Towards the end of the last session here, I think Hoka asked a question, something like, is there an alternative to zazen? And then also I think she said, what is the alternative? And I said, the alternative to zazen is suffering. And what I mean, so another way to say that, is there an alternative to the perfection of wisdom? Is there an alternative to enlightenment? There seems to be. But when I say an alternative to zazen, I don't mean an alternative to the form of zazen. cross-legged sitting in a approved Soto Zen meditation hall.

[01:08]

Is the form of an active Zazen limited to cross-legged sitting? No. It's not. It has nothing to do. Perfection of wisdom has, in some sense, it's not limited by any form. Intimate with forms, but not limited by them. Perfection of wisdom is intimate with forms, but not limited by them. Therefore, it is the freedom. It brings the freedom with whatever form there is. That's the same statement. can be made for Zazen. Some Zen teachers say, all you have to do is sit cross-legged. All you have to do is sit cross-legged. Like this.

[02:23]

And bounce your foot. Or it's actually supposed to be your right leg over your left leg. No form reaches it, but you must use a form. If you don't use a form, you don't realize it. But it's not limited by the forms it uses. You must use a form that doesn't reach it in order to realize it. So, is Zazen limited to or by cross-legged sitting? I say no. Therefore, we say Zazen is cross-legged sitting. This is the essence of the Diamond Sutra. Zen Center? Zen Center?

[03:29]

The Buddha teaches Zen. The meaning of Zen Center is no Zen Center, therefore we say Zen Center. So whatever posture you're in, you have the opportunity to be devoted to Zazen, to be devoted to the perfection of wisdom in any posture, to always be oriented towards the sitting of the Buddha. And the Buddha is not limited to sitting. There is another expression which I'd like to go into, I actually would like to go into in considerable detail,

[04:33]

And the expression is, from the first time you meet a master, wholeheartedly sit and thus drop away body and mind. I'd like to discuss that phrase and expand it into other phrases. But before, there's a few things I wanted to just pick up. One was a question which Elder Fu raised. In the last class, it was a questioning about preparatory wisdom or wisdom preparatory to non-imagination. Again, the Sangha teaches a kind of three-fold wisdom in terms of three aspects. One is preparatory to non-imagination, non-imagination in itself, and that accomplished subsequent to non-imagination.

[05:43]

Or you could rephrase it. wisdom preparatory to the perfection of wisdom, perfection of wisdom itself, and that which is accomplished by perfection of wisdom. And to elaborate a little bit more, there are practices which are preparatory Imperatory wisdom. So you can practice the six perfections before you realize the sixth perfection. You can practice wisdom before you attain perfection. You still... doing practices with some abiding in your practice.

[06:50]

And that counts as practice, fortunately. You can practice five or six perfections to prepare for wisdom, which is a preparation for the perfection of wisdom. So there is a wisdom that's not the perfection of wisdom. Going beyond that wisdom, one can enter the perfection of wisdom. And going beyond the perfection of wisdom, one can accomplish things after going beyond the perfection of wisdom. And you can substitute zazen in there if you want. Zazen, which is ...to the realization of satsang. Now this is something I've never seen done before and I'm just going to stick my neck out, all sentient beings, and say this.

[08:03]

that the wisdom which is preparatory to non-imaginative wisdom is a type of cognition which can be conceptual cognition or valid inferential cognition or valid indirect con cognition of ultimate truth, of conscious construction only. So you've heard the teachings of, you've heard the teaching of emptiness, you've heard the teaching of conscious construction only, which are basically two different ways of talking. And you have some understanding of these teachings. And at some point, it can happen that there is actually a valid cognition of that teaching.

[09:12]

An inferential wisdom arises about that teaching. And you have this, the idea of the teaching is present, and there is a valid cognition of it. This valid cognition, part of the idea of this is that its qualities is that it's irrefutable. Another quality is that it's fresh. One of its qualities is that it's irrefutable. Another quality is that it's fresh it's for the first time so it's like I don't know somebody said and I don't want to accuse her of this but she said that she heard these teachings of of non-abiding she said I probably heard him many times but suddenly there were I heard as though I never heard it before she didn't say but I got it was really fresh

[10:22]

and startling. Even though she heard the term, somehow there's a new take on it that was quite impressive. So words that you've heard many times, you probably heard them first. And the first time you heard them, you might have had a fresh take on actually hearing the word, like I never heard. And then you study it for some time, and then suddenly you have a new take on it that you never had before. And that isn't what it feels like sometimes when wisdom arises about a teaching. but it's still a conceptual cognition. It's still inferential. There is a type of wisdom which is inferential and indirect, but still valid, and it's the first step. Then based on that, you go beyond that into another type of cognition which is direct, also fresh, and non-conceptual.

[11:27]

There's no teaching out there anymore. There's no conscious construction only out there. There's no emptiness out there. There's just emptiness. There's just the fact that things cannot be found, cannot be grasped. So the teachings that have taken you to this place are actually dropped. And you become the teaching. And then you go beyond that and re-engage with images of whatever, including the teachings, and then you can accomplish things that are based on that realization you can go back and play with the ideas of the world, with all the practices of bodhisattvas and all the practices of other good practitioners, and you can engage with these ideas from the point of view of freedom from the ideas.

[12:44]

You can engage them from having realized non-abiding, and you can continue to practice non-abiding while you play with these ideas. And before you entered perfect wisdom, you also had learned how to play with the image without abiding in it. That was the first step. Then you realize non-abiding without even any idea of non-abiding or perfect wisdom. Then you re-enter the realm of perfect wisdom, of ideas, of teachings. So that's that alignment of this kinds of wisdom and with these different types of these different modes of cognition I haven't done before and it may be it may be an imperfect teaching which I'm not going to just in case I'm wrong and yes

[13:47]

When you describe that, it sounds like it's over a long period of time, the first aspect and the second and then the third. And it happens once. But it also sounds to me, or when I hear it, I think of it as something that happens over and over and over again. Yeah, I agree. Okay. except that as you do it over and over again, the third type is really . So first it's one, two, three, then it's three, two, three, two, three, two. Does that make sense? Does that make sense to you? I think so. Yeah. The first time you have a valid ultimate truth, it's the first time. And then there's a first time of having a valid inferential cognition of the truth, is the first time.

[14:56]

Then there's a first time of direct cognition. And then, actually it isn't over and over again according to certain teachings. It wouldn't be not valid, it would be then sub-sequential to valid cognition. But they wouldn't be valid anymore because they wouldn't be the first time. So it would go from non-conceptual to conceptual to non-conceptual to conceptual to non-conceptual to conceptual, back and forth. all of this subsequent to these two types of wisdom, which is the third type. It goes back to the second type of wisdom and so on. Yes? This reminds me of something I've read about the progression of the Mahayana historically.

[15:59]

Is that, do you think it's a valid cognition? What is the cognition that we're talking about? This progression that Asanga, that you've discussed based on Asanga's teaching, reminds me of the way the Samjaniramacana is described, its place in the development of Mahayana thought. Oh, kind of like the Samjaniramacana is subsequent to the perfection of wisdom? as being a return from the standpoint of perfection of wisdom to cognitive presentation, verbal presentation. Okay, thank you for the question. And I would say that, yes it is, but all Mita literature is also a return to conception.

[17:05]

So the Prajnaparamita, which is saying, Prajnaparamita is saying, leap from your ideas of wisdom into perfection of wisdom. It's saying, give up any conceptual enlightenment. However, it is saying that. So it is speaking to you from the realm of conception. So in the Heart Sutra, you have Avalokiteshvara is practicing the perfection of wisdom. He sees that all five aggregates are being, have no way to be grasped. And that vision, say, relieves all suffering and distress. This is the narrator's telling you that. that Avalokiteshvara has gone beyond wisdom into perfect wisdom and liberation from suffering and distress. Okay, that's the narration.

[18:06]

And then Avalokiteshvara starts talking. Avalokiteshvara wasn't talking before that. That was a narration about her and the Buddha. out in this samadhi and practicing the perfection of wisdom, realizing it, and relieving suffering through that realization. And then, Abalokiteshvara comes out of that samadhi and starts talking using language again. So the Prajnaparamita literatures are somebody's talking to us, subsequent wisdom telling us about it, and then the Samni Nirmacana Sutra, those sutras are also somebody's coming out of emptiness, realization, and talking to us in concepts. The way of types of sutras is different. They're both leading us back into the perfection of wisdom.

[19:07]

But one is giving us more information about karmic consciousness than the other one. Prajnaparamita is basically saying, basically it's saying, whatever it is. The other sutras tell us a little bit more about it, what it is, and then say, don't abide in it. Which is more like the early teachings, which describe karmic consciousness, taught us how to be aware of it, leading to not abide in it and enter wisdom. And then the Prajnaparamita says, okay, now don't abide in that wisdom either. The Prajnaparamita is not telling us that. The Prajnaparamita is that. And then after realizing that, the people who realized came and said, please follow, here's a path for you. Last night we had a little discussion about the book's

[20:11]

somewhat available book, a small selection of books, which I think are more practice-oriented than a lot of scholarly books. Reverend Hosho, is that your name? Hosho? He said, how do I relate these teachings to my practice? And I relate these six perfections, these six perfections a unpacking of Zazen. And six is a simple unpacking. There's also what's called the 466 billion parametres, which is a more detailed unpacking. But the six includes all those. Yeah. Their ways, basically I see them as ways of dealing with karmic consciousness. They detail the way zazen relates to karmic consciousness in order to allow us to be

[21:19]

upright and imperturbable in the chaos and dynamism of karmic consciousness, which is so, as you know, so giddy, so prone to realizing giddiness. And then these six bodhisattva methods, we can be sort of like present as we're getting spun around by words of praise and blame. And what attracted me to Zen were stories of people who happened to be in school, who were in karmic consciousness, and they were getting spun around. And they just sort of came up on their feet every moment, like the ballerina that can, or the ballet boy. What do you call a male ballerina? A ballet dancer.

[22:24]

So a ballet dancer or a ballerina, they can spin without getting dizzy. They sometimes do flips too, right? But they've been trained so that they don't become as they make these amazing movements in the world. And this is bodhisattva's aspire to learn that and use the six perfections to do that. Or aspire to learn zazen so that we can be stable in an unstable world. So we can be devoted to ethics and not get disoriented by ethical dynamism. I just want to say very briefly that if we're devoted to ethics and we don't acknowledge or accept ethics, the dynamism of ethics, and think that ethics is a fixed thing and that that's not changing all the time, then we will get disoriented.

[23:28]

If we hold on to it as it's spinning, we'll get disoriented as we try to practice ethics. So in order to practice ethics, we need to open to its dynamics and find a center where we can turn with it without getting dizzy. But ethics are so important that sometimes you want to hold on to them so we don't lose them, but then we get spun around by that holding. And that's part of what happens when we say, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I tightened up and I hurt somebody. Sorry. So those were some kind of points I wanted to make before I go back to the statement from the first time you meet a master. So I think some people here that statement as just wholeheartedly sit, they kind of maybe don't give enough attention to the fact that it says, from the first time you meet a master, first time you meet a teacher, from the first time you meet... Dogen Zenji, when he says that, is not using the Sanskrit term, but there's a Sanskrit term which is Kalyana Mitra, which can be translated as

[24:54]

a beneficial friend or admirable friend, admirable companion. From the first time you meet an admirable friend, just wholeheartedly sit. So in other words, this could be understood as you need to meet your sitting in which there is dropping off of body and mind is dependent on meeting a kalyana mitra, is dependent on meeting a spiritual friend. And many people ask, in Zen do you have to have a teacher? But if you want to practice the perfection of wisdom, I think maybe you do need a teacher. You can do various practices where you're still grasping things, but when you come to practice the perfection of wisdom, there I think the Buddhas are telling us that the practice is dependent on meeting a beneficial friend.

[26:11]

I kind of wanted to talk about this on Sunday, so I'm sad to bring it up now because it might be redundant on Sunday, but I just want to say that there's a famous scripture, and there's another famous scripture, and I wanted to mention that these scriptures, they seem contradictory and I want to talk about them. But actually before that I just want to mention that there's a contradiction and the contradiction is, which I want to emphasize, the contradiction between just sit and Zazen has no fixed form. Just sit and form.

[27:21]

It's kind of a contradiction. The form of Zazen doesn't reach the heart of Zazen, but you must use the form. That's a contradiction which I think, I hope this group can embrace. And again, I I was reminded of a quote from a Minnesota boy named F. Scott Fitzgerald. I read one time he was saying, before I get into this, that the test of a first-rate intellect is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. He also said, in some other place, he said something like, the most terrible invention of nature is consciousness.

[28:31]

And a neuroscientist, well, he's half right. It's the most terrible, but it's also one of the most wonderful because it's where all our problems are and all our deception occurs. There's no actual lying in the unconscious. There's the seeds for lying in the unconscious, but no lying actually comes to be attained. But in consciousness there can be deception, but also discovery of truth. Anyway, I hope you can hold the... dynamism and contradictions of zazen in consciousness and unconsciousness. I'm holding it in unconsciousness. I'm holding it in consciousness at the same time. Here's another one. In order to practice the perfection of wisdom, in order to walk the bodhisattva path, you need to think in consciousness.

[29:39]

will lead all different types of living beings to a perfect nirvana, perfect peace and freedom. And yet, when they have been led to nirvana, no beings at all will be led. Contradiction. The mind of the bodhisattva needs to be able to embrace those in order to realize wisdom. So our Zazen practice is an example of that. total devotion to immobile sitting and Zazen is not limited to sitting or lying down. So I don't know if I can say that on Sunday. Do you think contradiction is a synonym for duality? No, not a synonym for duality. I would say it's a synonym for, in other words, paradox. I think duality And non-duality, I think, non-duality has paradox. So a non-dual mind has paradox.

[30:44]

Non-dual mind is not trying to get rid of contradiction. Non-dual mind embraces contradiction, embraces duality. So it's what's not. It's what's not. And so again, we need to practice generosity and ethics and patience and, you know, we need to be really generous with our mind so that it can embrace the dynamism of contradiction. Here's another contradiction, which is very popular with a lot of people. I don't remember the name of it. Some of you may know it. It's a scripture where Buddha says, be a light unto yourself. And other places he says, don't believe something you don't believe in. Examine it. And realize for yourself whether it's true or not by inferential and direct cognitions.

[31:51]

That's one kind of teaching. And that teaching where he says, be a light... He said that there's one scripture like that, one, but it's very popular among independent-minded people. And I'm not trying to get rid of it, I'm just saying the Buddha did say that, but the Buddha also said... You know, he had this relationship, his Jisha, Ananda... In a couple of places, two places, Ananda comes up to him, more than a couple, and says, Lord, blah, blah, blah. And Buddha says, don't say that, Ananda. Do not say that. So Ananda, there's a scripture called Kalyanamitra. Kalyanamita Sutra, there's another sutra which is called Upada.

[32:59]

It means half, the half scripture. And so, at one point in the scripture, Ananda went to the Blessed One, the Buddha, and upon arrival, in bowing to the Buddha, he sat to one side. Sitting, Venerable Ananda said to the Blessed One, This is half the holy life, Lord. He goes to meet the Buddha. He walks around the Buddha, he sits with the Buddha, and then he says, this, this. What? Us being together. Meeting you, and paying my respect to you, and sitting with you.

[34:05]

This. Well, this is sitting, but it's sitting with the Buddha. It's sitting with the admirable friend. So Ananda says, this is half the holy life. And then he says, admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie. And the Buddha said, don't say that, Ananda. Don't say that. And the Buddha says, admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of

[35:14]

the holy life. When one has admirable people as friends, companions and comrades, she can be expected to develop and pursue noble paths. How does a monk or nun who has admirable friends and so on develop and pursue the Eightfold Noble Path? U-P-A-D-D-A-H-A. Just to make a little spacer, one of the members of our Sangha went to graduate school and wrote a dissertation on Zen and Herman Melville, or Zen and Moby Dick.

[36:50]

And he's finished, he's getting his dissertation published now. It's called Zen and the White Whale, is his book. The student's name is Daniel Herman. So he sent me an electronic version of it. I read a little bit of the introduction and one of the points I thought was neat was that in Melville's last doomed hero, Billy Budd, you know, the guy's name is B-U-D-D. He dropped the H-A. So, one way to look at, one way to look at practice is you got the teacher,

[37:56]

and the practice. The relationship with the teacher is half the practice. The friendship, the noble friendship, the admirable friendship is half the practice, and then there's the practice, the Eightfold Path, Zazen. There's the admirable friend, admirable friendship, It actually says admirable friend, but also admirable friendship, the actual relationship. And then there's the practice of zazen. From the first time you meet a teacher, practice zazen. I would say Dogen agrees with the Buddha, although he sometimes talks about this and that. He also basically says that it's the relationship in which the practice occurs. It isn't like sentient beings go meet the Buddha, and in that meeting, they enter zazen.

[39:09]

And that understanding of practice, which is that the practice occurs in that relationship, kind of comes from the teaching of be a light unto yourself. Right. I think the one you're referring to doesn't say, be a light unto yourself. But he does say something like that at the end, in the Parinirvana Sutra. There's another one where he says, be a light unto yourself. Yeah. Yeah, strive diligently, yeah. So I think that last sutra, silence, has that quality of, you know, work hard, you know, keep striving after I go.

[40:18]

But there's another particular sutra where he says that, be a light unto yourself. That particular, that translation is a different sutra, which I can't remember the name of it. Strive or striding. Yeah, well, there's striding too. Don't forget to stride while you're striving. Okay. So the Buddha starts out by saying it that way. And so friendship, you can say friendship, noble friendship is the whole spiritual life. And at the end of the scripture, he says, This, after, it's not very long scripture, he goes through the Eightfold Path and for now I just want to tell you a little bit about it and say at the end he says, this is how a monk, male or female, who has admirable friends, admirable companions, admirable comrades, pursues and realizes the Eightfold Path.

[41:29]

And then he says, it is in dependence on me. It is me. It is by depending on me, the Buddha says. The Buddha said, by depending on me, you can practice. By depending on me, as an admirable friend, that being subject to birth, being released from birth. It is by dependence on me that subjects, subject to aging, realize freedom from aging, but being subject to death, lamentation, sorrow, misery, and all that realized, released from these things. Sir, is this in the Upadha or the Kalyanavitra?

[42:33]

Upadha. And it says, some of you can find it too, but I'm having trouble finding it. Anyway, it's online. Just look up half the holy life and you can get it online. Yes? Do you think that when he says me, he's referring to all Buddhas, and maybe you could take the word dependence and replace it with interdependence? Yeah. Yeah. When he says me, he means all Buddhas. And you can replace dependence by interdependence. But we are dependent beings, but now dependent has this other meaning. So you can put interdependence if you want to. Yes? I keep hearing this contradiction you described in Zazen between no fixed form and just as less of a contradiction than

[43:43]

Well, let me say this one. The form of zazen does not reach Zazen, but you must use the form. Contradiction? Okay. Then what was your dynamism? Attention? How about attention? Okay, attention. And that tension between using a form which doesn't realize the thing and as a way to realize the thing, that's called dropping out body and mind.

[44:53]

It's like a map and a journey. A journey, but it's also remembering that the map is not the journey why you use the map. You can't just say, well, the map's not the journey and put the map aside. You have to use the thing that's not the journey while you're on the journey, which is not the thing you're using. You have to have that dynamism. Otherwise, you're just saying, we used to have this thing, I don't know, I didn't really read the book, but Alan Watts, did Alan Watts have this thing about square zen and beat zen? Was that him? Alan Watts, I think maybe was the beat zen, right? He wasn't into the square zen of like going to And he was a wonderful person, and I never heard him be mean to anybody. And, you know, I live right around the corner here, and he used to come to Green Gulf and sit on this deck and smoke and cough, you know, and drink lots of alcohol.

[45:59]

And we lost the guy because he abused his body with alcohol so much. But he didn't want to practice square Zen. He didn't want to get in the square. He had great insight, really, but he didn't want to use the form. To emphasize the point that Zen, you know, you can't get a hold of it. Nobody owns it. But the forms and ceremonies side he wasn't up for, and that was a problem. Yeah. So I'm hearing you say that square Zen is necessary for beat Zen. Well, I think maybe, I think beat Zen really, it means, I think beat Zen is more like you don't need square Zen, rather than just, I think real Zen needs to accept both, not needs to abide in either square Zen or beat Zen, but

[47:08]

it's hard to test Bitsen, but you can test Square Zen. The teacher can test Square Zen. And the teacher tests Square Zen by resisting it, or, you know, if you're abiding in it by resisting it, or nesting in it. That's why you need a teacher. It has to be in a context where you're open to seeing if you're abiding in the form, if you're forgetting that the form is emptiness. So we need Zen is the school of perfect wisdom, but also Zen is the school of precepts and ceremonies. To use a form with the teacher, like Ananda did. Came to the teacher, walked around him, bowed and sat. He used that form. And he spoke. That's square Zen. And then he spoke, and then the Buddha said, you know, and things go on. Don't say that. So I guess, more personally, I would say that the forms in the Zendo are ways to test whether you're abiding on the farm.

[48:18]

And then, I don't know, and then kayum, I guess, can you use the forms on the farm to see if you're abiding in the zendo. So maybe in the field, kayum and your other farm are helping you to see if you're abiding down there. And then in the zendo... the Eno and the Tanto and the Abbas are helping you, and your fellow practitioners are helping you see if you're abiding in the forms in the Zendo. And maybe practice compassion with it and feel some freedom with that form. And then maybe you can extend it to the fields. But in the fields, it'd be nice if there's admirable friendship there too to see, to test to see if you're practicing the perfection of wisdom in the field work, in the farming work. So we want to do it in both places.

[49:48]

One day you may feel, you know, I'm free at last here in the field. You know, this is the perfection of wisdom. This is nirvana. And then you go to the zendo and find out that you're actually just distracted. Like that story of, one of the stories I read in my early days of practice was about this monk who trained quite a long time with his teacher and the teacher says, I have nothing more to teach you. You're mature. You can go now. And I think this, he lived near Kyoto and he went down into the city. Oh no, this is a different story. And then the monk came back to visit his teacher one time. And it was a rainy night. Oh, I wish it would rain. He came into the entryway of the temple and then he went in and met his teacher.

[50:52]

He renewed his admirable friendship. And the teacher said, on which side of the entryway did you put your shoes and your raincoat? And he didn't know. And then he studied for six more years. So he was out there. But he lost the rigor of his attention to detail So to be free without attention to detail is immature. To be free without paying attention to the ethical details of moment-by-moment existence is an immature tzazen. But to stay in either situation, you can miss the point. The other story I was thinking of, the monk went down into Kyoto and came back to the teacher and said, I'm not ready for that life.

[51:53]

I need to train more. He could see that he was pushed and pulled by the Buddha. So he came back to study more to be able to be in the city and to be upright. He wasn't able to do it. He solved for himself. You can sometimes discover it yourself and in some sense when you discover it yourself that you're clinging that's the teacher. What? When you notice that you're abiding that's the teacher. That's the friendship that we need in order to practice just sitting. Because you can, again, Suzuki Roshi said, practice is just to sit, but it may be rather difficult to understand what just sitting means. And he didn't say at that time and follow up with, that's why you need a teacher. To tell the difference between what we mean by just sitting, which is perfect wisdom, and sitting.

[53:01]

like people would often talk to Suzuki Roshi, tell him their understanding of Zen, he would say, oh, that may be your idea. He wouldn't necessarily say, that's wrong. He would just say, oh, that's your idea. They got the message that, yeah, maybe that was just my idea. And on one occasion, you know, he said, one famous interaction, I think in San Francisco Buddha Hall, he said, Today I cannot be your friend. But another way to hear that is, today you're not letting me be your friend, you're not listening to me. So I'm not functioning as your friend right now. And also another Zen teacher, I think his name is Harada Sekiro. You shouldn't practice Zazen if you don't have a true teacher. And he says, if you can't find a true teacher, you probably should just try to do your work wholeheartedly.

[54:15]

Don't try to practice just sitting if you don't have a true teacher. Because to do that without that kind of guidance can really be kind of crazy. I think that's what he's saying. Yes. Yes. So, perfection of wisdom was a human event. Was a human being. Was a human being. So, this event must have transpired in other places and other times. There were Buddhas before Buddhas. There were other cultures.

[55:17]

And even if they don't then, A, do you think that this transcendent perfect wisdom exists in other cultures and other traditions under different names and guidances? And if so, do you think that maybe the contribution of the Buddha that distinguishes him from all these other cultures was that he was the first to include all beings? Most of these other cultures include only their own members. But the Buddha included the entire cosmos. But that's Well, the first part, I think definitely this disperfection of wisdom can occur in other in unlimited other cultural contexts. And it could also occur even with non-human beings, but human beings are really important because we're causing so much trouble.

[56:23]

So this is really important, but it could definitely occur for other beings and in other cultures, and I think it has. So I'm very happy to quote Mr. Rumi. I think he often seems to demonstrate the perfection and his life story seems to be. And there was a Catholic saint called Jehoshaphat. And as the Catholic Church became more aware of world religions, and in particular Buddhism, they realized that Saint Jehoshaphat was actually Saint Bodhisattva. That they had heard the story of Buddha and they made that story of Buddha into a saint. And then they found out that Saint Jehoshaphat was actually the story of Buddha, and they removed the list of saints. They also removed the only man who was ever sainted by Christ.

[57:26]

Yeah. So the Buddha can have a meeting with someone who is not a Buddhist and transmit and the person is still not a Buddhist, it's possible. And sometimes very helpful, maybe, to have a not Buddhist who is carrying Prajnaparamita in a not Buddhist form so that people who don't like Buddhists can get exposed to the perfection. for the people who say, oh, maybe even I could do this practice because this person can. So bodhisattva does not hold to the form of Buddhist in order to convey the teaching.

[58:37]

It's often helpful, but we should set it aside and be some other form. And the thing about, is Buddha different? I think, actually, it's possible that some other religions also have no limit on their congregation. Well, I think maybe some Christians feel that way, that it's not just for the group of Christians. Some Christians may have an open mind like that too. So, I don't know. Yeah, maybe Pope Francis is like that. I don't know. And by the way, I saw a headline when Pope Benedict became Pope shortly after he was enthroned. The headline was something like, Only by this friendship do the doors of happiness open.

[59:40]

The way this You know, it's very close to Buddhism, by friendship. But he meant only by this friendship of this particular school. And I just, so close. But that limitation, that limitation is, we don't limit it. But it is by friendship. That's the context of this practice. And also, towards the end of the little meeting we had last night, Keizan said he's been studying Sutra during this intensive. And he said, do you have any comments to make on that? And I said, well, actually, well, I hesitated for a little bit, and he looked like he didn't know if I heard him. I was trying to find a way to say it, that actually, I've been working on this Gandha-vyuha myself quite a bit lately. And that sutra is basically all about spiritual friendship.

[60:49]

It's about this boy who meets Manjushri, who meets the great spiritual, the admirable friend Manjushri, and Manjushri sends him on this journey to visit 52 admirable friends. And this process of him visiting all these friends is the great journey of Mahayana Buddhism, the great pilgrimage of Mahayana Buddhism, where he meets all these male and female, rich and poor, educated and uneducated, spiritual friends and has these interactions with them. And I feel like it's that sutra, which I feel that that sutra is like the prototype for the Zen style of practice of in China, the way they would visit many teachers and where teachers would send, where friends would send students to other friends in the monastery too.

[61:52]

And so I I've been warming up to bring up this teaching of the Gandha-vyuha with you, which I just did, somewhat. I want to say that I knew that you heard me, but I was afraid I'd stupefied you, because if anybody has read the Gandha-vyuha, it's like, you know, so epic. And to ask for one needle through in like an instant after your talk, well, you did a wonderful answer. Yes, Maggie and Yuki. Who did the Buddha rely on? You said the Buddha said to rely on him and all Buddhas and to the relationship between student and teacher and friend. And maybe I don't know. My understanding of his life was he sat. Maybe he had friends. That's my question. Well, this brings up rebirth.

[62:54]

The Buddha tells us that he studied with Buddhas in the past. And he names them. How do we believe him? Well, I... I'm... I don't... I... Last night, Beatrice asked about faith. For me, faith... Or my belief is what I'm betting on. You know? When I became abbot, I was supposed to make a statement. And in one of my statements, I said, I believe in Zazen. And for me, belief means what I bet on. I got a life, a wonderful life. What am I betting on? I'm betting on the perfection of wisdom. I'm betting on the Buddha's teaching. Do I believe it? I'm betting on it. I'm trying it out. I'm listening to it.

[63:58]

I'm listening to the teaching. I listen to it. I listen to it. I think about it. I'm betting on using my consciousness for that purpose. And I also notice I'm using my consciousness for other purposes too, like to be aware of the light in the room, to be aware of your question, to be aware of your face. My consciousness is also doing that. But it isn't exactly that I bet on those awarenesses. I bet on the practice. Because some things, I'm sort of like, what do you call it, my body's built to bet on. I'm not trying to train my body and mind to bet on these practices. So, people say, does Buddha have a teacher in his last life? You can't see another Buddha in his last life. Right? Got the historical Buddha, you can't see

[64:59]

in this world. And so that's one of the definitions of a Buddha. It's somebody who appears, who's the first one to give the teaching in a particular historical context. After him, everybody has the Buddha for 2,500 years. We all have the Buddha. Since we're not Buddhas, we are Buddhas' offspring, and we have a chance to become Buddhas because of the Buddha. And the Buddha tells us that I have discovered this teaching in this world, and I studied with other teachers. Pankara Buddha. And the Pankara Buddha predicted that I will be a Buddha. And I studied with Kassho Buddha, Kashyapa Buddha. And he can tell us about what Kashyapa Buddha taught him. For example, he tells us, Kashyapa Buddha was having a conversation with somebody and they asked, all the Buddhas, those six Buddhas before Buddha, they were taught to us by Shakyamuni Buddha.

[66:10]

And Shakyamuni Buddha said, among those six, which I'm teaching you about, which are in my lineage, I'm a successor to that, those teachers, among those six, all six, when they met people, they did the appropriate thing to liberate them. And they're all successful in showing people the Dharma, opening them to the truth, and helping them become aware. But three of their teachings didn't live very long, and three of the Buddha's teachings didn't live very long, and three of the other three Buddha's, their teaching lived long. And Shariputra says, well, what's the difference? And he said, the three that did not give forms and ceremonies, the precepts of forms and ceremonies, their teaching, and the threes that did give forms and ceremonies, their teaching lasted long. He said it's like putting stalks of wheat together leaning them against each other, they fall apart.

[67:15]

But if you tie them together at the top, they can stay up for quite a while. And then Shariputra says, well, then the Lord should teach us the precepts so that your teaching will last long. And the Shakyamuni Buddha said, the Lord will decide when to teach. And then Shariputra says, well, when are you going to? He said, well, when the Sangha gets so big that people are too, you know, and we have so many resources. that people get out of touch with me, then I'll make precepts. But when people are close to the Buddha, it's not so necessary to have the precepts because the example's right there. You can feel what's appropriate if the group's not so big. But as it got bigger, he started to make precepts for regulations when he wasn't visible as an example. So anyway, the Buddha reviewed, told his students about various past lives, some of which he was with other Buddhas, some of which he was a student of various people.

[68:19]

The Buddha even talked about where he was the student of some of his students. Part of his background was to be the student. Before he was a Buddha, he was a student of some of his students. And also part of his background, he was the teacher of some of his students. So in the past, in a way, you could tell the story, the Buddha would say, parents, you've been my mother, I've been your mother, You've been my father. I've been your father. You've been my sister. There's stories like that. I can't say that I see that, but I've heard that kind of thing. And it's a good idea to remember that. That, you know, we have had in the past, and we will have close relationships in the future. This is part of our meditation on our intimacy. But also, the Buddha said, after he'd been teaching for quite a long time, he had quite a big group, and some of the monks, some of his senior students said, maybe it would be helpful if you had some head monks, assistant teachers, so to speak, who could help you.

[69:29]

And the Buddha said, my head monks have not yet arrived. And then one day, these two people arrived who weren't monks. And when they arrived, the Buddha told the Sangha, my head monks have arrived. And then he named them. Then he ordained them, Shariputra and Mahamagalyana. And the senior monks said, well, why these enlightened successors? He said, why are you making these people monks? these newcomers, head monks, when you've proved our understanding and we've been with you so long. And he said, because in the past, on two different occasions, these people rendered great service to me. And after they rendered the service, I said to them, what can I do to express my gratitude for your great service to me and my teaching?

[70:33]

And they said, when you become a Buddha, let us be your head monk. And now they're here, so I make them my head monk. So she said, how can you believe this? It's like, how can I be astounded? I don't know how I'm astounded, but I'm astounded by the Buddha, repeatedly. He astounds me by these amazing stories. It's like... But he is still, wow. Wow that he says it, and wow that there might be such a world. Rather than the world which I'm used to, which I kind of think, well, that's true. So, anyway, the Buddha didn't say, believe what I say, but he did say, please listen carefully. And he said that to people who said, would you please, over and over people say, would you please teach us? He says, okay, it's good that you asked.

[71:35]

Now that you've asked, now I'm going to say it, so listen. He didn't say, but he said, since you asked, listen, I'm going to say it to you now. But still he wants us to investigate and reflect on this stuff, not just like receive it and then not work with it. Yes, John. When you say you're betting on the practice, would you also say you're betting your life on it? Yeah, I hesitated to mention Marx. When I had a kid, there was a TV show called You Bet Your Life. And yeah, I'm betting this life on this practice. In the end, I might say, well, that wasn't a very good bet. But I've been betting for a while, and I'm not regretting it.

[72:40]

What I'm regretting, actually, usually what I regret is not what I'm betting on. I regret being inattentive. I regret not following the precepts. I regret if I say something about someone that in any way makes people appreciate them less, I regret it. So I bet on that precept, I bet on trying to find a way to talk about people that if they heard you say it, they would be happy. They would say, oh, that was about me. Even though he maybe noted a shortcoming of mine, he did it in a way which I think was really helpful and makes people appreciate me more. For example, if I would say, Oscar is putting people down.

[73:42]

Oscar is, you know, Karen is totally incompetent at cruelty. She's really a shortcoming in nastiness. Karen, did that upset you? Did that upset you? No. Good. Did anybody care less about Karen after I said that? I have a question about teachers. Teachers, yeah. You said something like people who show me my attachment, abiding, is all teachers. And also you said in order to practice perfect wisdom, you need teachers. It's a different, like a, somehow I, I, my conscious mind says, you are my, I taught, we, I practice with you, I think of you as a teacher.

[74:54]

Yeah. And I don't know, I try to, I think I understand your question. When you live with other living beings, human and non-human, like you have some cats. Yeah. So if your cats show you your attachment, if they show you... At that moment, there's teaching going on. There's an admirable friendship when cats or dogs can show us our greed, hate, and delusion. That's teacher. However, certain other aspects of attachment are revealed when you procedures.

[76:01]

Like if you walk around the cat, and bow to the cat. But again, that's maybe, you know, maybe that is a different thing if you walk around a human and bow to a human and sit with a human. There's certain things that come up with formal relations. Uncover some certain subtleties of attachment that you cannot discover unless you observe these formalities. Just like you can live with someone And they can show you something about your attachments, which is the teacher. And then you actually make a formal commitment to the person, like you get married and make vows. And then you see certain aspects of attachment which you didn't notice before. Does that make sense? relationship with teacher and disciple reveal something cannot reveal otherwise.

[77:09]

Exactly. So like, again, I remember one of the surprising things I heard Suzuki Roshi say early on was for acquaintances, uh, may be fine. But as you become more intimate, for intimate relationships, you may need some formality. So there's, in his tradition, in the tradition of Soto Zen, we use formality to get at intimacy, which the purpose of it is not so much just to be close, but to learn about ourselves and to find our sticking points. If there's a lot of room in the relationship and there's no form agreed upon, it's not clear if it's just normal human change or whether you're trying to manipulate the situation. But when things are very formally clear, you can feel your resistance and your laziness maybe in a more subtle way.

[78:11]

you can feel that you don't want to be careful of something when it's shown in clear detail, and you know it. And sometimes you don't know the detail, so when you're not doing it, it's not clear whether the reason you're not doing it is because you're resisting or lazy, or just you don't know it. So then the relationship allows the trainer to say, did you do that on purpose? Are you doing that on purpose? I often use the example of, at Tassajara one time, this one monk came in front of me when he served and he had, I watched, and he had one foot was straight ahead and the other foot was off to the, maybe off to the right. Consistently, one foot straight and one foot off to the right. I thought, hmm, that's interesting that it happens every time. I wondered if it's kind of funny that it would happen accidentally that way every time. And I asked, and so I said, can I ask you a question? He said, yeah.

[79:14]

I said, when you serve, one foot's like this, and this other foot's always off to the right. I was wondering about that. He said, what difference does it make to you? And I said, I was just wondering. It seemed kind of, I was kind of surprised how that pattern occurred. I was just wondering. And he said, oh, uh-huh. So this is an example of, I was a little bit intimate with him, right? So these forms, naturally, I mean, we know, after practicing together, we can know people's feet, right? You could show somebody's foot to you, you'd know who it was, because you've been watching their feet, barefoot maybe, or you know their socks. So we are kind of intimate, so then we see things like, hmm, and then we sort of like ask questions.

[80:15]

What is that? And we feel like since the person is showing us their feet repeatedly, maybe it wouldn't be too intimate. But it's pretty intimate, actually. Because they know about my question. I've been watching them quite a few times, which I have. But it's not like I'm really snoopy. In this situation, I notice stuff, you know. So, anyway, one of his close friends, one of his close friends was another student, and that monk, oh, by the way, then the next time he came to serve, both feet were straight ahead. I didn't say make them straight. I just asked, how come? And the next time they were straight ahead, and the next time, then they were straight ahead for the rest of the practice period. I wasn't trying to get him straight. I was actually just wondering, what's happening?

[81:18]

Did you intentionally put... I often really wonder about these things. But I often ask, may I ask a question first? Because I know I'm asking something that could be intimate. I asked. And so I asked it, and then they were straight for the rest of the time, and that was the end of that. And then his friend, who kept in touch with him after he left Tassajara, 15 years later they met in another part of the country, and they met. And that man said, the most while I was at Tassajara was when he asked that thing about my feet. That's the thing I most remember of my training at Tassajara. And I wasn't trying to do, but these are very powerful things that we notice about each other. And the reason we notice them is because of the form. When I see you at a party, I don't know what to say.

[82:23]

But when you, you know, you just, you're, I have no form for the party. But when you sit in the Zendo, I see each one of you is different because we have this form. And what is this difference for? And what is this difference for? You know? Everything is easy to notice because of the form, and then we can ask questions about, is this intentional? Are you doing this on purpose? Did you know that this is the way we usually do it? And sometimes he would show it to me, and then he would watch how I performed them. And sometimes that was very... I could barely stand the intimacy that would be revealed by him showing me a form and then watching me do it and me watching me do it and see if I... Like I told that one story one time.

[83:25]

He sent me to Tassajara. He said, I want you to go to Tassajara. He was not going to go to Tassajara. And I was going to go to Tassajara and he wanted me to be a doan. and he wanted me to learn chanting from the visiting teacher, Tatsugami Roshi, who was an Eiji, so he was a noted chanter. He said, I want you to learn chanting from Tatsugami Roshi. So I did learn chanting from Tatsugami Roshi. And then, after the practice period was over, Suzuki Roshi came to Tassahara and he said, I'd like you to teach, I'd like you to show me what he taught you, what you learned about chanting. So then I chanted the dedications that we do in the Zendo. But in those days, we did them in Japanese. So I chanted in Japanese for Suzuki Roshi. And he listened to me and he said, very good. You've learned just like Tatsugami Roshi does it. But he said, he's an old Japanese man from the countryside.

[84:28]

And the way he does it is very beautiful. But for you to do it just like him is not really quite right. I copied him pretty closely, but it wasn't appropriate for a young American like an older Japanese priest would do it. So then he said, do it again. And then at various points of ornamentation that I had learned from Tatsugami Roshi, Suzuki Roshi kind of like ironed the ornamentation out. He was making these subtle way my voice was coming out. And then he said, now you do it. And then I would do it, and he would adjust it again, and then you do it back and forth like this. And of course, I kind of knew this is exactly why I came to Zen Center, was to get this kind of training. At the same time, I felt here. Because he could see everything about me, right? Because he had the form.

[85:29]

And he could just modulate my body, right, by his comments. Rush, I don't want to take any more of your time. He said, it's okay. Over and over I tried to get out of the room to spare him spending more time on me. He was not in a hurry. This is the admirable friendship where we're practicing whatever, you know, sitting or whatever. The teacher's watching us. This is what we want, right? Because we need that guidance to find the teaching, which is not the teacher's idea of the practice. It's not our idea of the practice. It's the practice that we find in that relationship, but that sometimes is just so intense. That relationship of Dharma is so intense we barely can stand to stay there even though that's really what we want and we know it, still it's so hard to and relax and hang in there, right?

[86:43]

But we do want it. That's what we did come for. Yeah. Yes. Yes. You're refutable. So valid. And there's some disagreement in Buddhist tradition about whether it has to be fresh. Some say it doesn't have to be fresh. But they all agree. Controvertible. In other words, If you look again, you see the same thing. Does that mean it's a conventional? Yeah, well, what did I say? Others agree. How would I put this? Others agree and or could confirm, but also within your own consciousness, there's repeated confirmation.

[87:57]

The thing you saw at first was not a confirmation. It was fresh. You never saw it before. But then it holds up when you look at it again. It doesn't get refuted or controverted by further observations. But couldn't you be pretty, I mean, couldn't you be crazy, having some sort of mad episode and keep repeating that validation of that? Well, in that case, then the other would come into play. Oh, I see. This is in the context of the... It's within your own consciousness and in relationship with the teacher. Yes, Brenda? So just out of curiosity, in terms of practice, you're going down the road, and there's the road splits.

[89:04]

On the road to the left, you have an easier time practicing the farm sets with generosity and patience than on the road. everything else, but you might not learn so much about your attachments and really see yourself clearly. And on the other road, you have, you really see your attachments, like the thicker part of your karma maybe comes up, but it's a lot harder to practice than the part you just did. And you can go down either road. How did you... That kind of question particularly applies to what's called diligence, the fourth paramita, diligence or enthusiasm. Part of that one aspect of taking that practice, the main aspect, not the main aspect, the source of

[90:12]

of the practice of diligence is what you aspire to. Again, you know, what comes from your... aspiring to. So let's say you're aspiring to find the path of non-attachment because, like in your case, you understand that non-attachment will protect you while you're caring for beings from getting fried. Right? You understand that? So you aspire to a mind that can... in a way that allows you to take care of them without getting burned out by attaching in the process of caregiving, right? That's your aspiration. I thought you used that example of non-attachment. Isn't that the example you used? So anyway, so your aspiration is to non-attachment, all right? And you feel some enthusiasm about that. You want to do that. You think it's really good. Okay? Now you see these two paths, or it could be three.

[91:19]

One is kind of like not too difficult. Matter of fact, it's what I'm already doing. Another one is a little bit more challenging, and the other is even more challenging. How do you decide? So sometimes... What did I say? There is a time when it... One way to decide is try to find out if you've been doing what you're already doing long enough. And sometimes that's a good time to talk to a teacher. So part of diligence is to give up. It's actually kind of non-diligent to keep doing something you already know how to do after you've learned it for too long. But sometimes it's good to do something you've learned for a while Like one time I used the example with Suzuki Roshi that I was having, I noticed that I was having a very busy time.

[92:21]

And that was kind of novel for me. So I went to him and I said, I'm not having a very difficult time. Is something wrong? And he said, sometimes the practice may not be difficult for you. And then he took a piece of paper demonstrating origami technique. He said, fold the paper sometimes. We fold it and then we press on it for a while before we fold again. So sometimes when you're doing a practice, once you get it in position, you just hold it for a while. Keep doing it before you make the next fold. And by the way, the next day, the next fold came for me. So sometimes, but sometimes you say, you've held it long enough, time for the next fold. So actually that was the case. Kind of an easy time, and then the next day, the next fold came.

[93:23]

I was asked to leave Tassajara and go to the city center to be the director of the building, Page Street building. And that was another, a new challenge for me. The other side is something that you do think is challenging, so when you look at it and you say, that will be challenging, it's important to consider whether, when it gets more difficult, if you think you will be able to follow through. And if you think you won't be able to follow through, you might not follow through when you get into the difficulty, maybe better not. Because if you're doing something beneficial, it's not good to start it and quit. If you're doing something not beneficial, it is good to start it and quit. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about doing things that you aspire to. Yeah, so like if people are going to do a session or practice period and they say,

[94:26]

And I don't think I'm going to be able to follow through. I'd say, well, why don't you come back when you think you would be able to follow through, that you'd want to and you think you'd be able to. Because you get in the middle of it, you think, well, how did I get into this? Even then, you know. But then because you wanted to and thought you might be able to, then you probably can be supportive to follow through. But beforehand you think, well, if it gets tough, I'm just going to quit. Don't do it. I would say, usually. So if you're trying something you feel is challenging, it's good to talk to somebody to see if they think you'd be able to follow through. by having a conversation they think you can follow through even though it might get really hard. It's better to go in a challenging direction, but part of diligence is to try something that's too advanced or too familiar and too easy. Does that make sense?

[95:30]

And that's part of managing our work, you know, our diligence. I went to the tea gathering last week, and we had a conversation about that that's a ceremony and not a ritual. After that, I didn't quite know what the ritual was. Maybe May I could say, are you distinguishing between ceremony and ritual? Maybe a distinction between doing something for the sake of something else and doing something completely. And you're using one word for ? Well, I don't really like to use either of those words to refer to the way it came. OK. So she wasn't really meaning to distinguish between ritual and ceremony.

[96:36]

So some people, when they do rituals, doing them for the sake of something else. Some other people do rituals for the sake of, how do you put it? Oh, to do it completely. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. So, if you're doing ceremonies or rituals, I would say, I would use them as synonyms. The Chinese character for, that we usually, like the Fukan Zazen Gi that we chant, the Gi is that character, is translated as ceremony, ritual, or rite, procedure. So to perform some procedure, to perform it in order to realize doing something completely, that would be the sense of ceremony is to use a form in order to arrive at doing something wholeheartedly or completely.

[97:47]

So you're doing it for everything and also not trying to get anything or expect anything. Because if we're trying to expect something, that erodes the completeness of the act. So again, sometimes you might think you did something without trying to expect anything. But maybe you were. If you do a ceremony, and you do a ceremony in a context where there's a teacher, you do the ceremony, and you may not think you have an expectation, but the teacher, without trying to prove it to you that you are or not, but just might make some suggestion in changing the ceremony a little way. And you might have a surprisingly difficult time adjusting to the suggestion. Like Nakamura Sensei, the tea teacher that used to be at Green Gulch,

[98:51]

she would teach tea and then just as, I often found that just as I was about to understand the testimony, she would say, let's do another, let's do a new one. And I would notice a little bit of expectation of wanting to master the form. But in some ways, mastering the form is maybe somewhat slightly contradictory. I wanted to master it like for example, to have it. Or to maybe master it to the extent that I'd be able to do it again. But just before I'd get to the place I was trying to get to, oftentimes she'd say, well, now we're going to move on to another procedure. How she knew when I was just about got it that we'd move on to the next thing, but it often was the case. So I never really learned anything, as you can see.

[99:58]

But I feel that that's really the best way to go, is to study wholeheartedly as you can, and then just as you're about to get something, move on, or be invited to move on. So my question is also a bit like, Doing any rituals or ceremony which we do for the sake of something, sort of, at another time, or, like, my sense is that it happens now. Yeah, it happens now, but someone could say, someone could say, we're doing our practices here for the future generations. for our children and grandchildren. We're doing these ceremonies, you could say that, right now. Again, one more story that I often tell is, I'll try to say it in a brief and meaningful way.

[101:03]

A Brahmin lay person came to see the Buddha and asked the Buddha about a practice that he did of going out into the forest. And the layman said to the Buddha, here's to God in the forest. And the Buddha said, well, the story's getting too long. I'm going to make the story simpler. The Brahmin asked him if he did this practice. The Buddha said, yes, I do. And at the end of the scripture, the Buddha said, you might think that if I'm still doing this form, this procedure out in the forest that I used to do, you might think that I'm not liberated, but I'm not attached to the form. So he performed the ceremony, this practice that he did out in the forest that was being questioned.

[102:09]

He performed it, and he still performs it. But he's saying, you might think that I'm not liberated from the form since I'm still doing it. But he said, I am. I don't have to do it. I'm completely free of it. It served me as a mode of liberation, and I don't need to use the form of the mode of liberation to be liberated. I am free. And yet I'm still doing the form. And he said, why do I do it? Because I like to. And for the sake of future generations. So we do the practice because we love it without expecting anything from it. And we do it for future generations because if we just do a practice that we love and it has no form, the future generations may not know how to get a foothold. So for the sake of the rest of the world, future generations means in the future, but it also means all the people who are alive right now who have not yet learned this practice.

[103:17]

So we show some form in the world, display wisdom for them. We do not have to use this form. I don't need this form. I can display it any way, the Buddha is saying. But I like this form, so I use it. And I don't use it for myself, for my own liberation. I'm already free. But I keep demonstrating my form because I like to. I like to demonstrate the form of freedom. And I do it because I enjoy it. And I do it so people can see it. And if I expected anything, I wouldn't be free. Because I am free. And because I don't expect anything, my non-expectation naturally demonstrates itself. Some people have expectations to also demonstrate themselves, but they don't notice that they're demonstrating. When you're free of expectations, you're constantly demonstrating yourself.

[104:22]

which is quite a situation. Yes? Yes? In that same tea ceremony, we were discussing the role of merit and the merit of the . I don't know how to word my question exactly, except I know that I'm grappling with the question of how much does performing the practice or the ceremony or the celebration of Zazen for all beings or for there to be some merit, does that erode then the practice of Zazen because we're doing it for a purpose? Well, I think that the main purpose of these forms is suffering. And if we're performing these practices to get something like merit, that wouldn't be necessarily appropriate to liberating beings.

[105:35]

But still, when you do practices which are conducive to setting the stage for wisdom, one of the practices, for example, is samadhi. If you practice generosity, ethics, patience, and diligence, you can enter into the practice of samadhi. If you're practicing tea ceremony, samadhi may arise. It can happen in the tea room that there's samadhi, that there's a concentrated space which is quite open. So the tea tastes really good because you're right there and you're also open to the tea tasting really bad. And so if something wonderful happens, that the tea doesn't taste as good when you're not as concentrated. But you're not trying to make the tea taste better, and you're not trying to get concentrated. You're trying to realize freedom from trying to get something. You're trying to realize freedom from the normal living beings.

[106:41]

Still, on the way, you naturally might get more skillful at generosity, at ethics, and at patience, and you might develop the great virtue and the great merit of samadhi. So, in our practice, when we do our services, when we're chanting, just in case while we're chanting, anybody in the room has realized samadhi, we give away the samadhi at the end of the ceremony so that nobody will walk out of the ceremony holding onto that samadhi. Prevent everybody from doing that. Some people, even though we have publicly dedicated the samadhi of the whole group to the welfare of all beings and all the Buddhas, some people may be secretly holding onto their samadhi and dragging it out of the room. We don't usually check. You know, we don't have a monitor outside the room to see if anybody's dragging any merit out of the room.

[107:47]

But merit does, virtues do arise in the world of cause and effect. There is like this wonderful thing called samadhi. It's a great thing in this world. And tea ceremony, I think a lot of samadhi does get developed by careful attention to the caring for all the procedures. I don't know if they formally give it away in tea ceremony, but in the zendo, we formally give away the merit after service, and we give it away after meals. Because again, in meals, sometimes you can get really concentrated and extremely skillful at orgy. But we give it away at the end of the ceremony. And then, you know, we give it away. Yeah. Kind of an extension to that, I think my understanding is that we're here together and that we're practicing for the benefit of all beings.

[108:59]

And that in that, there is a gaining mind, in the sense that we wouldn't be doing any of this if we didn't think there was an effect to do it. Maybe you're right. But does that get in the way? Yes, it definitely gets in the way. And even if you didn't, what you just said, when you start, you might feel like, I'm not trying to get anything. Matter of fact, I'm here to take all beings to nirvana. That's what I'm here for. But even though you have this wonderful wish for the welfare of all beings, still you can attach to that something from it or one of the things you can get from it is to be the owner of that wish. Like that's my wish. Well, that great wish doesn't prevent us from having the mind that's abiding. However, that wish will overcome all abiding. We need that wish and that wish will eventually refute any kind of gain.

[110:06]

And sometimes it refutes it right in the next sentence. Namely, although I have this devotion, there's nobody to be devoted. There's no beings that are being... I'm not going to get anything out of this. Nobody's going to get anything out of this. And everybody's going to get out of this. Everybody's going to be free, and that's not going to be a gain. And I can also understand that someone could see that as a gain, but it's not so. And I'm going to realize that it's not so, and there's not going to be any way of me realizing it. But no matter how good your intentions, it always can be co-opted by the view of self as a thing rather than a process. It always can slip in there. until you understand the Self. How in order to understand the Self? When you understand the Self, then there will be no co-opting, there'll be no possessiveness, there'll be no violation of precepts, there'll be nothing to grasp.

[111:11]

It's getting kind of late, but you've had your hand for quite a while. Sam, yes? That which be recognized is not realization itself. Yeah. Yeah. I think that's the best thing about fame. The best thing about fame is that it reminds you of yourself. It reminds you of the thing you were supposed to be learning about.

[112:17]

Those of us that aren't famous have to find some other way to remember to study the self. And it seems possible. At least you can be famous at Zen Center when you're here. You can be famous at your seat. The most painful thing about fame might be remembering the self. But also to be not famous, the most painful thing about not famous is to be reminded of the self. But it's really to be reminded of an immature understanding of the self. The self is the definition of pain. Immature understanding of self is the same as the alternative to understanding the self, the alternative to perfect wisdom. And that's painful. And these forms, in some sense, are to increase the pain of not understanding in hopes that we will be more sincere in our study.

[113:33]

Because we notice, my understanding of self is very painful. I want to find another understanding. And also, now is it painful, but if I would have a different understanding, that could help other people, because I notice they have the same problem. The pain circles around this immature understanding of self, the self as a thing, rather than process. And I was wondering, is it that valid cognition, does that come uninvited to understanding the process of self? Does it come uninvited? No, it comes invited. What? It's not sought after this valid cognition and consciousness. It comes uninvited through. It's invited by inviting the teaching, by inviting the Buddhas. I invite the Buddhas.

[114:34]

I invite awakening. And so when awakening feels invited, it says, hi, I'm here. The world takes its mask off and shows itself to us in reality if we invite it to do so. But it doesn't really believe us if we don't invite everything. Like if I don't invite you and you and you and you, if I'm only going to invite the Buddha or the Enlightenment, but I don't invite everything, then somehow Enlightenment doesn't believe I'm ready for it. So, gate-gate-padasam gate bodhi-svaha means gone, gone, gone entirely beyond. Welcome bodhi. But you have to go beyond all resistance to ordination in consciousness in order to open the mind

[115:45]

Completely.

[115:49]

@Transcribed_v005
@Text_v005
@Score_86.22