uh, compassion. I hesitate to say what it is, but sometimes we might say that compassion is a feeling, and being in touch with the suffering of ourself and suffering of others, and wishing

[01:07]

ourselves and others to be free of suffering, and wishing to devote one's life to helping beings become free of suffering. In that way, compassion is a feeling, and also a desire. It's a feeling of sympathy and empathy, but it's also a desire to help beings become

[02:08]

free of suffering. The feeling and desire aspect of compassion, once that has arisen, then this feeling of sympathy and this desire to devote one's life to the welfare of all beings, it's developed and protected by many practices which are in a sense also compassion. They are in a sense flowerings or branchings from the basic feeling and desire. And these practices are sometimes presented as in terms of four practices or two practices or ten

[03:15]

practices or six practices, many different ways that the practice of protecting and developing compassion are presented. One of the main ways is in terms of six practices, the practice of giving, the practice of ethical discipline, the practice of patience, the practice of heroic effort and enthusiasm, the practice of meditative concentration, and the practice of wisdom. These practices develop and the sixth one, wisdom, purifies the compassion. In a sense the sixth practice is not exactly compassion, wisdom in some sense is different

[04:19]

from compassion, but it purifies compassion. But giving and ethical discipline and patience and diligence, heroic diligence and concentration, those all protect and are very much in accord with and very much the same kind of way of living as compassion. I mentioned that the fourth of these six practices for developing and protecting compassion, first way I said it was heroic effort or courageous effort, or you could say heroic, courageous diligence in the practice of compassion. The first practice of compassion, or in some sense the

[05:33]

first practice of a Bodhisattva, the first practice of someone who feels this kind of compassion for the welfare of all beings, the first practice is giving. And through the practice of giving, in that phase of practice, one becomes very joyful. And maybe I should mention that the word for compassion is Karuna. The Sanskrit word that's usually translated as compassion is Karuna, which I heard etymologized as dented happiness. So, the compassionate being feels the suffering of all beings, feels the suffering of all beings, and it hurts

[06:36]

them to feel the suffering of all beings, even hurts them to feel the suffering of one being. But although they feel pain at the suffering of the world, they are not unhappy. Compassion is a happiness that hurts. But the Bodhisattva, the enlightening being who is devoted to the welfare of all beings, is basically happy, but feeling the pain of the world, feeling the pain but not exhausted by the feeling of pain, feeling the pain but full of joy. And in that joy, which comes from practicing giving, through the practice of giving, great joy occurs, and in the oven, or in the fire of joy, fear cannot exist.

[07:46]

So through the practice of giving and the joy which comes from it, the Bodhisattva is not exhausted by the suffering of the world, is happy in the midst of the suffering of the world, and also becomes fearless. Therefore, the effort they make is a courageous effort, it's a fearless effort. They are fearless because of the joy they feel in the practice of giving. And also the second practice of ethical discipline involves, it involves a commitment to ethical practice. Some people practice the ethics of a Bodhisattva, some people practice the ethics of compassion, but without commitment. And practicing the

[08:52]

ethics of compassion without commitment is still practicing the ethics of compassion, and some people do that, and are very happy to do that. But there is also, in addition to practicing without commitment, there is also practicing with commitment. Just like you can live in a loving relationship with someone without commitment, and then you can also live with commitment. There are two different ways of practicing together. And today, this afternoon here in this temple, in this room, we will have a ceremony where three people will receive the precepts of compassion, the Bodhisattva precepts, the precepts of those who wish to live the life of compassion. And in this ceremony, we imagine, we intend

[09:54]

that these people who are receiving these ethical precepts of compassion will enter into a new life, will be reborn as Bodhisattvas. If they also practice giving and work themselves into a state of extreme joy, they will also be fearless Bodhisattvas. And I feel, as I've said many times, that in order to really be compassionate, of course we must be non-violent. Violence is the opposite of compassion. But in order to fully realize non-violence, we

[10:55]

must be fearless. It looks to me like, you know, maybe everybody in this room right now is being non-violent. It's possible. But if we are not fearless, situations can arise which can push us into violence. We can feel, or rather the situation doesn't push us into violence. It's just that in some situations, if we become afraid, the fear can push us into violence. So Bodhisattvas, those who wish to be compassionate, those who wish to actually completely give up violence, they need fearlessness. So they never can be forced by fear to harm a being. So you can feel, and I can feel compassion, you can feel the

[12:03]

desire to devote your life to the welfare of others and to help people become free of suffering, you can have that true compassion, and yet, if you do not develop the practice of giving and overcome fear, your compassion can sometimes be undermined at the arising of fear. So part of compassion is developing fearlessness. Just a little while ago I was in Montana, I was in a retreat there, and the topic of the retreat was the four methods of a Bodhisattva. So the practice of a Bodhisattva was presented by four, and the four were, are, giving, kind speech, beneficial action, and cooperation. Or by cooperation means the

[13:06]

practice of practicing together with everybody, of acting, of co-action, acting together with everyone, those four. And then just yesterday I got some mail from Montana, from a person who was in the retreat, and she sent me a Xerox of an article in her hometown newspaper in Montana, Helen, Montana, which is the capital of Montana, I think, and the headline was Dalai Lama, colon, fight violence with poverty, and fight peace with compassion. Sorry. And the person who sent me the newspaper article said, this is the actual headline in the newspaper.

[14:09]

And she said, no wonder we've got problems. That was the headline. Dalai Lama says, fight violence with poverty, and fight peace with compassion. Of course, what it meant to say was, fight violence with peace, and fight poverty with compassion. In the body of the article it was stated in the most usual way, but the headline actually said that. Maybe it was a good headline, actually, to draw people's attention. But to fight or to meet violence with peace requires fearlessness. So bodhisattvas have to want to help and then

[15:18]

practice giving in order to meet violence with peace. And of course we're thinking of the war, and then also poverty, we're thinking of the poverty, particularly of people in Louisiana and Mississippi, and meeting that with compassion and being unafraid to find ways to meet this devastating poverty. The way I was thinking of talking to you about compassion today is, it's coming from an Indian teacher named Asanga. And this way of talking about compassion is somewhat analytic. In Zen tradition in Asia, you wouldn't

[16:21]

find too often a Zen priest presenting sort of this Indian way of looking at compassion, which I want to share with you. Part of the reason for that is that, in a way, Zen is a form of the Buddha way, which arose in China. It's a kind of creative Chinese response to the Indian Buddhist tradition. However, part of the reason why Zen could be creative and innovative was because of this huge background of the Indian tradition, which was transmitted to China pretty straightforwardly. So in that context of where these analytic teachings of the Indian Buddhist tradition was transmitted to China, Zen could do something new, or a new thing could come, which was called Zen. So in this huge teaching, this huge and elaborate

[17:30]

ocean of teaching of the Bodhisattva path of compassion for all beings, then Zen, based on that or using that as a foundation, could make one point very clearly. And the point is that in order to practice compassion truly, it must not be defiled. So the Zen touch to the teaching of compassion is that when we practice compassion, we must not defile the practice of compassion. So the emphasis in the Zen tradition was to purify the compassion. Today I'm not going to talk about that so much, but just to say that as a Zen priest,

[18:31]

I mostly am talking about how to, whatever practice you're doing, whatever practice of compassion you're involved in, the main emphasis, the main contribution of the Zen tradition is to purify the practice of compassion. How do you purify it? Well, there's many ways, but the basic way is you look at the practice of compassion that you're wanting to devote yourself to, and you look to see if you're trying to get anything out of it. Of course you practice compassion because you think it's good, because you want to help people, but still, is there any sense of gain of getting something out of the practice? Or are you doing the practice of compassion just for the sake of the practice of compassion, with no sense of gain? This is the wisdom aspect meeting the compassion aspect. Compassion

[19:48]

wishing to embrace and sustain all beings, the wisdom aspect to come and purify the compassion. So as I mentioned the other night to some people, we have this expression in the Indian Buddhist tradition, which is very important in Zen, is that a bodhisattva, a being who is devoted to the practice of compassion, should give birth to a mind which does not depend on anything, to a mind which has no abode, to a mind which is not attached to anything. Even while it's practicing compassion, it does not attach to the practice of compassion. And again, in order to practice that way, in order to practice such wisdom, one needs to practice giving, so that one is joyful enough to not be afraid to practice a wisdom

[20:53]

which doesn't even attach to compassion. Some people deeply want to practice compassion and non-violence, but they're afraid that if they don't attach to compassion and the practice of non-violence, that they'll lose it. It's true that we might lose the practice of compassion, it can be lost, it's an impermanent thing, we can lose it, we can lose the practice of non-violence, we can slip into violence, it can happen, it's dangerous, there is that danger. But if we're afraid of being violent, we're at risk of being violent. To wish not to be violent, fearlessly, including not being afraid to be violent, makes possible being

[21:54]

non-violent. Being fearless makes us more confident that we cannot, will not be pushed into violence. Being fearless also allows us to produce a mind which has no abode, which doesn't abide in sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, or thoughts, like the thought of compassion. Having the thought of compassion together with the mind of no abode, bringing them together, this is the Buddha, the mind of no abode with the mind of great compassion. The usual Zen emphasis is on the mind of no abode, because the compassion is understood.

[22:54]

The Bodhisattva's compassion must not be defiled by any gaining idea, by any attachment. So, the text that I have in my mind is a text called the Ornament of the Scriptures of the Great Vehicle, and it's said to be composed by the great ancestor, the great Bodhisattva Asanga, an Indian master who lived like in the fourth century of the common era. And in the seventeenth chapter of this text, he presents a series of practices, a series

[24:06]

of verses. In the beginning he presents practices of worshiping the Buddhas and ancestors, then the practices of serving the Buddhas and ancestors, and then he gives a teaching on what are called the four immeasurables. And these four immeasurables can be found in early Buddhism and also in the great vehicle tradition, the Mahayana. The path of the Bodhisattva also has these four, and early Buddhism has these four too. And these four are loving kindness, maitri, or metta in Sanskrit and Pali, karuna, compassion, mudita, sympathetic joy, and upeksha, equanimity. These four practices are recommended in the text. Loving kindness means you give rise

[25:11]

to loving thoughts, wishing everyone well, wishing yourself and others well. Compassion I just talked about and we'll talk about more, and sympathetic joy means you meditate on people, and you have sympathy for everything good about anybody. You look and see the good qualities of people and you meditate on them, again, until you feel joy over how wonderful their good qualities are. And the last one is equanimity, where you meditate on people not having a preference over pain or pleasure. And then, after introducing those, the Sangha

[26:15]

says that among those four, karuna is chosen as the most important of these four practices. Loving kindness is important, but in this text for a Bodhisattva, compassion is more central and more important. And so this section of the text is called the analysis of compassion. And, again, in some sense, analysis is kind of a problematic thing to do, to split something into parts, to divide something. So, in compassion, subject and object are not two. Compassion

[27:21]

is the ground upon which we develop an understanding that we ourselves and others are not two. And compassion really is subject and object not being two, and that's also what wisdom is. And yet, for the sake of understanding, the great ancestor, a Sangha, analyzes compassion into subjects and objects. And the objects of compassion, he suggests, are ten types, ten objects, ten types of beings who are the objects of compassion or the foundations of compassion. Compassion is built upon these objects. The first type are beings who are

[28:23]

inflamed, who are burning, who have desire, but a desire that's burning them. Next type are beings who are conquered by enemies. And enemies, in this case, mean what we call Mara, the forces of the psyche which deaden us, the forces of the psyche which deaden us, all kinds of addictions in modern language, people who are conquered by the deadening forces of addiction. They are objects of compassion. They are the foundation of compassion. They are the life of Buddha. Other people who are conquered by addictions are the life of Buddha.

[29:32]

If you want to bring Buddha alive, give compassion to beings who are conquered by addiction. Even if you yourself are conquered by an addiction, compassion towards yourself gives rise to Buddha. Buddha can arise in you who is conquered when compassion comes to you. Compassion coming to the conquered one gives rise to Buddha. Those who are oppressed or invaded by suffering, of course, are objects of compassion. Those who are enveloped by darkness, those who are enveloped by the darkness of ignorance are objects of compassion. Those who have fallen on a difficult path, a difficult path means people who are trying

[30:40]

to practice to be free but are using an inauthentic teaching, they are objects of compassion. Those who are bound by the chains of wrong view are objects of compassion. Those who are fond of banquets mixed with poison are objects of compassion. The comment on this is that this refers to people actually who are good meditators, who are successful at developing tranquil meditative states, but get stuck in them, and then the

[31:45]

nourishing meditative state turns into a poison because they attach to it. Such people are who are actually good meditators, are objects of compassion. And these successful meditators, some people actually don't feel compassion for them, but they are objects of compassion because they are poisoning themselves by their attachment to their meditation practice. Another one is those who have strayed from the path. So some people are on the path and get good at practicing it and become arrogant. In their arrogance they stray from the actual correct path. They are objects of compassion. These last two categories are not the perfect

[32:47]

people who are like captured by and submerged in ignorance and addiction, the way some people are. They are actually people who are practicing but getting off the track. In one case attaching to meditative tranquility, in the other case getting arrogant about their ability to practice the way. They are actually good at it, let's say, and they become arrogant and then they trip. They are objects of compassion, not celebration. But some people do actually feel happy about these people who get good at practice and then get proud of it and fall on their face. Some people say, oh good, they thought they were so good at the practice, it's nice to see them fall. Now this is, they too, these successful spiritual practitioners who actually got really good, as a matter of fact, better than us. We started practicing with them and

[33:51]

they just like zoomed way ahead of us, they were so good, and actually that's fine. And we see them heading ahead of us because they are so excellent and so diligent and so blah blah. We're supposed to be practicing sympathetic joy for them, like, boy, are they great. It's wonderful to see how wonderful their practice is and how rapidly they're evolving in a positive way. We're supposed to be doing that. But actually what sometimes can happen is that then, after that happens, then they become arrogant because they take it personally, they're great progress, and then, rather than saying, oh good, they are objects of compassion. Practicing the wrong path, in this case, is the next category of objects of compassion, and that's people who were practicing the right path, but veered off. And finally, the

[34:58]

last one is a good one, I think, it's called those of little strength. In other words, they have a little strength. And who are the ones who have a little strength, do you think? Who might they be? Those are the Bodhisattvas who just received the precepts, for example. These are the beginning Bodhisattvas, who are excellent, wonderful people, but they're beginning Bodhisattvas, in other words, they're not yet Buddhas. Everybody who is not a Buddha, even Bodhisattvas, are objects of compassion. So those are the objects of compassion, or you could also say those are the foundations of compassion. Who are not objects of compassion? Buddhas. Buddhas are not objects of compassion. And Bodhisattvas who don't have a little strength

[36:06]

but have a lot. Some Bodhisattvas are not Buddhas yet, but are very, very strong, and there's no more slipping. But they're still sort of, what do you call it, they're still behind the plow, you know, they're still in the world working for welfare of beings, but they actually are very strong. They're enlightened but not yet Buddhas. So enlightened beings are not objects of compassion. They're objects of veneration and devotion, and also, in that way they're similar to objects of compassion. We're also devoted to the objects of compassion. We love the objects of compassion. We practice loving-kindness towards the objects of compassion. You can practice loving-kindness towards these enlightened beings, but there's no compassion for them because their suffering is the suffering of their compassion, not the suffering in

[37:13]

these ten categories. Next comes the five fruits of compassion. Traditionally in Indian Buddhism, they had five types of fruits for certain actions. Compassion is a feeling, a feeling is an action, a desire is an action, it's an action of a being. Here we are, we desire, it's an activity. Compassion is an activity of a living being, and an activity of a Buddha. Five fruits. First fruit is relinquishing injury. This fruit is called, in some sense, the liberating fruit, the fruit which liberates you from violence. The first fruit of compassion

[38:21]

is to be liberated from violence. The next fruit is that compassion becomes a seed for supreme enlightenment, and this is called the dominant fruit. So the first fruit is the liberating fruit, becoming free of violence, so you can be non-violent. The second fruit is the fruit that compassion becomes the seed for supreme enlightenment. This is the dominant, the main fruit. The next one, this is a difficult one in a way, is that compassion becomes a seed, becomes the happiness of others, and the misery of yourself. The misery of yourself

[39:43]

is the hard part. And this is the, and this fruit is called the liberating fruit, because this fruit is called the fruit of virile performance. In other words, you're willing to, because of the happiness that arises from it, you're willing to fully accept the discomfort for yourself. It is somewhat uncomfortable. It is somewhat uncomfortable. It is somewhat a problem to be interacting with all these, with the foundation, with the objects of compassion. There is some problem. There is some difficulty. It does hurt. But the fruit of practicing compassion is that you can be man enough, or woman enough, to take on the task of practicing

[40:51]

compassion. You can take it. You can be a mensch enough to take what it's like to be in this world for the happiness of all beings. You're happy, but also some people aren't, and you keep working with them until they are. That's what can happen as a fruit of compassion. By practicing compassion, you can hang in there with the ocean of suffering beings until they're happy, and you can have the ability to take the pain that that involves. That's a fruit, to be able to do that. The next fruit is that, which is called in the Zen tradition, the fruit of maturity. That's the fruit that, because of practicing compassion, you get to practice that compassion some more. Practicing compassion supports

[41:57]

the continuation of the practice of compassion. And the next fruit is the cause for the desirable. This is the maturing fruit, and the desirable means the new life of compassion. You practice compassion to live the life of compassion, and then you have the path of compassion. It may not be surprising that you hear that the Sangha teaches that once these five fruits have occurred, enlightenment is not far off. And then comes the kind of, in some sense, this next verse is a kind of a ... it's maybe the first time this teaching appeared in the

[43:08]

Indian Buddhist tradition, very clearly. And it's the verse about not abiding either in birth and death, samsara, or nirvana. Now, you all know what nirvana is, right? That's the name of a rock group, right? But they name the rock group that because everybody knows what nirvana means, right? What does nirvana mean? Absence of suffering? No, not absence of suffering. What? It means happiness, because again, but it means more than just happiness, it means happiness, it means peace. It means the ability to be at peace, even when you're surrounded by the ocean of suffering. So nirvana is not the absence of suffering, it's being at peace with suffering, and being at peace with nirvana. It's peace. We use

[44:14]

nirvana to meet war and violence. So nirvana is not the absence of suffering, it's being at peace. But the Bodhisattva doesn't abide in the world of samsara. Samsara means going round and round between birth and death. It's the world of cyclic misery. It's the world of, hmm, that ice cream cone looks good, and then you get the ice cream cone and it falls off into the dirt. And then you slip on it. And then you slip on it. And then you slip on it. And you feel not so good. And then you think, a little bit later, you think, hmm, ice cream cone, that probably would make me happy. And you go to get the ice cream

[45:15]

cone, you have to wait in line a long time. And then when they get there, they say, we're closing. And then you get angry at the proprietor and become violent. This is birth and death. This is samsara. Bodhisattvas don't abide, they don't attach to samsara, and they don't attach to nirvana. They don't attach to peace. They realize peace, but don't attach to nirvana. They enter samsara, but they don't attach to it. And the verse says, having understood that all existence belongs to samsara, after having understood samsara, birth and death, as both having the nature of suffering and not-self, those who possess compassion and

[46:25]

highest wisdom, neither fall into disgust, nor into impermanence, suffering, emptiness and not-self. They shortened it to suffering and not-self. The compassionate ones who understand samsara see that it consists of suffering and impermanence and not-self and emptiness. Because they understand this, they don't have disgust or become tormented by the faults of cyclic misery. And the other night when I was talking to people about this not-disgusted and not-tormented, people said, Well, how could anything be disgusting in nirvana? And actually, today I feel like it's actually two different ways of relating to samsara. Because of compassion,

[47:36]

you're not disgusted by samsara, you're not disgusted. Because of compassion, you're not disgusted by suffering beings. And also because of wisdom, you're not embarrassed or tormented by the faults of cyclic existence. So you can live in samsara without disgust and because of compassion, you dare to live in samsara because of compassion, without disgust for it. And because of wisdom, or due to wisdom, you live in samsara without being tormented by the faults of birth and death. So, due to wisdom, the compassionate bodhisattva does not abide in samsara. If you abide in samsara, you'll be tormented by its faults.

[48:42]

But you don't abide there. You enter into samsara without abiding there. You have this mind which doesn't abide in sights, sounds, smells, tastes, or mind objects. You totally enter samsara, enter birth and death with all beings, and don't abide there because of wisdom. And because of compassion, you do not abide in nirvana. You don't abide in nirvana. You realize peace because of wisdom and compassion, you realize peace, but you do not abide in peace. You even let go of peace. Birth and death, samsara, cyclic existence as suffering is the life of Buddha. If you try to exclude the world of suffering beings,

[49:49]

you lose the life of Buddha. If you cling to it and abide in it, you lose the life of Buddha too. Only when we give up, disliking the world of suffering, or longing for the world of suffering, do we enter Buddha's mind. So, if you don't abide in samsara, you don't abide in Buddha's mind, there's a simple way to become Buddha. When you refrain from unwholesome actions and are not attached to samsara or nirvana, and are compassionate towards all beings, not excluding or desiring anything, you become Buddha.

[50:57]

The ancestor, Asanga, goes on to do further analysis of the subtleties of compassion, but he's telling me that you've been sitting here long enough, so maybe another day we can talk about more of his teachings about compassion. A person said to me just last night, something like...well, basically, I forgot what they said exactly, but it was an expression of gratitude. I think what she said was, if it doesn't get any better than this, that's okay. Or, if it doesn't get any better than this, we're still lucky.

[52:19]

She was happy. And I said, yeah, and some people who still have a house in Louisiana feel guilty that they have a house, and other people don't. And the person said, yeah, they have a house now, but soon they won't. We're all going to lose our house pretty soon. So, it's okay that we have one now, if you remember not to live in it. Don't exclude your house, and don't cling to it. Have compassion for all beings, and you will become Buddha. Of course, easy to say, right? Don't exclude anything, that wasn't so difficult to say.

[53:28]

And don't cling to anything, that's all. And you'll become Buddha, or the life of Buddha will be here. But I must confess that just a short time ago, I was taking a nap, and the nap sort of came to an end. I mean, there was a nap, and then the nap was kind of over. But I kind of wanted to stay in the nap, having trouble, like, leaving, letting go of the nap, even though the nap was over. But there was this other thing happening, which wasn't really the nap, but it was more like clinging to the nap, having difficulty getting up and

[54:36]

living the non-nap time. So, naps are sometimes very nice, and then when they're over, sometimes we want them to go on longer, even though they're gone. You know that feeling there, that post-nap thing? That feeling of, oh, a little bit more, and this is really nice to hold on here. And yet, there was an arising, there was an arousing, there was a letting go of the nap, and moving on into the non-nap time. But the transition was difficult, not to cling to this thing, this nap, and then not to sort of, like, hang out in that space right after, a little longer, maybe go back to the nap. I've told this story quite a few times when I was, I had only been at Zen Center for a

[55:51]

few months, I asked Suzuki Roshi, what's right effort? I don't know where I got that question, but anyway, what's right effort? And he said, to get up without hesitation when the alarm clock rings in the morning. When the nap ends, when the alarm clock has awoken you, to just get up, rather than, not clinging to nap, not [...] clinging to that, just get up. And also not excluding it. I'm never going to take a nap. Or I'm getting rid of my alarm clock. Not excluding anything, and not attaching

[56:57]

to anything. And yet, it's hard to, like, really be that clear. Not exclude this person, not exclude this suffering, not exclude this, not exclude this, and not attach to this, or this, or this. Very subtle, but lots of opportunities, right? Lots of opportunities to not exclude, because there's lots of opportunities to exclude. Not to cling, because there's lots of opportunities to cling. So it's actually a very challenging practice, but this is the life of the Buddha, this practice. That's very challenging. Bodhisattvas are very happy about it, though, even though it hurts. I remember a time when I was actually doing the chanting, and it always seemed like there

[58:18]

was a game that would help me go home. You know, the game doesn't have to be tantamount to the result. And I'm wondering if that type of game is acceptable. Your monetary game may not be. So, all the time, I'm very involved with people. Sometimes, one of my instincts seems to feel that we should have a joke, and we have to laugh. But that's because I don't think it's an accurate joke. So, that's the result of the joke. Well, there was kind of several questions there. One was not exactly a question, but

[59:27]

anyway, it is possible that you, for example, are generous to give a gift, and maybe the gift is quite helpful and beneficial to those who you give it to. And then there's a good thing, a very good thing, there can be this thread of some sense of gain running through it, and that sense of gain defiles what was actually a good thing. And if you give a gift and you feel good afterwards, the feeling good doesn't have to be seen as a gain. But if you feel good and then you project a gain on it, the mind that saw the feeling good

[60:37]

as a gain just defiled that good feeling and planted a seed of suffering at the same time. If you give a gift and feel bad afterwards, you know, right afterwards, for example, and you see that feeling bad as a loss or a gain, like some people might feel like, well, if I give and if it's really good, I should have some pain. I should feel bad after I give. So then they feel bad after they give and they say, oh good, I got the bad feeling. So to project gain and loss onto negative feelings or positive feelings, that projection onto the situation, plus the concern for whether it is a gain or loss, that is a good thing.

[61:46]

That's like abiding in samsara. That's not abiding in nirvana, that's abiding in samsara. And to give out of guilt, if you feel guilty of being stingy in the past or something, maybe you've been stingy and you feel guilty of past stinginess, and if you give from a place of feeling some remorse over being stingy, but you just give without some gaining idea like maybe after I give I won't feel guilty anymore, but if you just feel guilty, like if you're just like a guilty bugger and you're generous but with no sense of getting anything out of it, then the giving is pure compassion. And again, to give and feel good or to give

[62:47]

and feel bad, that happens sometimes. The projection of gain and loss onto the situation plus the being concerned with which it's going to be, that's what defiles the compassion. Or that's one way to defile the compassion. And also that way of defiling compassion is also born of basically dualistic view of, you know, it moved from me over there and over there, separate from me over here, that kind of projection onto the situation is another way to talk about how to defile compassion. But even if you have the view of gain and loss, still it's not the end of the story because if you don't get involved in that, it's kind of okay. It doesn't get any traction. If you say, oh, I gave and I got this good feeling, that seems like a gain, but if you don't really get into it, if you don't really believe it and try to do it again so you get that same kind of result, then you're not

[63:52]

getting involved in the gain and loss and your compassion or your giving is pure. I think what's really, not exactly out there, but I think what's actually here is true compassion. I think what's actually going on is true compassion. In this world, I think what's actually going on is true compassion. That's actually what's going on. But I think what's also going on is that we don't see that a lot of the time. We don't see true compassion. Sometimes we don't see any compassion and other times we see compassion, but then there's some gaining idea that comes in there. But the gaining idea is a mistake. There really isn't anything

[64:58]

to gain out of our life. Life is not something to get something out of. So really what's actually going on is we're actually being perfectly compassionate with each other, however we don't realize it a lot of the time, because of our views, our misconceptions, and our attachments based on those misconceptions. But actually, the compassion is the way we really are, is compassion, pure compassion. So we've got to wake up to that. So when Buddha woke up, Buddha said, Oh my God, this is cool, but most people don't get it. So it's a matter of waking up and then realizing, waking up and then proving or realizing true compassion. As a psychiatrist, I'm making money off of helping people. I'm making money off of helping

[66:06]

people. And I feel good when I get the money. And I feel good when I'm helping people. So now that seems like a problem. Well, even before you get the money, there's a problem. Got problems, man. Then there's also the issue of therapeutic yield, where I want somebody to get better, and that's actually harmful. I disagree. Well, this is part of my training, and there's some advantage in neutrality. Yeah, well, I agree. I think therapeutic zeal, if therapeutic zeal means a bad attitude, then I don't agree, but I agree with you. But wanting your patients to get well, I think, is the same as compassion. But the compassion is

[67:14]

supposed to be joined with equanimity. So you're not into some gaining idea around this wanting them to get well. You want them to get well and happy and fully alive. That's compassion. But having a gaining idea about that, that's not conducive to what you want. Wanting people to get well with no expectation that they will get well, that no expectation or no gaining idea purifies that wonderful wish that they get well. But to be zealous about people getting well is fine, as long as it's not had this threat of gain running through it. And I was thinking actually, just yesterday I read that Confucius said, if someone's

[68:18]

not bubbling over with enthusiasm, I won't teach them. And that's strange, because I mean, it struck me, one sense it struck me, yeah, there's a good point there. And the other side is, what do you do with the people who aren't bubbling over with enthusiasm? Let's just hold them to the side for a second. The people who aren't enthusiastic about the practice or the teaching. And I was thinking that the Buddha also didn't teach unless people kind of really ceremonially asked him. And they could ask three times verbally, or they could bow three times as a gesture, by asking you three times to teach. In other words, they're zealously bubbling over with enthusiasm to receive the teaching from the Buddha, and if they don't have that kind of like wanting the teaching, the Buddha doesn't give it. Because the person has to provide the ground of receptivity. And I was thinking actually

[69:30]

just apropos of what you were saying, was that one of the problems in Zen practice is people don't pay to receive the teaching sometimes. So maybe in some ways it's a kindness to get people to pay you for the teaching, so that they will be enthusiastic. Of course, some people pay and then they say, well now I can be a child, since I paid, I don't have to be enthusiastic. But there's some enthusiasm in the money coming forth. And maybe that's the only way that they can give something to the situation is to pay, because maybe they're so negative that that's the only positive thing they can do, is give the money. But get them in the mode of, I'm giving something, I'm actually requesting this lousy therapy you're giving me. You're a terrible psychiatrist, you're a waste of my time, you're really blah blah blah, I hate you, but I pay you. So maybe the money actually is, when you said therapeutic zeal, maybe it helps them being zealous, at least financially. If you see the money as

[70:37]

a gain and loss, rather as something to make the whole thing work, so that you can keep helping them, and helping them also express their enthusiasm, then that's your problem if you see it as a gain, and you get caught up in that. You have to work on that yourself, in your practice, to see, you know, even if in some other area, if the person did something which was good for them, and they didn't do it, would you actually continue to love them the same, as much? If they didn't do something else that was good for them, and if they didn't pay you, which was good for them, how would that affect you? So you can look in yourself on those points, but it actually may help the process for them to pay, in some way, so it's not a one-directional giving. You can look at that like, hmm, maybe some gaming

[71:51]

idea there on my part, regarding this payment. One other question that's very difficult for me to ask, and is troubling, and that's, you've heard of schadenfreude? Schadenfreude? I've heard it, tell me about it. The joy one feels in the suffering of others. The joy one feels in the suffering of others? You mean you're happy that they're suffering? I guess we have this practice called Confession and Repentance, that I feel joy over someone's suffering,

[72:54]

then I confess that, and you just confessed it, that's good, and then you see how you feel about it, and you said you felt troubled. And that feeling of troubled, I think, is the repentance part. The confession is the admission, and the feeling troubled is the repentance, and that feeling troubled, the confession and repentance, we say, before the Buddhas, melts away the root of that veering away from compassion. But it melts, it doesn't instantly vaporize it, it just gradually melts it. There's usually quite a few applications of the confession and repentance to melt away all traces of ever rejoicing in someone's suffering, or someone's unskillfulness, which will lead to their suffering.

[74:00]

But, before Buddhas were Buddhas, they were like us. They had moments where they rejoiced in the suffering of others, sometimes. Actually, probably innumerable times, in the course to Supreme Enlightenment, there's innumerable occasions for rejoicing in other people's suffering, especially somebody you're competing with. Like, you know, you're in a race and somebody slips and falls down, and they maybe get hurt, or anyway, they feel bad because they lost the race, but you feel happy that they fell down, because now you're going to win. So there's something about our basic animal competitiveness that's closely tied to other people's unskillfulness and unsuccessfulness, and the misery they feel around that. So we

[75:13]

have to practice many, many times catching that deep animal programming that's in our body, and to confess it many, many times before we start to actually change our body into a strange bodhisattva body that actually does not want to beat people anymore, that actually doesn't want to be ahead of people and better than people anymore, that wants to be together with people. So we don't want everybody in our boat to be miserable, we want a happy boat. We don't want to have a happy boat where we're also, it's a happy boat but I'm in charge or I'm the best one in the boat. I'm the most popular sailor on this boat, but that's deep enough to be the most popular rider. So we want to practice giving to these people, even

[76:20]

while we still feel competitive to practice giving until we become unafraid of being not better than other people, unafraid of having basically being in it together with everybody, unafraid of that. But partly because we're so joyful we dare to not exclude anybody or anything in some situations, but we have enough joy to make us dare, to make us not disgusted, enough joyful compassion not to be disgusted with misery. But still, even though we're not disgusted and we're together with suffering people, we still would like them to get well. Just like we would like them to get well, we'd like them to get well. But again, we dare to be with them the way they are, which means we dare to go on with

[77:22]

them not getting well for a long time. We really respect the situation as it's manifesting. But thank you for your confession of a German problem. Yes? What? A German problem. He brought up a German word. Huh? No, he used a German word. Pardon? Right. Pardon? That it's a human problem? Yeah, but it's also a German word. Pardon? Yeah, but I'm just talking about the German word, I'm not talking about German people.

[78:27]

Yeah. But it's also a German problem. It's a word problem. It's a word problem, and the word got you. Well, the word got me. Yeah, but, no, no, the word got you. You attached to the word. I attached to what you said. You attached to the word. You didn't attach to what I said, you attached to what you heard. Fine. Do you say fine? Yes. Okay. Yes. Can you really not hear me? Actually, I really cannot, I couldn't, I actually... I'm sorry about that. Anyway, we agree it's a desiring suffering rather than a human problem. All cultures have this problem. Yeah. Yeah, that's all I'm saying. Okay. Yes? The question I have is the opposite of feeling the other person's bodily suffering in your

[79:39]

own body. The opposite of feeling the other person's bodily suffering? No, no, the opposite of joy in someone's suffering is the feeling, an experience I have sometimes, witnessing something traumatic or witnessing someone in physical pain and feeling physical pain in a sympathetic way. Yes. From the perspective of compassion, what is the right attitude or the right practice? Well, it's not so much from the perspective of compassion, but it would be compassion that you would want that person to be free of that pain. That would be compassion. And sort of like feeling their pain vicariously, which your version of it also could be called empathy. So, empathy and compassion are synonyms, but they have a little bit different nuance. Empathy is emphasizing more the fact that you're actually identifying with the person's suffering. Compassion, you might not feel so much that

[80:40]

you're identifying with it, but that you have your own version of it. So, my version of it is enough for me to wish that they'd become free, but also sometimes I feel like I'm actually vicariously feeling their pain. In both cases, based on that kind of experience, I could wish them to become free, and that's compassion. Empathy isn't usually used as that you feel the person's pain and you wish them to be free of it. Compassion has this additional thing that you want them to be free of it, rather than you just are, you know, entering into the sharing of their pain. And compassion also means to suffer together etymologically, right? But it has this additional thing of wanting the person to be free. Okay? Yes? And I thought, well, one thing that I struggle with a lot is feeling like a person can come

[82:05]

to me and say something. And I thought, well, what if they never come to me? Do you enjoy it when people come to you? Do you hate it when people come to you? And I thought, well, maybe I can help them to come to me, so they don't come to me as, you know, as a human being. And I said, my question is, there's all sorts of ways of relating to suffering that are not really compassion. I'm wondering, of all the ways of relating to suffering that are not really compassion, is there a common denominator? Well, maybe. I mean, fear is pretty pervasive. So, it might be that there's almost always

[83:06]

some level of fear, when we unskillfully relate to our suffering or other suffering. Probably there. But again, the fear is coming from some sense of separation from the suffering. So, both a sense of separation from the suffering, your own or another's, and the fear which comes with the sense of separation. So, those two might usually be present in unskillful responses to suffering. Well, actually, maybe before you meditate on dependent co-arising, which is a wisdom practice, it would be good to practice giving, ethical discipline and patience for starters.

[84:12]

Because, if you're feeling fear and impatience with somebody's suffering, it may be pretty difficult for you to start meditating, doing wisdom practice, while you're feeling that agitated or that disturbed. So, patience is usually at the root of successful wisdom practice. It doesn't mean that you have to have no pain in order to do wisdom practice, but you can be afraid and feel some fear, until you're wise, you probably feel some fear and some pain, and then you practice patience with that fear and that pain. And then you can practice meditation on dependent co-arising more successfully. And also practice generosity

[85:16]

with the pain. In other words, be generous about the pain, be big-minded about the pain, let the pain be pain. And see that letting pain be pain is a generous act. And again, develop fearlessness through that practice. Now, there's still some subtle level of fear until you have perfect wisdom. We sometimes say in the Heart Sutra, without any hindrance, any kind of hindrance to knowledge, when the hindrances of knowledge have been dropped, there's no fear. Until you have perfect wisdom, there's a little bit of fear. But if there's a little bit of fear or quite a bit of fear, practicing generosity and patience with the fear will help you develop the wisdom which will totally undermine the fear. But basically, I think, don't skip over those compassion practices in the face of fear and pain, and

[86:18]

try to go right to wisdom. Do the compassion practice first to get your base in compassion, and then meditate on dependent co-arising. Doing tranquility practice alone? There's a propensity or there's certainly a danger of that. That's why it's good, again,

[87:25]

in some sense, to work up to tranquility practice by practicing giving, ethical discipline, patience, and diligence, so that you're already involved in relating to people in a generous way before you start, or as a base, not necessarily before, but along with your practice of tranquilizing meditations, so that if you're practicing tranquility and somebody comes up to you, they're not going to disturb you, because you're practicing generosity with them, which feeds your tranquility. So you don't see people as disturbances to your tranquility, but rather opportunities to nurture the roots of it through the precepts and through giving, and patience. Oh, here I am practicing tranquility and somebody's coming up to me and irritating me, so now I can practice patience and that'll deepen

[88:27]

the tranquility. I knew I needed something to help me deepen my unfair tranquility. And then, so you give up your tranquility to practice patience with this person, and then by giving up your tranquility, it gets deeper. The perfection of tranquility is giving up tranquility, that deepens it. If you don't have any tranquility to give up, even giving up no tranquility deepens the tranquility that you don't have. I feel like monitoring or being disturbed, not disturbed, something that, or in my course,

[89:40]

we sit down at a table in a cafe, and I've got somebody there who's disturbed sitting at a table in a cafe. I would want to approach the table where you sit. The calm table? The calm table. So, you have a tendency to be attracted to like-minded people. Okay, so actually the Buddha encourages people to, you know, if you want to practice skillful, wholesome behavior, to go hang out with people who are committed to practicing skillful behavior, and don't go hang out with people who are practicing unskillfully. However, he didn't

[90:44]

say prefer one over the other. So the Bodhisattva, if they wanted to do certain things, they might go hang out with certain people, but could they do that without preferring the one over the other? And so ultimately they want to not have preferences among anything, not exclude or cling to anything, and yet, in fact, if you wanted to drive a car or go riding in a car, you might choose someone who was a good driver, rather than someone who was, for example, intoxicated. But, could you also not prefer one person over the other at the same time? Or not even prefer to be in the well-driven car over the unskillfully driven car? So that if you got dropped into, like if the universe plunked you into the car with

[91:48]

the drunk driver, there you would be, and you would practice with that, which might mean you would say, excuse me, could I have the keys? Or, would you stop the car so I can get out? You might do that, but again, could you do that without preference? So that you would give the gift of, would you stop the car? But if they don't stop the car, then you're in the car not stopped. We're going to crash anyway, you know. The question is, can we be in a state of not abiding in where we are? If we're not abiding where we are, we won't be tormented by the faults of the driver. If we're abiding where we are, then we're going to cling to it or exclude it. But, you know, in fact, if you want to go

[92:52]

from point A to point B in a car, it's good to choose a good driver. Makes sense. And if you can, then you get this nice ride. But sometimes you can't. And when you can, can you be equanimous about the fact that you've got a good driver?

[93:11]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ