Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Ven Jampa Gendun opens this 47-minute session by acknowledging that his English-language course on Collected Topics is entirely experimental — no precedent exists, and his own notes are in Tibetan. He justifies beginning so elementarily by quoting a blunt secular source: “practically the whole human race is out of its goddamn mind” and needs training in rational, methodical thinking. Two epistemological errors anchor his framework: ignorance of reality’s nature, and the assumption that self-cherishing leads to happiness. He maps their correction onto the Buddhist threefold training of hearing, reflecting, and meditating. After reciting refuge and Mañjuśrī prayers, he surveys the full Geshe curriculum to show where this introductory text fits, explains its Sūtra School viewpoint and its sources in Dharmakīrti’s logic and Vasubandhu’s Abhidharma, and outlines the three “paths of reasoning” that structure the work. Suited to newcomers with no prior philosophical background.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 01 CT 1988 03 08.mp3
UUID: ead47ed2-5daf-4d1a-b7db-54b5230a12cc
Teacher: Ven Jampa Gendun
Collection: Collected Topics (Ven Jampa Gendun)
Date: 1988-03-08
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 47.4 minutes
Words: ~5,857
You’ve been here so long. This is going to be, from my point of view, very experimental for many reasons. One of which is that I have never taught such a type of course at all. And as far as I know, nobody else has either, in the English language at least. So there’s no textbook that we can use.
There is a textbook which I am going to use, but it’s in Tibetan. And my notes from when I studied, they’re also in Tibetan. So it’s going to be experimental from the point of view of developing a vocabulary and method of operation. I propose to begin at an elementary level of instructing in the various topics, divisions and vocabulary, which are later going into in much greater depth in the various profound texts that a Buddhist monk or nun would train in during his course of studies. What we are going to begin with is oftentimes in a monastery situation begun at the age level of perhaps nine or ten years old.
This is purely because they use the text that we’re going to study as also a method for learning how to read and learning how the operation of the debate, learning the vocabulary, divisions and topics. At my school that I went to, I attended the Buddhist School of Dialectics in Dharmasala, India, sometimes referred to as the Buddhist School of Dialectics. We debate each day. The normal course of a day at the school, six days a week, would be we would have an hour and a half lecture by a teacher and then two debate sessions of approximately an hour and a half each on whatever subject was being taught. And oftentimes, these debates became rather dramatic.
There’s lots of hamming it up, you might say, involved in debate. Lots of what do they say? Much sound and fury. Quite often, not much meaning, but it looks good to people who don’t quite know what’s happening. So in my course of study at the Buddhist School of Dialectics, in the first year, the first subject that we take up is called the Collected Topics or more the title in full would be Presentation of the Collective Topics of Prime Cognition.
This is the very first thing that, as I said, a monk or nun would study. It in itself is not particularly profound. There’s not much information which is going to be presented, but it serves as the basis for all the later studies. It serves as the basis of beginning to comprehend the vocabulary, all the various subjects, the divisions, topics that you’re going to cover in a later, greater text. So the course of study would follow first the collected topics.
In my case, we studied that for six months. Then we went on to awareness and knowledge, that is the study of the mind. We studied that for three months. And then we went on to classes of reasoning or logic. We studied that for another three months.
So this first year is purely an introduction to the later texts which are taken up. I actually studied the first year twice. My school was taught purely solely in the medium of Tibetan. And as I knew no Tibetan, I oftentimes sat in a class and I didn’t understand one word that was being spoken for a whole day, quite often more than That was the situation I was in, but I persevered. I think it was worthwhile.
I’d like to read a quote, you know, why we’re going to take up Buddhist doctrine at such an elementary level. Why is it worthwhile? Why can’t we start at a more advanced level, sort of taking in more information, as it were? This has nothing particularly to do with Buddhism. I think that practically the whole human race is out of its goddamn mind and could use therapy.
All are biologically prone to think crookedly. All humans are somewhat nutty because they refuse pig headedly to accept reality and therefore make themselves depressed, anxious and enraged. You know, as I have mentioned quite often in my talks that we think one way and our emotional life is enacted another way. And I think very much our thinking is, as this author says, is quite crooked in the sense that we don’t think logically. We don’t know how to think logically.
We’re not used to it. It takes training to think rationally and logically along very methodical lines. So I think it’s a we all have a great deal of information. We all have a great deal of experiences. But we don’t somehow we have not been able to make use of this information and experiences and trans translate them into some sort of understanding, some sort of insight, realization.
It’s like pouring oil on water. It more or less floats on top. So in Buddhism, they stress very much the threefold activity of hearing, reflecting and meditating. Hearing the various teachings, getting the meanings of the of the words correct, getting the subjects, the divisions, that is taking in information, data, raw facts. Somehow we have to be able to interpret these facts.
We have to be able to fit them into some sort of conceptual pattern to see how they work within our own lives. And this involves the process of reflecting. It’s simply not enough to take in more information. Think T. S.
Eliot said something like, where is the knowledge we have lost in information? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? We are the age of information. But it’s just being piled more information one on top of another on top of another, and it’s not being integrated. And one reason that my personal experience and that I see about me is not a particularly Western problem is the fact that we don’t know how to work with the information, the data that we do have.
And therefore, I think training the mind thinking rationally and logically is quite worthwhile. So as I said, this is a very elementary subject. But I hope that we can train our minds, which I think is the real importance of what we’re doing here, in the use of using information, using it to think logically along methodical lines, using reasoning in our lives more and more. The whole of Buddhism is structured around a threefold training in listening, reflecting and meditating. While Buddhist scholars concentrate on studying or listening to the Buddhist doctrine, the logicians study valid means of knowing and reasoning, the tools with which one reflects and is able to discern what is true and false.
This corresponds to the stage of reflection. The yogis or meditators are those who have established through listening and reflection what must be the case and who are now engaged in training themselves in the art of abandoning their delusions. It is one thing to decide through reasoning what must be true, another actually to see the world in that way. So this is quite necessary in order to come to a stable understanding, stable insights, to go through this threefold process of listening, reflecting, and meditating. Meditating in a sense of habituating yourself and gaining direct insight into what you have actually come to understand intellectually or conceptually.
The reflective part is very much the process of intellectual, rational, methodical thinking. The listening is getting the meaning straight, getting the division straight, understanding what is being said as raw data. As I have spoken about before, you know, if we talk about our basic problem where all our suffering is coming from, we can talk about an epistemological error. Ignorance, unknowing, misknowing, however you want to refer to it, is an epistemological error. Epistemology means the study of the method of knowing.
There’s something wrong in the way we understand reality. There’s something wrong in the way we conceive of reality. If we can begin to correct this error in the way we conceive of reality, is the ultimate benefit of all of our practice, then we can finish our suffering once and for all. So what we mean by removing ignorance is to correct our way of thinking. And we can begin to correct our way of thinking by simply training ourselves in the method of thinking clearly, rationally, methodically, logically.
So this experimental course in debate and the study of collected topics is going to be much very much orientated to developing and training the mind in rational methodical thinking. Partly we’re going to get more information but we’re going to take very simple information and we’re going to understand it, try to understand it, very small ideas. Generally we’re working with huge abstracts like vast abstract ideas. We don’t even know the building blocks. How can we understand these vast majestic palaces that we’re trying to build without even understanding how to do the mason work, one brick fits on top of another.
So we begin at the beginning which is the, in this case, the collected topics. I wish to begin at the very beginning and we’ll take recite the verse of refuge to generate some end the generation of proper motivation. Also, I would like to if you’ll share this, I’ll make some more copies in the future. I just have ten copies. This prayer, a very beautiful prayer to Mañjuśrī, which is often recited in the context of studying collected topics or Prajñāpāramitā, the perfection of wisdom.
Yeah. Oh, it’s okay. It doesn’t matter. It’s okay. Maybe it’s good for the It imprints some dispositions.
Who is it? Vasubandhu. He used to recite the Abhidharma, the one text on cosmology and psychology. And there was a bird outside of his window and used to hear him every morning. And this bird took rebirth as a monk in his future life and was able to recite the Abhidharma without having ever studied it.
So maybe there’s some benefit. There are two basic epistemological errors that I believe we make. One, we call ignorance. That is misunderstanding the nature of reality. The other is the efficacy of self-cherishing.
These are the two I I believe. I’ve never heard the other one put that way, but this is my my own conception I’m sharing with you. The efficacy. Efficacy. Efficacy.
Ah, there it is. Efficacy of self-cherishing. That we think we have a very and within our belief system, have a core assumption that by putting ourselves first, by getting mine, I’m going to gain the happiness that I’m seeking. And I think this is a misunderstanding. This is not in accordance with reality, neither is ignorance, which misconceives the nature of reality.
So the I think there’s these these two basic epistemological errors that we’re making. The ways that is to say errors in the way we understand, errors in the way we know. By correcting one, we we gain our own peace. The mind goes beyond suffering by removing all the disturbing factors within the mind, the various afflictive emotions, the root cause of which is ignorance, misconceiving the nature of reality. By removing the other, then we understand that our fullest potential is realized, is actualized in benefiting others.
And therefore, we have both method and wisdom that we generate the both the two bodies of a Buddha, that is the truth body and the form body of a Buddha through these two methods, removing ignorance, removing self-cherishing. In order to do that, we we first have to make use of a method, which is the Dharma or the truth. By coming in contact with the truth, the actual way things are, correcting our misunderstanding, then we can realize our potential both for one’s own and this realizing this potential, both one’s own purposes as well as other purposes, the purposes of others, are brought to fulfillment. In order to do this, we go for refuge to the method. We go for refuge to the truth, which is, in this case, we call the Dharma.
And we in order to actualize our own Buddhahood, in order to actualize our own potential, which is going for refuge to Buddha. And we do this in the context of a spiritual community, a Sangha, as a support, as an example, as inspiration in order to bring this process about. So in going for refuge, we’re going for refuge to our own potential as Buddha, to the truth, as the Dharma, the method by which we can actualize our potential, and the Sangha, the spiritual community, the context of the actualization. And as I said, by act by the ultimate benefit of going for refuge is one’s own peace and acting acting skillfully in the world to benefit others. So with such a motivation, that understanding that we are making errors in our ways of thinking, and that in order to begin to correct these basic misunderstandings, these basic crooked ways of thinking, that it’s worthwhile, I think, I have found it with my own experience to have studied dialectics and this specific topic of collected topics, therefore generating a motivation that in order to realize my own potential, in order to bring about the purpose not only of myself and others, I’m going to listen to this discussion on eclectic topics.
With such a motivation, we go for refuge and generate the proper motivation. To the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha, I go for refuge until I am enlightened through the merit I create by practicing giving and the other perfections. May I attain Buddhahood for the sake of all beings. To the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha, I go for refuge until I am enlightened. Through the merit I create by practicing giving and the other perfections, may I attain Buddhahood for the sake of all beings.
To the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha, I go for refuge until I am enlightened. Through the merit I create by practicing giving and the other perfections, may I attain Buddhahood for the sake of all beings. Reverently, I prostrate with my body, speech, mind and present clouds of every type of offering, actual and mentally transformed. I declare all my negative actions and accumulate since beginningless time and rejoice in the merit of all holy and ordinary beings. Please remain until saṃsāra ends and turn the wheel of dharma for sentient beings.
I dedicate the merit created by myself and others to the great enlightenment. May all beings have happiness and the causes of happiness. May all beings be free from suffering and the causes of suffering. May all beings never be separated from the happiness that knows no suffering. May all beings abide in equanimity, free from attachment and anger that holds them close in others’ distance.
Abayance to my guru and protector Mañjuśrī, who holds to his heart a scriptural text symbolic of his seeing all things as they are, whose intelligence shines forth as the sun unclouded by delusions or traces of ignorance, who teaches in sixty ways with the loving compassion of a father for his only son, all creatures caught in the prison of saṃsāra, confused in the darkness of their ignorance, overwhelmed by their suffering. You whose dragon like proclamation of dharma arouses us from the stupor of our delusions and frees us from the iron chains of our karma, who wields the sword of wisdom hewing down suffering wherever it spreads, appear, clearing away the darkness and ignorance. You, whose princely body is adorned with one hundred and twelve marks of a Buddha, who has completed the stages achieving the highest perfection of bodhisattva, who has been pure from the beginning, I bow down to you, O Mañjuśrī. With the brilliance of your wisdom, O Compassionate One, illuminate the darkness enclosing my mind. Enlighten my intelligence and wisdom so that I may gain insight into the Buddhist words and the texts that explain them.
So the text we’re going to study is the presentation of the collected topics of prime cognition. It covers a vast number of topics and is an introduction to all the various later texts that are studied by monks and nuns in their Buddhist philosophical studies, mainly logic and epistemology. A few words about the text itself. It’s written from what is called the sūtra school point of view. Some of you may have may know that who have already studied the the system of tenets that within Buddhism there are four overall schools which can can be defined.
There’s the Great Exposition School or Baivesika in Sanskrit. There’s the Sūtra School or the Sautrāntika. There’s the mind only school, the Cittamātra. And then there’s the Middle Way school, is the Madhyamaka. So these were taking all the various teachings that the Buddha gave.
They were able to approximate classify these into four schools. Now some people question, well, Buddha really know the truth of situation, the matter, why was he so wishy washy all the time? Why did he say one thing to one person and say one thing to another? And if one really goes into it and thinks about it, it is an expression of skillful means, isn’t it? That giving one teaching consistently would show a lack of ability to communicate with the diverse capacities, dispositions, propensities of different people, that everyone has a different level of ability is what it comes down to.
So if one gave consistently the same teaching, only a small minority would be able to understand that teaching. Only a small minority would be able to be benefited by that teaching. By giving whatever was applicable to each person according to his dispositions, the capacity, then there was some benefit to be derived by everyone. Everyone could be led on from their place a little further along the path. Each teaching was of some use to lead a particular disciple along the path somewhat.
So this particular teaching, this particular book, is written solely from the point of view of the sūtra school, of the four schools. Usually they rank them, from the Great Exposition School, the Sūtra School, the Mind Only School, and the Middle Way School. That these are a graduation in gaining a closer and closer approximation to the nature of reality, an actual explanation of the way things are. A person in the great exposition school, if you were to present the nature of reality from the middle way school, he could not benefit from it. He could not understand it.
Also, can be understood from the point of view of the process of development of one individual practitioner, the course of development of one person in his spiritual progress. He will pass through these four schools in his understanding. That’s why when we studied the the tenets, the four tenets, we said in order to understand the higher tenets, you must understand the the lower tenets. It’s like a ladder building up to the higher understanding. Without the lower understanding, then it’s impossible to understand the highest, the most subtle points of the middle way school.
We’re very fortunate in a way, we’re very sophisticated If you compare us to someone who hasn’t been exposed to, for example, the atomic theory, you know, that we take it for granted when we talk about that this table is actually just a concentration of energy that’s made up of millions of atoms whirling about in orbits. That’s a very sophisticated concept. The table just isn’t quite as solid as it appears to our naked eye. If you would explain to that that to someone who had never, come in contact with the idea, he would question your sanity probably. You know, how can, you know, how can that be made up of whirling bits of matter energy?
It’s solid. It’s hard, rock hard. Because this concept would be a little bit too difficult for him to soak in initially, that he’d have to become more exposed to this idea slowly over a period of time than he could begin to comprehend what you meant. So this would be more or less correspond to say the great exposition school where everything that’s built up is atoms, solid, indivisible, partless atoms, truly existent atoms. And then above that, there’s a more sophisticated point of view in the Sūtra School.
Now everything that we’re going to study is going to be presented from that particular viewpoint of the Sūtra School. It presents a complete system of all of logic, epistemology, the nature of reality. Most of this will be accepted by the upper schools. Some of it will not. Some of it will be refuted by the upper schools, by the mind only school, by the middle way school.
But since most of it is, and we cannot and for initial studies, we cannot go directly to the higher schools, then this is a good place to begin. Since most of what is presented here is accepted by the higher schools, and it is a complete system explaining the nature of reality and its various aspects, then it’s a it’s a useful place to begin to study Buddhist philosophy. But it has to be pointed out it’s being taught from a particular point of view, from a point of view of a particular school, the Sūtra school. The text, Collected Topics, has as its source two major works, one by Dharmakīrti, perhaps the greatest Indian logician in history, who wrote a text called Commentary to Dignāgā’s Compendium of Valid Cognition, which in Sanskrit is Pramānavārttika, probably one of the most profound of all logic texts that was ever composed in India. Dharmakīrti’s teacher was named Dignāgā.
Dignāgā wrote a text called Compendium of Valid Cognition, Prime Cognition. In order to help others understand his teacher’s work, Dharmakīrti wrote the text a commentary to that, therefore the name Commentary to Dignāgā’s Compendium of Prime Cognition. It’s interesting why he he wrote this text. Dharmakīrti wrote this entire logic text in order to prove that Buddha was a valid person. By valid, I mean, that he could be trusted.
Therefore, he had to set out a complete system of logic why Buddha could be trusted. Unless you could present valid reasons for why Buddha could be trusted, then there’s no way that we can really convince people. And in order to then present valid reasons why Buddha could be trusted, we have to know what a valid reason is to begin with. So you have to teach people what is a valid reason in order to teach people why Buddha can be trusted so that, you know, you can actually progress along the path. All the various parts of the text fit together as a but with the prime goal of establishing that Buddha was a valid person.
For example, that he was not prone to error, And even though he was not prone to error, he did not lie. There was no reason why he should present things falsely. So we had to establish that the Buddha was not prone to error, that he was not making any mistakes in his presentation of the nature of reality. And not only that, but he didn’t have any reason to lie or to state things wrongly, that he had, in fact, great compassion. In order to establish great compassion, had to Dharmakīrti had to establish rebirth because great compassion was so unimaginable to attain in one lifetime that Dharmakīrti said, well, it can’t be attained in one lifetime.
It has to be built up over dispositions over numberless lifetimes. Therefore, Dharmakīrti had to prove rebirth. And all these various foundations had to be laid, rebirth in order to develop compassion. What is the valid reason in order to understand, to show that Buddha was in fact, did understand reality without error. And so he developed a complete text, the Pramānavārttika.
The other source of collected topics is Vasubandhu’s treasury of knowledge, which is Abhidharmakośa. Abhidharma is Abhidharma literally means high high Dharma. I know where was it? Ajahn Buddhadasa, a Thai master. Sometimes the forest monks in Thailand, they’re rather derogatory toward the city monks because the city monks, sit around and study Abhidharma all the time.
And while the forest monks are out there meditating. Ajahn Buddhadasa said, he was translating the word Abhidharma, which usually means high Dharma, the highest Dharma. He said it means too much Dharma. These are the true sources for all the various topics, definitions, divisions within the collected topics. Within the monastic system in Tibet, each of the universities within the monasteries would have their own set of textbooks.
For example, Loseling, Drepung had within in India these days, it has two main divisions, two universities within the Drepung monastery itself. Sera Monastery has two universities within itself, likewise Ganden. So there are at least six different universities, monastic universities. Each of them have their own monastic textbooks. That is to say, one particular author or in some cases several authors would compose the various commentaries and the various sets of textbooks that the monks in these particular universities would use.
This was done for several reasons. One, there was some dispute about settling the meaning of many of the the finer, more subtle points of the Buddhist teachings. Another was that by having a diverse set of textbooks, having various presentations, that there would it would never fall into dogma, that the doctrine could always, there would always be a dialectic going on. When these monks got together, they wouldn’t all agree upon the same doctrine. My teacher says this and right, know, your teacher says that, right, we have the same textbook.
I agree with you. That in fact, their textbooks might say something very different from one another. So they would occur a dialectic. A debate would be carried out in order to arrive at the real meaning, the real truth of the situation. So it was very much purposely kept in mind of the value of this diversity of systems of presentation of the same teachings, that they would use different definitions.
They would actually have some basic doctrinal differences. And that when they came together, they would argue these out not in order to as a method not only of developing the mind, but never allowing the teachings to fall into a rut, into some dogma where everybody accepts it because everybody has the same text, has the same teacher for that matter. So each of the universities has their own set of textbooks. First, the collective topics, and then as I said, the awareness and knowledge. They study a mind, they go on to study of reasoning, classes of reasoning.
Then they would go on to systems of tenets, which we, Lama Ngondro, taught here last year. And then they would begin the five great treatises, which are the main study within the area of sūtra, if we divide Buddhism into the two broad categories of sūtra and tantra, in order to gain a complete exposure to the study of sūtra, the monks would pursue the study of the five great treatises. So the first would be the Ornament for Clear Realization. The Abhisamayālamkāra. This was written by Maitreya as set down by Asaṇga.
And this is as if you know, this comes from the Prajñāpāramitā, the the wisdom gone beyond literature of the sutras. Maitreya condensed all the meaning which was found in the wisdom gone beyond, the transcendent wisdom sutras, and he composed the text Ornament for Clear Realization. In it, he sets forth all the paths and stages from where we are now at the level of an ordinary being and progressing through the spiritual stages up to a Buddha. Every stage, every path is clearly delineated, is clearly explained. This is called the explicit teaching.
Implicitly, it teaches emptiness. It’s the hidden teaching. This book is written from another point of view of one of the four systems of tenets. From the from the Autonomy Middle Way School. So this entire text which is it’s not the highest system is taught.
The Middle Way School has two divisions. Autonomy Middle Way and Consequentialist Middle Way. This text was written from the point of view autonomy middle way, all the various paths and stages and hiddenly the teaching on emptiness. In in my studies, I think the root text I think is fifty one pages long. We studied this text for five years.
Sometimes in the monasteries they studied they studied even longer. So this is the the the first treatise that they studied. Then they studied entering the middle way by Candrakīrti. Madhyamakāvatāra by Candrakīrti. This is a commentary to Nāgārjuna’s Root Wisdom.
Here that very highest system of the Consequentialist Middle Way school with respect to emptiness is set forth. It is probably the most important text if one wants to study emptiness. Entering into the middle way by Candrakīrti. And that studied for approximately three years. Then there’s, as I mentioned, there’s the Dharmakīrti’s commentary to Dignāgā’s Compendium of Prime Cognition.
This is studied it’s a very heavy text because it goes into a great deal of logic, a great deal of reasoning. Therefore, it’s not studied in one swoop. It’s studied about two months a year for about ten years. Each year, they would set aside a period of time and study this particular text for two months. Then the next year, they would progress further in the text but again study for two months.
It says it’s more involved with epistemology, logic. Then they would go on to study Abhidharma, that is cosmology and psychology. And there are two basic texts for this study. There’s Treasury of Knowledge, Abhidharmakośa of Vasubandhu by Vasubandhu, who sets forth the Abhidharma from the point of view of the Hīnayāna or the two lower tenets. This is a lot of background information.
It’s probably not so important. But it will give you an idea of what a study for a Geshe, I think some of you are familiar. The Tibetan government awards a doctor of divinity degree, which is called Geshe. And this is what he is actually studying. It’s necessary for him to go through in order to attain his Geshe degree, these various studies, these various treatises that I’m setting out.
This is the very first thing that a Geshe would study, They collect the topics. And then the second, Abhidharma text would be Abhidharmasamuccaya, which is compendium of knowledge by Asaṇga. And that is written from the point of view of the two upper schools, the mind only school and the middle way school, or sometimes referred to as the great vehicle schools. And this he would study for about three years. And then finally, he would study Vinaya, that is to say moral discipline, the the rules of the monk’s vows or the nun’s vows.
And he would study this for about two years. After this time, he would within within his class, he would wait for his turn to take the examinations which are given yearly by the Tibetan government. And he would sit in debate. He would have to take a tour of other universities and have to sit at each of these universities, then in that whole university by himself or sometimes with a partner, there might be two hundred monks debating him at one time. And so it takes a great deal of composure, let alone knowledge and understanding, to withstand this onslaught that goes on.
This usually occurs at the Monlam Festival, as just happened in Lhasa, or as just happening also in India. If you saw on SBS, you saw some monks debating. Usually, period of examination for the Geshe degree would take place during the Monlam festival. So this is the training that a monk would go through in order to finally get to the point of being a Geshe. After that, he could could become a teacher.
He could go off and meditate on his own. Or sometimes they would go on to tantric college. They would begin their study of tantra. As I said, all of this is merely the study of sūtra, only part of the teachings of Buddha. There’s the vast other area which is covered by tantra.
He would go on to a tantra college, and there he would study for perhaps four years, four additional years, in order to become conversant in all the literature of tantra. So the text itself, Collected Topics, has three divisions. These divisions are called paths of reasoning. They’re chapter headings. They’re called paths of reasoning.
So very easily enough, there’s the lesser path of reasoning, the middling path of reasoning, and the higher path of reasoning. So each of these would take up various topics. Sometimes they would repeat the same topic that was taken up at a lower stage but go into it a deeper, more exhaustive form. So to begin with, the lesser path of reasoning. Now as I said, each of the monastic universities would have their own textbook system.
So there is no particular conformity with how many divisions would be in each particular book, which topics would be covered. Roughly, it would be the same. If I use this, then I can say that the lesser path of reasoning is divided into eight divisions, or eight subjects, eight topics will be taken up in the lesser path of reasoning of this particular text, which is used at Drepung University, Drepung Loseling. For example, there is color. It’s the first topic.
Establish basis. Establish base. This is my vocabulary that I’m going to use and also very much so our system of debate is going to be experimental. So if I have to backtrack often, please excuse me, I haven’t been able to think far enough ahead. So we’re to more or less play it by ear as we go along.
The third would be reverse of being and reverse of non being. Reverse of being. B e I n g. Being. So these things won’t make any sense to you at this point.
Many of these are going to give you information. Many of these are simply going are methods for helping you develop, train your mind, to stretch yourself in abstract thinking, to be able to right now, you’re very sophisticated, much more sophisticated than the average Tibetan student who would be taking up these subjects. So some of these, we won’t even we were only going to present information that we’re going to go on. There’s no sense in working at things which you which are beneath your present ability in in my judgment. So some of these are information.
You acquire some new information, some new understanding. Others are purely material to help you work with in training your mind in debate and dialectics.