I'll just start by reciting what the Buddha is supposed to have said in one of his early discourses, um, birth is suffering, old age is suffering, sickness is suffering, death is suffering, sorrow, lamentation, dejection are suffering, association with the unpleasant is suffering, not getting what one wishes for is suffering, in brief the five aggregates of grasping are suffering. So I would say in a write-off that his summary, in brief, the five aggregates of grasping

[01:04]

are suffering is a key point, and someone said that it's hard to find a statement in the scriptures that the five aggregates are suffering, the five skandhas are suffering, it's hard to find that statement, the definition is the five aggregates of grasping are suffering. So the five aggregates, if they were just the five aggregates, you might not need to say that they were suffering, but the five aggregates of grasping are suffering, for sure. The key difference is the grasping. Once you're born, if there's no grasping, birth would not be birth or life, is not suffering.

[02:19]

If you don't grasp, growing old is not suffering, and even death is not suffering if you don't grasp, if you don't cling, if there's not attachment. So, without this key point, then this point of view that people say, you know, some people say Buddhism is pessimistic, there's this book out called the Tao Pu, you know that book? Anyway, in the Tao Pu they say, well you know, the Buddhists are pessimistic and the Confucians are uptight, but the Daoists, they're really totally cool, and then they describe the Daoists, of course the Daoists are just like Zen monks. Buddhism is quoted, I think there's a very popular book now out called The Way Less Traveled, or something, The Road Less Traveled, and I think at the beginning of that book Scott

[03:27]

Peck says that the Buddha said that life is suffering. And a lot of people say that Buddhism teaches life is suffering, or universal suffering. It's not true. However, you know, how do they say, the world will little, no, nor long remember what I just said here, but they're going to remember what Scott Peck said, and he's out there saying, Buddhism is saying, Buddha says life is suffering. Well Buddha didn't say that, Buddha said, life that you grasp is suffering. That's the nice thing about this character, you know, ki, ki means energy, means function, means opportunity. Life is ki, you know, it's this opportunity. If you grasp this opportunity, life turns into suffering. And so my name is, you know, Zen Ki, a total opportunity, or a complete opportunity.

[04:39]

So not only does life offer an opportunity, but if you don't grasp it, it offers an opportunity to complete, or to totalize, to total, to total life, to complete it, to fulfill it. You can make life better or worse. You can squeeze it, you can grasp it, try to grasp it anyway, you can try to grasp it, try to cling to it, and if you try to cling to this opportunity, it'll throw you for a loop. However, if you respect it, study it, sit upright with it, it becomes total, totally, well you know, it's a happy thing, it's a joy, life is a joy if you don't grasp it. It's a fantastic opportunity.

[05:45]

And the first part of my name is Ten Shin, which means, you know, basically, just, you know, Suzuki Roshi, when he gave me that name, he said, Ten Shin means Rev is Rev. So when Bernd is Bernd and Leslie is Leslie, that's Zen Ki. In other words, when you don't cling, when you just let things be completely, and don't spend your time messing with them, but just spend your time letting things be and respecting them as they are, without trying to bring them this way or push them that way, without trying to hold on to the pleasure or push away the pain, but let the pain be pain, let the pleasure be pleasure, that fulfills the opportunity offered by pain, that fulfills the opportunity offered by pleasure, that fulfills the opportunity offered by birth, that fulfills the opportunity offered by death. But the Buddha, you know, sometimes I think the Buddha did say, maybe, I don't know,

[06:57]

I can't find it myself, of course, but I think maybe somebody found someplace that the Buddha said, the five skandhas are suffering. He might have, you know, said that sometime when he was sleeping, five skandhas are suffering. What did you say again, Buddha? Did you say five skandhas are suffering? Uh-huh. Maybe he did say that. So here also he said, birth is suffering. That's an abbreviation for birth that you cling to is suffering, and he says the association with the unpleasant is suffering, and not getting what you wish is suffering. So it's the excessive craving for the pleasant that's suffering. Even wanting pleasure is actually okay. That isn't even suffering. Even not wanting pain, even that's not suffering.

[08:04]

It's the excessive wanting of the pleasure and the excessive avoiding of the pain. Again, if you're sitting upright, you know, and some pain comes by, especially a nice strong one without much warning, there'll probably be, before you can do anything about it, you know, some little animal's going to say, yikes, let's get out of here. Some little squirrel, you know. That's okay. That isn't that bad. You say, oh, there's that kind of little chicken there again. It's the, like, making that into a big scale project that turns into suffering. And the same with pleasure, you know. Like I mentioned that Zen master, where's my cakes? That's okay. But, like, actually, like, not getting mad at the admiral for not bringing them, that's too much. It's okay. You know, it's okay to like pleasure a little bit and not like pain a little bit.

[09:11]

A little bit's okay. You know, it's too natural to avoid, but you can just let it go at that, and it can be just a little, like a, just a little flip on top of pleasure and pain. It's not that bad. And even a characteristic of a great person is having few desires. That's a characteristic of a great person. The last thing Dogen wrote, very simple, eight qualities of a great person. One of the qualities of a great person is having few desires or easily contented. How do you make a great Zen master happy? Bring the cake. Oh, wonderful! I'm so happy! That's all it takes, you know, a little cake. Or you know, gosh oh, oh that's sweet, thank you. Just some little thing is enough, because the great person is easily satisfied, doesn't have big desires. But they have some desire, which they, you know, they still use, like they have a desire

[10:14]

to go to the toilet, they have a desire to eat lunch, they have a desire to sit Zazen, but it's not an excessive desire, so if they're going to the Zendo and you need some help, they don't like, you know, it's not that big a deal to stop for a second, maybe even be late if it's really helpful. So it's not that there's nothing. It's the excessive. I mean big-scale desire for the pleasureful, the big-scale holding on to life, I mean actual sincere attachment, not, you know, kind of like, yeah, I'm attached, but you know, not really. Yeah, it's still attached, yeah, and even not even be afraid to admit that you're a little attached. Moderate, middle-way, little desire. Just enough, just enough desire to get you to be in this world, so you can be a Bodhisattva. And then drop it, basically, but let it come up again if it's necessary.

[11:18]

In the Abhidharmakosha, in the Chapter 6, sometimes called the Path and the Saints, or the Path and the Saints, the Sacred Ones, it starts off by saying, it has been said that defilements are abandoned through seeing the truths and through meditation. The path of meditation is of two types. The path of seeing is of one type. It didn't really say that, it says the path of meditation is pure. The path of seeing is pure. The path of meditation is of two types, namely pure and impure. Pure and impure means, without outflows is pure, without flows is impure.

[12:29]

There's two kinds of paths of meditation that the Buddhists recognize. One kind has outflows, the other one doesn't. And the path of seeing the truths, however, doesn't have outflows. To see the truths, the vision of truth does not have outflows. So, the defilements, the obstructions to our existence, are abandoned through the vision of truth which has no outflows, and also through a meditation practice which has no outflows. However, there is a meditation practice which leads up to, for most people, the vision of truths, which does have outflows. So the path of meditation which has outflows is the path of meditation where there's some

[13:39]

gaining idea, where there's still belief in self and other, and so on. Where there's fairly strong inclinations that you indulge in, for example, a strong inclination to meditate rather than not meditate, a strong inclination for a quiet place rather than a noisy place, a strong inclination, a serious inclination to be at Taos of Arah rather than someplace else. People who are like that are doing what's called meditation practice that has outflows. When your meditation practice gets more and more stable and simple and these outflows start to wane, and finally pretty much do wane, then you can see the truths, and then the defilements start dropping off. However, even when you see the truths, and even when you have a glimpse of nirvana, we

[14:48]

still have lots of habits which were established under the auspices of the outflows, under the auspices of belief in a self and a clinging to the self. And those habits don't drop off all of a sudden, so then those habits are gradually dropped off by practicing meditation in this non-dual way of not having outflows, which follows the vision of the Four Noble Truths, which also doesn't have outflows. And then it also mentions, you know, earlier in the Abhidharmakosha they present the Four

[15:49]

Truths in various orders, but in this chapter they now present ... and Vasubandhu asks the question, is this the order of the Truths, some unusual order, and he says, no, rather the order is suffering, origin, extinction, path. What is the reason for offering them this order? Because this is the order that they're understood. So they're presented in this order because they're understood in this order. And ... let's see ... what should I say next here? I think I will mention that a key ... the third verse in this chapter is that the impure

[16:50]

dharmas, whether they are agreeable or disagreeable or otherwise, are suffering. And impure, again, means dharmas that have outflows, whether they are agreeable, disagreeable or otherwise, are suffering. Now this is a different layer of specification of suffering. So if the five ... which is actually just a microscopic version of the five aggregates the five aggregates, if you cling to those, they're suffering, but then the five aggregates can be broken down into, basically in this system, 72 elements of experience, and the 72 elements of experience, when they have outflows, they are suffering. So, for example, in the five aggregates, one of the aggregates, the fourth one, has

[18:01]

in this system 64 elements, all kinds of things like attention, faith, decision, concentration, diligence, shame, lack of shame, lack of self-respect, laziness, hypocrisy, indolence, many, many mental factors. Those dharmas, along with conception, perception, feeling, and also the form aggregate and consciousness, many, many different elements of experience, all of those, if they have outflows, each one of them is suffering. So the five aggregates, if you cling to that, plus all the little tiny elements in the five aggregates, if you cling to any one of those, or in other words, if there's outflows on any of those, each of those are suffering. But it also says in the beginning of the book that it asks, what are the pure dharmas and

[19:12]

what are the impure dharmas? What are the dharmas that don't have outflows and what are the dharmas that do have outflows? The dharmas that do have outflows, there are 75 dharmas in this system, 72 of them have outflows. Which ones don't? Three. What are the three? Nirvana, which comes from making an effort, pratyusamkhya nirodha, nirvana which comes without making an effort, apratyusamkhya nirodha, and space. Those are the three things in the universe that don't have outflows. Nirvana that comes through effort, nirvana which arises without any effort, spontaneously, and space. Those are the three things in the field, in the totality of what a being can experience, realize, or have something to bear in their life. Those are the three that don't have outflows. But then he mentions something else which isn't the dharma, which is actually called

[20:13]

the path, the middle way. That also is nothing but the 72 dharmas, that's nothing but all these different elements of experience, that's nothing but the five aggregates, but the path doesn't have outflows, but the path is nothing but these 72 dharmas, nothing but in a grosser classification the five aggregates. It's just the total working of the 72 dharmas that are appearing, or the total working of the five skandhas, it's the interdependence of what's happening that doesn't have outflows. But any one of those things by themselves, anything that's seen in isolation, leaks. Anything that's seen in isolation is a partial circuit, but all the different elements together are a complete circuit, there's no gain or loss in the total system, including its interdependence.

[21:20]

So the path, at a given moment, is just the interdependence of all that's going on, and the interconnectedness. And if you look at any part of what's going on by itself, by that very narrowness of vision, that will have an outflow. So, if you look at any one of the aggregates by itself, it has outflow, and therefore is suffering. If you look at consciousness by itself, if you look at feeling by itself, if you look at any emotion by itself, any conception by itself, any form by itself, anything by itself that you look at, without seeing how it's interconnected, it has outflows, and therefore it's suffering. Looking at birth by itself is suffering. Looking at death by itself is suffering. Looking at getting old by itself is suffering.

[22:23]

Look at being young by itself is suffering. Like teenagers. They look at being a teenager by itself. They don't see it in the big picture, so it's suffering. Little babies don't see little baby in its total context, they suffer. Old people don't. Whatever you look at by itself, without seeing it in a relationship, is suffering. And we have a strong tendency to look at things by themselves, therefore we have a strong tendency to suffer. This connects, for me, to what we studied last year, Nagarjuna, and what he said, that

[23:24]

chapter 24 is about the Four Noble Truths, and the supreme verse of the whole book is chapter 24, verse 18, where he says that whatever is interdependent, whatever dependently co-arises, is emptiness. Any feeling that dependently co-arises is emptiness. Any feeling that you see in its interdependence is emptiness. You don't see it as a thing by itself, it's emptiness. You're liberated from suffering as soon as you see that. Painful feeling that dependently co-arises is emptiness. Not just the painful feeling is empty, the painful feeling is empty, okay? You empty the painful feeling, the pleasurable feeling is empty, you empty the pleasurable

[24:25]

feeling by this vision, but more than that, he says, it's emptiness. It's not just empty, it is emptiness, it is liberation from pain. Emptiness, however, we don't want to make too big, although it's liberation from pain, we don't want to make too big a deal out of it, emptiness is just a word. So, emptiness is also empty, liberation is also empty, liberation is also not ... if you make liberation into a thing by itself, liberation is suffering. We'll deal with that later, right? Even nirvana, which has no outflows, and is liberation from suffering, if you make nirvana

[25:26]

into something by itself, suddenly there's suffering again. When you make anything into a thing by itself, excessive desire arises. But things that don't have independent existence, and don't exist all by themselves, you can still have a little desire for them. You can still see, well this feeling to go to the toilet, it's emptiness but I still want to go. This person is emptiness but I still like him. And, that being ... so, first of all, anything that you see in context, anything you see

[26:39]

in context, I mean total context, see the whole thing, well you see enough so that you do not see it out of context. You don't have to see everything about the thing, you don't have to see how it's connected to everything, all you've got to do is see it's connected to some things in a significant way, and that's enough to realize it's emptiness. Then also, to not leave emptiness alone, that's good, and then, okay, and then when you see that even dependent core arising, even the interdependence which sets you free is just that, that's the middle way, that's the path.

[27:49]

Well, by that I mean that could be either dependent core arising or that could be just conventional or that could be emptiness. So, what's happening could be interconnectedness or it could be emptiness or it could just be convention. When you see that, that's the middle way, or being that way is the middle way. So, you're thoroughly balanced in your view, that you see interconnectedness, therefore you see emptiness, but also then you see the emptiness of that emptiness, and you see also the emptiness of the interconnectedness. That's the middle way. That's how you appreciate, actually, you know, thoroughly appreciate the interconnectedness of all these things which each independently are suffering. You realize the interconnectedness of them, plus also you don't make that realization

[29:01]

into something. Your apprehension of interdependence is interdependent, right? Right. In other words, you don't get to apprehend interdependence without everybody's permission. Nobody gets to apprehend interdependence unless we all say you can do it, so nobody gets to be enlightened ahead of anybody else. That's one kind of way to put it, and in fact, that's the case. As soon as one person understands interdependence, everybody does, even though they don't say so. Unless you understand it's by the support of everybody and are willing to tell people, you know, that you've done it and see if they, you know, will underwrite it, you're still kind of thinking, well, this is really good, you know, so I'm not going to tell anybody because they might take it away from me. No. You're willing to spill the beans if you think you got something, which is, you know, what

[30:06]

you got is that you didn't get anything independent of other people. That's why you're willing to tell. By the way, it's good to open the horn lines before that happens, just so you've got a kind of habit of talking about stuff beforehand, just in case something like that happens, because if it happens you might not want to start at that time, you know what I mean? It's like these people who came out to California prospecting for gold, if you had no friends before you discovered gold you probably wouldn't get any afterwards, you know what I mean? It's not like suddenly you have no friends and you find gold and you think, oh now I'm going to share with everybody, no. Say, now I really have something to keep from everybody else, these people I didn't like before, now I got something now to really hold back, do you understand what I'm saying? No you don't, because you're friendly people, you already do have some people you're friends

[31:09]

with, so you don't know what I'm saying. Okay, so basically the Buddha didn't really mean life was suffering or that birth is suffering or death is suffering, he also didn't mean that birth is happiness or death is happiness, he meant birth under the conditions of not understanding independent co-arising is misery, death without understanding interdependence is misery, and birth understanding interdependence is happiness, death understanding interdependence is happiness, it's the condition of understanding that he came to talk about. He could have just as well have said, you know, birth is happiness, death is happiness, but

[32:15]

he didn't, because that wasn't his problem, the problem was birth under certain conditions is unhappiness. And one more thing that the Abhidharmakosha says is that, when grasping the five aggregates of experience, when considered as a cause, is the first truth, no, grasping the five aggregates when considered in effect is the first truth, grasping the five aggregates considered as a condition or cause is the second truth, so the first and second truth are two names for the same phenomenon, one looking at from the point of view of the result, one from the point of view of the condition, they're the same situation though, speaking

[33:17]

in terms of result and condition, exactly the same actual situation, yes? If you're in a situation of grasping your experience, grasping the five aggregates, as a result, if you look at the result of that grasping, that's called the first truth of suffering. If you think of it in terms of a condition, the condition of that grasping, that's the second truth, that's the origins of suffering. But it's the same situation, you see, looking at the same situation, if you want to look at the side from the heart, what's the result of that? Suffering. If you look, what's it a condition for? Suffering. The condition and the result are the same thing. Now, then he says something which is kind of interesting, he hasn't said anything interesting

[34:24]

so far, but then he says something, he says that the third and fourth are not only differ in name, three and four are different names, but they differ in fact. And when the path is without flows, then the second and the third truth are different in fact and in name. But when the practice doesn't have outflows, the second and third truth do not differ in fact, but only in name. When you practice the Buddha's path without flows, then the path and the nirvana differ in name, but also differ in fact. In fact, the practice, when there's outflows, is not the same as nirvana.

[35:25]

But when the practice or the path has no outflows, then the practice and the realization of nirvana are the same in fact and differ in name. Dogen's teaching is, he doesn't even deal with the practice that has outflows. Now of course, probably at Eheji, somebody was dealing with practice that has outflows, but he would not talk about that, and he probably was too, but he just wouldn't say so in lectures that were taped. Almost everything Dogen ever wrote, I mean that we have now, maybe he wrote some other stuff that he threw away or somebody wrote down some stuff and he said, throw that out. He didn't leave, he left almost nothing behind which deals with practice that has outflows. So Soto Zen, quote Soto Zen, supposedly does not teach practice which has outflows, does

[36:39]

not teach the type of meditation that has outflows. Therefore in Soto Zen, the practice of meditation that we do teach is a practice of meditation that does not have outflows, and then that practice, that path of meditation is the same as nirvana, in fact, only differs in name. So practice and realization differ in name, but they're one condition. There is no realization without the practice which has no outflows. And you can't have practice without outflows and keep realization away, it's right there. But in the Abhidharmakosha, where both types of meditation are taught, the meditation which has outflows prior to seeing the truth, the path of seeing the truth which doesn't have

[37:41]

outflows, and the path which follows the seeing of truth, which since it teaches a whole range, it says that the path is not the same as nirvana. So the fourth and the third truths are not the same in reality, except when the path is super mundane or without outflows. Then it's the same. So, the first two truths are the same thing, and the second two truths are the same thing when the practice has no outflows, and they're different when the practice does have outflows. However, in fact, most people have to practice without outflows for a long time. So let's recognize the Abhidharmakosha, Dogye Zenji recognizes it almost not at all, except like in Genjo Koyane it says, when we first approach the way, we are far removed from

[38:42]

its environs. He doesn't recommend that practice, but he mentions that case. If you approach the practice, there's an outflow, you understand? If you approach the practice, there's an outflow right away, before you even arrive at the practice, and when you arrive there, you bring yourself with it, there's still an outflow. But as soon as you move towards the practice, you move away from the practice, which is the practice. But you have to do that, I mean, almost no one can get to Zen Center without approaching Zen Center. I must admit, I did, I really approached. I approached over many miles, I approached, I approached, I approached, I committed so many sins in just coming to Zen Center. Did myself a lot of harm in coming here. Some of you were lucky, you just sort of found yourself here, that was good. I just came with a friend and then I was here. I never intended to come. So that's enough presentation maybe.

[39:44]

Do you have some comments? Yes? You said, many approach practice without focus. I forgot exactly how you mean. Uh-huh. Now, so, you say many, does that mean that there's some who don't approach practice without focus? You mean, is there any cases of people who somehow started practicing in a... No, I'm just saying, when you say many, then that implies that there's some people who don't have practice without focus. Yeah, there are people who don't have practice without focus. You said previously that the enlightenment of one is the enlightenment of all. Yeah, right, that's right. So I can't, there seems to be a contradiction. Uh, there seems to be what? Some contradiction there? Some contradiction? Let's see, what's the contradiction? Contradiction is in words, not in fact, in words.

[40:49]

So if you talk about it, there's a contradiction. Right. But you should still talk about it. Well, I should, I did. But, you know, mainly what I talked about was, I wasn't emphasizing so much, I was emphasizing the fact that when your practice is such that the practice doesn't have outflows, that means that that's the same as the realization. But the realization doesn't have outflows either, which means that the realization is not independent of the practice, and also the realization is not independent of everything in the universe. It's not like this realization all by itself. Like nirvana is this thing separate from samsara. No. The nirvana which is realized is totally connected to all beings, and if you think that you can attain nirvana without everybody's participation, well that would be an isolated nirvana that

[41:56]

you thought was existing by itself, and that wouldn't be the path. So everybody's included in that. Okay? So, I go and I tell you about my realization nirvana, and you support that, the way you support it might be by saying, you know, well how come I didn't get it? But still the point is, my understanding is, you saying, how come I didn't get it, how come I'm not included in this, I feel your support, and I need your support for this kind of nirvana. This nirvana which is not an independent thing, I need all of your support, and you need all everybody else's support for any kind of nirvana that's not going to turn into an isolated thing with outflows. So, it isn't that the other people aren't maybe approaching practice in a dualistic way still, but that you would be willing to include, you are willing to and you see how all people

[42:56]

who are approaching practice non-dually and dually, they're all supporting this nirvana. This nirvana includes and is connected to all beings, including beings who say, I don't get it, but you feel that way, you see it that way, you see that they're all connected with it, and that they share in it. But the way they share in it sometimes is saying, I don't want any part of this nirvana thing. Is nirvana different for everyone? Pardon? Is it different for everyone then? Is what, nirvana different for everyone? What did you mean? Is nirvana different for everyone? No, there's not different nirvanas, but there's different takes on nirvana. So, some people's take on nirvana is they're really happy about it, and that's called realization of nirvana. Other people's take on nirvana is they're really depressed about it. Well, that's really what I'm saying. Was that what you mean by different nirvanas?

[43:59]

Okay, yeah. That's what you mean? I would agree. But nirvanas are just people? No, no. Some people's take on nirvana is that nirvana is just people. Other people's take on nirvana is that nirvana isn't just people, nirvana is the interconnectedness of all people. That's the happy view of nirvana. I mean, that's the actual happy experience of nirvana, is that it's the interconnectedness of everything. But to think that nirvana is just what a person thinks it is, or thinks it's not, that's a very unhappy way of looking at nirvana. But that's a very unhappy way to look at anything, that things are what I think they are. That's very unhappy. Or things are what you think they are, or things are this way, in other words, or that way. That's very unhappy. But things aren't that way, actually. But to think that they are is to grasp the opportunity. To grasp it.

[45:02]

Choke it. By thinking it's this way or that way, by thinking that my view of what's happening is what's happening. This is unhappy. That's an outflow, to think that way. Yeah? I'm wondering if perhaps we stick with our suffering, because our very suffering might feel in a way that we are connected in some sort of way. Is that like hanging onto it, like an emotional attachment? That's one positive side of suffering, is that it does give you a way to feel connected to other people. Yeah, that's one thing good about it. Suffering is not all bad. After all, it is the first truth, right? So suffering is an opportunity. Although, you know... Is there a better way? Well, but again, if you relate to suffering, then again, in a narrow way that turns it

[46:11]

into an outflow, then you lose the opportunity of suffering. If you start studying suffering, you start seeing, again, if you meet suffering, which is a result of not meeting pain properly, but now suffering is a result, and you face and you see the five Upadana skandhas there. Buddha did that. He faced his suffering and used his suffering as an opportunity to realize that suffering was the clinging to the five aggregates. So he actually used the opportunity of suffering to realize his path for all beings. So suffering is an opportunity. It's a way to understand and it's a way to help other people. But to stick your head in it isn't necessarily the best way to understand it. Running away from it is not the best way. So you just sit upright with it and study it. It is a good opportunity. It looks like you're done with that. Yes? I have a question. Everyone has written the Four Noble Truths.

[47:16]

I feel uncomfortable with the word noble. And then I say, well, you know, it's sort of at the same time that we're talking about the world-honored one. And I wondered when in Buddhist history this sort of language receded and it became... Receded? When did that language... Well, I guess we do talk about the world-honored one. You don't see it that much. It's sort of like, you know, like Zen is more ordinary. I don't even know what the... When did that language... When... By these people who, you know, really were... They weren't into this nobility thing, right? They were just kind of... They were just kind of like these people who acted in this amazingly wonderful way, without even calling it noble, right? They just were wonderful.

[48:17]

I didn't call them noble, but anyway, they didn't say noble. And if you went up to like that one story I've told so many times that turned me towards Zen, Hakun was, you know, called, you know, a sleazeball, and he just kind of like went, uh-huh, and then he was called noble, and he went, uh-huh. So, you know, it's like not to care whether you're called noble or un-noble, that's really what it's about. And then you say, well, that's pretty noble. But anyway, before you say that, that's the point, is not to be attached to it. Um... This thing about India was that they lived in a society that had, you know, they had this caste system, right? And it was... And the caste system was set up by the Aryans, right? The Aryans set up the caste system. So the whole caste system was based on a word which means white. The Aryans were these white people who came in from the north and took over the dark people in India.

[49:20]

So Aryan meant noble, meant, you know, meant the people who were in charge of the society or whatever. So again, in terms of Buddhism, in terms of like steps, when you first start practicing, you're practicing, you're kind of commoner, and you're practicing dualistically, and then when you get free of the dualism of self and other, and, you know, things independently existing, you become, you know, you move up in the hierarchy. So, you know, in a hierarchical way, they called those who understood Aryans or noble persons. And that was part of the society. And the Buddha, however, you know, allowed people into his group that weren't Aryans, you know, in the society that weren't Aryans. And he allowed Aryans, people who were Aryans in society,

[50:23]

into his group who weren't Aryans spiritually. He let, you know, social Aryans and spiritual, social non-Aryans and spiritual non-Aryans into his group. And both people could become noble beings. So, to the extent that noble is a relative term, it's got that problem in it. And... But fortunately, Buddhism at some point broke into new kinds of flowers, and some of those kind of flowers didn't have this kind of noble, un-noble thing to it, and that became a way to attract beings who were turned off by that kind of language. So, some of us were attracted by this more ordinary form of extraordinary, rather than the extraordinary kind of extraordinary, whatever. Some of us were not.

[51:25]

Some people are attracted to the bright colors of Vajrayana, right? The golds and the reds and those colors. And Zen is more, you know, subtle colors and so on and so forth, attracted to different people. Anything else? Is this true? The Buddha said that not getting what one wants is suffering. Right. What about wanting what one gets? What about that? I think as long as it's not excessive, it's not a problem. It's good. Basically, wanting what one gets is being upright. I want to work with this, I want to work with this, I want this, I want this, I want this. But if it's not excessive,

[52:27]

then you can be soft and adjust to the new this. If it's like, I want this, and then it's excessive, then that will interfere with the next this. No, I don't want that, I want this. No, that would be too much. Just, I want this. You know, I'm talking to you, I want to talk to you. Not because you're better than other people, but because I'm talking to you. That's a, you know, how many conversations you have with people where you are talking to them and you actually kind of wish you were talking to somebody else? This is not an upright conversation. Go to a cocktail party and see if you can talk to the person you're talking to, because all the other people are running around. And while the person you're talking to is looking around, you know, to see somebody else that's more interesting to talk to. Now, it's okay, I think, to say, I'm talking to you, and what I'm saying to you is, I'm really bored with you not paying attention to me. So, if you want to talk to somebody else, go right ahead.

[53:28]

But I will stay with you, you know, looking around the room for more interesting people to talk to, until you go. Does that happen to you a lot? It happens to me a lot. I often get bored with people when they hide. I'm, you know, if I'm extremely tired, I might get a little sleepy, no matter what's in front of me. I might. But usually, if there's actually a person there, who's actually telling me who they are, even if I'm tired, I think it's really interesting. But even when I'm quite awake, you know, I don't know how awake, but anyway, quite awake, plenty of rest, you know, and somebody comes in and starts hiding, I suddenly start... So, you know...

[54:29]

But that's because it's kind of a balance. People are like, come on! I don't do that anymore, though. No, I just, pretty much, as soon as I sense that, I start saying, I'm getting bored. Do you have any idea why? I don't say why, I just say, do you have any idea why? And usually they say, yeah, because I'm lying. That's why. I'm hiding. Admission of hiding is not hiding. That's perfectly good, too. Yes? I noticed when you first started talking about this, you used to write, I think, the five aggregates of And I thought that sounded a little funny, and it seems like I'd always heard it more clinging to the five aggregates.

[55:32]

Well... Is that an expression of what you were talking about, of one and the first and second are to cause and effect? You know, I just read it that way. You seem to have read it the other way, I've read it the other way, but actually, I think your way of putting it, in some ways, is better. What did you say? Clinging to the five aggregates. Clinging to the five aggregates is suffering. That's saying the clinging is the suffering. But, in fact, the other way is also true, that when we cling to something, we think the thing is suffering. That's our experience. When you're clinging, you don't think, the reason why I'm suffering is because I'm clinging. You think the thing is the problem. In fact, that's what you usually do. Like, I cling to Ana and I think, I feel that looking at her is the suffering. You think the object is the problem when you cling to it. So, you know,

[56:33]

when you cling to the pain, you think the pain is the problem. You don't... As soon as you think that the clinging is the problem, there's no clinging anymore. Basically. So, both ways are useful. If it really is the clinging that's the problem, it really is the clinging that's the suffering, but your experience is that the thing is the problem. That's what's bothering you. But it's not that thing that's bothering you, it's your attitude towards it that's the condition. Because take away that attitude and the thing doesn't bother you. Another way to put this is, any experience that you approach will be miserable. When you don't approach experience, it's blissful. Or, that's to say the experience is. The experience becomes painful when you approach it. The thing becomes painful when you approach it. The thing becomes blissful when you don't approach it. Or put it the other way, approaching is painful,

[57:36]

non-approaching is blissful. So it depends if you think in terms of the object, the object becomes, you know, a spring of pain, or a source of bliss. If you think in terms of your approach, your approach becomes a source of pain, or is painful, and your approach becomes blissful. So I think both ways of putting it are fine. The Sanskrit is, Panchas, five, Upadana, clinging, aggregates. The five clinging aggregates. Yes? Are there criteria for when the clinging starts? You know, when the balance point is lost? I mean, it's the difficulty to see when. When the clinging starts? I think the clinging starts as soon as your vision of interconnectedness starts to dim. Then you start to cling.

[58:37]

If your vision of interconnectedness is already dim, then the clinging is a status, is a situation that we've got. Which is why people say suffering is, some people think they're saying suffering is universal, because most people's vision of interdependence and the dependent co-arising of their experience is to some extent dim, or, you know, total blackout. Therefore, it's so common that people don't see it, severe suffering is very common. But that's because that condition is very common. The condition's almost universal, therefore the suffering's almost universal. But that condition can be ameliorated by study of the first truth. If you can see this, if you can see the first truth, if you can see the clinging, then you can see

[59:46]

the second truth. And then you can see the third and fourth. If you can bring this first one into view, you can see that your suffering is not an independent thing and that it has to do with clinging to things as though they were independent. If you can see that, then your vision starts to get brighter. And if you can stay present with that, it gets brighter and clearer and brighter and clearer. And then the condition starts to wane, and the outflow starts to wane, until finally it's almost, you know, losing its effect. And then the vision's clear and the suffering is nirvana-ized. Yes? Well, I think I understand how clinging to the five aggregates kind of creates or is my suffering. Still, I'm confused

[60:46]

because I feel that I cling in many different forms. And basically, my suffering is made up or created by my ideal being me and myself. And now there are states that support this ideal. And I think I cling very differently. It's a cling in a positive way that has to pose for example... Could you tell us? Could you give me an example? I don't know what you mean. Well, independence seems great. It seems to be a great condition for me because I can live out my greed, which I may not be aware of. Then, obviously, there's not even an awareness of clinging because that seems to be

[61:47]

the condition I want to be in. I want to be like this. I want to be independent. Yes. Yes. So, for example... So, being independent is, to some extent, fun. Is that what you're saying? So, to some extent, great? Yeah. Yeah. And this that I would like to go on, this seems to be very different from, for example, clinging to pain and saying I do not want to have pain because basically pain subverts this idea of independence itself. Yes. So, there's a different... One is clinging to the idea of independence and actually getting a little bit of kick out of it. The other is clinging to pain, clinging to the idea of I don't want to face pain because that might subvert this other program. Is that what you're saying? Yeah. Yeah, that's different. Mm-hmm. I can see that. But in both cases

[62:48]

you just... what you just told us shows that you have some vision of those two different qualities, those two different types of clinging, those two different types of attachment, those two different types of vision of independence and attachment and outflow. Those are different varieties of outflow which you're studying and if you keep studying that stuff you'll find something which is even greater than being an independent happy guy who's actually, you know, also sometimes heavily fighting the pain because it might interfere with the happy independence. Okay? No? No, it's... I think I was like... before I started to talk I thought... I was thinking in terms of these outflows which subvert the idea of self. They are, let's say, the problem. When I started talking

[63:50]

it changed. Well... Yeah, that's the advantage of... that's the advantage of talking about this stuff in the presence of someone else. Things can turn around. A big part of this is to... get your understanding out there and it can turn. Whatever your understanding is whatever it is the important thing is that it can turn. Even nirvanic should be able to turn. So whatever your... If you have a good understanding put it out there. If you have, you know, confused understanding contradictory understanding whatever it is get it out there and it can turn. Then you start to see the interconnectedness of speaking it and your understanding it. Expression and understanding are interdependent. Non-expression and understanding are interdependent. Non-expression and understanding are interdependent in such a way as to keep understanding down. Expression and understanding are interdependent in such a way

[64:50]

as to promote liberation from your current understanding to a new understanding which is not necessarily better it's just new and therefore liberating from the old, and then do the same with that, keep it and express your new one, which was a liberation from the old, and then you get liberated from that. So liberation keeps going, liberation on top of liberation on top of liberation on top of liberation, pretty soon you get into this liberation thing, which is sort of the point of the process. And all the time you're studying because you have to keep watching what the thing is in order to like state it and express it. It isn't that you're perfectly clear, just express whatever you've got now. But again that's tricky because you don't, you kind of want to wait until you're really clear about it. Just cough it up there in the present state of undeveloped rawness. Fine. Get in trouble. Okay. Yes there is. There's such a thing. However, again if that thing's

[65:53]

interdependent, if you see the interdependence of the thing talking too much, you're free. If you see it talking too much as an independent thing, there's outflows, and then you've got this talking too much as an independent thing, there's an outflow there, it's suffering. Well, I have to stop. Yes. Pardon? Mara and outflow. Mara and outflow. Mara and outflow. Hmm, they're related. When you see things with outflows, things turn into Mara.

[67:02]

When you see Mara, the interdependence of Mara, Mara evaporates as a, as a, you know, the function of Mara stops. Mara is basically various ways of, you know, of curtailing or squelching the total dynamic function of your life. When you, so when you, when you squash your life and stop seeing it's interdependent, then life turns into Mara. Life starts pushing you around. Because you push it around, it pushes you back. You disrespect it by squishing it into like categories of thought, and independent, you know, make it independent of everything else, make your view of it independent of all other views, you do that, then life comes back and punches you in the nose, or, you know, or leads you around by your nose, or flips you in the air, or makes you a slave, or makes you a king, you know, pushes you all over the place. Because you push it, it pushes you back. When you

[68:14]

stop messing with life, there's no Mara anymore, there's no constraint of your life. So it's related, but it's not the same as the outflow. It's the, Mara is what a result of the outflow. You create all the Maras through your leaking attitude towards things. Anybody can turn into a Mara for you. The nicest people can turn into Mara. If you just give them a little, a few outflows here and there, and got a Mara on your, on your hands, it's great. But, you know, it's not so bad though to have Maras, because you're, then you're sort of sitting in Shakyamuni Buddha's seat. He, he did that. Buddha sat on a boat tree, and then, you know, outflowed on all over the place, and Mara came out heavy. But he says, I'm just gonna stay here and study. And Mara backed off. Yes? Well, I was thinking that the truth of

[69:16]

suffering, it's relatively easy to understand in the formulation that being, with, you know, being in the presence of what we like, of what we don't like is suffering, and being kept away from what we do like is suffering. I think we, certainly I would have the experience of feeling like a thoroughly deluded person, and being in the presence of something that I liked, and being really happy about that. Yes? Being apart from what I didn't like, and being really happy about that. Right. And, and yet it didn't seem to me particularly that that was, that I was released, that I was free in that state. Right. And, and so it seems like then that's still suffering. We can be with what we like, and apart from what we don't like, and we're still suffering. Correct. But it's harder to understand. And that's another, what do you call it, the place where they bring in the word

[70:18]

ariam, you know, those who have seen understand that they're suffering there too. You know, like if we look, if we look at a hell-being, we think, oh poor baby. The Buddha looks at us, Buddha says, oh poor baby. You know, we feel, we see a hell-being, we feel, oh God, I got a good, poor baby, you know. You know, here I am with my cute little family, and they're all healthy, and hi. Oh, you're over there, you know, getting ripped to shreds, and all your loved ones are being tortured. It's terrible, you know. Buddha looks at me and says, oh poor baby. Because, you know, I don't understand that I'm connected to that guy. I'm, I'm, I'm out of touch with

[71:20]

my anxiety, which Buddha sees, can see me, you know, wiggling, can see me like, what, can see what I'm gonna do as soon as my family, you know, develops this change. Yeah, so, it's kind of like, so the arians see that the suffering is always there when the conditions for suffering is there. As long as there's this attachment to the experience, basically it's suffering from the point of view of what the person would be like if that condition was removed. But you get used to it, you know. So you get used to it, and then your family comes to visit, and you feel real happy, you know. But compared to what you'd be like if you weren't clinging to the situation, you're like in hell. I went to visit somebody in one of his rooms one time, a woman, in the summer, and I went into her room, and she smoked,

[72:24]

and she had the windows shut, and she closed the door when I came in the room. And she was sitting there, and I could hardly breathe, and she felt perfectly comfortable, you know. She was almost dead, this woman. I mean, she was in fact almost dead, so she felt fine. Because a person who's almost dead would feel comfortable in a situation like that, because that's a room where you could test to die. No air. But from the point of view of a person with regular lung capacity, there was no air available. She had gotten used to functioning at such a low level that she didn't need much air, which is, you know, in some kind of great yogic feat. I conclude with my, you know, this is what, speaking of yogic feats. The Buddhas are, they're like, you know, totally absorbed in

[73:26]

interconnectedness, you know. Their yogic powers are applied to observing interconnectedness. Ordinary people have very powerful yogic powers which they apply to studying independence. And I mean, they're absorbed, they're powerfully, you know, their yogic powers are fully developed, and they're using them to stay focused on interdependence, I mean on independence and isolation. And, you know, you can't distract them from it very easily. It's easier to distract a Buddha from interdependence than to distract them from independence. The thing about when you're meditating on interdependence, you're easily distracted, because you can change topics and there's no problem because everything's interconnected.

[74:21]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ