DOWNLOAD PDF COURSE MATERIALS
[NOTE: If you view this PDF in your WEB BROWSER, the Tibetan Fonts may not display properly. However, those fonts do display properly in the Downloaded PDF.]
DOWNLOAD PDFs & MP3 Recordings from Earlier Terms
DOWNLOAD MP3 Recordings of the first 15 Classes of the Spring 2016 Term here.
DOWNLOAD Spring 2016 CLASS NOTES
- DRAFT Transcript of CLASS 3 (April 22, 2016)
DOWNLOAD MP3 Recordings of SPRING 2016 CLASSES
CLASS ONE - Monday, APRIL 18, 2016 - Introductory Review:
- Geshe Wangmo spoke about the class prayers at the beginning of the Spring 2015 Term.
CLASS TWO - Wednesday, APRIL 20, 2016
CLASS THREE - Friday, APRIL 22, 2016
- DRAFT NOTES - PDF
- Track 1 - Are Environmental-External Phenomena Truths of Suffering & In the Nature of Suffering - Discussion/debate: Eight Worldly Concerns; Why are Non-Sentient Phenomena in the nature of suffering? Are Buddhas? Bodies Truths of Suffering? Afflictions & Suffering. Root of Suffering & Four Attributes of Truth of Suffering.
- REVIEW - Buddhist Views regarding a Creator God; One is One?s Own Protector; Enemy & Witness; Can God be Permanent or Self-Arisen? Meaning of "Being Self-Arisen.
- Track 2 - Can a Creator God be Permanent?
- A God that is Permanent could not perceive things.
- What if God is Permanent but God?s Mind is Impermanent.
- Collective Karma & Creation of the Environmental Universe
- Track 3 - Refuting [the Idea that a Creator God] is:
- Permanent: Our consciousness defines us.
CLASS FOUR - Monday, APRIL 25, 2016:
CLASS FIVE - Wednesday, APRIL 27, 2016:
CLASS SIX - Friday, APRIL 29, 2016:
CLASS SEVEN - Monday, MAY 2, 2016:
CLASS EIGHT - Wednesday, MAY 4, 2016:
- Track 1 - Permanence
- Track 2 - "Alternatively, it leaves doubt". Alternatively, if [the opponent’s syllogisms] were merely to establish that [abodes, bodies, and enjoyments] are preceded by another creator, it would follow that the pervasion was not ascertained, because since God would not be ascertained, the pervasion would leave doubt."
CLASS NINE - Friday, MAY 6, 2016:
- Track 1.
- Track 2: Was God created by himself (his own awareness) or by someone else? Distinguishing Causes. Direct and Indirect Causes, Substantial Causes, Cooperative conditions. Q&A/Discussion. 'One with the Guru' - Will we 'all become One'?
Friday - May 13 - Class 12: Topic - Review, Discussion/Debate & Q&A;
CLASS TEN - Monday, MAY 9, 2016:
- Track 1 - Introductory Pep Talk for New Topic: Our self-grasping is contradictory, creates difficulties. The logical reasoning of Syllogisms focuses on revealing Contradictions. Having concluded its analysis of the predicate, Gyaltsab Je's text introduces something new.
- What makes a Syllogism Incorrect? <p. 103> "Unless one analyzes the predicate, it is impossible to apply the fault of being all three types of wrong syllogism simultaneously to one syllogism."
- Three types of Wrong Syllogism: Syllogisms of: (1) Contradiction, (2) Non-Establishment & (3) Non-Ascertainment are logically faulty as they do not satisfy the three modes of a correct syllogism.
- Track 2 -Presentation of Three Modes of a Correct Syllogism (as background for understanding Wrong Syllogisms):
- Forward Pervasions; Counter Pervasions; Reverse Pervasions; Property of the Subject; and Illustrations/Basis, Relationships.
- Background for understanding Relationship between the Predicate and the Reason/Sign -
- Correct Sign pervades the Predicate (whatever is the Reason is necessarily the Predicate); and
- it is always in relation to a person who realizes that pervasion in connection with a basis [example, illustration] (e.g., to understand the pervasion, ‘whatever is product is necessarily impermanent’, an illustration/basis is necessary for understanding.
- Wrong Syllogisms of Non-Establishment [for the Respondent] - do not satisfy the first mode of a correct syllogism, i.e., the property of the subject, since the respondent realizes the thesis before the syllogism is posited; e.g., when the predicate and the reason are the same.
- Syllogisms of Contradiction [for the Respondent who believes a contradictory thesis]. Whatever satisfies the reason of the syllogism necessarily contradicts the predicate because whatever satisfies the reason necessarily does not satisfy the predicate.
- Two main ways the Pervasion of a syllogism is Flawed:
- Whatever satisfies the reason does not necessarily satisfy the predicate [e.g., whoever is a human being is not necessarily a man; not necessarily not a man; and not necessarily a woman]; or
- Whatever satisfies the reason necessarily does not satisfy the predicate. [E.g., whoever is a woman is necessarily not a man; whatever is a table is necessarily not a person], i.e., things that are totally contradictory so there is nothing that is both.
CLASS ELEVEN - Wednesday, MAY 11, 2016:
CLASS TWELVE - Friday, MAY 13, 2016:
- Track 1 - Question & Answer, Review, Discussion
CLASS THIRTEEN - Tuesday, MAY 17, 2016:
- Track 1 - Review: Predicates given in 3 Syllogisms supporting Creating God IIshvara.
- 3-part Reason one Syllogism gives in support of Ishvara. Continue examining one of the three reasons for why the environment, etc., is created by god:
- "the environment (1) performs certain actions; (2) has specific shape; (3) performs function, i.e., produces certain results."
- Track 2 - Continue Examining fallacies of 2d Reason, Having a Specific Shape.
CLASS FOURTEEN - Wednesday, MAY 18, 2016:
- Track 1 - Review/Summary of material presented in Class 13. Q/A “If I hate or love one person, it is wrong . . .”
- Track 2 - Presentation of: <p. 108> ”Determined by the presence or absence of blessings . . . established the way a shape, etc., that which is inferred from that is reasonable" <p. 110> Explanation of logical absurdity of syllogism’s illustration - cause of a vase, a potter; causes of the environment, karma of beings. The shape can be applied in both cases, just being similar and not different, it is not reasonable to infer from this the creation by God, like fire from a grey substance." . . . an example of non-ascertainment.
- WEDNESDAY [May 25] class is MOVED to TUESDAY [MAY 24]; i.e., classes will be held on Monday, Tuesday & Friday. Geshe Wangmo will be interpreting at Tushita for Yangten Rinpoche, who will lead an all day Chenrezig Retreat (5:00 AM - 5:00 PM) on May 25th. If you wish to attend the Retreat, contact Tushita & go to Toshiba web here: Retreat Details.
CLASS FIFTEEN - Friday, MAY 20, 2016:
- 1 Track - Review:
- Announce & Explain: Change in text translation: Ishvara will henceforth replace "Creator God".
- Review. Q&A.
- 2 Track - re Syllogism Reasons of "specific shape” & of "mere shape".
- "Rebounding Argument".
- <p. 113> Presentation.
- General Q&A.
CLASS SIXTEEN - Monday, MAY 23, 2016:
- Track 1 - Review: Rebounding Argument. ‘Rebounding Argument” translates the meaning of the Tibetan term, the literal translation into English of which is: “Flawed Refutation of the Same Result”.
- Examine incorrect syllogisms in order to understand what a correct syllogism is.
- Eliminate [the objection of a] Rebounding Argument.
- Three types of non-Buddhist Indian philosophers who revered Ishvara as creator God: Samkhyas, Vaisheshikas and the Naiyayikas.
- Examine how a Samkhya argument (the result of something must exist at the time of the cause) reflects our own innate misunderstanding of the relationship between current behavior and future results.
- Track 2 - Analyze the “Akshipada" follower’s argument that the Naiyayika reason “arisen through effort” is a Flawed Refutation/Rebounding Argument.