Audio recorded at Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 109-minute seminar, Geshe Jampa Gyaltsen guides advanced students through the offering section of Lama Chöpa, a foundational Tibetan Buddhist liturgical text. The teaching centers on rigorous grammatical analysis of complex devotional verses, particularly the precise construction of topicalizers, cases, and continuative forms that encode tantric meaning. Gyaltsen walks through multiple offering passages—water offerings, flowers in various forms, incense, lights, and perfumed waters—explaining how classical Tibetan grammar, when parsed carefully, reveals layers of philosophical content: the three spheres of offering (offerer, object, recipient), the inseparable union of bliss and emptiness in tantric practice, and the metaphorical language drawn from ancient Indian courtly ritual. Students translate verse by verse, discussing technical challenges such as the retroflex consonants in Sanskrit loanwords and the poetic ambiguities that even classical commentators found difficult. The session is pitched at students already engaged in formal Tibetan language study and familiar with tantric Buddhist concepts.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 2011-05-26 – KR.mp3
UUID: cd003333-c069-4a49-a5e9-1ea88c581d97
Teacher: Geshe Jampa Gyaltsen
Collection: Emptiness
Date: 2011-05-26
Recorded at: Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide
Words: ~6,467
Then we will we will give you a break and ask our next volunteer, Melissa, who has kindly returned to her seat, to continue. Oh, sorry. Where did you get to? We’ll start from the beginning again. Would you continue for us?
Mhmm. Mhmm. Very good. Chris, would you take on? Oh, that’s so bad.
Sylvia, have you had a chance? No. Then then for next time. And then, Jasmine, would you continue? I haven’t got.
Then for next time, we have to finish what was for today, you know, because there’s no point in continuing in the memorization, And it is extremely beneficial to memorize. It’s not done in Western societies, but it lead really to a deepening of the vocab. You can see how hard it is, I imagine. You don’t have to memorize to a tune. You choose.
I mean, I never memorize to melodies because then you’re you’re prisoner of the melody. Yeah. But then I can’t recite it to a melody. You know? That’s good.
That’s very good. Very, very good. So since Marni wasn’t there, I will cover again how to memorize to refresh it in all our memories, which is you memorize in the morning the new material. You go over it at night. Go over you go over at night the material you’ve memorized in the morning.
If you haven’t memorized it, if doesn’t stay in the mind, you rememorize it. You don’t move on until the old material is there. It’s impossible to memorize it’s impossible to recite if I give you the beginning of the verse. The the Tibetan memorizers are not able to do this. If I say, unless you know the text like this, you won’t be able to do it.
You start a bit earlier, and then you move into that. So so when you do the verse on, you can start from there. Once you really saw that, you could start theoretically. Like, Rinpoche could do that for many years. Rinpoche would start in the middle of a verse.
Very few people can do that. I’ll tell you an anecdote to lighten the mood after memorization. One of the greatest minds of the twentieth century in Tibet was a very controversial Geshe, Geshe Gendun Chopel from Drepung. So he disagreed strongly with some of the key points of Je Tsongkhapa’s readings on emptiness. But he was one of the great luminaries of Drepung Monastery.
And then the top Geshes of Sera and Ganden and Drepung formed a committee, and they went to debate Geshe Gendun Chopel on his critique of Drepung. And when they came to Geshe Gendun Chopel’s rooms, he said to them, if you can recite the 21 praises of Tārā backwards syllable by syllable, I have time for you. Otherwise, I have no time for you. Then none of the Geshes could, and then he whirled through it backwards. Then they all left.
What could they say? What could they say? So for today, I suggested that you look again through what we covered last time to see if there were any doubts in your minds. Do you have any questions about the commentary of? Yes.
Was everything clear in the grammar? I see. Very good. Then if the students are lazy, the teacher perhaps should start to be lazy too. Then we will go to what I hope you did for today.
So the offering section of Lama Chöpa, page 49. So you remember last time basically we covered all the way down to here, the end of the prostration section, and you would have noticed that the beginning of the Pänchen Lama’s commentary on prostration, which starts here, leads directly to the final verse of the commentary. Right? So the root text is ensconced between sections of commentary. Okay.
So if you were to translate it, if you were to try it for a really careful translation, you would have to take into account your topicalizer here and your ablative here. That would be how you would have to proceed. So we haven’t gotten to something that accurate, But perhaps if Melissa would or Jasmine would agree to read and translate the commentary for us down to here and then we will start directly the prostration verses, the offering verses. Mhmm. Good?
Very good. You let’s start with the grammar, the basic grammar here. So you have two topicalizers. Right? One here and one here.
Then you have two times the verb to offer. So what do you do with that? And you have an ablative which we partly explained. Having offered prostrations, past tense of the verb with veneration, You could translate this by an adverb in English, reverently, by the three doors. Then you have a topicalizer here.
So what do we do with a topicalizer? Does anyone have an idea? It is a problem. The next part of the commentary that’s further down. Grammatically, you’ve got two topicalizers.
A topicalizer introduces a subject. So what’s happening here? Is it an emphasis of symmetry? Could be. What do you think it might be grammatically?
What is a a structure which is very common in Tibetan? Yes. I think that’s what’s happening here. The topic of making offerings or making offerings, and then you have to read it as an apposition to the second clause which ends with a ni. Right?
So so far, so good. How would you translate this? What is? Did anyone find? That’s how you translated it.
Are there other translations? It’s a very difficult one for you to find. I was wondering whether whether anyone would get it. I’ll give you a hint. Does this say anything to somebody?
What is Chakgya? What is Chakgya Chenpo? Mahāmudrā? What is Chakya? The seal.
The seal. Is to seal, to stamp. It’s an abbreviation of which I’ve never seen, but which I I’m sure must have existed at some point. So offering after having sealed, Dani do. So Dani is nature.
Right? As of the nature of is what? What is? Yes. Is what?
Undivided bliss and emptiness. Having sealed in the nature of inseparable bliss and emptiness, what is? Nonconceptual bliss and emptiness. And what is? The three circles of offering?
Yes. Exactly. What are the three circles of offering? Do you think so? Does that make sense here?
How would you seal without your inner and secret offerings? Any ideas? The three spheres. Okay. We’re covering all of saṃsāra and nirvana.
So you’ll get there eventually. Yeah. The three the two Wessies. Now what is Khorsum? Khorsum, the three spheres, the three spheres of the emptiness of the offerer, the offered substance, and the recipient to whom the offering is made.
Other words, the complete emptiness of the act of offering. Right? And there’s two different presentations of the two spheres, but that’s a standard one. So if we look at this sentence then, making offerings, and then it is an apposition to what comes here, is offering after having sealed what? The offerings implicit in the nature of the non conceptual inseparable bliss and emptiness.
Then you have to add some sort of either a case particle here or an apposition. So if it is a case particle, it is by the three spheres of offering. If it is an apposition, it is comma, the three spheres of offering. So here what you have is actually a tantric reading of these three spheres. It is not offerings which are sealed by emptiness alone.
It is offerings, the object offered and the recipient of the offering, which are sealed by bliss and emptiness. In other words, which are emanations, that’s what is the meaning here. When we say sealed, means they are actually emanations of bliss and emptiness. Emanation, no, but you have to find an interpretation for to seal. So offering after having sealed.
What is the meaning of sealing? When you seal something, you basically put a stamp which gives its identity, its origin. Now here, that stamp is bliss and emptiness. In a sūtra context, it would just be emptiness. Normally, a sūtra context, you speak of the three spheres of offering.
You’re speaking of the emptiness of the offer, the offered substance, and the recipient of the offering. Here, it is something different. You’re speaking of the emptiness. You’re speaking of the inseparable bliss and emptiness of the offer, the offering substance, and the recipient. Then, Melissa, will you take the next couple of verses for us, perhaps down to.
Why would it be u? Why would you pronounce it u? There’s no dao. Right? Uh-huh.
Excellent. Then could you give us a basic grammatical breakdown of this? Mhmm. It’s the verb to descend bab pa. Exactly.
Uh-huh. Do you think or ideal. You think it’s a continuative? Okay. Medusa stands for the continuative.
What is the sign that the law works as a continuative? What is always an indication for that? I think it’s a it’s a long long. Term review. So why would it not be a continuative?
Because we’ve identified Yes, exactly. It’s a dative. It’s just a dative. Also, it was a continuative, normally a continuative comes after a verb. So Che is not a verb.
Therefore, it would be very strange if it was a continuative. It’s not impossible, but it’s strange. You have a dative at the end of the first verse, a topicalizer at the end of the second verse, an ablative at the end of the third verse, and a verb at the end of the fourth verse with an instrumental. It’s a very well behaved sentence. How would you translate that?
So do a precise translation. That you have to tell us. If you make it function as a verb, then you will have a very hard time working with your need. I think it’s a noun. Who?
The object. Yes. Exactly. It’s in the dative. To the noble guru and his entourage.
And then your question is, does Kyabgon, lord of refuge, qualify the noble guru alone or the entourage as well? I would have thought that they are the refuge protectors. So you think they are refuge protectors other than the noble guru. Is that what you’re saying? Why?
No. It’s I mean, context dictates these are offerings to the Guru. Then if you translate, as you are thinking of doing it, lords of refuge, noble guru and entourage, you’re implying that there are lords of refuge which are higher than the guru. It doesn’t fit with the context at all. In addition, is a standard term for one’s teachers.
It’s like. You know? So so it’s refuge, protector, and then and his entourage. Exactly. Okay.
So there’s three entities. No. Two entities. Refuge protector, comma, noble guru in opposition or noble guru who is a refuge protector and entourage. Right?
So we’ve done two verses, and it’s very clear now. Your knee gives you a topic. Mhmm. Any other suggestions? Normally, it’s four different water offerings.
So I I don’t know them by heart. It’s it’s water for the mouth, water for the heart, water for the feet, and then there is a fourth one. So I I would have to check-in the commentary for you. It’s four offerings, but we only make three, which is a bit awkward. But then the four rivers is a good idea, but it’s a bit out of context.
There is a reference to that. Later on, yes, there is. Definitely. Well, Chu is water. Then it could be its verse.
So it could be four waters, four rivers, four fountains, four sources. Here, it’s four four types of water. Context. I mean, what is the context here? Right.
So what is what is offered first? Water. Right? You have water for the mouth, then water for the feet, and depending on the practice, water for the heart, and water for the heart comes later. Perfume and water for the breast.
So it’s it’s a water offering, in other words. It’s a water offering. So, so four waters. Of purifying nectar. Excellent.
Flow unctuously. Very good. Unctuously. English English is a beautiful language. Del Del in Tibetan, does has anyone checked the connotation?
Del means softly, what does the other meaning of del? Leisure. Leisure. Exactly. Rinpoche yesterday spoke of the eight leisures, del wa gye.
So he’s got that whole idea of smooth, relaxed, gentle motion. It’s a leisurely flow leisurely flow. And then your last verse. Accuracy. Accuracy.
From vast vessels. Ablaze with. Ablaze with what? So what do you do with your? That’s light.
So Ablaze with light. Okay. Alright. And then you have you have to account for. Fast, containers, precious and well made.
Fast, resplendent. It’s good, but I mean, you want to try to come close to the verb. Means to burn, to blaze, to burn, to blaze. Then you want to have that connotation if you can. You could.
You could. You could. So from vast vessels Precious and well known. Yes. We’re getting there.
Vast vessels ablaze with light, resplendent with light, precious exactly. And then what do you do with colic? Well known. Is that it? Well well arranged.
Yes. What is the meaning here of well arranged? Yes. Well set out. Yes.
Exactly. Harmoniously set out. Exactly. Exactly. Very good.
Very good. Then, Monty, would you like to give it a shot, or would you prefer to to wait until next time? Well, I’ve translated it. My weakness is gone, but I can try. Take a shot.
So. Oh, sorry. There’s one line I missed. Yes. Dongpo.
Excuse me. My fault. Dongpo. Dongpo. Kung.
Kung. Did anyone get this? How so we we did these Sanskrit transliterations. You should be able to make sense of this. Let’s go step by step.
What is this? Well, obviously, to start with, this is not a Tibetan word. Right? It’s obviously something transcribed in this case from Sanskrit. What would this be?
Be. Be, actually. Be. Be. Then what would this be?
Melissa is going really aiming for the popularity, contest today. What are the reverse dentals? Remember? You had a exactly. Exactly.
You had a handout on that. They are the retroflexes precisely. So you remember Sanskrit? Like oh. It’s a a something like that.
How do you pronounce it? So? Sorry. How would you pronounce it? It’s a logical system.
I mean Why would you take a dental? Dental and make a palatal. We will get there. Why would you take a dental and turn it into something horrible like a guttural? A retroflex?
Dentalist what is the meaning of a dental? It’s from a leaf. So, the tongue is between the teeth? Yeah. Then, there’s another way of pronouncing consonants where the tongue is turned backwards.
That’s what retroflex means. What happens to the tongue? It’s on the palate. It’s just behind the dentals. We don’t have those letters in English.
So you have your normal da pronounced between the teeth, and your retroflex da where the tongue is put on the palate is pronounced da. Da. Da. Do you hear the difference? I’ll give you the dental and the retroflex.
Da. Da. It’s more explosive. Right? That is a retroflex.
Retroflex because the tongue is put backwards. Then in Tibetan, the retroflexes are always indicated by turning the letter in the opposite direction. Right? So you remember we have your dentals. Yeah.
Well, I will give you the Sanskrit equivalents. Right? And then you have these are your Sanskrit letters, your Sanskrit dentals. So you have one which does not exist in Tibetan among the dentals, which is the aspirated dental. Here.
This does not exist in Tibetan. Then you have your retroflexors, which are written as such. This is gonna be really difficult. Okay. So these are all pronounced between the teeth.
Ta ta da dha na. And these are all pronounced with the tongue curved backwards and touching the palate. I don’t do it well. An Indian, a Sanskrit pandit, you would really hear the difference. So so we found that this is Bi.
Now this has what is beneath here? Do you remember? Yes. What does it represent? And in Sanskrit, you have long vowels.
It’s a long u. So then ra and you are pronounced rya, and then suddenly Tibetan grammar takes over again, and they put it in the genitive. So up to here, you have a Sanskrit transcription. This is a genitive. So it’s baidurya.
Baidurya is do you know what baidurya is? Lapis Lapis lazuli. Exactly. Lapis lazuli. There are Tibetan terms for lapis lazuli, but they’re not widely used.
They’re not widely used. So that’s most common for It comes from Afghanistan, so it was always imported into Tibet. It was a luxury. Then Tibetan transcription of Sanskrit is very unstable, so you will find frequently mistakes. But this is I think, I haven’t checked, this is probably the standard spelling.
Then, Molly, would you move onwards for us? Uh-huh. Any suggestions? Yeah. You can stop there.
So you have four verses. Now do you think these four verses have to be dealt with as a unit of meaning? Where do you have a verb or do you have verbs? If you have verbs, where are they? Yes.
Exactly. Yes. That’s a way to do it precisely. You have four lines, but each two verses basically in the rest of the text is a unit of meaning. Then you identified correctly your verb at the end of the first two verses to fill, and then you have a verb at the end of the following two verses.
It’s always used for clouds. The billow is nice. We have a verb for that in English. So would you translate the first two verses for us? Uh-huh.
Close. Close. So difficult to translate. What is? It’s a trunk.
It’s correct. Yeah. But it doesn’t make sense in this context. There’s another meaning for dongpu. A stem.
A stem. Stem. The stem of a flower. You see you see the the the relevance a bit further there. Silma is what?
Silma is loose flowers. Loose flowers. Loose flowers. Is garlands. What is?
I’ve I’ve got got a a basket. Basket. Assorted. Lekpa, well. So these are the three Sanskrit offerings of flowers.
Flowers on stems, in other words, natural flowers, the cut flower, and flower on garlands. Probably silma, I have not seen this in India myself, but probably silma meant scattered petals. This is a three different flower offerings. So flowers on stems. In other words, we’d say flowers in their natural state.
Flowers. Then petals probably, garlands which are well assorted. Then the well assorted, you have to check does it refer to the whole sentence or does it only refer to the garlands? I think it refers to the garlands just because of the way garlands are made in India. Pieces.
Means fragments. And that’s how you get dust powder, that’s how you get flower fragments. It’s it’s fragments of flowers. Context. This is the offering of flower, Zepeh Metok.
So it is beautiful flowers, which as you translated very correctly, fill the earth fill earth in space. Barnam is the intermediate space. Actually, it is space. What is between the earth and above. And then, Shaya, would you take the next two lines for us?
Or if you want to, Molly, by all means. Exactly. Exactly. So what does There’s two meanings for the path of the gods. There’s two meanings.
Heaven is a meaning. Here, there’s another meaning. Does anyone remember? Jasmine? Halam.
The path of the gods. Here it means heaven. But it meant at the beginning of Lama Chöpa, it can mean the Milky Way. The milky way. The milky way.
So if we if we go carefully, clouds, yes, Then what is what do you make of is what? Is summer. Yes. Yes. Yes.
So is what? What does mean? To be born to arise. The clouds which arise in the summer, summer clouds. Yes.
You could. Then the the question which arises is, are they does blue summer clouds refer to a specific hue of blue, or does it refer to a specific mode of arising of the clouds? Are the clouds in Tibet in the summer azure blue? It should be blue summer clouds. Or are these blue clouds which arise differently?
It’s actually the second interpretation. If you ever look at clouds in Tibet, I I have not been, I have only seen this in movies, but if you look at clouds in Tibet, you will find that in the summer they arise much faster. They arise actually out of nothingness almost. It’s a high altitude phenomenon. We don’t have that here.
And it is something which seems not to happen in the winter. So that is the meaning of Ya’Keh. So Estevan. Esteville. Blue Esteville clouds, summer clouds.
So it’s not the color blue. It’s it’s So that’s a question. Right? Is Yaque Numpur a hue of blue, or is Yaki referring to a particular way in which clouds arise? Of Yes.
The Exactly. Exactly. Yes. Has anyone has anyone seen lapis lazuli? What’s the color of lapis lazuli?
Dark blue. So that is another argument. It’s a very good point, Jasmine, against being Azure. Azure is light blue. If the clouds were Azure, to refer to them as of the color of is is contradictory.
So most of the the translations just skip over the. Don’t know what to do with it, it’s just passed. Know? It’s just passed. Of lapis lazuli, pukyi dukpa.
What is pukyi dukpa? Does the pu here refer to the smoke? The smoke, exactly. So actually both puh itself and dukpa refer to incense. Here, pukyi dukpa is just there for the meter.
You get three feet, whereas otherwise, you would have one. And you all found is, Yes. Perfumed. Shim is smelling good is good. Fragrant.
Very good. Very good. The is odor. It is not difficult for us. The problem here is that the Pänchen Lama is refer is using poetic metaphors which often go back to ancient India.
So there are treatises in poetry in Tibetan, and I won’t inflict them on you. But basically, Tibetan poetry, classical Tibetan poetry, as opposed to Milarepa’s poetry, relies massively on the Indian metaphors, which often did not make a lot of sense in Tibet. For instance, the three types of flowers, this comes straight from India. You know? This is how you offer you venerate someone in India.
So in India, if you met Julia Gilliard, I’ll explain to you how you should honor Julia Gilliard. If you were Indian, as Australians, obviously, you will not do that. You would, first bow at her feet, and then with a bowl of water, you will wash her feet and then dry them with your hair. This is how an Indian It is biblical. Then you would make these offerings.
These offerings were the offerings which are made to a guest. Oh, I wouldn’t have a chance. I wouldn’t have a chance. Wouldn’t have a chance, but Chris could still do it. Chris could still do it.
So these are the offerings which are made to an honored guest in India. This is how we ended up with the offerings to the Buddha. It’s not since time immemorial. When someone came in India, he came in from the heat, he offered water first. You know, water to drink, to to slake their thirst first, water to wash their hands, then perfumed water.
This is done to this day in India with politicians who arrive in the village. Same thing, same offerings. Then you place perfumed water with sandalwood perfume, because it is cooling on the heart. Then you place a garland around the neck of the politician. You know?
Then you offer something to drink, food, and music with incense and lamps. And that is where the offerings come from. It is beautiful. It is very beautiful. You can see what’s happening.
It’s just the trying to stick to the script. So Right. Here, our goal is to to cleave very closely to the grammar. Even if in verse, it’s not always possible. So we’ll take a short tea break and then come back in ten minutes.
That’s excellent. That’s the skill in reading which comes from practice. That’s excellent. So how would you how would you translate these for us? Where where are verbs?
What is the grammatical structure? Mhmm. Mhmm. So, yes, how do you translate? What do you think?
Does it make sense for it to be what is a here? Do you remember that you were most of you were at the seminar Rinpoche gave on. What is Goppa? Does anyone want to say. No.
No. Almost definitely not. The opposite of that. The absolute opposite. Goppa is agitation.
Actually, Goppa means originally in Tibetan, wild, untamed. So I was going to translate agitation by wildness, and I thought everyone would get lost. But in English, it’s normally translated as agitation. It’s uncontrolled behavior. Then what could be the meaning here that’s obviously not the meaning?
What’s one of the other meanings of Goppa? Did anyone find? Goppa in classical Tibetan also means to laugh because laughter is uncontrolled. Someone who laughs is wild. So, you found.
Is joy, delight. Right? Is what? Right? Yes.
So if we take this verse, how do we translate this? You choose, but I think laughing makes sense. It fits with tewa and gawa. Wild doesn’t. Right?
Is what? Dong is 1,000. Oh, and Dongsong together is Dongsong is 3,000, normally. 3,000 worlds. So how do we what does it mean here?
Three times 1,000. 1,000 times 1,000 times 1,000. Thrice 1,000, we would say in English. Thrice 1,000. So actually the problem in this sentence is that if you look at it carefully, find you have to break it up like this.
Scores of luminaries fiercely ablaze, Rabbah, and then you have to ask yourself what Nima, Sun, Dawah, and Nourbu mean. Are they qualifiers of the luminaries? Are the luminaries similar to the sun, the moon, and jewels? Or are they luminaries in their own right? But the grammar doesn’t tell that to you.
Well, luminaries here that’s why I use luminaries. It’s all sources of light. So in ancient astrology, one referred to the sun as a luminary. Right? Here, actually, that’s the meaning.
In other words, we are offering the light of the sun. We are offering the light of the moon, and then we are offering the light of jewels, which are in ancient and you’re supposed to have their own light. Right? So these scores of luminary luminaries, and that is your subject, actually. This is your verb.
Laughingly, I will translate it as an adverb, and you have to throw in emanate or radiate. Laughingly, delightfully, and playfully emanate rays of light which dispel the gloom of the thrice 1,000 worlds. Otherwise, you cannot connect sock with a. So what you have to assume here is that you have a partitioned genitive with inserted here and that inserted here and that itself is connected to. Does that make sense?
Do you have any other readings? Words you don’t have. You have the three times 1,000, and that is where you need a good commentary. So has anyone checked Jamyang Shepa? Jamyang Shepa is what you would look into for something like this because that’s where you would find it fleshed out.
It’s, I think, on page 33. Didn’t we have a bit of time, so I’ll try to get it. It’s a lot of work. That work, it is. It’s a lot of work.
So Okay. It’s exactly here. So if you look up here, and we have to move back a little bit. That’s from your root text of Lama Chöpa, the scores of luminaries, the scores of lamps, literally. But if you say lamps, you you run into trouble.
Right? Because then the sun is not a lamp. Right? The scores of luminaries. So he doesn’t give you a lot of data.
He just gives you the genitive indicating that the gloom is a gloom of the 3,000. In other words, Rinchen Dratschi translates this as a tricheliocosm, the billion worlds. Without exception, it’s a light which does the clearing. And he doesn’t really give you anything extra here. For instance, he gives you no information about the verb which you have to find in the dictionaries as having the meaning of laughing.
Which obviously means that he had trouble with the passage as well. That’s what it means. Know? What what do you do with Gawa then? Play.
Then what do do with Tawa? If Tawa is play, Gawa is joy. Is really laughter. Like, and you can sort of conflate. I’ll just let joy escape.
Is laughter. Is laughter. So then we return to our text. So that’s that. There’s nothing in the grammar which allows you to know that.
I mean, you’re sort of stuck. Is there’s some things which are obvious and you have to reconstruct the grammar from that, which is basically that it is the light rays which are laughing, joyous and playful. That’s obvious. Then at the beginning, you have luminaries. Now the light rays dispel the gloom of the three kilocosm.
What do we do with the luminaries? There’s no evident verb, so you have to try to turn gopa into a verb. It lends itself to that. It functions as a verb. You know?
Then it is not impossible nor unnatural to see the hearer as being the the light rays of the luminaries. And then what you’re saying is that you have an inserted object. The obscuration or the obscurity of these 3,000 worlds. And then you have a subsidiary verb, to dispel. Right?
So it functions pretty well. So Jamyang Shepa gives you the particles, but there’s no space in inverse for the particles. That’s a problem. Then let’s move on. So I think, Shaya, would you continue?
Do you have any suggestions? Does anyone have an idea? No. Quil Khilwa indeed means Khilwa has many meanings. It can mean circle.
It can mean center. If it functions as a verb, what would it mean? Swirling. Yes. Swirling.
Exactly. Swirling. Swirling. Making circles. Making circles.
So what do how do you translate in? What is called you? Is it a swelling? No. Kill.
Kill is swirling. Right? So we were saying here. Right? We were saying here we’re going to you find generally at the end of these verses, the second verse, a term which functions as a verb.
So khil is our verb here. Modern Tibet, it means the environment. Then boundaries is a possibility, although there’s a term in classical Tibetan for that. Landscape, setting, environment, if you want. Kune, all.
Then this is quite easy. Is great lakes. Yes. Well, I would say here great oceans because can stand for Gyatso, which means ocean. So can stand for Gyatso and they just omitted the Gia because of meter once again.
Oceans of Perfumed water, scented water. Perfume, in other words. So what is the verb here? You have. What is your root verb?
How is it written? How do you spell? So this here is what tense to start with? Tense, yes. What is a radical?
So what does this mean actually in Tibetan? Doors. Doors. So what does a verb mean? Interest.
Yes. How does a verb like that make sense here? Why would it mean infused? How do you go from door to infused? Where did you get infused?
Yeah. Got scented. Scented? So you’re right actually it means infused but why does it mean infused? What does it do on?
It into something. The past tense here means the scented water, and it’s probably a passive as well, in which sent entered. Goa here means to enter. And then from that, you get to infuse indeed. It’s very rare to see this very rare form.
So I was asking you where you got infused. I think I know, and I suspect it’s not a dictionary. Was it? Was it in the dictionary? You found it in the dictionary?
That’s exceptional, because it’s very rare, it’s a metaphor. So then you have oceans of set of perfume which have been infused and here is in which case? Instrumental. By what is Gabur, Tsendan, and Gurgum? Camphor, gabur.
Yes. Is Saffron. Sandalwood, and gorgum is Saffron. Saffron. Exactly.
Exactly. Gabur is a Persian term. Tsendan is from the Sanskrit. Santal. Gurgum, I don’t know.
Did Dre here normally is dak tar drakpa dre. Right? Then with the sa, the sa here is an instrumental marker. So it is in which the scent of camphor, sandal and saffron has infused. So we could just say infused with?
Exactly. Then saffron has no scent, so these are poetic expressions. Chris, would you take then the next verses for us? The very bottom, Mhmm. Not so.
Very good. And would you then you have a we said in Tibetan, symmetry is important. You have the same pattern here. So you have translate this two verses by two verses. Typically, you will have something akin to a verb at the end of every two verses.
So what are our two first verses? What do we have which functions or can function as a verb? Pong exactly. Pong. Pong means what?
Heap. To heap. Exactly. To pile precisely. Did you say to what?
To pile or to heap? So what is our subject in this sentence? Is there a subject? So if you look here, you have a dung. Right?
Conjunction. Right? An and, a conjunction of coordination. So the dung connects the first verse with how much of the second verse? How far does that go?
The first verse. You think it’s just to the law? So I would propose this I won’t go back, but. Right? So what is why would I break it here as opposed to breaking it here as some of you suggested?
Well, that’s because that is still feasts still feasts. Is what is the common denominator between these two? It’s food. It’s got nothing to do with deities. We’re not talking of deities here.
So Sacha is what? Sacha is food, right? Toa is beverages. So food and beverages, which has what? Is?
Two day. So two is what? Right? It continues here. So food and beverages which means has, the nectar, the essence.
Right? The nectar of what? What is? 100 flavors. 100 flavors.
Exactly. As well as is food as well. Yes. It’s a honorific for food because you have the honorific of mouth, zhal. Foods of men and gods.
Right? Please. Yes. You asked that a while back. Both are valid.
Both are valid. Strictly grammatically, you should translate of humans and gods, but Tibetan is not consistent. They do not seem within a clause to consistently move backwards even though they should. Grammatically, they should. But in terms of meaning semantically, it’s not something they necessarily do.
It makes no difference. Makes no difference. So what does mean? Is Mount Meru. Mount Meru.
Now it is here with. What does the do here? What does it mean? This is a verb. Right?
Yeah. So the food is piled on the No. No. Grammatically, what does a do? It is a?
No. It is an adverbializer. It transforms which means Mount Meru into an adverb Meru esque monumental. Monumentally piled. No.
Right. You see, the grammar here is beautiful. That single r here tells you you have an adverb. If you know your grammar, you can get it. What is Merusque?
It’s monumental. It’s gigantic. Right? Then I would go swiftly through the rest. We would break it up as follows.
We have an ablative here. An instrumental. So the three grounds, those are the three realms. Desire realm, form realm, and formless realms. And then your instrumental is actually an adjective here.
So what is it? What does the adjective do? It functions as in ergative language as a subject substitute. So the melodies which have arisen from measureless measureless varieties of not so diverse songs fill will fill the three worlds. Is no.
No. That’s it’s really song. Then what is meant here? You’d have to look into the commentaries. However, yang is very clearly melody.
So, again, a classic adjective here, right? Your verb is kappa, to pervade. Then you have your agent which is the goddesses and the question is how far back does the agent go? It goes all the way back to here. So the offering goddesses.
Then Chinang is a big problem. Chi is outer, nang is inner. The problem is there’s no offering of the inner offering here that’s offered later on in the text. So why do we have nang? So all of the translators have just skipped the whole issue.
They don’t translate chi nang. They just pass it. I’ve checked all of the versions. It is present in all of them. There is something going on here.
It is outer and inner torma offerings. What is being referred to? It’s a frozen form, that is why the outer and inner come before Torjon, which are objects of offerings. These actually, I think, are the goddesses of outer and inner offerings who do not here offer the inner offering, but only the outer offering. I think that is the meaning, but nobody translates this.
They just skip. Bear bearing glorious form, sound, smell, taste, and sensation. And what is missing here is that if you read the commentary such as Kachen Ngawang Chöden, the goddesses are bearing the symbols of form such as a mirror. The symbols of sound such as a lute for instance, a vina. And what do the goddesses do?
They fill, kyabpa, they pervade, the ten directions. And the reason I rushed through a bit is because, as I told you before last time, I have some copying for you to do. So since we have completed the offering section, I have a scanned outline. And I would like to ask you to copy out and translate for next time. This section here, which is in blue without paying any attention to the notes in the margin.
Because we will then use this outline to understand the totality of the offering section.