So this is supposed to be kind of an even calm all the time, not just sometimes? An even calm all the time? It's an even calm, well like it's like, when you get into a shaman, you might get in a situation where you have several trillion moments of tranquility in a row, but that's not all the time. That's just like for maybe like an hour, or two hours, or six hours, or a day and a half. But most people it doesn't last for a week unless they would go back and recharge by giving up discursive thought again, so there's a time limit. But a week is an awfully long time to be tranquil. Yeah, I was thinking a little shorter time period. Well, you know, it depends. If you get really tranquil, if you get quite tranquil, your tranquility might last for

[01:10]

an hour. That would be a long time. An hour of tranquility would be a long time. There would be a lot of moments of feeling relaxed, and alert, and buoyant, you know, and calm, and like porous. Well, I'm still not getting this riddle. If I'm supposed to be tranquil before I study, and it's that hard to be tranquil... No, it's not so much before you study, it's before you do insight work, because you're already studying. You've been studying for a long time. Okay? But we're talking about how do we make your study into insight. Because, you know, sometimes you're studying and basically you're just nervous, and trying to get something out of Buddhism, right? Well, that's not insight work. That's just ordinary, greedy, you know, acquisition of moral power, you know, to make yourself smarter or something. But it is studying the same material that you would study if you were calm. If you're calm, you might even like the study more.

[02:12]

You might say, boy, this is really interesting stuff, and so is this. And when you're tranquil, you pick it up and you read it, and it's like you're not distracted, you're just like, I think I'm going to read this, and that's what you're reading, and you're not jumping all over the place. And so it's much more effective. Or if you're sewing your robes, you're just a little sewing machine. You know, it's very nice. But you can also sew not being in a tranquil state, and still somewhat pretty darn good. As a matter of fact, when you sew in a non-tranquil state, a lot of people start getting tranquil because sometimes they aren't thinking about their boyfriend while they're sewing. Sometimes they're just like ... Because if you start thinking about your boyfriend, the needle kind of goes weird, you know? And then the sewing teacher comes over and says, oh, are you thinking about your boyfriend? Take those out. I said namu kie butsu, not namu kie Michael.

[03:13]

There's little beads, you know. So when you do that, you start getting more constant and less discursive. Generally, most people do get less discursive than normal when they're sewing, don't you? Most people do that? A little bit less discursive, or way less discursive. And then after when you're done sewing, you probably may feel a little tranquility, which you weren't trying to get by sewing, but you may notice it. So when I'm at decurative fervor ... And then after that, if you went from sewing to studying, you might notice you're studying qualitatively different, that you're much calmer. And the calm could last, like I say, pretty long. Five minutes is pretty long. But usually five minutes doesn't follow from five minutes of giving up discursive thought. Usually you give up discursive thought for forty minutes, and you might get a flash of shamatha. But some people, because they're really experienced at tranquility,

[04:23]

they can practice tranquility for a short time, train it for a short time, and quickly go into it. It doesn't take as long. The more experience you have at it, the faster you can get into it. But to first get into it, you have to overcome this huge habit of discursive thought, so it takes a long time to really get over it for an extended period of time. Then when you do, then you can study before that, but that is not vipassana. That is an intensified effort concordant with vipassana. It's not vipassana itself. It's still wholesome activity, but not all wholesome activity qualifies as vipassana. Vipassana is a higher state of vision than our usual, because it's in this special environment of tranquility. And tranquility is quite a feat in itself. Just to get tranquil is wonderful, right? Because then you can do all kinds of wholesome things, one of them being to apply yourself to these teachings,

[05:24]

like it says, to apply yourself to the teachings which you have already learned. And you apply yourself to the teachings in accord with the way you've learned them. And you learn them by talking them over with your teachers and so on, and friends. So before you do vipassana, you've already been studying and trying to straighten out the teachings, and then you enter into shamatha, and when you come in shamatha, then you review the teachings and look at them again in this new state in accord with the way you learned them before you were in that state. But you could have also been in samadhi when you were originally learning, too. So after a while it gets to be a cycle of, hopefully, you're doing study or you're doing vipassana work, and then you have to reactivate your shamatha machine every now and then to revitalize your tranquility. And then you go back, and you're tranquil again, you go back and do insight work in the tranquility,

[06:26]

and hopefully before the tranquility goes flat, you put more, what do you call it, you balkanize it, or not balkanize, recharge, what's the word? You pulmonize it, you pump air back into it, the tires pump up again, and then you go back to drive down the vipassana road, and then before too long you pump it up again. So after a while you have a pretty steady thing. That's why we have daily zazen for those who can do it. Now maybe you don't need it every day, but just to make sure, why don't you do it every day? Reactivate, reestablish your tranquility on a daily basis, so that throughout the day you're practicing vipassana. And for some people, they haven't yet got shamatha, so they have to do practice periods and stuff to get a hang of it, so that's why we have a practice period for you to get a feeling for shamatha. And then practice it,

[07:30]

and then when you realize it, use it for your insight. Does that make sense? Yes, very much. Thank you. You're welcome. Yes? Following on that question, what story would you tell about that transition from where the words and the conceptually elaborated understanding of the teachings makes it kind of a leap, it seems, to a non-conceptual becoming the teaching? Well... How's that process? When we first understand these things, the understanding is not words, but the understanding is mediated by concepts, but it's not necessarily mediated by words. But by concepts, yes. You have an image, for example, of this state where... For example, you might have this image of this wish

[08:31]

to benefit beings and be free of any... where there's no conceptual clinging. You might be able to actually know that state, but there's still some conceptual mediation in knowing that state and realizing that state. Any kind of imagination of it. Yes, imagination of it, but correct. And you actually know it. You're sure of it and you know it. You actually know it. But there's still a little bit of conceptual mediation of a state of no conceptual clinging, for example. But the understanding is not words. But there's still a little bit of confusion with the image of it. So then we have to remove that sign, that image. So that's why we have to rejoin it then with the shamatha practice again. At that moment where the... So that the insight work is like shamatha work. So shamatha work is like insight work. So somehow we have to make the giving up of conceptual...

[09:35]

We have to make the giving up of discursive thought like the insight and make the insight like giving up discursive thought. So one story maybe would be that the mind is so used to and trained in this way, this conceptual way of seeing truth that the transition is not that big a leap or that... And that training and giving up discursive thought will help you when it's there. The shape of the mind is already in place so that when you give up any conceptual vibration about it the shape of the mind basically stays the same. Yeah, for a while. But it's impermanent still.

[10:35]

So it will change. So that's why you have to keep shaping it in that way so that it will be easier and more quickly brought in alignment with the understanding of freedom from believing in concepts as being what is and thereby being able to look at the world beyond the way we grasp the world. So what time... according to the schedule, if we had ended at 10.30 the period would have started at what time? It would have started... at a quarter of 11. 10 till 11. So the period goes till... goes till when? 11.20? Goes till lunch, till service. No, 11.20. 11.20? Yeah. So we have a half an hour until the next period starts.

[11:42]

Any other questions? Did you just say... Pardon? Did you just say it's OK to imagine the state where you don't have any concepts so you can have a conceptual elaboration? Is it OK to imagine that state? Yeah, to try out that state. Actually, it's OK to imagine anything. You can even imagine Razi and Zender if you want to. So go ahead and imagine anything you want. Please. You can imagine me doing something stupid. Which you've already done. So you can imagine whatever you want. And you can imagine all kinds of wonderful states. But that's different from actually understanding the state and seeing the state. But when you first see the state, usually, if you never saw it before, you see it through some image of it. That's the first way. And then, when you... But it still works. You're correct.

[12:45]

Then you need to find a way to remove the image and be with the state without the conceptual mediation. I just really wonder if that's not making it harder to meditate. If you actually ponder signs, if it doesn't make it harder to remove them because you're so into it. It does make it harder to remove signs. Signs are always hard to remove. It's just that if you use certain signs to get certain information, then you didn't use those signs for that purpose before you used them. So you're actually introducing some problems into your life that you didn't have before. Right, like meditating on emptiness with signs. Like having a sign of emptiness. Exactly. And most people, a lot of people don't have signs of emptiness. They don't have a problem with those signs. But also they don't understand emptiness. So those who understand emptiness need signs of emptiness to find emptiness. But you still don't understand emptiness?

[13:49]

No, some people do understand emptiness. With the signs? As far as I know, all the people who understand emptiness understood them with signs first. The Buddha, you meet the Buddha and the Buddha gives you a sign of something. Like they give you a face. But you can't meet the Buddha without a face. You're walking around, you don't see any Buddhas. Then the Buddha gives you a face. But you don't see the face of the Buddha. He says, here's a sign. Put the sign up and then you can see the face. Now you get to see the Buddha, but you didn't see the Buddha before. So now you have problems you didn't have before. You have the problem of having a sign of a Buddha. So now you've got to get rid of that. You've got to get rid of it before, but also you didn't have a Buddha before. So I'm sorry that having a Buddha means, first of all, you've got to have a sign of a Buddha, or an image of a Buddha, or a concept of a Buddha. Also sitting.

[14:50]

Before you have a sign of sitting, you don't have any problem with sitting. Or before you have a sign of a grandfather who goes to the Zen Do, you don't have a problem with the sign of a grandfather who goes to the Zen Do. But you do have a grandfather who goes to Zen Do, that you know about. But before you have a sign of a grandfather who goes to Zen Do, you don't know you have a grandfather who goes to a Zen Do. You don't know about it. He's there, but you don't know about it. So Buddha's there, being in this wonderful state, and you don't know about it until you have an image of it. Because all of the Buddhas right there, all the time, going, all the time, you don't know it, because you don't know about your direct perceptions of Buddha. They're too fast. But Buddha's like zapping you all day long. Come on, come on, come on. Wake up, wake [...] up. But too fast.

[15:52]

So you have to like, get a big heavy concept, like after Buddha's whacked you seven times, then you got this big heavy concept. Buddha! So now you got this big heavy concept between you and this wonderful Buddha, but now you know it at least, you got a hold of it. I've got a Buddha, I've got a Buddha, I've got a Buddha. Okay, okay. And then after a while you know you have a Buddha, and then after a while you've got to, you know, chuck the sign. And the Buddha is telling you, chuck the sign. But the Buddha first of all says, Hi, I'm here. So the Menju, first of all Menju is like, find the face. And then the Menju is, get rid of the face. All these things that, originally they're like, ways of making contact, but you need signs in order to be aware of any of this stuff. So, and you use signs to get more and more deeper understanding of all this stuff. And then when you have a clear, correct understanding,

[16:54]

then, as Chapter 8 says, then you go through the process of removing the signs. And there's a section there which, some of you may have seen already, systematically go through and talk about how to remove different types of signs that you put on this wonderful stuff. But before you realize this stuff, you don't have problems of signs of this stuff. Before you meet certain people, you don't have the problem of signs of those people. Before you know certain things, you believe you don't have the problem of the signs you use to know them. Which is nice. You don't have those problems. But it's not nice that you don't have those, those relationships and those knowledges. That's not nice. It's too bad. It's suffering. But you're right about that. Yes? So what are the signs that Buddha provides for us to see and meet the words, whatever we see as consciousness?

[17:57]

By the way, I mentioned so much that Buddha provides signs. Our mind, the nature of our mind, is that the way we are, our mind actually, our wonderful mind, has the ability to come up with signs by which we can grasp things. It is exactly that. Buddha gives us the signs. But Buddha allows us to put signs on Buddha. Because Buddha understands that in order for us to get to know Buddha, we have to use signs. Just like Buddha used signs to get to know his Buddha. Or her Buddha. So Buddha doesn't really give the signs exactly. Buddha is part of the program of our relationship to our mind that conjures signs so it can grasp things. Yes? So the question was, would one of those signs for seeing Buddha be the teaching that when you see his consciousness only, that teaching? Is that a sign or have you got other examples of signs?

[18:58]

That teaching, in order to grasp that teaching, you have to assign that teaching. That teaching is not a sign, but in order to cognize that teaching, which is happening to you all day long, it's coming to you, in order to grasp it, you have to put a sign on it. But the teaching isn't a sign. We need signs to get the teachings. See the difference? Not quite? Yes, I see the signs and the teaching. I'm wondering if that is an example of one of those or a sign of one of those. That's an example of a sign. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry. I didn't follow what you just said. Are you going to explain what he's saying, Grace? I was going to digress slightly

[20:01]

or add a clarifying thought to what he's saying. Okay. Can I try it now? In my experience, one of the characteristics of mind is that it can give a gift every now and then of an image, a sign, that explains the teaching. It's not the teaching itself, but it's an image that's so fresh or different or something that it's showing itself in a particular way. So some signs you're saying are particularly fortuitous because they seem to be the sign by which you understand the teaching. Yeah. So then you've got the sign of the teaching, and it's a really nice one because with that sign you actually understood the teaching.

[21:02]

I don't know if that took care of your question. I'm not saying... I guess maybe to bring it down a level, if I work with this sign of the teaching that whatever I see is cognitively, that seems quite helpful. I recognise it's just a sign of that teaching. I'm not actually seeing, I'm not actually realising and understanding that what I see is cognitionally, but having that in my mind, I find making something quite useful. For example, if I find myself not being very nice to someone or not thinking nice thoughts about someone, that thought may come in, and I find that kind of helpful. The thought of? That it's cognition only, it's not anything other than me. Right. That thought comes in and helps you, yes.

[22:04]

So I'm saying it's a useful way to practise, even though I'm still working with the sign and doing it your way. Yes, I think it is helpful. And you might be doing that, and it would be nice to do that in a state of tranquillity too. Yes. And so now it's getting like 20 minutes before you get into Zen Do. So you can gauge how much time you need to get to Zen Do. Yes? I think this is important. I'd like to follow up on what I asked you last night. And if someone realises or even realises that awareness is nothing other than the object, they'd realise that. Yes. Can that being make the mistake

[23:05]

of confusing an image with the object? When you first realise it, you probably will be confusing the image with the object when you first realise it. Because you'll first realise it with conceptual cognition. Because it's with conceptual cognition that you apply the teaching that this object is not separate from the subject. And so that teaching or the image associated with that teaching, like you kind of say, Oh, I see it! I get it! You really understand it, but there's kind of an image mixed in there and you confuse the image with the actuality of this truth, of this teaching, I should say, or this meaning. So you actually touch the meaning and the meaning touches you and you're transformed

[24:05]

and it really is wisdom. You really do know it. You not just hear the teaching and say it makes sense, you know it. You're convinced and the other story no longer applies. But you still have an image by which you're seeing it and you do confuse the image with the thing, which is still a little bit of a mistake. So again, when you understand that things are impermanent, that's correct. When you see the impermanence of things, that's correct. But when you see the impermanence of things, I don't know if I said this very well last minute, when you see the impermanence of things, the impermanence of things is not the impermanent thing. The impermanent thing is not the impermanence. The impermanence is a concept. Impermanence is an abstract noun, right?

[25:06]

The thing isn't an abstract noun. The thing is an impermanent thing. When you see the impermanence of an impermanent thing, you're actually seeing a concept, which is correct. You're seeing a correct thing about a person, is that they have this impermanence zapped onto them. Then the next step would be to remove the image of impermanence, which was right, and see the impermanent thing. Does that involve direct perception? Yes. That would be direct perception. So first it would be conceptual cognition, correct conceptual cognition. Then, removing the image, you'd have a direct perception of an impermanent thing, of a particular impermanent thing, and you'd understand. And that understanding would be under the heading of having an understanding of impermanence in general, and now you see the specific impermanent thing.

[26:13]

And then there's no mistake, because you're looking directly at the impermanence without the conceptual mediation, with the impermanence manifesting in this particular sensory experience. And there's no separation between it. And at that level of realization, you realize this, too, at the same time. With objects rather than images. Yeah, exactly. Okay? Got it? You've been struggling with this for a while? Okay. So now you have, like, about 12 minutes before you get to Zen. Four minutes from the door. Yes. In relation to Jeff's question just now, and earlier you told the Zen stories of the person who sees the peach blossom or hears the stone hit the bamboo.

[27:14]

So, in those kinds of awakening that doesn't appear to be based on this kind of conceptual teaching, but which can be talked about in terms of this kind of conceptual teaching. Yes. It seems a little different from what you were just saying, and I just want to clarify that, about the... Like, it doesn't seem like any consciously Vipassana, sign study work was going on. Yes. You don't hear that talked about. You don't hear that talked about. And then this occasion of direct perception... But you do hear talked about. If they're talking about the story. Yes. If you just hear the story, then no one hears the story. Right. But if they start talking about the story, the Zen people will say, but there was still this thing. You know, this guy was walking around,

[28:16]

sweeping the ground, but there was still this thing. What was the thing? It was consciousness. There was still this consciousness besides the world. And then when the rock hit the bamboo and he heard it, then there was not this thing anymore. Right. So some people, when they talk about this story, they talk about this. But I'm telling this as a Vijnapti mantra, but they're talking about the same thing. Yes. But for the man with the broom... Maybe he never heard about it. That's what I'm saying. He came through this experiential place without any of the teaching before him. Right. That type of teaching. And the people who wrote this down, the people who wrote this teaching, these were people who were coming from Menju. They had a Menju. They had a Jijuyu. They had a Kanodoku. They met this Buddha. They had this meeting.

[29:16]

And out of that meeting, they wrote this. This is a philosophical expression of an actual relationship between mind and the sound of a pebble hitting bamboo. But the actual way that that is, the person may not be able to get this teaching. But some people who have that experience then write a sutra. Because the meeting they're having with the Buddhas is such that the causes and conditions are there. Part of the reason why Zen people didn't write sutras is because the sutra was already written. So they said, Hey, all I've got to do is just keep sweeping. That's a good idea. That's awesome.

[30:01]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ