I'd like to say something that you've heard before. I'd like to repeat myself. May I say something over? The middle way is avoiding the extreme. You know, like, that a person is a thing. or a person's nothing. And avoiding the extremes, we are meditating on the non-substantiality of the person. So, it's been said over and over for thousands of years, a person is an entity.

[01:01]

A person is an entwining of relationships. A complex. The root of the word complex is an entwining of conditions. Dependent on an entwining of conditions, there appears a person. So the implication of this nonsubstantial person, some of the implications of that, one of the implications that the non-substantial or insubstantial persons are not located.

[02:06]

There's a blue jay. Inside. Inside. A substantial blue jay. But persons are not substantial and not being substantial They are not located in space-time. Time-space. Not located. In time or space. I shouldn't say this, but anyway, I'm going to be having a meeting with a A journalist who's a scientist, he wrote a book called The Whole Shebang, The Whole Shebang.

[03:07]

And so I'm reading his book, and one of the things which I like particularly was he said, all the places that exist today were originally the same place. That's the standard model of cosmology. It's called the Big Bang. All the things that seem to be places now were originally the same place. So, as a Buddhist priest, I would say all the places that exist today are fundamentally the same place. They were once the same place, according to cosmology, but today still they are one place in the mind of Buddha.

[04:11]

These different places are just set up by mind. So the insubstantial person is not located in... So, not located in time means that we don't grasp the extremes of eternalism and annihilationism. We are not momentary. That's not us. Momentary is an extreme. It's annihilationism. We're not momentary, and we do not endure completely. So there's the... The relational view of the person means that we are not momentary and we don't last. We do not exist in time as lasting or just momentary.

[05:16]

Our existence in time is indeterminate. Do we last? Well, not really. Are we just momentary? Well, not really. If we're located When you can locate things, in physics actually, when you can locate things, it looks like, according to Mr. Feynman, Dr. Feynman, it's annihilation, it's arising and annihilation and arising and annihilation and arising and annihilation. But when you can't locate things, they're not annihilated and they don't last. So Middle Way of... is indeterminate in time, which means we don't grasp those, a temporal identity. And the other thing is that we are all indeterminate spatially.

[06:23]

We're not located in space. We're not here, we're not there, and we're not in between. The insubstantial is not here, is not there, and is not in between. And this is the end of suffering. The insubstantial person, realizing the insubstantial person who is not located in space, is the end of suffering. The substantial person who is located here is suffering. To be located in space is suffering. To be a substantial person, you're located and you suffer. Being insubstantial, relational person, you're not located. The Zen master Wang Bo said, it is precisely the Tao.

[07:36]

And Tao means, you know, path. path or road, but it also means understanding or enlightenment. So you can hear it is precisely the path or precisely Buddhist understanding that has no location. The Mahayana mind. This mind is not present inside, outside or in between. In actuality, there are no locations. Wang Bo echoing... Wang Bo teaching the middle way. Now... You won't be surprised to hear me say this, with a mind like a wall, is the way that we open up to, or the way we are opened up to, this vision of this insubstantial relational person.

[08:59]

mind like a wall being in the scene, there will be just the scene, that way of being with sense contact, we see that there's no here or there or in between. Is that familiar to you? So that way of meditating, which is that way of being with, for example, sense contact, opens us to the vision that... ...location to the person who's meditating. In other words, the person who's meditating is not located at the meditation site. It's not a... This is a... You're opening up to the vision of insubstantial person who's there... somewhere around the sense contact, but they're not located there.

[10:09]

There's no there or here for them. They've just opened to that vision of no here and there. So the meditator's not here doing this meditation. This meditation is happening. It dependently co-arises their sense contact, and with the sense contact, there is a mind like a wall. But there's nobody there who has this mind like a wall, who's doing this meditation. This is mind like a wall time. So the practice of in the scene there, or just the scene, in the herd is not located in the practitioner or outside the practitioner.

[11:28]

It's not located in this insubstantial person or outside this insubstantial person. This kind of mindfulness at sense contact, like at hearing and seeing, is the dependent core arising of the end of suffering. The lack of this kind of presence at sense contact is the dependent core arising of misery. So if we're not mindful in this way, then there arises feeling. And if we continue to, I should say, I take away we continue, if there is then at the arising of the feeling also not the mindfulness practice of being like a wall, then there arises craving.

[12:42]

And then again, if there's not the practice, there arises clinging and so on, there arises misery. The lack of practice, however, is also not located just like the practice is not located. For someone who is non-locally enjoying this practice, there is freedom from suffering. and there's freedom from the idea here and there, and there's freedom from the idea of she is doing it. But that freedom is also not located. So, that person is not doing the practice, not located in that person, and the freedom

[13:45]

from suffering. The end of suffering is not located in that person either, although that person doesn't... isn't outside of it either, because outside of it would be location. You're not inside or outside the freedom. Nobody else is either. This freedom does not belong to one practitioner. Similarly, the lack of this practice The lack of this kind of mindfulness and the suffering that comes from it, unless there's some recovery program later, that suffering is also not located in actuality. So it is not, it is, that suffering is shared by all beings, including who? Want to shift back now to the one who is doing the practice? No. There is no such person who's actually the good one who's doing the practice.

[14:49]

So it's not like you got this good one who's doing the practice who's not located and is not located in them and everybody's sharing it. And then someplace else No. There's no other place. There is just the practice is happening or not. If the practice is happening, there's no location for that practice. Did I say the practice is happening? If the practice is happening, if there is this kind of presence with sense contact, there is no here or there. There's no location to this practice. The practice is not located in a person who's doing it. People do get to be carried along in this practice. The behavior of Buddha includes all beings. So beings can be included in this practice. And when beings are included in this practice, then there's a dependent cause of suffering, non-locally.

[16:03]

And nobody gets credit for doing it. No one person gets credit for doing it. You can get credit for it, but not exclusively. And also, you get the suffering relieved, but not exclusively. Similarly, when this practice is not happening, when there's a dependent co-arising of not this presence with sent contact, there is a dependent co-arising of suffering. And also, there isn't some good person who's doing the practice some other place who isn't suffering. Everybody's included in this suffering. Everybody's included in this lack of practice. So both lack of practice and suffering and practice, authentic practice and freedom from suffering, are both non-local people. Now, the funny thing is that the lack of practice is what happens when we imagine local people.

[17:11]

It is possible, however, practice while still imagining that there's a local person trying to do the practice and at a certain point the local person learns how to stop being local. The local person learns to practice this mind like a wall which means they realize that they aren't doing it and that there's not a here doing the practice and a there doing the practice. Somehow they get freed up from that point of view and then the practice is happening. So that's basically one of the things I wanted to talk about this day. And there are several others, but I'm patient about some things, and this is not one of them. But even though I'm not patient,

[18:24]

I could not present more at this time and get into questions. Which way should I go? Present a little bit more? So where to go next? Oh, I'll go here. This is important. The other stuff is too, but... Um... I think the Zen teacher, Dogen, said something like this.

[19:36]

This is different from Taigen-san and Okamura-san translated this, but this is the way I would start by translating it. Something like, it's in Bendo-wa, no, Bendo-ho. said something like, you know, to accord conduct of the other monks is the dropped off body and mind of the self. Or, I don't know if you see, whether he did or not, I would also reverse it and say, To accord with the conduct of the other monks is the self of body-mind dropped off. To accord, I don't know what the first one was, but to accord with the conduct

[20:53]

of the other monks is the dropped off body and mind of the self. This may be... What I see here may turn out to be one of the main differences between Buddhism and Indian Buddhism.

[22:03]

This point. Which, I say Indian Buddhism, but I mean Buddhism as it appeared in India. In other words, Shakyamuni Buddha's teaching is not Indian Buddhism, it's not Tibetan Buddhism, it's not Chinese Buddhism, it's not Japanese Buddhism, it's not American Buddhism. It's not Buddhism. But his teaching was interpreted in this spectacularly wonderful way. You've got to give it to India. It's a fabulous culture. And they produced an incredible interpretation of what Buddha was teaching. I mean, it's just awesomely wonderful what the Indians were dealing with, even though it was a misunderstanding. And Chinese culture also came up with a fabulous misunderstanding of Buddha.

[23:11]

and Japanese, and now we're coming up with something too. But I think one of the main emphasis on group practice. Zuki Roshi said, our way is group practice. And we have a number of people here at Zen Center now who are sincerely practicing at Zen Center, but they were practicing in Tibetan centers before. And part of the residual practicing there is solo retreats. You could say, I mean, I'll just say, this is not true or anything, but there are no solo retreats in Zen. No solo retreats. There is no person located in a hut in Zen. Zen practice is the practice of the entire community. It's group practice. And it's... It's called continuous practice or continuous conduct.

[24:28]

And in there, there's these stories of all these great Zen masters practicing solo retreats. you know, very intensely, you know, living on sautéed pine needles. Although the practice of mind like a wall is not located, it's time for the practice of mind like a wall. It's time to not get involved in objects. So these Zen masters were on solo retreat, but Dogen Zenji's interpretation of this fabulous practice of these people is that they were already finished their training

[25:45]

They were Buddhas and they were just, I would call it, had just been ejected from their home temple to start a new one. Their teacher kicked them out and they were sitting in the mountains waiting for the people to find them. And they weren't practicing by themselves. Where they were, is just a, what do you call it, a false view. They weren't somewhere. They were not located. And they were not doing the practice. They were being carried along by the Buddha's practice. They had realized this non-local suffering of the world and the non-local liberation from suffering. And they were waiting for their disciples to come, and their disciples did come and find them, and then they were apparently surrounded by people.

[26:54]

But they were always surrounded by beings, it's just that some of them got closer. So there is especially in Soto Zen, a strong, and maybe Rinzai Zen too, I don't know, but I know in Soto Zen from Dogen and Eijo, very strong feeling, and Suzuki Roshi, very strong feeling of practicing together. It isn't that you do the practice of practicing with them. It's not like there's you, and then you join the practice of them. It's that you and them together, all over the place, the practice. All the different places are the same place, same practice, the same realization, the same path. And in practicing with the Sangha, with the schedule or not with the schedule,

[28:03]

but maybe with the schedule, when we do not harmonize with the community, when we feel separate from the community, and that we're practicing alone and we're making decisions on our own, when we do that, then the practice is localized. Here's the practice. You know, I may not be perfect, but anyway, I'm doing the practice here, and when it's different from the other people, then it's easier to see that here it is. The other people, the practice isn't here, and it's also, by the way, not there. You don't have it either. I'll give it up, but you don't get it. All of us together are what each of us is. Now, dependent on ignorance, karmic formations arise.

[29:14]

Dependent on the ceasing of karmic formations is the ceasing of ignorance. Now, you may have heard that depending on ignorance, karmic formations arise. You've heard that, right? And you've heard, depending on the cessation of ignorance, is the cessation of karma. Haven't you heard that? Did you hear about that dependent on karmic formations, ignorance arise? Have you heard that one? Now you've heard it. Where's that coming from? Am I channeling something? Am I making something up? Did Buddha turn it around like that? Yes. Depending on ignorance, karmic formations arise. Depending on karmic formations, ignorance arises. Depending on the cessation of ignorance is a cessation of karmic formations. Depending on the cessation of karmic formations is ignorance.

[30:21]

Does that make sense to everybody? You're furrowing your brow, Anu. Is that necessary? It's not local, that furrow, but now it's infecting me. And now it went away, so now I'm free too. We're all free. She's also red now, and we're all red, aren't we? We're sharing the flushing of the face. No more furrowing on the brow. Okay, got that pattern? I could write on the blackboard if you need to, but we don't have a blackboard. I bring it up because based on ignorance is karma, is activity, okay? Based on ignorance, what's ignorance? Based on the view of the inherently existing person, based on the view of the inherent existence or Deirdre, based on that view there is

[31:25]

What do you call it? It's contaminated activity. Personal behavior. Does that make sense to everybody? Based on the idea of an independently existing person, behavioral behavior. This is what we mean by karmic formations usually. The actions which are based on that ignorant idea, karmic formations. Okay? However, when the behavior is no longer based on that idea of individual behavior. When the activity or conduct, and the word conduct, by the way, means to be led, to having been led together. Having been led. Whereas the word behavior has to do with holding, having. personal behavior, personal having, personal holding, versus being led along together, conduct.

[32:38]

When the practice is being led along together with the community of beings, when we're practicing together, this is no longer karma based on ignorance. This is now Buddha's activity. This is the body and mind of self dropped off. This karma, this activity is the cessation of karmic formations. So, rather than just sort of like karmic formation is just being impermanent and stopping, this is different. This is the antidote to karmic formations. This isn't just that they change every minute. This is a new way of being. This is Buddha's community practice. This is the, according with the conduct of the community, this is non-localized practice. This practice then is a cessation of contaminated karmic formation.

[33:40]

This then leads to, or I shouldn't say leads to, but dependent on this attainment of this kind of practice is a cessation of ignorance. And maybe you should ring the bell. And when the practice is this non-local way, practiced ...practice together with all these insubstantial, conventionally existing people practicing together, where the practice isn't located like on my seat more than your seat. When the practice is like that, the view of existence pops up very nicely.

[34:43]

So it is in the context of this kind of practice that this false view will very nicely be flushed out. And then, although you don't do it, there is the mind like a wall which is observing this false view and seeing there it is and gee whiz it doesn't hold up very well to together with all beings this me practicing all by myself and me making better decisions than those other people can do that doesn't hold up very well to this dropped off body and mind of the self and then there is the um again the extinction of that ignorance view. Ignorance is a consciousness. And that consciousness pops up very nicely in the context of this community practice.

[35:56]

And I say that this may be one of the main differences between Indian and Chinese Buddhism or Zen Buddhism. This is Buddha's teaching, I think, but the Indians, I think, are less communally oriented. They less think of themselves. The background of Indian culture is more like the self. The self is like an embarrassed which should as soon as possible become merged with Brahma. Whereas in Chinese culture, before Buddhism got there, the idea of a person was of relationships. And maybe you read in Sukhoreshi's commentary on Asandokai when he's talking about He wrote on the blackboard this Chinese character for person. You know that character? Is it written? Do they have the character in the book? Do they have the characters in the book? Huh? That's too bad because part of what he's doing is he's commenting on the characters.

[36:57]

So this one character. See it? It goes like this. Look. Look. Look. So one sort of inclined line like that. Oh, a blackboard. This is group practice, see? Localized. Okay, thank you. I'll let you guys go by. This is another thing called the swinging door, right? Here, this character here. Right? That's a character for a person. Can you see it?

[38:07]

I'm not doing this. I'm not doing this. Who is? So he said, this is like, you know, a person depends on this, right? You take this away, person falls down. Like man, if you have man, man depends on woman. Take away woman, man falls down. Same woman, take away man, woman falls down. All the things about person depend on something. That's what persons are. So this is like Chinese already sort of had more of this point of view. So when Buddhism came, I think they interpreted it more in a group way rather than in terms of individual psychology. So in some ways, Indian Buddhism is more easily understood, I think, by Westerners.

[39:10]

I think our Indo-European perspective makes the psychological, the personal psychological side of... It's not Buddhist teaching. Buddhist teaching is not personal, psychological, anything. It's also not group. But different cultures interpret it different ways. And I think all the way... all the ways have, you know, some relevance for different people. But I think it's important for us to understand why the Soto Zen masters say, do not practice alone. Stay in the monastery. You know, don't go out in the woods to practice alone. Very strong. It's really... Until you understand that wherever you are, you are not locally practicing. then you have to stay in the group until you surface any behavior that's based on this ignorance and therefore surface this ignorance by entering into the practice which you don't personally do, but which is you being led along together by Buddha with all beings.

[40:33]

That kind of karma relinquishes, let's go of that view, but also brings it up. Like, you know, that example I gave about, you know, getting my lunch, right? When I didn't get the croutons. At a regular restaurant, and you don't notice yourself clinging. You don't notice the idea of the local mouth. Now, sometimes you do, if the service is really bad, This mouth is not getting with one, and you don't give him a good tip, but basically you don't get that into it. But in a Zen monastery, together with the other monks, everybody gets the same, right? So when you don't get your croutons, suddenly your belief in inherent existence just pops right up there, and it's very embarrassing. to surface what we should be embarrassed about, namely our false views.

[41:46]

Okay, I have some more to talk about until some other time, because if there's going to be some questions, we'd better do it soon. Yes? Yes. His question is, what do we mean by presence and mindfulness with sense contact? That's your question, right? So I mean when I say sense contact, I mean contact with the concept of blue.

[43:11]

At the level of direct sensory awareness, there's no training necessary. Train yourself thus. There is direct sensory experience with no conceptual mediation. We do, that's part of our life, a big part of our life, a rich part of our life. Oh God, it's a rich part. That's one of the main reasons. It's not just theoretically that we like sunny days. There actually is this kind of like thing that happens to you, right? Which like, and you just feel different on days like this and on other kinds of days. Because part of you is directly experiencing what's going on. And it's quite a rich experience, isn't it? I mean, yes, that's going on. However, we don't need training on that. What we need training on is in the realm where we have conceptual mediation.

[44:18]

On a day when we're having lots of rich direct sensory experience, of electromagnetic radiation, of mechanical waves, of chemical presentations, and of gaseous presentations. Right when that's happening, we also then convert those into, this is blue, that's stinky, this is sweet. That's where we train ourselves. So when he says in the herd, there will be just a herd, he's saying this is a conceptual training he's doing. In other words, when there's a herd, there should be no conceptual elaboration of what you hear, like Reb's voice. All those categories of training that the Buddha's mentioning, and in the original text there were

[45:29]

four categories, but the third category is an abbreviation for three categories. Did you know that? Remember that? Non-locally Barrett. Other people remember that? Well, for Barrett's sake, since everybody else, would you tell him something about this? So the first one is the conceptual category called, you know, visual objects. The next one is auditory objects or sounds. And the next one is called reflected sometimes. Those conceptual things. Because when there's conceptual mediation in our experience, that's when we get excited and upset. Mediation also creates me and mine and here and there. So when we give up conceptual elaboration by training ourselves this way, then we also, then here and there drop away.

[46:34]

The idea of localization drops away. And we enter into this vision, non-substantial person. This person who's not located in time and space. Does that make sense now? Does it make complete sense? We might as well finish this off now so you get this for the rest of your life so you can teach this. Okay, Baron, let's get it now. Not you, of course, but let's get this understood in this room completely. Part of my understanding is that in meditating on sense contact, that I always fall down into cause and effect. Especially in this kind of meditation. Excuse me, I want to repeat for the tape. In this kind of meditation, you can see a falling back. By the way, he said, I can see a falling back.

[47:36]

Okay? Yeah. And which false view is there falling back into? For example, when you're believing that there actually is a sense object, a sense organ, a sense consciousness, it seems to make so much sense that this is here. Yes. When I perceive something coming in, this code permanently creates me and other. That's very clear. Uh-huh. Yes. So that's a false view that's appealing? Yeah, we know about that. Is there another foot going to drop now? Is that it? I mean, we all understand, I think, that that's tempting to slip into that view. That's our habitual view, right? Yeah. So we're talking about a training of a new way New way for things to be.

[48:42]

Okay? We're talking about a change of the scenario. And is it a difficult transition? Is somehow, is there a lot of momentum for the scenario to keep going in the same direction? Yes. Is the new way kind of like just tentatively feeling our way? Yes. Yes, this is happening now and better move away. So I say... What recently changed, and this is very disconcerting for myself, is, let's say, from believing that this object is real or clear, it is believing that this is imputation of imputation of imputation. Uh-huh. Yeah. It's very scary. Uh-huh. Okay, so there's been a shift from believing the objects really out there to now a belief that there's imputation involved.

[49:55]

That's all there is. Okay. Well, that's still a little bit, you know, a little bit noisy. So try to make it a little bit simpler. Let's try, everybody together, to have it be different. There is just the sound, and there's not even the chatter about imputation there. That way of being will even more clearly surface the reality of imputation. the actuality of how this sound arises, which is that it's not out there and you're not over here. But there needs to be continual effort. You need to be continually pulled along by the practice of training in this way.

[51:02]

And if there's getting scared, there is patience with that fear and continuing to do this practice, you know, not something that you're doing all by yourself. You're not doing this all by yourself. All the Buddhas are supporting you, backing you up, fronting you up, holding you up, squashing you down, packing you in there at your non-local position, your dharma position, which is not located and where nothing can hurt you. I think, I don't know who was next, but Kendra was before Jane. I know that part. Mm-hmm.

[52:15]

Would you say that again? Oh, sure. Yeah. And I'm wondering if you can help me understand How I can do these things and try to stay within, like, I'm not pushing the teeth of how long in 10 years, my teeth, but I'm pushing them. Is it that? Yeah. So, Ken is referring to... I think I said something about... Actually, I said, you know, the eternalists are the people who are befuddled by the idea of eternalism, right?

[53:23]

They're the people who are befuddled by the idea of we last. And they think that they are selves, that the self is a thing, and they think they own stuff, like teeth. Okay? The other... annihilationists who think we're just momentary and then we're gone. And what do they do with their teeth? They don't have a self. There's no self at all. And they don't possess anything, right? So what do they do with their teeth? Huh? They drink Coca-Cola, right. They let them rot. Or, you know, whatever. So, on one side you grasp you know, morality for, you know, for your future enduring self. In the other case, you forget. But anyway, Kendra's more wondering about how can she make the transition from being an internalist to a middle-wayist, right?

[54:29]

Well, one way is to practice mindfulness at So while you're brushing your teeth, you try to let the felt just be the felt. And if this toothbrushing activity still seems to be done by a localized, substantial person, you know, you're patient with that perspective, still being there and being suffering because of that. And that suffering, which you think is happening to you, the local brusher, is actually pervading the whole universe. But you don't care about that right now. You've got no problems making sure your teeth are nice. And you're suffering because you're worried about your teeth. But you're trying to learn this new way simultaneously while you're brushing your teeth and suffering. You're trying to learn how can there just be the brushing and just the sound and just the feel.

[55:37]

You're already doing that. That's already happening. You're brushing your teeth now. Right now you're brushing your teeth. And you're still somewhat in the old mode. But you're trying to learn this new mode. And as you do this new mode, [...] you reach the point, place where there just is in the scene, there's a scene and so on. And at that point, this here and over there toothbrush drops away, and you're free of suffering. You're free of suffering, and so am I. Now, if you say, how am I going to figure out when to stop brushing? He just flips back to the other side, that you're the one who's got to decide about when to brush. You just flip back into the old pattern. Okay? The actual activity of brushing, in actuality, is not local.

[56:41]

And there's not a local brusher. Once you realize this freedom from suffering, the brushing activity will stop in concert with all of us. Now, an unusual example of the way it stops is we come to your room and we say, Would you please come to the Zendo and put your toothbrush down? And you say... And you say, okay, fine. I've been waiting for a sign. This is the sign. This is the group practice now carrying you away from your toothbrush. Okay? There are other signs too, like alarm clocks go off, Hans makes sound. Various conditions arise such that there is a response, but it's not local. It's not local. It depends on the Han, that you're a Tassajara. If you're in San Francisco and you hear the Han, you don't necessarily respond the same way. Being a Tassajara, hearing the Han, brushing the teeth, kind of goes with the toothbrush goes down.

[57:46]

But it isn't you doing it. It's the whole situation. This whole situation of Tassajara makes sense that you would not brush your teeth all the way through Zazen. And somehow that's There. And you can... You together with all beings can be free of this local idea of you taking care of your teeth. Brushing your teeth. as one of the activities in the spirit of according with the behavior, the conduct of the other monks, you know fairly well about how the brushing should go on. And you know that after the monks brush their teeth, they put their robes on, or they already have them on, and then they start trotting off to the zendo, or whatever, or to have their tea.

[58:53]

you kind of know that although you're not, we're not all like, we're not practicing that closely in situations where you actually can see the other people have stopped brushing, and you say, well, I guess I should stop too. We kind of know about when there are other people that are brushing, and we kind of know what would be like an excessively, you know, trippy amount of brushing to do. So we kind of know when to stop in relationship to what other You don't have to, but, you know, you kind of, if you're... Who knows, maybe according with the behavior of the other monks, with the conduct of the other monks, maybe it would mean some time brushing your teeth a real long time. It might occasionally mean that. And still you could be in accord. But usually you're somewhat in the same... Usually. But again, ideally you get to the point where you're not so much like trying to match them, but you're carried along by what we're all doing There's that side of it too, you know, like... I'm sorry the kitchen's left, but you know... You know, I notice that you're doing more than the minimum around here.

[60:09]

You people are taking really good care of the practice here. Somehow it's happening in a very nice way. Very... People are doing more... than just what they have to do. There's a great generosity here and we're being carried by that, all of us. Each of us is involved in it in a way that you could make it locally that you're doing it, but I see the practitioners going beyond that personal limited way of practicing and doing more than the local person has to do, or has to be done from the local person's point of view. The relational, insubstantial people have a life here already. But then sometimes they're slipping back into this substantial, local, you know, master.

[61:19]

lasts and has things and is controlling what's going on. That's our... And that's not just... Chinese people, Indian people, American people, we all have this basic delusion. Jane, I think your hand was up there. When I heard you say you're in that space of . It reminded me of feeling similarly Uh-huh. Uh-huh. It's... Yeah, that's a good point.

[62:46]

At least you knew that you were grasping an extreme. It wasn't that you were getting closer to the real practice and that stuff was really bad. Although sometimes as you get closer to the real practice then you more intensely veer off into these extremes than usual. But still they're extremes. And... The extremes, in some sense, it's good to be a little bit uneasy with the extremes. All there is is imputation. It's not imputation, but you had that view, right? Phenomena require more than conceptual imputation. You can't just dream up a universe, but there's no universe without your dreaming. But when you think that you can dream the whole universe, that's that's too, what do you call it, idealistic, in terms of being an idealist philosopher. In other words, there is nothing but my imputation.

[63:48]

That's not true. But there is nothing without your imputation. Different to say there is nothing but my imputation, that's not right, but there's no phenomena without imputation. But it takes more than your imputation for phenomena to occur. And again, I wanted to say that conventionally speaking, you might hear the words practice being mindful with a mind like a wall when objects, conceptual objects appear. And you might think that you heard You practice that way. Okay? But again, the teaching of dependent co-arising is not, you know, you are practicing sense contact, you are practicing feeling, you are practicing craving, you are practicing becoming, you are practicing birth, you are practicing aging.

[65:04]

Now, we usually don't think the person ages, the person does the aging, right? We don't usually think that. Somehow, they're connected with it, but we don't age ourselves. We don't birth ourselves. We do feel ourselves, maybe, no, but we do think we crave ourselves. We do the craving. We do the clinging. But if you look at that chart, it doesn't say you do the clinging. It doesn't say you do the craving. It doesn't say you do the birth. It doesn't say you do the suffering. And you notice some places you put the person Or sometimes you put the person in as the receiver and sometimes you put it as the person as the giver. But the chart doesn't, the teaching doesn't put the person in any place. This stuff happens actually without any person. There's no person doing this stuff. And to bring up some sutras which discuss this point that it isn't a person making these different links.

[66:07]

So a person doesn't do the links that give rise to the suffering and a person doesn't do the reverse which gives rise to the cessation of suffering. There's not a person doing the suffering and there's not a person there doing the practice which reverses the suffering. In neither case, in the forward or backward motion of this process of the arising of suffering, there's no person mentioned in there doing that stuff. And the monks ask over and over again, who does this and does the person do that? And the Buddha just comes back. Dependent on this, there is that. Dependent on clinging, there is becoming. Dependent on feeling, there is craving. Doesn't say who did it or who didn't do it. Just that when there's that function, depending on that, this comes to be. So, as in the process of this meditation, again, I almost said it, as you do this practice, as you do this meditation, okay, but just take that away, maybe, although you understand I'm just being conventional, in this practice,

[67:22]

Please let there be not only in the scene there will be just the scene, but let there just be that and not have you in there making the scene just be the scene. Now, if you're there for a while doing this, doing the practice of letting the sense contact, scene or whatever, just be that. If you're there adding yourself to that, be patient. When it gets to be that, and the Buddha says actually, when for you, conventionally existing, non-local, insubstantial you, when for you, sense goes away, then there won't be you identifying with it. There won't be you identifying with the practice. There will be just the practice, and there won't be a here, a focus here, separate from over there. There won't be that. So it's quite... But there it is. Okay, let's see.

[68:48]

Here we go. Cedar. Cedar's connected to Kendra. Depending on Kendra, there's cedar. It's kind of like your kind of group question here. Getting yourself, yes? This is not my business. This is not my business. Okay? That's your business. I'm not going to suffer with you on that one. That's going to be local suffering. I'm not going to suffer with you. Okay, I'll suffer a little bit. You have to brush your teeth every day. Two times.

[69:48]

Once in the morning, once at night. That is it. You must do it, and if you don't do it, you will be punished. Now, is the tooth brushing because you're rebellious? What's your problem? What's our problem here? We have a habit problem? What is it? What's the habit that's a problem? Which link is that? It's craving. But it depends on some other stuff. Any more questions? You're going to quit? So I'm quitting too? I don't know. How long ago did you have your hand up there, Robert? Huh? With the group?

[70:52]

Ellen? Huh? Group? Robert? Yes? Yes? If you're going to do Vipassana, you have to have Vipassana's base. Fully developed Samatha. That's real, authentic Vipassana that he's talking about there. Okay? It might be dangerous to do Vipassana without Samatha.

[72:08]

Yes, right. Has realized full samatha. Right. Uh-huh. So, do you understand the problem? So, practicing vipassana... Well, first of all, practicing vipassana, actual vipassana, has to be joined to actual shamatha. Okay? All right? I thought you said that. Actual vipassana has to be connected to actual shamatha.

[73:08]

At all times, yeah. There's no... You cannot have vipassana, actual vipassana, floating around without actual... That's... But I've heard that's the party line. Okay? However... And... Okay. However, there can be a... What do you call it? A similitude of vipassana practiced with a similitude of shamatha. something similar to. Okay? Is that all right? Anyway, listen to it. This is another teaching out of the Samadhi Nirmalachana Sutra. If you practice vipassana without having fully attained vipassana, is that called vipassana? And the Buddha said, no, it's called something similar to or something in accord with vipassana. Also, is shamatha that hasn't attained pliancy and ease, is that shamatha?

[74:19]

No, it's similar to shamatha. If you're doing these practices and you haven't yet got pliancy and ease, it's in accord with shamatha because you're doing the right practice, but you haven't got consistent enough at it so that your body's actually transformed fully. You get partially transformed, though. And if you do that kind of... When you practice vipassana, it's not real vipassana. It's similar to or in accord with vipassana. So that's in the sutra. Okay? And most other presentations agree with that. And it is dangerous to practice vipassana unless you have full samatha. It is impossible to practice real vipassana even if you've attained real, full samatha, unless you've done some other kind of vipassana, not vishnu, some other kind of insight work to prepare yourself for it. You need some conceptual training to do vipassana once you've attained full samatha.

[75:27]

For example, you need to be told the Four Noble Truths. Now, maybe somebody thinks, well, Buddha didn't have to. It's the only exception on this planet in the last 3,000 years. Everybody else had to hear the Four Noble Truths in order to have them pop up there during their meditation for them to have insight about. So if we have not yet attained Samatha, and we start to, which is most people's situation, and we start to learn about this inside stuff, there's danger. We should know there's danger. However, there is also danger if you don't practice shamatha and don't practice vipassana. Shamatha is also somewhat dangerous. And I think vipassana is relatively more dangerous. And I would not say that if you have attained the lofty situation of full shamatha,

[76:29]

that vipassana work is now not dangerous. There's still the danger of having vipassana, real vipassana, you know, pretty full understanding and still getting off and getting this Zen sickness. So danger, I think, is a good thing to be aware is part of life. And also understand that you can do some shamatha practice, most of you are doing some shamatha practice, but most of you have not attained this pliancy and ease of full samatha. But you're still doing the samatha practice. You just say, samatha is not just concentration. Samatha means that the concentration has now taken effect. You know? And, you know, actually your body and mind are kind of like reworked by this concentration. Based on that, then you can take the teachings which you heard before you practiced Samatha.

[77:34]

And now you start to analyze these teachings which you've already heard. That was, in some sense, insight work, because you were listening to teachings, and you were thinking, and you were conceiving, and you were analyzing, and having some understanding of the teachings. You were talking to the teacher, so you're learning about all these teachings, this practice period, and you're learning them, not in the state of Samatha, usually. We're trying to keep calm enough so you can learn well. up to the point that you would then understand pretty well and then shift to concentration and take your understanding into your concentration. Does that make sense? But this is all, there's dangers all over the place. But people do have considerable insight prior to attaining full samatha. It just... Vipassana is a very... I mean, actual Vipassana is a very lofty realization.

[78:37]

And partly it depends on the concentration. But prior to that, we need enough concentration. And by the way, there are loftier states of concentration than Samatha. And those loftier states are said by a lot of people to be too lofty. They're so lofty, you can't do your Vipassana work. Some people... But prior to even attaining shamatha, where shamatha is enough concentration to move into these higher states, even prior to that you need to be calm enough to study and follow the teachings. And based on that level of calm, with that level of insight, actual understanding of emptiness. I mean a real... accurate transformation of your mind can occur. You know, a correct understanding of insubstantial self can occur. And you have not yet become this realized person.

[79:41]

Now, at that point, you might then want to enter into... Again, I'm saying you might want to, and I'm saying you have attained, okay? This is not... Buddhist teaching. This is conventional language. There is no you in the West or the East who has attained Samatha. No substantial person localized attainment of Samatha. And that's the emphasis of Zen practice. It's irrelevant You attain Samatha. We are, as bodhisattvas, we vow to attain Buddhahood in order to help all beings, which means Samatha and Vipassana along the way. It's like, you know, small potatoes in a way. We're heading for this lofty goal, which is non-local. And all the steps of the way would be nice if we weren't getting caught by the local thing, because the local thing is what we're trying to get over in the first place.

[80:48]

So our practice is we're not concerned about whether we attain Samatha or we attain Vipassana or we attain enlightenment. This is not our concern. Our concern is to practice the middle way, which is not to be concerned with my attainment, but also not just to be lying about the fact that I'm concerned with my attainment and this seems like an out since I haven't attained much. Since I haven't attained much, then this is good for me because then I don't have to worry anymore. So I'll just be this other thing now. Okay? And Helen has recovered her selfhood over there. Her localized self has a question now. Yes? You think there's a difference?

[81:51]

I was using the synonyms. Mutually inclusive? Ah, mutually inclusive. Another word, I would say substantial person is another word for inherently existing person. That's the way I'm using the term. Synonym. Synonym. E-I-E, substantial. No, I-E equals substantial. Inherent existence. Now, lack of inherent existence, which is emptiness, is lie. L-I-E. But I didn't want to call lack of inherent existence, call emptiness a lie. But, in fact, the acronym for emptiness is L-I-E. Lack of inherent existence. Or it could be no inherent existence, which is nigh. Maybe that's closer to emptiness. But for me, anyway, when I said non-substantial person, I mean lacking inherent existence.

[82:59]

A relational person, a dependently co-arisen person, we have those kinds of persons, and they are not local. And in time and space, they're not local. However, they are the lifeblood of the practice. Is the practice alive or dead? We know that it isn't done by a person, a substantial person. Stay by the bell. Stay by the bell. Did you have another question, Helen? Could you speak up, please? You had a nice question going there for a while and you blew it.

[84:12]

You said, in a monastic situation, just by being... Why don't you finish that sentence? Sounds like you're saying... Yes. Yes. No, you can't see the insubstantial non-local person. You realize it, plus what happens in the monastic situation is the belief in the inherently existent person keeps popping up all the time. Like, huh? Pardon? From? Yes. Yes. You are. You are. Well, it pops up means... No, no.

[85:18]

What I mean is that settling, and particularly if you were settled quite well, you know, somehow you had dropped into this self of the dropped-off body and mind, which is just being in accord with the monastic situation. This is realizing the insubstantial self. Right? That makes sense to you, right? Non-local practice. Right? Now, in that kind of situation, if there is any non-according with the monastic activity, then that helps the surfacing of any belief in inherent existence. Bell rings if there's this little bit of That little thing there, you know, this isn't my practice right now. This is what it usually is, but not right now. I want to have a little bit of my practice for a little bit long, just a few seconds of my practice. That's not according to the other monks, okay?

[86:22]

The image of this substantial person pops up when you resist the conduct of the community. Then this false view pops up because it flushes it out. You thought you were recording with it. So then people say, all you got to do is just follow along and you're Buddha, right? Yeah, you're Buddha, but you're non-local Buddha. Well, that's close enough for me. Thanks. But really, you're following along and you're hiding this view which you're holding all the time. You're kidding yourself. But then something happens and it pops up and you realize, oh, I've been faking it all the while. I haven't been according with the monks. I've been holding this idea all along. But the program does surface this in us. then it helps us understand better what according would be. Does that make sense?

[87:30]

No? What's the problem? It does make sense. Something popped up. It got red there. Okay, I think Noah was there. Maybe Noah and Brian and Domio and Carol. Is this an Eno announcement by any chance? It's just a practice. Noah? He's going to try to ask the question in a way that I'll give a brief answer. Let's see if this is possible. She said, when you're brushing your teeth, that this idea of substantial itself comes up. And then you had said something along the lines of, no, just brush, feel the brushing.

[88:34]

But for me, I see the substantial self arise constantly. But I don't necessarily think to it. So can it just arise? So it can be there. Can it arise without you clinging it? Yes. Brian? So, one time, what I heard Helen say, you know, in practicing, there's no person in the clinging, grasping, no person there. And this image of it, we're stuck on top of it. Excuse me. Say it again. In practicing this way, there's no clinging, grasping. Okay. There's just this activity of the monks.

[89:34]

Yeah. It's just the monastic events happening here. No, it's not in doing that. It's in resisting that. As soon as you resist, either you hold back a little bit or you try to be the best. You know, be a little bit better than the other people. That's another thing it says in there. It says, to be better than the other is not the noble way. To resist and be the worst student is not the noble way. To accord is the noble way. But if there's a slight, if there's a hair's breadth deviation, the self goes, because that's what that deviation is based on, is that you think you can do something separate from the rest of us. It flares up. Okay. How about when there's no deviation? No deviation. Then it seems like that would be a relational person. Yes. Who you're saying is not localized.

[90:35]

Yes. My question is, is it that there's no person separate from the activity that's in place? Same thing. Because the activity... No, because the activity... No, the activity is the whole monastic toothbrush activity. It's the sound of the creek, it's the hahn, it's the fact that other people are brushing their teeth. This is the practice that... There's no end to the toothbrushing. There will be no end to my toothbrushing until all beings are saved. That's one of the chants that you're doing while you're brushing your teeth. There is a conventionally existing person. It's just that it's not located at that... There's like still is a Brian who has some hair on his head. Okay? There. But it's not substantial because there's no like sharp demarcation between Brian and the rest of the universe. Because Brian is nothing... It's not that Brian goes to brush his teeth. It's that Brian and toothbrushing are what Brian is.

[91:38]

That's the experience I've had. Not so much of a person, but a very sharp, defined experience. When bells ring, it's like bells not ringing and then a bell. Yes. I feel very located in that sound. I'm not necessarily resistant to it, but, you know, it's like for a split second before my mind starts hitting over and resisting or not resisting or practicing or not practicing, it seems like everything... Well, everything, yeah, but I feel located in there is a separation again of you and the bell. Well, maybe that's my language. It seems like there is location. If there's just the bell, there's no location. That's what this teaching is saying. In the sound of the bell, there's just the bell, rather than now I'm over with the bell. When there is in the herd, just the herd, then there is no in the bell, over there. I'm not over there with the bell, and I'm not still here listening to the bell over there. That here, that thing drops away when there is no addition to the bell.

[92:41]

But the brine is born with the bell and nothing in addition to it. And the bell which is born of brine and nothing in addition to it. There are no bells without... Time means you don't last completely, and you're not just momentary. And in terms of space, you're not here. Here is that focus of being present is the belief in inherent existence, that there is a here. Being located in everything at once doesn't seem like a belief. It seems like... That sounds like there's not any person at all.

[93:50]

There's still a conventional existing person trotting around with the monks. But anyway, it maybe sounds in such a way, but it's just simply like a bell rings and you stand up and that's it. And it's kind of like Happiness. I think you were next. In searching for the view of the American soul, I've been trying to give up the reputation of it before I find it. Yeah? Good. And I realize that that's somewhat uncomfortable sometimes.

[94:59]

You know, I'm giving up, like you said, contemplating the plastic thing. And I'm contemplating what I really could be. Which is... stupid. But... Yeah, but then when you find out what you believe that's stupid, do not say it's stupid right away. Just be quiet. When you find this thing, just before you call it stupid, you can start to see it's kind of stupid. But before you even say it's kind of stupid, just sort of like sit there and just face that you've got some stupid thoughts there appearing. There's some stupid thoughts appearing. But slightly before you say stupid thought, just let them be. We're waiting for this stupid thought, and when it comes, be very quiet. Put your hands together and stick them in your mouth. And if you want to, you can hear my voice saying, you are practicing meditation on emptiness, don't worry.

[96:06]

early phase, but very important phase. You're starting to see a stupid thought that lives in this area and is the idea of locality. Well, maybe you should stop. You don't make it a fold. It's already full, and if you try to make it full, it's similar to refuting it.

[97:15]

If you mess with it, you'll lose it. Not doing anything with it. What we're looking for is a consciousness. What we're looking for is a conception. We're looking for a misconception. We're looking for a fundamental misconception. But we have to look quietly and gently. And it's already there. And when it's time for it to show, it will show. You do not have to make it into a nice, clear misconception. It is a definite misconception. You do not have to make it. It is there. You have to discover it. Now, if you discover other misconceptions that are not this most subtle one, it sometimes helps to bring them up so we can say, that's fine, you discovered a misconception, that is a misconception, that's right, but that's not subtle enough.

[98:18]

There's one underneath that one. So just say thank you very much for the vision of that misconception. You might remember that you saw it, but now just keep being quiet and alert and accord with the practice of the other monks and you'll probably be given another gift. be another misconception but perhaps a more subtle one until you finally get to this very deep and subtle misconception which is the root of our suffering from which all these other misconceptions are built. Someone said that one of the problems with this way of talking about the meditation on emptiness is it sounds like she's being asked to make something up.

[99:19]

Then I thought later, oh, it sounds like you think you're being asked to use your imagination. And it's not so much that I'm asking you to use your imagination, but I'm asking you to study your imagination, to see what you're imagining. we do imagine quite a bit of stuff all the time. So I'm not telling you to imagine. Just go right ahead and imagine all you want. I'm just saying study your imagination. And if you study your imagination, you will start to learn how it is and you will eventually find that you're imagining self to be inherently existing. I'm not telling you to imagine that, but I'm saying If you study all your imaginations, you'll find that that's one of them that you, a very deep and subtle thought imagination that you have. And it can be slightly different in all cases.

[100:21]

Its emptiness is the same. Our different misconceptions, our different fundamental misconceptions are slightly different in terms of, you know, like where we... But they're basically the same idea. And they basically have the same emptiness. But there's a slight difference in the misconceptions which make slightly different things that are empty. I mean, yeah. So slightly different emptinesses in the sense of what they're the emptiness of. So I think there's one more question from Carol. What is meant by understanding? What I mean by understanding is the way the world is for you.

[101:24]

Your life is your understanding. And what we're talking about here is a change of understanding. A change in what you see in the world. A new understanding means a new version of the world. Pardon? The part Part of what the world is for us is due to conceptual imputation. Without intellectual activity, without conceptual imputation, we have no experience of phenomena. But that's not all that's happening for us. What about that?

[102:24]

What about that? What about that? I don't know what... What do we mean, what about that? You cannot experience something that's not a phenomenon. Pardon? If there's a shift in understanding, then what? You mean, do you know it happened? Not necessarily. When Buddhas are truly Buddhas, they don't necessarily think. But they are Buddha anyway. So which is most important? To be happy or to think that you're happy? Which is most important? To be compassionate or to walk around thinking that you're compassionate? To be relieved of suffering or to think I'm relieved of suffering? Now, in the Genjo koan where it says when Buddhas are truly Buddhas they do not, one translation is they do not think

[103:31]

or they do not know they're Buddha. But I like the translation that they don't necessarily know. Although he didn't sit there thinking, I'm Buddha, somehow the words came out of his mouth, I'm Buddha. But I'm Buddha does not mean I'm Buddha. It means I have to say that. That has to be said. But Buddha's not localized. So this relief of suffering is not localized. So to know it locally is a misconception. How would you know if you've seen the conventionally existing self that doesn't have this thread of misconception running through it?

[104:41]

One of the main ways you'd know, if you want to know, is that you would have discovered the self that has that thread of misconception running through it, and you would have looked at that misconception with the right conception, namely emptiness. You would match the IE with the LIE or the NIE. You match the emptiness with the thing, the apparent inherent existence, relieved of the apparent inherent existence. Get a break, get a relief, you get liberated from it. And again, I said, you get it, but I take it back. It's just that when emptiness meets the belief in inherent existence, when the belief in inherent existence is realized concerning objects, there is liberation.

[105:47]

But it's not local. And looking beforehand from the point of belief in inherent existence, you might say, well, I saw that yogi go into the cave, and I saw that yogi come out, and when the yogi went in, the yogi believed in inherent existence, and when they came out, they were free of it. So that yogi did it. So... Huh? There was a group. When he went in the cage, there was a group, and when he came out, there was a group. And one of the people in the group that was there before and after he went in is still suffering because that person feels like, I'm here and the yogi's there. So from my suffering point of view, believing in myself as separate from the yogi, I say that the yogi attained liberation by the yogi's efforts. The yogi, however, does not feel like she's there and I'm here.

[106:53]

That's her liberation. The yogi disagrees with my point of view that she attained it. The yogi has understood, finally, freedom from the idea of her and me. I still am saying that yogi who doesn't think that she locally attained liberation, I say she locally attained liberation. And I say that I need the same thing, I need the same liberation, whether it's local or not, I need it because I didn't get it when she got it. Right? And that's not Zen practice. a different kind of point of view on practice, which is easy to slip into, and especially if you have a little bit of delusion in the neighborhood. So, there is the appearance of delusion.

[107:58]

Delusion does appear. There is the appearance of enlightenment. These things do happen. However, in delusion, it's localized, and in enlightenment, it's not. There's a change from . I see your hand, but it's 11.05. It's a question requiring a one-word answer. Oh, well, I gave it. I gave the answer already. It's not the one you want.

[109:02]

No, it's the one that came. It's a question requiring a one-word answer, but it can't be the one word that you gave before. I want a different one-word answer. That one wasn't the one I wanted. And this suffering is not local. The suffering isn't just over there with that person. It's in the whole room. The suffering isn't over there with that person. It's in the whole room. The suffering that's in this room is not localized. And the freedom from suffering is not localized. There is a dependent core arising of suffering, and there is a dependent core arising of liberation. There's either one of them.

[110:04]

Anyway, that's the teaching of dependent core arising. There's no people running the wheel. They're just the wheel. They create suffering or cessation. May our intention equally penetrate every being and place.

[110:55]

@Transcribed_v005
@Text_v005
@Score_87.32