Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 45-minute revision class, Ven Jampa Gendun quizzes students on the Collected Topics logic curriculum rather than lecturing — drawing out definitions, examples, and debate posits through rapid back-and-forth. He opens with a brief recap of the three major divisions of Collected Topics, then works methodically through topics from the lesser path of reasoning: the Buddhist taxonomy of colors (four primary, eight secondary drawn from the Buddha’s discourses), the systematic division of all phenomena under “established basis” (form into eleven types, consciousness into mind and mental factors, and the three conditions required for any consciousness to arise), isolates, reverse phenomena, and generality versus instance. A sustained worked example — why a cat qualifies as an instance of animal and satisfies all three required qualities — shows the debate format in action. Suitable for students actively drilling Buddhist logic and debate.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 53 CT 1988 08 30.mp3
UUID: 80fd200b-add3-4496-804b-e35aad89554c
Teacher: Ven Jampa Gendun
Collection: Collected Topics (Ven Jampa Gendun)
Date: 1988-08-30
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 45.5 minutes
Words: ~3,479
So we just continue with the revision. So we’ve finished the abbreviated presentation of the cause and effect. There wasn’t very much presented, just the direct and indirect causes and the cooperative and substantial causes and then their corresponding effects. Are there any questions? Any of the material that we’ve covered up till now?
What are the topics that we’ve covered? First topic, you know, within this the lesser path of reasoning there’s eight you know, there’s the collected topics has three overriding divisions, major divisions. What are the three major divisions? Lesser, middling, and greater paths of reasoning. Lesser, middling, greater paths of reasoning.
And then the lesser path of reasoning has how many divisions? Eight. First? Color. Second?
Established basis. Third? Instance. I think we’ll call instance. I think it’s maybe the better word.
And seventh? The small explanation or the abbreviated explanation. In the middling path of reasoning you’ll get another explanation of cause and effect but it would be more extensive. So this is called the small or the abbreviated explanation of cause and effect just to introduce the subject. Let’s see.
Let’s take a look. Let’s read this here. So Karakama. Karakama. Colors.
Colors. So colors is is this what to it was the first, you know, the first thing that’s taught to the to the new to the new student and just to get him used to the idea of working with divisions and definitions and beginning to have some basis for the debates. So color is divided into how many divisions. What are those two? Okay, primary and secondary.
We can’t say secondary in general. That’s right. Secondary the secondary where do they call it? In this context. Because these secondaries don’t include all secondaries, do they?
Do they, Danny? What were the primary colors? Blue, red, yellow and white. That’s right. Blue, red, yellow and white.
So it’s just like in western system but we don’t include the color white as a primary color. And the what were some of the examples of secondary colors in this context? Well, was cloudy. Mostly. Misty.
Misty, that’s right. Smoke. Smoke color. So these were the eight colors that were mentioned in some of the discourses by the Buddha. So these aren’t in general.
They’re not the general secondary colors. They’re secondary colors in this context. Just specific eight which were mentioned in the discourses by the Buddha. And then the second division was what? The second subdivision?
Established basis, that’s right. So this is a way of systematizing all the phenomena which make up the universe. Everything is included in this system. So I think, you know, if we could remember, for example, that existence iswhen existence is divided it has manyhow many divisions? Existent?
Two. And what are those two? Permanent thing. Then when we divide thing, how many divisions? Three.
Three? What are they? They are form, consciousness, and non-associated compositional factor. Good. That’s right.
And then we divide form. How many divisions? Eleven? Anybody take a chance? Nonsense.
So, it’s eye, ear, nose, tongue, body. Eye, that’s five. Mind sense? Is mind sense included? Is it a form?
Eye, ear, nose, tongue, body. Yeah, that’s fire. Yeah. So these are all forms. They’re very they sense powers.
For example, eye sense power is not the fleshy white thing. It’s said that there’s some kind of very subtle matter within the eyeball itself and this is a very subtle form. It takes three conditions to generate a consciousness. It takes what? Can anybody name these three conditions to generate a consciousness?
Can anybody just guess? We’re just talking about any type of consciousness. In order to generate a consciousness, we need three conditions. When these three conditions come together, then a particular consciousness arises. Consciousness itself.
Okay, previous moment of consciousness? The sense power and the objective sense. That’s right. So the object is called the objective condition. The sense power is called the dominant condition or sometimes called the determinate condition.
And then the previous moment of consciousness is called the immediate condition. So we need all those three when these three aggregate come together, then a particular consciousness arises. So these senses, these eye sense powers are subtle matters in the various organs. So that’s five. There were six more in a division of form.
Form. Taste. Hearing. It wouldn’t be hearing, would Yeah. Isn’t what is it?
Why? Odor. Odor. Well, odor. Smell.
What would be an example of form for mental consciousness? Example of mental form for mental consciousness? Is it a form? I don’t have a good It’s so much better. Mine are no good.
Oh, okay. Let me have another one. Let’s see. No. It’s not good.
That’s right. Yeah. Those are all formed from mental consciousness, which I don’t have it. Oops. Yeah.
So form for mental consciousness. For example, you know, a single atom. So that this it’s not an object of any of the sense consciousnesses but it is formed. It’s only formed as an object of the mental consciousness. So there’s eleven divisions of form.
In consciousness, how many divisions? Two. What are they? It’s mind and mental factors. Mind and mental factors.
Yeah, that’s right. What would be an example of mind? Mind, eye consciousness. It would be that’s almost a little more quick to say. According to the list, eye consciousness goes beyond Yeah.
I think is that what it says here? I think it’s more mind. As I think I mentioned, I didn’t quite go along with that. It is better to say primary eye consciousness or primary eye sense consciousness. But that’s not so important.
That’s right, Uni. What would be an example of a mental factor? A mental factor. So there are fifty one mental factors. Sleep is one.
That’s one of four changeables. That’s right. Yeah, that’s right. So there’s things like anger, all non virtue, the faith, anger, ignorance, identity, things like discrimination. Yeah, so there’s a list of fifty one mental factors.
Non associated compositional factors are divided how many divisions? Two. And what are they? Person non associated compositional factors and non person And what would be examples? Person non associated compositional factors?
Pardon? Deni. Non personal? What is the meaning of non associated compositional factor? What is the meaning of that word?
Why do they call it non associated compositional factor? That’s Composite? Yeah, a product which is neither form nor consciousness. The aggregation of causes and effects causes and conditions. But it’s neither, but it’s not associated, it’s neither called form of consciousness.
Any questions about that? So, I mean, each the sense objects are divided. The colors, odors, tastes, tangibles. Then the third topic was what? Isolates?
Identifying isolates. And there are How many phenomena are mutually equally pervasive with, for example, the isolate of thing? How many? Five. Everybody agree?
Four. Okay, if we take isolate of thing. What is the first? And if you were to pause it that, what would it be? Which is the same as thing?
And if you were to posit that? Third? You can’t read that, can you, Pon? Do you have this? What’s the top?
Read the top and read it from me. That’s number one. Oh, I wasn’t writing it very clear. The same thing which is the thing. And the third?
Definition? That which is able to perform a function. And what is that? Reposit that? Definition of that which is able to perform function?
So this is, you know, in each of these we’re talking about the same object. Same as thing, thing which is the same as thing, that which is able to perform a function. They’re all pointing toward the same object. What was the fourth? That which possesses of imputation and of which possesses three qualities which possesses the three qualities of existence of?
Of that which is able to perform function. So that which possesses the three qualities of imputation or existence, That is the definition of what? That which possesses the three qualities of imputation or existence. That is the definition. Is it a definition?
That which is able to perform that which possesses the three qualities of imputational existence? What is the difference between that which we just spoke of? Number four and number three? The fourth and the third. What’s the imputational existence?
Well all we’ve done is the definition of definiendum is that which possesses three qualities of imputational existence. So we just used the definition of defendendum, wrote that out, and then repeated this. So we haven’t changed the meaning in any way. And what is that? That which possesses three qualities of imputational existence of that which is able to perform a function.
That’s the only So in all these, we’re just So what how do You know, we’re talking about We have an object. An object. And we want to talk about just that object. So just as when we develop a meaning generality or a mental image, the way we can begin to talk about the object is by eliminating everything else. After we’ve eliminated, thrown out everything else.
That which is left over is that which I’m talking about. I want to talk about this thing. I’m going throw out everything else and say, Okay. You see that? That thing that’s left over?
That’s what I’m going to talk about. That is the same as thing. That is the thing which is the same as thing. That is the definiendum of that which is able to perform a function. It’s an isolated thing.
We’ve isolated it. This is where this word comes from. We isolate it. But if I say green thing, a green thing Green thing is not the isolated thing. There’s only one object which is isolated thing.
What is that? Yeah, because it’s not in order to be it has to be the same as thing. It has to be the same as thing. So green thing is not the same as thing, is it? So green thing is not the isolate of thing.
Green thing is not the definitum of that which is able to perform a function. It’s the definitum of that which is able to perform a function and is green. We’re talking about only one exact object. As compared to when we talk about generality, for example? A tree.
A maple tree is a tree. A gum tree is a tree. But the only thing which is an isolate of tree is what? Tree. So a maple tree, is it the isolated tree?
Why is it not the isolated tree? So, when I talk about tree, when I talk about the isolated tree, I’m not talking about maple trees, gum trees, any I’m only talking about tree, whatever that happens to mean. So sometimes when we’re in debate where you say want to specifically talk about tree, not any particular type of tree, maple trees or gum trees. I’ll say, isolate of tree. I use this term Isolative tree.
That’s what I’m going talk about. I’m not talking about any specific instance of it, but just isolated tree. That which is the same as tree is what I’m talking about. And then what was the that’s the third topic and the fourth? Is this about this?
Is that the fourth or the fifth? Reverse of being and reverse of non being. What is the okay, if I say dog, what is the reverse of not being dog? Reverse of not being dog? Reverse what did I say?
Reverse of bean dog? Reverse of bean dog? Not dog? And the reverse of not being dog is what? Isn’t it Yeah.
A gum tree the reverse of not tree? A gum tree the reverse of not being tree? But being gum tree. But is gum tree Is that the reverse of not tree? Gum tree is not the reverse of not being tree.
So if we take the example of gum tree and we say, well first we reverse the gum tree. We get rid of everything made in the gum tree. So we get rid of maple trees, houses, dogs, cats, oak trees. And then the reverse of not gum tree. Reverse of not is only gum tree.
And the reverse of not tree Is gum tree the reverse of not being tree? We have tree and we get rid of everything. First, we reverse of that, we get rid of. And then the of this reverse is this thing, isn’t it? What is that?
That is the reverse of not tree. Tree. Tree. And so is the gum tree reverse of not being tree? Isn’t it is is the gum tree not a tree?
The gum tree is a tree. Isn’t it the reverse of being tree? No. That doesn’t look as old as this. Is the is gum tree the reverse and not bean tree?
Is it the reverse of being tree? Then it’s the reverse of being tree? Not tree. Nut tree. When we get rid of nut tree, do we get rid of gum tree?
Yeah. And then reverse of that is gum tree still in here? So is this the gumtree the reverse of not tree? Not tree? And the fifth word is is and is-not.
What do we do with that? The dog which brown and animal which is not a bird. What is what is the pervasion? Dog which is brown, an animal which is not a bird. Sweet possibilities.
Anybody else? We’ve got three? Anybody else? Three possibilities. Is not pervasion, it’s not three possibilities.
Which pervades which? Which is may not be pervaded by animal, And then? An animal which is not a bird is not pervaded by being a dog which is brown. Pause it. Cat is the subject.
It is an animal which is not a bird. Dog which is brown is the subject. It is an animal which is not an animal which is not a bird. Dog which is brown is the subject. It is not an animal which is not a bird?
Oh, we said cat is subject. Cat is subject. It is an animal which is not a bird. It is not an animal which is not a bird. No, it’s not.
Cat is the subject. It is not a dog which is brown. Why? Because it’s a cat. Actually, mean, you give that answer.
I mean, you say, a cat, why is a cat not a dog? Because it’s a cat. You haven’t really Anyway, I mean, start with that. A cat is subject to why is it not a dog which is brown? Because it’s not a dog.
And then, why is it not a dog? Because it It doesn’t have dog-ness. It’s not a feline or something. Okay. So that’s so difficult.
Is enormous. In the what, generality in particular? The instance? Generality in instance? Let’s see.
Animal. Animal. And cat. Okay. Cat is the subject.
It follows that it is an instance of animal? Why? That’s right. Cat. Animal is the generality of cat.
Cat is the subject. It follows that it is the instance of animal. It does not follow that cat is an instance of animal because it does not have the complete way of applying instance of animal. It does not have the complete way of applying instance of animal. Do have the sheet, Betty, handy?
Let’s go through that one. Yeah? Okay. So cat is the subject. It has the complete way of applying instance of animal.
Cat is the subject. It has a complete way of applying the instance of animal. It does not have the complete way of applying the instance of animal. Cat is the subject? It follows that it has the complete way of applying the instance of animal.
Okay. So you could not accept. If cat is a subject, follows it has a complete way of applying instance of animal because cat is an animal. It has a relation of being the same entity with animal and there are many animals which are not cats which have a common locus with animal. There are many phenomena which have a common locus with animal which are not cat.
For example, dog. The three ways of applying the instance, there has to have I mean, not three ways. The complete way has three qualities, doesn’t it? In this, what would be the three qualities? When we say that cat is an instance of animal, cat has to have three qualities with respect to animal.
What will be the first? It’s the same type object. So yeah, so cat is an animal, okay? An animal. And the second?
Same entity, that’s right. And the third? Yeah. It’s very good. Yeah.
Yeah. Other let’s say other phenomena. Yeah. Many. Many many other.
Phenomena. Common locus. Common locus with you know, aside from cat. Yeah. Aside from cat with animal.
That’s good. Then we can go we can go through. You know you could debate the first one. Animal is a subject. Why is it an animal?
But we won’t do that. Animal is a subject. Cat is a subject. It is the same entity as animal? Why?
Cat is a subject. It is the same entity as animal? Because it’s instance of generality. Well, that’s what we’re debating. That would be So let’s because if we eliminate animal, we eliminate cat.
And if you got rid of all animals, get rid of cat. Therefore, say that cat is the same entity as animal. Dog is the same entity as animal. If we got rid of animal, we get rid of dog. Chair is not the same entity as animal because if we got rid of animal, we could still have a chair.
If we take away this object, then anything else that we necessarily have to take away at the same time, we definitely necessarily have to take that object along with it, then the object is the same entity. For example, the impermanence of this paper and the paper are the same entity. If I take away the paper, I take away the impermanence of the paper, I take away the ink on the paper, I take away the white color of the paper. Whereas I take the table away if I take away the white paper. So the table and the white paper are different entities.
So any phenomena which I necessarily must eliminate, take away when I remove a second object, they’re of the same entity. So cat and animal are the same entity because by removing animal I must if I get rid of all animals I get rid of cat. If I get rid of the animals in this room, I get rid of cat. And then, the third quality was that there are many other phenomena which have a common locus with animal which are not cat. For example?
Cow is a subject. It has a common locus with animal. So, posit that in the common locus. What is the common locus between cow and animal? Is ultimate truth an animal?
It’s easier than you think. Just the cow? Something which is a cow and an animal. Alright? Common locus between cow and animal?
Cowboys? Cowboys. Well, can you something which is both a cow and an animal. Is sting a cow? Does sting get milk?
Not without the next number. Something which is both a cow and an animal. Give an example of a cow. What type? Friesian.
That’s a top tier cow. It is? Comes black and blue Okay, good. Friesian cow. Yeah, that’s right.
Friesian cow is a subject. Is it a cow? Yeah. It is an animal? Yeah.
So, it’s a common locus between cow and animal? That’s a yeah, it’s freezing. I’ve never heard of that. It must be Australian. Then the seventh division was cause and effect.
Is the direct cause? Oh, no. It’s just yeah. What is the direct cause of fire? What is the subject?
And it’s the direct cause? Why? It is immediate cause of Is that what we said? It is a direct cause of fire. It’s a direct cause of fire.
What is the posit the indirect causifier. It’s not the direct cause of fire? Why? Air is not the direct cause of fire because it does not directly cause fire. Nobody?
We’re not sure. Yeah? Then you get fire or flint stones. Get fire. So what are we talking about there?
We’re not talking about direct and indirect. We’re talking about cooperative cause and substantial cause, aren’t we? It means the fire is glowing and we look for the substantial and direct cause. We got a flint. What is the substantial cause?