about how you approach these cases. What are you reading there? Hand it over. So I would like to say a little bit about that. A little bit more about that. So what I have to say is, I wrote down all day long. And you might try to, on a regular basis, to think of the case in the morning and in the evening, and try to think about the case in some sense throughout the day.

[01:07]

And when you think about the case, even for a short period of time, see if your thinking can be what I have been talking about as upright. See if your thought, your attitude, can be upright. The upright attitude is sometimes called the art of thinking, or the art of zazen. And I think I've already been talking about uprightness for some time.

[02:21]

But just to start, I would say that think about the case now and then, and try to have an upright attitude or upright thought about the case. And actually, what I would suggest is even aside from the case, that you try to develop a sense of uprightness throughout the day. A monk asked a great Zen teacher, Zhao Zhou, I think the monk asked him something like, do you remember what he asked him? Oh, he asked him a bunch of things. Well, didn't I have one time, remember when he asked him about, are we the same or different? Remember that one? No. He said, are we the same or different, the monk asked him, and he said, no, we're different.

[03:33]

And the monk said, what's the difference? He said, you get used by the 24 hours, I use the 24 hours. So I propose to you that the way to use the 24 hours is to be upright 24 hours. If you're not upright, then the 24 hours will use you. And the case will use you. And you won't be able to use the 24 hours or use the case. You might occasionally be able to use the 24 hours. Like, you know, if you're not upright you're like this, you know. So when the 24 hours are over here you can catch them. Hi! So once in a while you'll be able to use 24 hours. You'll be able to use 24 hours over around in here.

[04:37]

You know, the 24 hours in accord with your bias, in accord with your inclinations and your prejudices. Once in a while the world lines up with your prejudices, which is nice. But then the rest of the day you get thrown for a loop. Whereas if you're upright, everything that happens you can use. And so one definition or one way to talk about uprightness is being able to use whatever happens. And as I mentioned before, the Buddha said, those who practice all virtues... are upright and gentle, will see me right now teaching the Dharma. And practicing all virtues means that you're with, you're in the mud and water with all beings, which you are, pretty much, probably.

[05:47]

And gentle or flexible means that you have no fixed idea about what uprightness is, and you adapt according to the circumstances, and uprightness is this uprightness, this unbiased attitude. Yes? Isn't that what you described as using in 24 hours, wouldn't that be bias? Wouldn't that be bias? Wouldn't that be in a sense of bias? How so? Well, it can make a distinction between either Being used by or using the 24 hours, it seems like... Well, being used by means you don't think you're using it. Okay? Being used by means you don't think... You think, somebody's imposing this life on me. This is not... You know, I can't participate with this. I can't resonate with this. I can't relate to this.

[06:50]

This is not my idea of fun. Uh... To be able to use it means you can even use not being able to use it. You say, okay, can't use it? Fine, I'll use that. It means no matter what happens, you come up alive. And that's good enough for you. And no matter what you call it, no matter how you turn it, you can flip it up the other way. You can turn it. Which relates back to the previous case where there's one line there where it says a Zen monk or a genuine monk is like a pearl in a bowl. So uprightness means you're like a pearl in a bowl. Pearls are never upside down. And they're all turning on themselves, too. So, if you have some idea of what bias means, well then, even to use that.

[07:51]

Whatever. No matter what happens. Because if you relate to everything the same, then you can use everything. So that's the way to approach these cases, is with this uprightness. That's number one, uprightness. All day long, if possible. And even when you meet a koan, upright. Koans actually will test your uprightness. If you have any idea, like for example, if you think, oh, I'm upright. then that koan will frustrate you. You have to upright, you know, to think all the time that you're upright will mean again... You cannot think all the time you're upright. You can't think that way, except by becoming, I don't know what. You become very depressed or autistic if you actually thought the same thought all the time.

[08:57]

You can't do that. But to... So to treat everything the same doesn't mean you treat everything the same. It means your attitude is always unbiased, which means that you don't hold inside or outside. You don't fall for objects and so on. That's uprightness. The other thing is that this uprightness is practiced in the context or resonates with another approach, in a sense, or another way to work with this material, and that is, what do you call it? What's your relationship to causes and conditions? Well, it should be upright, right?

[09:58]

but also there should be some sense of relationship. So you're upright, but you're upright in the context of what the Buddha called dependent co-arising. You're upright in the context of cause and effect. You're upright in the context of the overall picture. So you're upright in the context of not forgetting that uprightness is not something you're doing in opposition to what the world's doing. You're upright in the midst of awareness of the mirror-like quality of your experience. And we sometimes call this kind of awareness, we sometimes call it the dual mirror awareness, and sometimes call it the self-receiving and self-employing awareness.

[11:12]

So with these two kinds of awareness, in a sense, they're a little bit different. They actually should be practiced together, but you can also alternate between them. This is how to approach these cases. When you look at the case, realize this case and everything you feel about this case is nothing but yourself. If you like the case, that's nothing but yourself. If you don't like the case, that's nothing but yourself. And the thing you think you like or don't like is nothing but yourself. The liking and the thing you like, the disliking and the thing you dislike are nothing but yourself. And yourself is nothing but yourself. And if there's no contradiction in your awareness...

[12:21]

then there should be a contradiction in that, and therefore there's a contradiction in your awareness. And if you don't see that as a contradiction, that's really a contradiction. And eventually you should realize that the nature of your existence in which you practice uprightness is complete, unremitting contradiction. So you practice uprightness in an extremely dynamic, well, extremely, a thoroughly dynamic situation thoroughly dynamic, which is very similar to being able to use everything that happens. Because the thing you most can't use is the thing you're using most. But the you that's using it most is not your usual you, the little you that you usually carry around in a little package.

[13:34]

That you is not able to use this thing. But you, who you really are, is most using what you cannot use at all. This awareness you live in when you practice Zen. Or rather, if you use this awareness, you use Zen to enter into the Buddha's Way. This is not exactly the same as Buddha's Way, what I'm talking about. Buddha's Way is, in a sense, completely beyond everything I just said. But this is the entrance to Buddha's Way. If you don't want to play this game, I will say to you, as far as I know, you can never get into Buddha's Way. Except by playing some game basically like this. And you can understand these cases in various ways, too. But to use these cases as entrance into Buddha's ways, as keys into the Buddha Dharma, which is far beyond human stuff, human effort, this is how, as a human being, you can enter into that realm.

[14:41]

These two kind of... mutually supporting kinds of meditation, which are really one kind of meditation, which we call zazen. This is zazen in the sense of zazen is not learning concentration. It is the dharma gate of repose and bliss. It is deportment beyond hearing and seeing. Once its heart is grasped, you're like a tiger when she enters the mountain. So this tiger-like ability of a human being. Actually, can tigers survive on vegetables? Huh? Can they? Cats can, so maybe tigers can. Would tigers have problems? Are tigers unable to utilize vegetable matter? Well, if they are, so be it.

[15:46]

But we aren't. We are omnivorous. Human beings are omnivorous. So Zen students should be omnivorous. Your stomach should be like a blast furnace. Whatever you put in there, you can cook it. So that's a little bit about how to approach these cases. OK? Are you ready? Before we approach these cases, I want to tell you one more thing. What's happening over there, Henry? What are you smiling about? I was just taking in everything, or attempting to take in everything that just went through. Well, it's okay that you're smiling. How about you, Eva? What are you smiling about? Smiling because Henry's smiling? Henry's Eva's friend.

[16:49]

She's happy when he's happy. But she's not sad when he's sad. Is that true? I don't know if that's true. I haven't either. I wanted to tell you about three kinds of insight. I'd like you to keep your eye out for these kinds of insight. One kind is called insight that happens in relationship to hearing or seeing. Another kind of insight is insight that happens in relationship to or in the context of thinking or reflecting.

[17:51]

The third kind is insight that occurs in the context of being. So in the context of hearing means that you can like listen to Buddhist teaching. You can also get it in through your ear. You can also read it. And sometimes actually you can get it by being touched or even could maybe by smelling. or tasting, it's possible too. But usually, the main ways that people receive it usually is by hearing. In the early days, by hearing.

[18:52]

They didn't read it usually. Now we often read Buddhist teachings. But to tell you the truth, still, mostly people, in terms of Buddhist teaching, rather than like reading a book, when you read a book, anyway, it's different. When you actually listen to another human being talk about the Dharma, it comes in, you get it mostly through the ear. You can also see it, though. You can see the person. The emphasis, basically, though, is on just that you're getting something from outside yourself. It's not your own thinking. And that's usually the first level of insight that happens to you is when you receive something from the outside. Most of us are at a particular... Our insight now is at a certain state. Right now, all of our insight is. And usually the initiation of a new wave of insight can come from any of these three levels.

[19:56]

You could get insight from the way you are. You could get insight from thinking about what you've already thought about and what you've already received in terms of teaching. And you could get insight from getting information from the outside. When you come to a class like this and you read a new koan or a new story, then the insights could occur from any of these directions. But in order to get what the teaching that this case maybe has to offer to you, which you haven't already been working with, you need to first get it in from the outside. So in this class, insights can happen at all three of these levels, and I'm just partly saying maybe you can, I think some of you do sometimes have insights in the class, and you might watch first to see if you can sense what level the insight's coming from, whether it's coming from what you heard, what you're thinking about, or something about your being.

[21:05]

And all three can happen at once, too. In a sense, the order I gave them in is their order of depth. But also, in our sense, they're simultaneous. And it is possible to discriminate between the three and experience them separately also. Yes? What is an insight? Well, I think an insight is... Insight is when you're like, well, when you change, when you have an understanding and you feel and you change. You become a new person, in a sense, by virtue of your understanding. Is it a thought? It's not a thought, no. Although insight is always associated with thought.

[22:08]

every moment of experience you have a thought, or is thought, and every moment of experience has some view associated with it. You always have some view of what's going on. And when view kind of like often turns around on itself and takes another look at, takes a different way of looking at itself, and particularly It's usually associated with some relief or some sense of discontinuity from the way you thought before. I like finding out that you can think differently than the way you have been thinking and it's okay. Oftentimes we're afraid to think differently and we resist insight. And sometimes, so sometimes when insight happens, we find out actually you can completely or partially change the way you see things.

[23:14]

And sure enough, it's okay. So there is a relief, maybe a multiple level to the relief. One level of relief is to be relieved from the fear that what would happen to you if you thought differently. A relief in the sense of being relieved of what you're holding on to. a relief in a sense of getting to see things from a new point of view. It's not so much that your new point of view is more accurate, but you can usually remember the way you used to think. And now you can think a new way. So, for example, if you think things are permanent and suddenly you see that they're not, it's not so much more true that they're impermanent than that they're permanent. It's just the seeing that they're impermanent relieves you from belief that they're permanent, which most people hold that belief. And that belief is a pain in the life.

[24:16]

So if you see that they're impermanent, you get relieved from that view that you're holding on to, which causes you pain. And now you have this new view. Now you need to be relieved from that, too. And you will be. Because you can keep deep... Whatever view you have, whatever insight you have, can be deepened and deepened. And it will be deepened partly by developing more and more tests for it, which is practicing virtues and trying it out with more and more sentient beings, more and more situations, and also deepening it by continually being flexible about it. So then you can get further reliefs from your previous reliefs, which are insights. there is often this experience of, oh, I get it, or, ah, you know, which may be painful sometimes. Ah, it's a shitty situation, I see. Oh, this is a mess.

[25:19]

That's what he's trying to say. Oh, I should stop trying to fix this situation. It's not going to be fixed. It might not make you happy to hear that, but you might feel relieved and that you finally understand that what you've been doing is a waste of time. Oh, we're not going to get a final, complete, utter conclusion to this thing. We're not going to find something that's going to be the basis of all knowledge and can build everything on top of it. Oh, I see. Oh, that's sort of a dead end. Oh, I see. This is what lots of scientists are finding out now, right? And in a sense, they're happy because they're no longer barking up the wrong tree. They're going in a more useful direction now. They have an insight. It makes them sad sometimes, what they have insight about, but they feel relieved. It's maybe better to be sad about giving up some cherished hope that was a dead end.

[26:25]

and to keep battering yourself and other people with this basically, what do you call it, fruitless effort. Yes? Is there a difference between awareness of what is and insight, and also of insight is insight part of thought process? Or is it somehow, is it above what's beyond or different? Is there a difference between insight and what is? And awareness. And awareness of what is? No, same thing. So, awareness of what is, discerning what... Awareness of what is means awareness of what's appearing. So the deepest insight is simultaneous with what's actually happening. But there's other kinds of insight which are basically awareness of what is appearing. So awareness of illusion, awareness of karmic activity, awareness of how karma produces things is the contents of wisdom.

[27:39]

What's your other question? Is this awareness of insight within the thought process or is it part Well, it's non-dual with the thought process. But non-dual means that it's not the same as. If it was the same as, it would be dualistic. To be the same as something is dualistic. So it's inseparable from, but it's not the same as, because you could have a deluded state of consciousness here and a deluded state of consciousness here. And the fact that this deluded state of consciousness is a deluded state of consciousness, that's insight.

[28:41]

The belief that this deluded state of consciousness is not a deluded state of consciousness is delusion. It's not recognizing delusion for delusion. So in that case, the level of insight is so low that we call it just a biased view. We don't even give it the name insight. We call it, you know, false view. But when the view gets so close to what's happening or what's appearing, we start to call it insight. So insight is very closely related to actually the way things are. And the deepest insight is, you know, not the slightest bit in addition to what's to what is. So there's not even the slightest bit of awareness of even. So there can be awareness of things in a very, what do you call it, very deluded way, like you can think that delusion is reality.

[29:54]

So there's dualistic, there's a dualistic view, so that the mind is quite disturbed by thinking that this delusion is an object. So the mind's agitated by that subject-object separation, plus the attitude and understanding is very poor too. It's also possible to have an understanding that this is delusion, but still think it's somewhat separate. You're right, it is, but there's still some separation. When delusion is precisely delusion and nothing but delusion, and awareness is nothing in addition to that, And this is even a deeper non-dualistic wisdom. And such a wisdom is synonymous with what we call awakening. So that this basic affliction of delusion itself is nothing but the immutable knowledge of all Buddhas. But the itself is extreme in that case.

[31:04]

I mean, it really means just itself. There's nothing in addition to that. Yes? Since you have different levels of insight, would each one of those levels be delusional? You mean, would the idea of levels be delusions? Is that what you mean? No, each level is built deeper than the former level would be delusion if you had different insight. Well, the content, each level of insight is inseparable from delusion. There's no insight someplace else from delusion. But you can have superficial insights about delusion and deeper and deeper insights about delusion. But there's always delusion associated with insight.

[32:07]

But that delusion, and when the delusion is most profound, I mean, yeah, when the delusion is most profound, that's actually, we've got that set up already. When the insight is most profound, there is no longer any insight or any view of the delusion. So right now everybody has some view of delusion. Everybody has some view of delusion. And so for most people, we start out by just saying that view of delusion is just a view. Everybody has a philosophical view about delusion. Everybody. Everybody. Even the Buddha. Or even a Buddha. But as that as what we mean by the insight of the view of delusion becomes deeper and more

[33:19]

more accurate, more to the point. We start to use the word insight or wisdom for that view of delusion. And finally, we get to a point where the view is deep enough or the insight is deep enough so that basically we call that right view. And right view is finally no view at all of anything. It's just what is happening, after all. That's the deepest. Then you just have delusion and ignorance, and that's it. And ignorance is completely liberated from itself. in the living system, which is shot through with ignorance, is radiant, is radiance.

[34:25]

So, what a Buddha is, is just a radiance of ignorance. Take ignorance, put a happy face on it, that's Buddha. That's it? So, the case for tonight is case 17. I mean, case 27. You've got delusions. I've got delusions. Everybody's got to have delusions. But there's only one delusion. That's for me. Good old case 27. This is about Fa Yin.

[35:31]

Fa Yin means Dharma eyeball. He's also in case 12 and case 20 of this book. Case 17. In case 17. Huh? That's a Harrisburg deviant. You keep reminding me of that one. He's in case 12, case 17. Oh, you shouldn't have told me about that one. Now I have to go back. Case 17 and case 20. Okay? Here he is in case 27. This introduction is kind of about the case. I mean, they all are, but this one particularly is, I think. Shall we read it?

[36:34]

A cappella? When the teachers are many, the mind is confused. The cause or issue, the mind is born. Though curing sickness where there is no sickness may be extreme kindness. How does going by the rule where there is a rule reclude citing a story? Okay, so another translation would be when the doctors are numerous, the diagnosis is confused. When rules are set up, trickery is born. I've noticed that around here. If we had no rules, there would be no trickery.

[37:37]

People would be begging for rules. Get these people under control. But since we have so many rules, we have a lot of trickery. People are being clever. Testing the rule makers. Though curing disease where there is no sickness is extreme kindness, how does going by the rules where there are rules preclude citing a story? What do you think about this curing a disease where there is no disease? I don't understand why that's coming.

[38:44]

Well, before you understand that, what about curing a sickness where no sickness exists? What kind of situation is that? Maybe if you understood that. Isn't that like? Trying to correct. Trying to find enlightenment where the conditions already might... Trying to have insight outside of delusion. Trying to have insight outside of delusion. Yes. It's creating the system. Yes. Well, one way it just occurred to me is that, you know, to see somebody and say, oh, they're sick, I think I'll cure them.

[39:53]

That's one kind of situation, right? To see somebody who you think is well or enlightened and help them be enlightened is It isn't that you think you're improving them or changing them. So I would propose to you to consider that maybe that's the extreme or the ultimate compassion is to be helping people that don't need any help rather than helping people who do need help. Helping people who do need help That's compassion too, of course. But the ultimate compassion would be to help those who do not need your help. To cure diseases, to cure a sickness in where there's no sickness. Or if you didn't do that, maybe sickness would develop.

[40:56]

Pardon? Or if you didn't do that, maybe sickness would develop. You're neglecting something because, oh, that's fine now. Getting a vaccination. Or is it like helping without any thought of neediness? Or is the action without the doubt? Or it's like we say in Zen, we clean the clean. We clean the clean. We also clean to clean. Just wanted to be sure.

[41:57]

Is it like polishing a tile? Is it like polishing a tile? It is the opposite of polishing a tile. He polished the tile to show the opposite of that. Like you see a tile and you say, oh, here's a tile. This tile is not a mirror, so I'm going to polish this tile and make it into a mirror. This is what I have been calling impolite. Politeness is when you either take a mirror and just leave it be a mirror, or when you take a mirror and try to make it into a mirror. Think about this. I don't know, how do you feel about helping people who don't need any help? Doesn't seem like the right effort to me. Whoa! It might not like it.

[42:57]

How so? It's like a leisurely mind. There's nothing lifeless about it. Lifeless? Yeah. Let's take these one at a time now. How does it seem like not right effort to be clean in the clean? Well, I guess for two reasons. One is that if there is so much effort available, what is the best way to put that effort into effort? Is it to clean the clean or is it to clean the dirty? And then the other thing is, does the clean want to be clean if it's already clean? And if you're cleaning it when it doesn't want to be clean, that doesn't seem right.

[43:59]

OK. I'm not yawning. I'm not yawning because I'm bored. I'm yawning to try to pop my ears. My ears are stuffed up. I think when we talk about cleaning or helping, that we're not actually talking about cleaning or helping. We're not cleaning something that needs to be cleaned. We're talking about the fact that things already are cleaned, and those people already are helped. And that's the ultimate kindness, that even though people are already helped, They're already clean fundamentally. We go back and we show them how to clean themselves. And that's the cleaning of the cleaned. And that's the ultimate kindness. Right. But you still have the same question, I would guess. Or does that clear it up? No, it doesn't. Oh, okay. So one of your, I don't know what you call them...

[45:03]

one of your givens was if there's a limited amount of effort available. Okay? So, in Buddhism there's no such, there's no limit on the effort. So that doesn't count. Because, again, Effort is not something you do. It's not like you have this little package of effort and you've got a certain amount. You do have a limited amount of lifetime, in a sense, you could say. But again, there too, we tell you that not because that's true, but basically to get you motivated. Actually, life is not limited. Life is infinite. But we don't tell people that necessarily except in the right context because they might not make any effort if we told them that life was infinite. The kind of practice that actually we're talking about here is based on life being infinite and effort being infinite. And not so much like, well, if I... I only have enough effort for this because you have to do...

[46:16]

Whatever kind of thing you imagine you need, whatever kind of helping you need to do, you need to do it all. You need to do the ultimate, the middle, and the lesser. You need to do all of it. It's just trying to point out here what the ultimate is, and what the extreme kindness is. Because some people do not do the extreme kindness. Funny thing is, they don't do the extreme kindness. That's my experience. Myself. That I don't help those who don't need any help. I sometimes don't do that. I help the, what do you call it, I oil the squeaky wheel. But to help the one who doesn't need the help is actually pointed out here as the extreme of compassion. Again, I think part of our human point of view is we should make offerings to the poor.

[47:25]

Of course you should. But what is the most meritorious offering to make? It is not most meritorious. Again, this is just a way of talking. This is not true. But the Buddhist teaching is the opposite of the way most people think. The way most people think is it's most meritorious to give to those who are most in need. But that's not most meritorious. That's just the most common way to think. It is meritorious, though. No question about it. Buddhist teaching says it is meritorious to give to anybody, anytime, anything, unless it's harmful to them. The slightest giving, the smallest thing to the smallest being, To think of giving a piece of dirt to a worm is extremely meritorious if you feel good about the thought.

[48:28]

It's extremely meritorious. To think of giving an earthworm a college scholarship is also very meritorious if you like the feeling of it and you feel happy at the thought. To think of giving a poor kid a college scholarship All these kinds of thoughts of giving with joy are very meritorious. But the most meritorious thing is to give to the ones who do not need anything. To think of giving to Buddha is far greater than to think of giving to a bodhisattva, an arhat, or just an ordinary Zen student, or a poor, miserable criminal. This is the opposite. And it's not just because it's opposite, but mostly because it's opposite. Mostly it's to reverse the way you think that's what's beneficial. Because the way you think is precisely the worst way to think. Which is why you're so busy kicking out all the props.

[49:31]

I am not doing that. I'm hoping that that will happen. But I haven't been successful with that. Now, the way you think is not any worse than the way I think. Your attitude, your [...] attitude is no worse than my attitude. But for you, the way you think is the worst possible way to think on the planet at the time. Therefore, the best possible thing for you is to reverse the way you think. Not for me to reverse the way I think. That's the best thing for me. It will also be helpful to you if I could do that. And you should hope that I'm doing that. I hope that you're doing that. Now for me to hope that you're doing that is not a reversal of the way I think. I already think that way. It would probably be good for me to stop thinking that. But that's the way I think. But for the people who think that it's most meritorious to help Buddhas, they should reverse the way they think.

[50:42]

Still, that's the teaching. But you should reverse the way you think about that. Now, Martha, can you hold your thing for a while? Oh, good. So I think Grace, Nancy, well, actually, let's see. Something like Grace, Nancy, Carlos, and Arlene. Go. Can you When you said reverse the way you think, I got, again, the image of the pearl in a bowl. It's like every time you reverse it, you have to reverse it again, so you just have to keep rolling. Right. It might wind up right back where you started, of all places. I thought I was supposed to reverse the way I think, and now I'm thinking that way again. Oops, here I go. It's the reversing, and the uprightness in the reversing. No matter how you're turning, you keep being upright, and you don't get stuck. Next.

[51:47]

Grace, you done? Where I get stuck on this is, you know, in the things that I spend a lot of time doing, we have this statement, do no harm, do no harm. So where I get hung up on this is around the concept of what does it mean to help anyone? And in some ways... I get caught by this when I think if something is clean, leave it alone. Watch it carefully, but leave it alone. That's called cleaning. That's how to clean things. And of course, that particularly seems to make sense when you have something clean, doesn't it? That the thing to do would be to leave it alone. But human beings don't usually leave things alone. So for you to leave something alone is already something remarkable. And then if you're leaving something alone that you think is clean, as an act of cleaning, as an act of veneration, and so on, it's even more beneficial.

[52:57]

It is beneficial to... to do kind things to people even if you think that they are sick and you are healthy or that kind of stuff. This is dualistic, but it still is beneficial. Especially if you're trying to be kind and helpful. It's good. But you could also drop your idea of who they are and do exactly the same thing. And then it would be incomparably more beneficial to everybody concerned. who you think you're helping is not who you think you're helping, but it's how you think about who you're helping. And you will always think, probably, that who you're helping is such and such or so and so. You will make some judgment of who you're helping. This is normal. It's not that we should stop doing that. Like, what is it? That thing is, let the one who is free of sin cast the first stone.

[54:09]

Something like that? Is that how it goes? But that doesn't mean you shouldn't judge. Because Jesus also said, the way you judge, you know, the judgment of how you judge will be how you're judged. So you're always judging things. But if you believe your judgment, then you're in trouble. To try to stop your judgment is believing your judgment. People who believe their judgment try to stop their judgment, which is fruitless. But to admit that you're judging, to notice how you're judging, will lead to a new way of judging. And that way of judging, you can be happy about how you get judged for that. You will be judged... Since you judge fairly... And you judge fairly to the extent that you're aware of how you judge.

[55:13]

If you understand how you judge, you will become a fair judge. And the fair judgment is that all sentient beings are Buddhas. That's the fair judgment. That's the judgment of the Buddha. That is called justice. human beings just as they are is precisely what we mean by Buddha. Carlos? Who is the one who doesn't need help? Pardon? Who is the one who doesn't need help? It's called Buddha. It's called liberation from humanness doesn't need help. But that's the best one to help. That's where you really should put your helping energy.

[56:16]

Now maybe come back to how Martha feels that that's lifeless. I mean, I also read this where there is no sickness. It's actually the truth for everybody. In other words, we all have Buddha nature. What Buddha chose to help us out of the sickness, which is that we think we don't. In other words, it's not just people being... I see it differently now. I guess it came from what Jordan said. Some of where there is no sickness is really the way things are. Right. Right. And the place where there is no sickness, there are beings who defiantly... believe that there is sickness. But to come from the point of view of they're right and I'm going to fix them up is pretty good, pretty nice. Here are beings who think they're not Buddha and I'm going to help them see they are Buddha.

[57:19]

Rather than here are Buddhas who are in misery And I'm not going to try to change the misery, I'm going to help the Buddha. Because if I get into trying to change the misery, I'm setting the example that they've already learned very well. I'm going to do something which they've never seen before. I'm going to help the part of them which is not sick. And they're going to wonder, what am I doing? Why am I wasting my time helping the part of them that doesn't need any help? Because they're going to expect me to come and relate to the illness, which they, first of all, if anybody does, they might be very insulted and rebel. Anyway, but even if they didn't, you'd still be going along with their conception, which is why they're in misery. But to help them, the part of them that doesn't need any help, this is going to be enlightening.

[58:21]

But again, it's not because you're trying to do the best thing. It's because you just can't get behind the person being a lowly thing that you're going to lift up out of the thing and make them into a better person. You're relating to the person as Buddha. And if you're a Buddha, you do not see other people as different, as separate. Therefore it's quite natural for you to relate to them as Buddha. But for a Buddha to relate to a person who doesn't believe she's Buddha as Buddha is called a big surprise. And the way it actually comes down often is that the person is acting in such a way from your point of view that you feel what? You feel this dynamic thing. Namely that you've got to change everything. Not to get better, though, because you're already thinking that way.

[59:27]

That would be right in the same groove. Get better. Be different. This is beyond different and the same. This is beyond getting out of the mess or indulging yourself in the mess. This is called the middle way. which is what happens when somebody comes up to you and tries to do this thing of curing a disease which they don't themselves think you even have. But it seems like that's what Bayen is doing in the case, even though he just gave him off. Right, well then they say, then in the case, so when the case does exist... When a thing is presented, when there are rules, when there aren't any sickness and you cure the sickness, this is the ultimate compassion.

[60:40]

When the cases do exist, and they're presented, then why not tell a story? I thought preclude meant you didn't have to tell the story. That's what's confusing to me about that last thought. I don't know whether there is a rule actually take the place of citing a story or make it not necessary to tell a story. Is that what preclude means? Well, one way to read it would be, why does going by the rule where there is a rule, why does that mean that you're not showing the case? The other way to read it would be, if, how is it that going by the rule, when there is a rule, you know, why wouldn't that allow you to bring up a case?

[61:58]

Wouldn't you be able to bring up a case? Wouldn't it be all right to bring up a case? But it seems to me that either way you read it, the question, the thing is, we're being asked, in a sense, why not present this case Why not present this case here? So this is all coming down to why not present this case, case 27. The question is being asked, why not present this case? We're coming up to case 27, but he's saying, why shouldn't we go ahead and read this case?

[63:01]

Right. So he's saying, well, I think actually we should go ahead, but actually there's a question here. Maybe we should not have these stories. You see? Because the ultimate kindness is to cure a sickness where there isn't a sickness. So wouldn't it be kinder, in a sense, to not have this class and not read this case? Yeah. If we weren't having a class, we might think I need to have a class. And that does it. So why have the class?

[64:17]

Why have these Zen teachings? So we can see we don't need... So you can see we don't need them. But even beyond that... To cure sickness where there's no sickness. Right. It's to cure sickness where we don't need them. It takes a Buddha and a Buddha. Right. Because the strange thing is that the extreme kindness is to do these things where they're not necessary. That this class as an act of extreme kindness or extreme compassion is offered in this sense. of you people don't need this class. And each of you coming here, your classmates do not need your help because they're not sick.

[65:29]

And you come to this class as an act of extreme kindness to be with people who do not need your help. Or is it just another big delusion that we think we need it? We know that that is a big delusion to think we need the class. That we've got. I mean, we used to have, or some people have such ideas that they need classes and so on and so forth. But that's not what this is talking about here. This is talking about in a room of people who no longer think that. You people almost don't think that anymore. Is it also dropping the idea about sickness and no sickness? Just drop the idea? Is it dropping the idea? Yeah. And dropping the idea of sickness and no sickness is called no sickness. What? Yeah, drop that.

[66:31]

And that's what we call no sickness. Or that's what we call health. to drop those ideas. So we have a class for people that have dropped those ideas. And you people come to the class, being one of those people who have dropped the idea, you come to the class to help other people who have also dropped the idea. You come to help these other people who don't need your help, who have no disease, and you come to cure them, these people who do not have a disease. Now, that would be the kindest way to come to this class. That would be the way that you would be getting nothing out of it. You also would be giving nothing to anybody else and getting nothing out of giving something to somebody else. You would get no joy out of helping other people. You get no joy or misery out of not helping other people. You get nothing out of this class

[67:32]

And that is the extreme kindness, something you get nothing out of. And Buddhists are not trying to get anything out of anything. And they are not trying to make people better. And they naturally, and without exception, never do anything but go to where people are suffering. But the kindness they do, the ultimate kindness they do, the extreme kindness they do, is that they cure a disease where there isn't one. That's the extreme kindness. They also do lesser kinds of kindness, by the way. They also cure diseases that do exist. They do everything. You name it, they do it. What? do they if there is no sickness?

[68:34]

Well, people ask for it, so they give it. People say, can I have some, you know, whatever? And they say, okay, here. You say, can I have a piece of red paper? You say, here. Yeah, but I mean, if they're really asking for help for a disease which is only a concept in their mind, should I help them? I mean, should I engage in the subject of life and If you feel it would be helpful, you do it. If you don't think it's going to be helpful, then don't do it. But even if you do decide it would be helpful, it's not the extreme kindness. It is a lesser kindness. It's almost like a distinction you're making between Bodhisattva and Buddha. I'm trying to hear this in what you're saying. A couple of pieces back, you're talking about the Buddha, because it's really not just since there. But then Bodhisattva gets in there and passes through.

[69:39]

It's a distinction between Buddha way and Bodhisattva way. But Buddha way and Bodhisattva way are never separate. But still, there's a Buddha way and Bodhisattva way. The Buddha way is this extreme way. So like, you know, this story, another one, this is another story, this is a story about, what's his name? Matsu, Master Ma. So, somebody asked Master Ma, what's Buddha? Master Ma says, mind is Buddha. Mind itself is Buddha. Then later a monk said to Master Ma, I heard that you say that mind itself is Buddha. Master Ma said, I say that to help people stop crying. The monk said, well, what do you do when they stop crying? He said, then I tell them that, then I say, no mind, no Buddha.

[70:40]

If people are crying, you say, no mind, no Buddha, they might just cry more, which is fine, but if you want to stop crying for a little while so that they can hear the next teaching, you say, mind itself is Buddha, they'll stop crying. Because they think, I've got a mind, my mind is blah-de-blah, so I'm going to cry. My mind thinks this. My mind thinks that. This is bad. This is good. This is a mess. Cry. So, you want to know what Buddha is? Buddha is the way your mind's working is Buddha. This is not false. This is not false. And if you do that, you'll stop crying. After you stop crying, you ask again. It says, no mind, no Buddha. No disease. I do not want you people to think that you should not do these lesser acts of compassion.

[71:51]

I just don't want us to forget that there is another kind of compassion. Don't skip over the ultimate just because you're afraid you'll forget the lesser. There is a danger that you'll forget the lesser. There's a danger. I don't want you to forget the lesser. You should remember that when people are crying, the ultimate kindness may not be good for them. With the tears filling their eyes, they may not notice you sitting there, right next to them, not doing anything. They may not notice. Their eyes are covered with tears, they can't even see you. Spending your life, spending your life sitting there next to them, not doing anything. Much more kind than any other kindness. If they stop crying, they'll notice. They'll notice. Somebody was there and never said anything.

[72:58]

They'll notice. Maybe they won't even notice for a long time. Maybe ten years later they'll look back and say, oh yeah, she was sitting there all that time and didn't say a word. Oh, I get it. Other people were trying to get me to stop crying. And then I did. And she was there. And she didn't do anything, but she was there. The things the other people did were good, were helpful. Keep doing those things. But please, start doing the extreme kindness. Now, if that's the case, How can we bring up this case in the context of extreme kindness? As Stuart said, how are we going to bring this case up? Which brings us right into the realm of gain and loss. So it's a good warning.

[74:03]

It's a good warning before we enter this case. Don't you think? So, in Zen monasteries, in the meditation hall, the main door of the meditation hall, they usually didn't have a door. They had a roll-up screen, which could be made of canvas or bamboo. but it rolled up like this, you know, like a scroll. So, Fa Yun comes up to the meditation hall, he points at the screen, and there were two monks there, and they both went to roll up the screen, one from each side probably, rolling the screen. Okay? And he says,

[75:06]

One gained, one lost. Or one gained, one lost. Or one got it, one missed. That's the story. Yes? When I read it, I feel like it's like three people that all have I had two moms and I actually ate one person.

[76:09]

So it's kind of like what's going on all the time. So our mind, something happens in our mind, maybe it's a story about it, but that's kind of losing it. And there is something that doesn't also is involved in the action or is with it but doesn't make a story and that's what gains. There's one that's what? That doesn't make a story and what else did you say? Right, and that's kind of maybe what gains or doesn't lose anything. The one who doesn't make a story gains? Yeah, it doesn't engage in kind of making a story. It doesn't have to cite a story because it goes by the room. It's connected to the room and stays there. So it feels like this is happening all the time, and it's real one.

[77:14]

I think that it's kind of like they're not three different people. Right. It's happening all the time. There are three different people and there are two different people. And it's happening all the time. And also it's happening all the time that there are two different people and three different people. That's happening all the time too. I thought also, like Christina, in addition, I rather thought maybe bringing ideas of gain and loss as a positive and negative was maybe not so useful either.

[78:16]

And I was thinking about loss as, in one of these cases, it talked about getting meaning on the hook so that you kind of take action or you Maybe this loss was when, wasn't that blindness was blind, or a blind point was pointed out, but then after that there was an action that created a whole other set of stories or something, but maybe there was some insight on that. It may have appeared as a loss, but... That meaning came out of that, to let go of the positive and negative around ideas that came and lost. Well, how do you see this story happening? What do you see? You see the teacher pointing at this curtain, and these two monks go roll it up.

[79:17]

Did they look any different to you, the way they rolled it up? I see some humor in it. If these are the stories of what people said and did, actually did, they're not always going to be so serious, and worried about what classes later on are going to be talking about it. I see it almost as a joke. Two people go over and say, one gain, one loss. And he probably didn't expect us to be talking about it now. The rain is on the other side. This is a dualistic world that one gave and one lost. Just like... But John, don't you think people are like, sometimes in the old days, trying to have really conversations that would go down in history? No, I don't think, I don't know. What do you think? I think we'll go down in history.

[80:35]

I think that the Buddhas are willing to live in history. And history is gain and loss. So I think Fa Yin is an example of one of these people who was willing to enter into the realm of gain and loss. At the same time, I want to understand this story as an example as a meditation to remind me how to all day long practice the ultimate compassion.

[81:43]

And I'm not sure how to... I am sure actually how to practice the ultimate compassion. I just don't want to forget about the lesser compassions. And I want to encourage other people to practice ultimate compassion because I think a lot of people are pretty good at the lesser compassions and I'm happy with the way they're taking care of those. So I'm kind of like trying to emphasize this kind. And this kind is about, one of the things about ultimate compassion is ultimate compassion is most willing to get dirty and to get involved in the mess. Lesser compassions are somewhat queasy about that. have some reservation about getting involved in the ordinary world. So I guess my understanding of this story is not that my understanding is the only understanding, it's just that my understanding is the way I want to understand it.

[82:46]

The way I want to understand it is, this story is telling me to practice extreme compassion, ultimate compassion, which is simultaneous with being ultimately and thoroughly involved in the world. That's what I think about the story. And I think that if I do that, this is called entering into history. And I think that if I do that, if I think about it, I think that people will tell our stories for thousands of years. And if Afaya never thought of that, he would realize that he would be remembered for a long time, because I think that's what he did. I think these people got completely involved in the nuts and bolts of history. Therefore, they become historical figures, which is the same as being completely willing to be in the world. But a lot of people in the world, and these people, the way they were in the world, were showing this special thing called absolute unconditioned compassion.

[83:51]

Which means he really did not think that there was a difference between gain and loss. He did not really think he was helping somebody else. He did not go around thinking that he was a helper of other beings. He didn't think that way. I don't think these people thought that way. That's the way I understand these cases. That's what I think. However, case 17 is the hair's breadth difference. This is very subtle, this whole thing. So you might look at case 17 along with this case. It might be helpful. Where is the Harris breath deviation in this story? Where is the issue here? And I think part of what this is about is why should we have this class? Why should we have Zen stories? Why don't we just let everybody be alone?

[84:57]

And why is it compassionate to help people who don't need any help? Why can't we just be more polite and just leave people alone to be free? Because they actually are free. All these things are part of I think what's being brought up here in this case. I thought we might finish it today, but we didn't. So I guess we'll talk about it next week. In the meantime, please practice uprightness

[85:33]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_86.69