Well, let's talk about property. There's several cards that are dedicated to it. Okay, what's the next card? Could you speak up? What are the mental state? The mental state are the five types. At the end of the contract?

[106:30]

Okay, what are the et cetera, Rodgers? Well, let me address. Thank you, Jack. And so on? No. There's five types, right? What do we find? . Those are the five. And by the way, this is a good time to make sure you memorize the list. We did that before, right? Memorize the list. Now is a good time to, again, memorize it.

[107:31]

Because we're going to be studying these 4.6. Next time, I'd like somebody to recite the list. So I'll call once. And somebody should recite the whole down list again next to me. OK. So those are the five groups that we're studying now. 46 times. Yeah. Are you sure the group? Yeah. Well, see what's the story on you? The explanation when you look hard at the Mahabundi at Ruslo-Mahabun school.

[108:39]

. The first we studied, you know, the card 24, Talked about the Mahabharata 25 Talked about the Kusura Mahabharata 26 Talked about the Kusura Mahabharata 26 Talked about the Akushura Mahabharata

[109:54]

We have studied five on page 34. We have studied five categories of the mental state. There are other mental states that are indeterminate. So the way the course is set up is they have these five categories. They don't want to say it's not from the category because sometimes we want the categories that we talked about. I won't be able to get it. But there are, they're done. In the chart, it looks up .

[111:01]

It's a separate category. So you can understand that this category F really could go into other categories, depending on . One of the . What should . But I think . . So he asked to be associated with neutral mind.

[112:20]

So that means, well, do you have some problem with that? Yeah, probably not, but I'd like it to be doing it. All the other checkers are divided, either have some . Well, that's all. Except for the model. Uh-huh. But the . We have some that are present in all minds, named all good minds, bad minds, so on and so forth. We have others that aren't in all minds, but can be a different one. All right, so those are the five groups.

[113:33]

Do you understand five groups, how they work, which would be six groups? Is the parita ? Yes, it is. means almost a question. Approaching being a question. Parita means literally little. Okay. [...] Bumi, you know the word Bumi?

[114:35]

Bumi means Chinese character they use for his birth, by land. So it can mean a level, like we have the Bodhisattva Bumi. It talks about the 10 Bumis of the Bodhisattvas. That means levels, or spheres, or extent. So in this case, the meaning that's applied here is stent. It said fear, or place of origin, but I think the way of understanding it here is stent. The Mahapuramika, to a big extent, they stent over the whole mind. They're always found in all kinds of mind. And to be a little bit more exact, if you study different Abhidharma texts, and if you study the sub-Aktavadan Abhidharma texts like this one, not like this one.

[115:46]

This is not really true. If you study the older sub-Aktavadan texts, you'll see that these categorizations shift, the grouping shift. One century, they got five. Another century, they got seven. Another century, they got 10. Then they got five, and so on. Theravadan originally had five. Then later, they had seven. And in this system, we say 10. But Vasubandhu says 3D is 5. So let's read about it. Any questions on this CART 20 CD? We'll go to CART 24. But what are these?

[116:49]

What are these three? Vedana, Chetana, Sanya, Chanda, Parsha, Mati, Nukti, Manaskara, Adi Nukti, because it every month The second we'll ask one deeper in this list. What's that?

[117:50]

What's in this list? Yeah, the same. This is an interesting word. I believe . They both come from the root . And the root means face. And so ,, to a bird's face. And moksha, word moksha, you may know, demoksha, v-sang yoga, had to do with liberation, demoksha, cut to turn the face.

[119:04]

So there's actually a kind of etymological mistake in the word demoksha. In moksha, it's not just a burying place of looking at what looks also good. It's more than that. But there's some kind of mistake there. People thought it meant something else. So to turn the place. In other words, to avert, turn towards object. So it talks about one of the functions which you could say is in all minds. But in particular, the technical meaning of this word is not necessarily present in all minds, because this word is an important component in meditation. So in what Vasubhanda said, actually, adimupti is not present in all minds.

[120:07]

He said, strictly speaking, not all minds will have this, but in particular, all meditative minds will have this, because this is turning toward the meditation object. And the meditation object then means an object that has been decided upon as the meditation object. So you're turning towards that which you've already chosen. And if you look at the name here in this text called a poop, ethnologically, speaking, it's not at all like approval. Just turning towards. But it means the word approval carries part of its intent. And if you turn towards that, which you've already chosen, in other words, you approve. Oh yes, this is the meditation object, okay. So you check to see if it's the one you've chosen, and you turn towards it. Or you turn towards it, and when you find it, you approve it, and you stay with it.

[121:12]

Now, of course, this all happens in one moment. So really, you couldn't turn towards it and then not prove it. As soon as you turn towards it, that's it. But it's body mukti in the sense of you accurately turn towards that meditation that you've chosen. And in a sense, not all minds have that. But in another sense, all minds do that. Because whatever you're looking at is your meditation. even if it's safe to not. But still, if you're meditating in such a way that you're choosing something and deciding to either are not meditating, then Adi Mukti would approve or not. So what's the bond is playing with that edge. So don't worry too much about this being there on all minds and not all minds, because the crux of the matter will be your understanding of meditation. I'm curious.

[122:16]

Well, no idea if people wouldn't need to turn away from other people. Say, turn away other things. Body doesn't like that. I mean, it needs to, but to turn the face, then you turn the face. Turn away from the pores, yeah. Say, away. Not necessarily away. Not away from your body. So, okay, is that enough on that one, Peter? Well, you know, there's a lot of contradiction. I mean, aversion doesn't sound like tension. You're talking about tension. Did I say, can you say aversion? Aversion. Aversion. Aversion. Well, OK. Aversion, just the sound. So, you know, it's OK.

[123:19]

It's just that these two definitions, the medical report is in the diary list. We made up a new word for that. Translator . This journal? Yeah. This translation was . So the decision, in some other places, you'll find it translated as decision. I thought we were going to use both of the words because it's adverting, but also I'm trying to adverting to what you've already decided was your meditation on here. But once again, etymological decision isn't really relevant. To carry the meaning, I think you'll find those two separate words. Sometimes they actually say it to sit. So that's why I say, etymologically, it's the included art.

[124:21]

Think about faith. Misunderstood. And that's probably the reason why this is . Should we go back to the top of the list? Yes. . Well, it's not about the discussion, Dr. Daniel. And it's published on it. OK, so first one is beta 9. Already you know something about that. Anything more you want to talk about in terms of . Refresh it back to where it was defined.

[125:31]

It was defined in chapter 1, card 14, the definition for . Same . Next is the Chetanat. That with conditions, it forms shapes of the mind. Chita Pali Samskara. Chita Pashanda. Pashanda Pashanda. OK, so these words, conditions, and form, and shapes, I think they're all kind of good. Chaitana has sometimes been characterized as the, in Atasadi, it said that Chaitana is like, what do you call this, form it with.

[126:43]

55 hands, 55 laborers working for him. And this is an example of, as I mentioned last week, I recommended that you could read both Theravada and Sarvastavadan works on these dharmas here. Because in this is the area that they agree most, two systems are most agree, on these mental dharmas and how they work. You'll find some differences, but you can read most easily from one to the other, and it's varied. So we can refer to the Siddhi Maga to study this. Historically speaking, chaytana was the first samskara that we started talking about.

[127:53]

You know, we say perception, we say, you know, form, feelings, perceptions, impulses, consciousness. So originally, samskarasaganda was chaytana. And that's one of the reasons why sometimes is called repulse. Sometimes it's called volition. But that's what Chaitanya is called too. Chaitanya is called volition. So in some sense, Chaitana is the basic samskara.

[129:04]

Or another way to put it is, it's the samskara which talks about the total impact of all the other samskaras besides and even including perception and view. So historically speaking, at first they advise kind of they thought, well, there's this feeling, and there's perception, and then there's volition. And then later, they broke down volition into, you see, these 44 in the categories, 4 and 6, they include 3 against 2. All this, they're all, in a sense, they're all skam samskara. Samskara just means made things. So then they changed the name, in a sense, from volition skanda, the samskaras count. So they could put all of the main dhammas in that are associated with non. Plus, even they could even throw in dhammas that aren't associated with non into the samskaras count.

[130:14]

When they were first thinking about it, they thought feelings, perceptions, and impulses. Yes? Your chief thought to listen to me before, if I'm young, Yeah. It's out of the usual orbit. You could put Chetana at the top, too. I'm in order if I'm . Well, that's fine with me. I think Chetana could go at the top, because actually, Chetana includes in some. Chaitanaya is talking about the general landscape of all the dharmas that are associated with mind. So originally, Chaitanaya was the whole samskaras kanda, but later they threw stuff that wasn't associated with the mind into the samskaras kanda.

[131:20]

But when the samskaras kanda was just volition, we started adding more more dimensions to the mental impulse. Chaitanya can still include all of them. But actually Chaitanya also includes the first two skandhas. So this may be a little confusing, but Chaitanya is in the samskara skanda. And Chaitanya is one of the 75 dhammas and one of the 46 dhammas associated with mind. But Chaitanya actually includes three skandhas. two and a half. It includes feelings, it includes perceptions, and it includes all the other samskaras that are associated with mind because what it really is, it's the total impact or shape or texture or topology or something like that of all the mental states. Consciousness

[132:28]

is that which gets shaped by mental functions. That's what actually gets impressed or gets shaped. And Chaitana is that shape. Like you're Jonathan and you're Michael. You're what sort of inherits your karma. But then you also have a shape, which is part of you. So your shape is like chaytana. Chaytana is the shape. And you can say, well, there's a valley over there, and there's a hill over there. And it looks like you poured water on this conscious that would also run down over that way. It sounds like chitta is not a lot like chitta.

[133:36]

It's a lot like chitta. Well, Chinese characters are sounding a little bit helpful. See, chitta and chitta hold down from the same root. I think the root is chitta. They go from chitta to chitta. The Chinese character for this is heart. Heart in one. The Chinese character for this is this. Which means to think. This and this in one. depending on who's currently who's using these words in Chinese may confuse. But this tends to be more active.

[134:43]

This would tend to have some little more body to it. So I think that they're not very popular, and they come from the same group. And sometimes they're trying to say it does the same way. But usually, chitta is not translated as thinking, but as thought, or mind, or consciousness, or heart. So they're very closely related to your shape. We're studying karma in the other class now, and the definition of karma is chaitana. Chaitana and chaitanayita. Chaitana and that which follows after having been willed.

[135:46]

Volition and that which follows after having been willed. So chaitana is very important because chaitana is brief. just Chaitanya, not doing anything else other than being Chaitanya, is the karma of the moment. So the shape of the mind is what the mind is doing, is the action of the mind. The way the mind feels or senses construes or produces itself, that is the karma of the mind. That's the basic action of human existence. It's a basic way that you can see something happening. It's completely flat, there's no karma, and there's no chaitana. But as it gets deformed and bumps and bridges and pops up and you have a certain shape, that event is the origin of action, and that's chaitana.

[136:49]

That volition, that impulse, that vector. Or the resolution, the main tendency of all those vectors. I mentioned in the other class that the mind is like a matrix of various impulses or various vectors. And the resolution of all those vectors will be shaped enough. Are you familiar with matrices, how they work? Well, you can have like a vector, right? Something that has a direction and a value. How do you do it? Direction and length. The length measures the value, like four inches long, pointing north. That's like the impulse.

[137:53]

You want to go that way. Okay. You can have another impulse that could simply be going at right angles. Okay. Two of them like that. Or it could be going not at right angles, but off in another direction, but then you could, if it's going off in that direction, you could project it back into right angles by projecting it back over into this right angle and then back up to that right angle and you could have it If it's two lines, you can project it back into two-dimensional space. And then you can have a resolution of those two vectors into the diagonal, which will be the resolution of the main tendency of those two. And then you can stack up vectors. This way and this way. And you can have a resolution of various vectors. it had the rules by which you compute resolution. And that would be, you'd have three, four, and you'd have multidimensional then space and multidimensional consciousness, not just one mental state or two mental states.

[139:04]

And the resolution of all those, that would be the line along which you would act. That would be sort of the main, how they all come down to do something. Center of gravity of what seems to have happened. That's Chaitana. So that's why I tell you, Chaitana is very important, the most important, because it's actually not a thing in itself, it's all the other dharmas. So if it's okay with you, we'll start our next class with somebody reciting, and we'll just continue to study these 45 dharmas. Thank you.

[139:55]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_78.25