Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. “Does ‘pencil and table’ exist as a single entity?” — that puzzle anchors this 25-minute session as Ven Jampa Gendun works through the Buddhist logic curriculum known as Collected Topics with a small group of students. He opens by distinguishing generality from instance, using “dog” as the test case, then examines pervasion — what logical entailment actually requires. The session’s liveliest stretch tackles whether conjunctive subjects like “hot and cold,” “Sue and Alastair,” and “milk and sugar in your tea” can be said to exist at all, drawing students into Socratic back-and-forth with flashes of dry humour. The session closes with a traditional dedication of merit. Suited to students actively working through the Collected Topics debate curriculum.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 48 CT 1988 08 09.mp3
UUID: 9c99fda1-b004-46e4-8766-32a69793cd47
Teacher: Ven Jampa Gendun
Collection: Collected Topics (Ven Jampa Gendun)
Date: 1988-08-09
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 25.0 minutes
Words: ~2,000
Which is which dog? Which one is it not? Dog is an instance. It’s not a generality? An instance.
The generality is Is dog is dog dog is a subject? And dog can be a general idea as well. Mhmm. Then you get many dogs with different voices. So what is with respect to generality and instance, what is pervasion?
It is not three possibilities because it is not four possibilities. Why? Because there is a common locus and if an object is in generality it is not pervaded by being a thing and if an object is an instance it is not pervaded by being a generality. I gave three reasons. If an object is an incident is not is is not not pervaded by being a generality, is not not not pervaded by being a generality because there’s an object which is an instance and which is not a generality.
The reason how to spell it. Let’s say, hot and cold is the subject. Hot and cold is the subject. It is not a generality. It is a generality.
Hot and cold as the subject. It follows that it is a generality. Why? Because it is an instance. Reason why it’s an instance.
Of course. Hot and cold as the subject is not an instance? Hot and cold as a subject is an instance because it’s an instance of thing. There is no such thing. Hot and cold as a subject is not an instance of thing?
Hot and cold as subject is an instance of thing because it has a complete way of applying the thing. It has a complete way of applying as an instance of a thing. Why? Because hot and cold is a thing. It is hot and cold is the same entity as thing.
And there are many phenomena which are not hot and cold which have a common locus with thing. Let’s talk about that. Hot and cold is not a thing? Hot and cold is not a thing. Hot and cold — does hot and cold not exist?
Hot and cold hot and cold does not exist. Hot and cold exist because hot exists and cold exists. I give two reasons. Hot exists and cold exists. If hot exists and cold exists and hot and cold don’t exist.
If hot exists and cold exists, It’s not prohibited by being that the hot and cold exists. If dog exists and cat exists, there’s not prohibited that dog and cat exists? Dog and cat do not exist? Dog and cat do not exist. Do Sue and Alister exist?
Why? Sue and Alister don’t exist. Sue and Alister do not exist. Do not exist. Sue and Alastair do not — are they the object of cognition, of a valid cognition.
I’m not the object of valid cognition. How about table and pencil? Table and pencil as a subject, they exist? They don’t exist. Table and pencil do not exist.
Yeah. They do exist because of the object of eye consciousness. Object of a valid eye consciousness. Is there any valid is there any valid con eye consciousness which has ever seen a a table in a pencil? Just just just one.
Just one valid consciousness. That’s all thanks. Has anybody ever seen a pencil on the table? Has anybody ever seen? This one is a we have a volunteer in the audience.
Sir, will you step up here? Tell us what it look like. You’ve never seen a pencil on a table? I’ve seen a pencil and a table. Have you seen a pencil on a table?
You’ve never seen a pencil on the table? Comma. Comma. Have you ever seen a cat and a dog? Have you ever When you eat mixed vegetables, you stick your fork in and there’s a piece of corn and a piece of string bean.
Do you see a string? You see one at a time? Or do you see them all together? You have you ever seen corn and bean at the same time? Have you seen corn and bean?
Is it did the corn and bean exist? Corn and beans do not exist. I see. How about milk and sugar? If you put milk in your your tea and there’s no sugar there?
If you put sugar in there and there’s no milk, there’s no tea? They don’t exist? Milk and sugar. Do you ever put milk and sugar in your tea? Does milk and sugar exist?
No. How do you put them in your tea if they don’t exist? No, I didn’t ask that. Do milk and sugar exist? No.
Yes? No? No. Then you don’t put milk and sugar in your tea? No.
You don’t put milk and sugar in your tea? No. Does it No? I see. Okay.
Does you put gas and oil in your car? Petrol and oil in your car? No. No? I wouldn’t buy your car.
You don’t put petrol and oil in your car. Too strong. It’s still steaming and dry. You put petrol and water in your car? No.
I don’t know. Don’t know. Why they say it together. Do you put do you ever do you put both legs in your car? Both legs?
Do you put two legs in a car? Why do you say that pencil and a table don’t exist? Pencil and table do not exist. Because of the because a pencil and a table is not a pencil. Does something for for something to exist, does it have to be a pencil?
Pencil. Pencil. Pencil. And table. That’s the subject.
It is existent. Is it not nonexistent? Reason:? Give me a give me a good reason. Because because an object cannot be both? Because because an object cannot be both pencil and table.
Okay. Okay. Let’s check it out. If okay. Let’s check out the second one.
We’ll just we’ll just jump down to the second. Okay? The pervasion? Okay. If an if an object if an object cannot be both a pencil and table then it’s pervaded by being nonexistent?
If this is a correct reason, what you’re saying it is, then you must must have pervasion, right? Therefore, if an object if an object cannot be both pencil and table then it’s pervaded by being nonexistent. Right? Okay. Dog is a subject.
It is nonexistent. It follows that it’s nonexistent. Why? Because if an object cannot be both pencil and table, it’s pervaded by being nonexistent. Then a dog cannot be both pencil and table.
It’s not not not permitted by being nonexistent? This is yeah. You you’re saying because the pencil and table is not a pencil and table, therefore, doesn’t exist? Because the pencil on table is not a pencil on table? Pencil on table is not a pencil on table.
Okay? Therefore, it’s it’s pervaded by being nonexistent. So dog is a subject that is nonexistent because the pencil on table is not a pencil on table. Pencil on table is the pencil on table? So pencil on table is nonexistent?
Maybe, how can you what? How many let’s take a vote. How many think a pencil and table exists? Does anybody agree that a pencil and table don’t exist? But not as named like that pencil and table.
There’s no such thing as a pencil on a table. If you glue it, you glue the pencil to the table, maybe you could have. They have a vase and a cloud. What? Vase and a cloud.
If I ask you to bring me your your coat and shoes, say, well, they don’t exist. I can’t bring them. Sorry. Could you bring them? Then your coat and shoes exist?
Yes. But it’s separate objects. We’re not questioning this. We’re just saying coat and shoes, pencils and paper. We’re not talking about whether they’re mixed together or That that was his thinking at the time.
See, he he he thought you would trick him. To go to. Yeah. But we you can’t common sense. Last time we had similar thing with the white horse.
The white horse white? Is it white horse? Is white pencil white pencil? No. It’s so it’s does does a could bring me your hat and coat.
Yes. Can still do that. So your hat and coat exist? That’s true. Hat and coat exist?
Yes. Pencil and table exist? They exist as well. Okay. Separately.
So what do you think? Not as well, but you do. Do pencil and table exist? Yes? You sure?
Do the Marx brothers exist? Yeah. You know the Marx Brothers? Marx Brothers? It’s American, I guess.
Oh. An American comedian comedy group. Why don’t you think a pencil on the table exists? I’m just trying to understand that, hot and cold may exist. Not being nonexistent?
Did I say that? So hot hot and cold is not hot and cold, but hot and cold is existent. Hot and cold is hot and cold, but hot and cold is not not hot and cold, it’s existing. If something is not, it doesn’t exist. Something have to be itself to exist?
Let’s see. The thing and the non thing. Is the Does the non thing exist? Is the instance instance an instance? Is is instance an instance?
If something is not Is the man a man? Yes. I don’t know. Just to find out. Yeah.
How are you looking out? Why? Are all things all things? Anyway. How are things open?
How are things open? How are open? Do you think? I’ll think what do you think? If all things were all things I think all things were me.
Is this piece of paper all things? No. Then all things are all things. The paper is all things. If all things are all things, then anything has to be all things, doesn’t it?
No. All things has to be all things. All things. Anything. No.
If I say all things, that means everything has to be all thing. All thing and everything? Everything. Everything is not all thing. No.
Show me something which is everything is not all thing. This is a holistic question. Okay. Anyway. Notebook.
Is it not notebook. Notebook. Notebook. So I think hot and cold is an instance which is not a generality. That’s my idea.
Sounds like truth. That’s my idea. It’s an instant. Hot and cold is an instant because it’s an instant of thing, but it’s not a generality. It has no it has no instant.
There’s nothing which is hot and cold. What’s the thing? Hot and cold is a thing? Hot and cold is a thing because it is what? Object is What is it?
That’s good. Let’s say we’ll perform a function. Yeah? Hot and cold are not able to perform a function. I can’t think of them.
I hope it cannot perform a function. Can hot perform a function? Can cold perform a function? Can hot and cold perform a function? How about can Sue and Alastair perform a function?
Is there an instance? Sue and Alastair able to perform a function? Sue and Alastair exist? Soon Alistair exists. Do they have an instance?
Then they can’t how can they perform a function? Sue and Alastair — they don’t have an existence as an instance. How about the Sue and Alastair who got married? Are they Sue and Alastair? Think so.
I’m not sure why. So, Sue and Alastair is sitting in this room? Are they not Sue and Alister? Sue and Alister is sitting in this room. And the Sue and Alister sitting in this room are Sue?
Okay. Let’s see. We’ll stop. We’ll stop. Through these merits, may I soon attain the enlightened state of Guru Buddha, and may I lead every migrating being without exception to that state.
May the precious bodhimind not yet born arise and grow. May that born have no decline. May it increase forevermore.