According to the Samadhi-Nirvana-Jnana-Sutra, how is the other-dependent character a phenomenon known? Louder? What? Strongly adhering to the other-dependent character as the imputational character. Strongly adhering to the other-dependent character as the imputational character? Right, that's how the other-dependent character is known. And how is the imputational character known? What? Independence upon names that are connected to signs, the imputational character is known.

[01:06]

The character of conceptual grasping can be known through association with names and signs. The character of dependent origination can be known through conceptual clinging superimposed upon dependent existence. How is the thoroughly established character known? Say it again? The thoroughly established character is known in the absence of adhering to the other-dependent as being the imputational? Yeah, that's right.

[02:20]

Independence upon the absence of strong adherence. I guess a little tiny bit is okay. In the absence of strong adherence to the other-dependent character as being the imputational character, the thoroughly established character is known. Or another translation is, the perfected characteristic of reality can be known by not clinging to conceptions superimposed upon dependent existence. Excuse me, so does that mean that the conceptions are still formed but you don't cling to them? Well, I think, yeah, I think that certain conceptions could be still formed.

[03:26]

But you wouldn't hold to them as being what's happening. By the way, some conceptions, we'll get into this later, but some conceptions are what's happening. And those are okay. But there's a certain type of misconception that we must stop adhering to and superimposing on reality, and that type still could occur. The conception would still be available, like you could be talking to somebody about it, but you wouldn't use it in that case, you wouldn't adhere to it as what's going on, which is actually beyond and non-applicable to this misconception of what's going on.

[04:31]

Because, anyway, this is part of the deal. We do need to have some kind of conception going on in order to talk. So, a kind of subtle topic would be how does the Buddha talk, without confusing the basis for conversation, which is the imputational, with the other dependent character. So, and according to the Sambhidharmachana Sutra, how does the Buddha start teaching wisdom? He starts by teaching a production lack of own being, or a lack of own being in terms of production. In other words, he starts teaching how phenomena are not self-produced. And then, as a result of this teaching, when people hear, when beings hear this teaching,

[05:39]

and I would say, when they really hear it, or when they hear it and understand it, or at least hear it and let it in and meditate on it, what happens to them? They're disappointed in what? They're disappointed in compounded phenomena. In what way are they disappointed? They see them as unstable. They see them as impermanent. So, they might be disappointed because they used to think they were stable and permanent. Huh? They might have thought they were reliable, like, you know, a reliable car. You know, let's buy some of these nice reliable cars. And as we meditate, we start to think that even the reliable brands are not really reliable.

[06:45]

So we feel disappointed because we just, you know, paid quite a bit for this reliable car. We thought it was going to bring us happiness. Reliable happiness. Like, get in it and you're happy. Even before you start driving. What else happens to them besides being disappointed? They adhere to virtue. What does virtue mean, do you think? Turning from self-power. Yeah, turning from self-power, right. And it also means that you're turning away from wrongdoing. And what's wrongdoing? It's belief in self-power? No. It's action based on belief in self-power. Belief isn't really, you know, doing anything.

[07:48]

But based on these beliefs, you feel uncomfortable and then you want to do something based on these beliefs. And the things you do based on belief in self-power is wrongdoing. And also when you do things based on belief in self-power, then the things you do and the things you do things to, you think what you do is self-powered and you think the things you're doing things to are self-powered. So since they're self-powered and you're self-powered, you get excessively involved with these things. You get too involved. You brush your teeth with too much anxiety because you think, maybe they'll never fall out if I brush them right. Oh, what's the right way? And if they do fall out, you say, well, maybe if I brush better. So actually,

[08:53]

dealing with compounded phenomena with excessive involvement is wrongdoing. Turning away from excessive involvement and working with the world is virtue. And then all these kinds of good things happen as a result of hearing this teaching, turning away from wrongdoing, hearing this teaching, developing these feelings of disaffection towards compounded phenomena. And disaffection, by the way, in the Bodhisattva practice does not mean you stop loving beings. It's that you stop thinking that the beings you love are stable, reliable, stable, permanent. You love impermanent, unreliable, unstable beings. Have you ever seen any of them? You love those kinds of beings,

[09:59]

you're devoted to those beings, but you know what? What don't you do with those beings anymore once you hear this teaching? What? What? You don't control them, did you say? You don't try to control them. You never could control them. Now you see they're uncontrollable, so you give up trying to control them, right? Trying to control beings, I would say, is wrongdoing. Have you ever tried to control a being? Have you noticed that it's wrongdoing sometimes? You know, especially when you don't succeed? When you see that beings are unreliable, unpredictable, uncontrollable, you stop trying to control them. In other words, you give up the wrong type of activity, which is the activity of trying to control beings, including yourself, even though in some suttas it says control yourself.

[11:00]

Control this, control that. Well, anyway, some teachings that are wrong are sometimes right for some people. So some people, maybe it helps to say control yourself. Since you're on a control trip, get with it. And then after that, then now I'll tell you the way things are, and then you can see that they're uncontrollable, and now you can give up trying to control. So what other ways do you relate to beings when you see them as impermanent, unreliable, unpredictable, uncontrollable? What else do you give up in terms of your relationships? What? You will eventually be able to do that, but that's the next step. I'm still at the stage of working with the teaching of the production lack of own being. Okay? You haven't yet been able to give up the superimposition

[12:08]

of false conceptions. That hasn't happened yet. Okay? Ready to wait for that? At the level of this meditation on other dependent character phenomena, how else would you characterize the virtuous way you now relate to impermanent beings? With clarity? Gratitude, yeah. Gratitude, right. And what else? When you feel gratitude for a being, what ways do you turn away from? You turn away from attachment, yeah. What other ways do you turn away from when you're grateful for beings and you see them as impermanent? No, what do you turn away from when you see these dear little impermanent beings? You turn away from hatred, yeah. What else do you turn away from? Expectations. What else do you turn away from? Greed. What else do you turn away from?

[13:09]

Blame. What else do you turn away from? Praise. Yeah, what else do you turn away from? Delusion. You're not ready to turn away yet for that one. Anyway, I just want to make you turn away from excessive involvement. Which is similar to micromanaging. You turn away from excessive involvement with beings who you really care about, but now you care about them knowing that you care about something that's impermanent. That knowledge of the impermanence helps you not get prying into excessively involved and your relationships turn into virtue because you're not excessively involved. Also, you don't... You turn away from beings and to abandon them would also be excessive involvement in the negative direction. So you don't abandon them and you don't

[14:13]

get in there and make sure they happen just the way you think they should. You hold hands with them and walk through birth and death. And they fall down and you stand with them when they fall down and you talk to them and if they want you to help them get up, you help them, but you know, you don't get in there and decide you're going to help them before you find out what's appropriate. So this way of practicing virtue gets you more and more ready for the next steps, but I just wanted to say again this part in the sutra where it says, basically it's basically saying even though when you practice meditation on the lack of own being in terms of self-production you make great progress in this way and give up all these wrong ways of acting based on self-power and so on.

[15:16]

Still you cannot be released completely from attachment and bondage to suffering. You're somewhat free of attachment, but not completely free of attachment. So we have to go on to the next level of teaching where we explain the character lack of own being, or lack of own being in terms of character and the ultimate lack of own being. Then that results in complete liberation and complete giving up of attachment. And just to I just want to read these three versions of this part of the sutra. So this is after they've heard the teaching and these feelings of disaffection for trying to control

[16:19]

the impermanent world, how do they feel about the impermanent world? They have arisen after you give up trying to make impermanent things permanent and practice virtue as a result. So in that way they complete everything from the generation of good roots up to the accumulation of merit and wisdom, of virtue and wisdom. However because they do not understand as they are, in other words they've heard about the other two but they do not understand as they are the two aspects pertaining to the lack of own being in terms of production, that is, the lack of own being in terms of character and the ultimate lack of own being because they do not yet understand these other two aspects of the production

[17:23]

lack of own being. They do not become wholly averse towards all phenomena, all compounded phenomena. They do not become separated from attachment. They do not become fully liberated. I wasn't planning on commenting on this, but you notice it says they become disaffected towards or disappointed in or not excessively involved in compounded or compositional phenomena. But it didn't say all phenomena, it says all compositional phenomena. In other words, it's okay I guess to continue, or not to continue, but to learn how to be non-averse to be maybe even excessively involved

[18:27]

in a certain type of phenomena which is called suchness or emptiness. It's okay to be involved with what's not compositional that particular one. So you don't have to turn away from all phenomena, it's okay actually to turn towards and be really into emptiness or the thoroughly established character. I guess maybe that's all right when you have a chance. The other translation, even though they plant the roots of goodness until they accomplish the two requisites of virtue and wisdom, yet in this essential no-essence of arising, they will not really be able to understand the essential essencelessness of marks. You know which one that is, right?

[19:30]

Huh? That's the imputational. That's the lack of own being in terms of character, another way of putting it. They will not be able to understand the two kinds of essential no-essence of ultimate meaning. So there's two kinds of ultimate lack of own being. Have you heard about those two? Have you heard about those two? Some of you have, some of you haven't. So we'll tell you more about those. So at the level of meditation we're doing so far, in a way, you haven't yet understood those and some of you haven't even heard about them. But don't worry, we're going to eventually get to them. And the other translation I thought also brings another little light to it. It says, even though they cultivate

[20:33]

good and accomplish virtue and knowledge in this way, however, they are nevertheless, as yet, unable to truly know the essencelessness of characteristics and the two kinds of ultimate essencelessness in the essencelessness of birth. The essencelessness of birth is the production lack of own being. So they, in other words, when you're meditating on the lack of own being in terms of production, or the production lack of own being, when you're meditating, in other words, when you're meditating on other dependent phenomena and also in their aspect of lacking a self-production, when you're meditating on that you still, just on that alone, you cannot see

[21:36]

the other two types of essencelessness. But still we need to be well stationed in this meditation because, as it says, these other two which we need to be fully liberated are aspects related to this. These other two things which complete our wisdom they are based on this one. They're aspects of this one actually. The fundamental thing in our life is dependent co-arising, but the fundamental thing is not enough. We have to learn these other two aspects. Okay? So I just want so you understand how, in one sense I want you to really feel how wonderful this meditation is and at the same time understand its limitations. It is limited, it's not the whole course but it's great. So now I want to just give you some other

[22:40]

words about how to meditate on the essencelessness of birth, or the essencelessness of arising, or the lack of own being of production of impermanent phenomena. And again say that, so this is meditation on dependent co-arising, this is meditation on the other dependent character of phenomena, or this is also meditation on other dependent phenomena. So this first type of mindfulness practice was available in early Buddhism when they said be mindful of the body, be mindful of the breath, be mindful of feelings, be mindful of states of consciousness. These are dependently co-arisen

[23:45]

phenomena, these are other dependent phenomena, these are impermanent phenomena. So the basic Buddhist mindfulness practices are really addressing this too. But they didn't mention in the early days that the body was not self-produced. Now at this level of teachings we're being told, well what's an example of other dependent phenomena? The body. Is it good to be mindful of it? Yes, because you're meditating on the other dependent character by meditating on the body. This level of teaching also tells you, by the way, this body is also an example of a production lack of own being. This body is actually something that arises not by itself. This body doesn't have an essence in terms of birth. Now we get that picture too.

[24:46]

Now, in the early days it was possible that people, as they were meditating on the body or the breath or the feelings or other events, in that process they would realize that these events did not have self-production nature. And that would be good. Then they would be doing this. Or that the Buddha would guide them in their mindfulness practice in such a way that they would realize this. But there's no mention of it. There's not much mention of it in early teachings. Other ways which I think I'd like to just mention to you to describe this meditation is that it's meditation on the inconceivable. So, the body, you know, you can have a conception of the body, but the way the body is is really beyond your conception. It's meditation on mystery.

[25:49]

It's meditation on how we and all things, how we and all dharmas are other-powered. How we're actually other-powered is inconceivable. Like yesterday when Shannon asked, well, should we think about how the breath depends on air and lungs and parents? That's a conceivable approach to the other-dependent character. But actually, the way the breath is an other-dependent phenomenon, the way it lacks self-power is inconceivable. So actually, to enter into meditation on the other-dependent character of breath, or posture, or practice means to enter into an inconceivable realm. The introduction into the conceivable realm could be something conceivable, but when you actually enter, you're entering the inconceivable. There is a fascicle

[26:58]

in the Shobogenzo called ko-myo in Japanese, and it's translated sometimes as light. Ko means light and myo means subtle or wondrous. But it's okay just to translate it as light. But sometimes they translate it as spiritual light. And also ko-myo is the word for This statue behind me, the Jizo, has a halo behind his head, but sometimes, as you may have seen, like Amitabha Buddha, sometimes instead of having a halo around it, in addition to having a halo around his head, there's like an aura of flames around him. And that aura of flames is called ko-myo. So the Buddha sits in the middle of these flames, or the spiritual light

[27:59]

in those statues. So there's a fascicle called ko-myo written by Dogen Zenji, and then his first disciple Ejo, the second ancestor of the tradition in Japan, he wrote a fascicle called ko-myo zo, zanmai, which means the samadhi or absorption in the womb of light, in the womb of this light that the Buddha sits in. And at a certain place in the text he says something like, trust everything to inhalation

[29:07]

and exhalation, and then leap or jump into the womb of light and don't look back. So, we're in the world, so we're in the world of, oftentimes we're familiar with being in the world of self-power, of where we think we and other things are made by themselves, or we make ourself, or we make our sitting posture, or we make our breathing, and our breathing makes itself, the inhalation makes the inhalation, we make the inhalation, this kind of attitude we usually start practicing with, so trust everything to this appearance of the breathing, and then leap into the light and don't look back. So,

[30:12]

in the realm of where we believe that we are doing the inhalation and we are doing the exhalation, that we make them, in that realm, trust that phenomenon completely and then leap into the light. Now, you might wonder, what is the light? What is this spiritual light? Which is fine. Now leap into it. Leap out of, in other words, leap out of your, I say your, but I mean mine too, me leap out of mine, because we're not talking about our spiritual nest, we're talking about my spiritual nest and your spiritual nest. Leap out of the spiritual nest of delusion, of self-power, and leap into the realm

[31:20]

where what's happening is due to others. Leaping into the light means you're leaping beyond your thinking, because your thinking cannot figure out what the light is. Leap into, leap from where I can do what I want, I'm in complete control, leap from there into the realm where I can't do what I want. Leap from the realm where you do things and you don't need anybody else to leaping in the realm where your activity needs somebody else, where your activity can't happen without the help of others.

[32:21]

And of course you don't know what that is because you need somebody else to help you find out what it is. So you have somebody else who's telling you about somebody else who said leap into the light, that's how you do it. Leap into the light, jump out of your nest into the light. Leap into the womb of non-thinking. Leap into the womb of non-thinking and non-doing of just sitting. Leap into just sitting, which means leap into inconceivable sitting. Leap into the way sitting is happening through the kindness of all beings. And it can happen right at your seat. Leap into that kind of sitting. Jump from carrying yourself

[33:24]

forward to your sitting and doing the sitting or imposing your force, your strength onto making yourself sit. Move from that nest and jump into the place where everything comes forward and realizes you're sitting through you. Leap from one world into the other. This is how you leap from the meditation on self-power into the meditation of other dependent phenomena. Did somebody say how? Yeah, that's what you do. You sit there and you say how and jump. Or you jump and you say how. Either way. In concrete terms, you do not leap.

[34:42]

You do not do it. You cannot leap into the womb of light. You cannot sit in Buddha's lap. But you can leap into the realm where you are sitting in Buddha's lap. You know, it is a good practice to give up discursive thought and become thereby. It's a good practice. It's a useful practice. But the sitting meditation of the Soto Zen tradition which sometimes we say the Zazen of our school

[35:42]

is the absorption in this womb of light. And this absorption in the womb of light was transmitted by the Buddha Dipankara to the Buddha Shakyamuni. The Buddha Dipankara was Buddha's teacher before Buddha was born in this world. And Dipankara means a burning lamp. The Buddha burning lamp transmitted the samadhi of light, the samadhi of the womb of light to Shakyamuni before he appeared in this world. And now we have it in this world through Shakyamuni. This is meditation on the lack of own being in terms of production. So Bob says, well, how do you do it?

[36:45]

You have to leap out of the nest of how do you do it. You have to leap out of the nest of how do I do it and jump into the nest of how it happens not by your power. So you cannot do this meditation. We are talking about leaping into a meditation which you cannot do. How does it happen? The way it happens is inconceivable. So again, jumping into this samadhi or jumping into this realm and being absorbed there is being absorbed in how things happen which is beyond your conception of how they happen. So you're leaping from the realm where you have concepts of how things are happening into the realm where there still may be concepts of how things are happening

[37:49]

but where obviously they do not apply. And you're not any longer trying to apply them. You're in the realm where you have given up trying to conceive of how things are made by themselves. Are there any ways to cry out for help? Cries of help do appear. But you're in the realm where you realize that all, where you start to realize that all things come together and realize a cry for help in you rather than you make the cry of help. Before you enter this realm, you think you can cry for help in the nest of delusions you think that you can cry for help all by yourself. Are you familiar with that feeling?

[38:53]

That you can do it, you can cry for help or that you cannot cry for help all by yourself. By your own power you can not cry for help. That's what people usually do, actually. They just sit there like, hey, I can not cry for help. Watch. See? Of course, once in a while, a little comes out of the mouth. Whoa, whoa, whoa, get back in there. See? I got myself under control. I'm in complete control. That's what I tell myself. See? And I told myself, and it's true, I'm in complete control. But there's a creeping sense of deadliness starts to take over the life. People who talk to themselves like that in a mode other than a joke feel kind of like things get kind of stuffy in there. In the closet of self-power. The little room where you're in control.

[39:53]

So are we completely passive in this process? Are you completely passive? Passive can also be called receptive. When you're in the samadhi, you are completely receptive. Completely receptive. This is called, what we chant at noon service often, the self-receiving samadhi. You're in the mode of you receive a self. You don't have a self and then drive it. You receive a self. And then that self you receive, you employ. You go to town with it. You receive a function. You receive and there's a function. You receive a function. You receive an activity. So you receive activity. You receive activity. So you are receptive and active simultaneously. That's a samadhi.

[41:01]

Absorption in the treasury of light is the same samadhi as the samadhi where you're receiving your activity and at the same moment of receiving, you're employing. You don't receive and then employ. Or you don't take and then employ. Or you don't employ, take and employ. You receive and employ. This is the same samadhi. This is, as I say, the standard of our steady meditation. The criterion for it is this self-fulfilling samadhi, being absorbed in this receiving, the support, all things coming forth and realizing you. You're in that mode. Can you see how all things are coming forth to realize you? No. No one can see this. All the Buddhism ten directions it says at the end can't measure this way that all things are coming together. All causes and conditions

[42:04]

are converging on you moment by moment to create you. This is inconceivable and yet you can be in the mode of, hey, thank you very much for a life. And now you're out of the closet and now you start feeling alive. And when you remember the closet, you maybe get scared because you're not, you know, what's going to happen out here? Well, we don't know. But there is life. Is it dangerous? Yes. It's mostly dangerous that in this open space you would go back to your old techniques, which you might do. So it's not without danger. It's just that this danger is heading in the direction of realization. The other danger is just getting more and more deadly. Yes. Mindfulness practice.

[43:08]

Well, you can start by, again, mindfulness practice. Mindfulness practice is also, you know, if you're trying to be mindful of, for example, your body, that's what kind of a phenomenon is mindfulness practice. It's another dependent phenomenon, right? It's not a self-powered phenomenon. It's not a self-dependent. It's another dependent phenomenon. So you have mindfulness practice. So how to do mindfulness practice? Well, we're talking about, well, be involved with mindfulness practice as a dependent, as an impermanent thing without getting excessively involved in it. Without trying to control your mindfulness. Without being, like, thinking that your mindfulness practice is a permanent thing. A lot of people who would like to practice mindfulness would like their mindfulness to be a permanent thing.

[44:15]

Right? They don't want a mindfulness that happens and goes away. They want one that would, again, turn on the mindfulness and it's there. Permanently installed mindfulness. But mindfulness isn't a permanent thing. So if you want to practice mindfulness, like if you want to brush your teeth, if you hear this teaching, the way you practice mindfulness would be without excessive involvement. Without trying to micromanage your mindfulness. Even though your mindfulness might be microscopically paying attention to things, you're not trying to micromanage yourself into being microscopically attentive. You're just being, like, Mr. Cool, microscopically attentive. Paying close attention, meticulous attention to detail without being excessively involved. And also being, like, really cool and relaxed about things

[45:20]

without being excessively involved and being really cool and relaxed. You're not trying to make mindfulness practice or a simplified life or any practice into a permanent thing. You're not trying to do that if you hear this teaching. Because you realize all practices are impermanent. Even the practice of meditating on what is permanent, for example, the thoroughly established character, even when you're looking at the way things always turn out to be, the way things are actually established in permanent, permanent time, even when you're looking at this wonderful object of purification, the wonderful ultimate truth, your meditation on that is an impermanent thing. Enlightenment is impermanent. Is that because you won't always be receiving? Yeah, right.

[46:21]

So when you say that receiving and employing are the same thing? Yes. Is that where you don't feel like you're doing it? Is that where you don't feel like you're doing it? That's right, you don't feel like you're doing it. You feel like you are being created. And this person who feels like they're being created also notices that a great activity of this person is also being created. So if you split the two characters apart, you know, Ji, Ju, Yu, Zom, Mai, Ji means self, Ju means receive, and Yu means function or activity. So, if you split them apart, you have self-receiving, you receive a self, you receive a body, you receive a practice, and then you receive an activity. So you receive an activity, and then you do the activity. But when they're combined at the same moment,

[47:24]

then when you combine receiving and employing together, the translation of the word is different. Then it's translated as enjoyment or pleasure. When the receiving, not to mention taking, and employing are separate, then you don't see that actually the great joy of your activity. But actually they're united. So splitting it up is one way to translate it, but combining it is another. Combining it, it's called enjoyment or pleasure. The self-receiving, self-employing, or the self-enjoyment, self-pleasure samadhi. Manjushri's name, Manjushri means, one translation would be sweetness and light. The Bodhisattva sweetness and light.

[48:25]

Manjushri emanates a light which is sweet, but also Manjushri lives in the light which is sweet. Because it's the light of where you receive your body and its function, and then it's employed simultaneously. You can have conceptions, but you know that they don't apply. You can have a conception of light and see that it doesn't really make it. Like imagine being in the light, okay, and then having the word light fly by and think, oh yeah, that's what this is. That you probably would laugh. Sitting in the flames with all the Buddhas, the spiritual flames in the center of the universe with all the Buddhas, and then somebody says, light, you think, yeah, right, that's what's happening here.

[49:32]

That really characterizes it. Or even happiness, or like not happiness, or like whatever, man. Those words can be flying around there, but they, you know, like Ejo says, Bodhidharma said, basically, outwardly and inwardly give up excessive involvement, and then he took, after seven years, he understood what that meant. It took him seven years, it might take you seven years. But knowing us, not being maybe up to the same level of gifts as the second ancestry, it might take us more than seven years to understand what it means to not be excessively involved in what's happening outside or inside. In other words, in all these impermanent phenomena that are flying all over the place, how do you like cease getting involved? Again, cease getting involved is kind of like

[50:38]

a little bit rough. Cease excessive involvement with what's appearing and disappearing, and that's the same as getting ready to jump into the womb of light, and there, Bodhidharma says, how you doing, second ancestor, monke? And the second ancestor says, I have no involvements. Bodhidharma says, is that nihilistic? He said, no. He said, prove it. He said, I'm clearly aware, and no words reach it. So you can be aware in this light, but no words reach it. And when no words reach it, then you see, you're starting to see that the words that the imputational uses to operate, the words are not reaching what's happening, and you're starting to open to the thoroughly established character. But first of all, we have to, like,

[51:41]

train ourselves to enter this samadhi, which has many names. Like, you know, at first, you know, when you're meditating on your breathing, on your inhale and exhale, you're being mindful in the realm of the conceivable. Your meditation on your breath may start in the realm of the conceivable, and you can conceive of, you know, you being able to concentrate on your breath or something, or you can conceive of you not being able to. Those are things you can conceive of. In that realm, your breath is long and short, and you can know that you think your breath is long and short, and you can know that you really think it's true that your breath is long or short. But when you jump into the realm of light, in that realm, inhalation and exhalation

[52:44]

are not long or short. In the realm of self-production, in the realm of where you do your practice, of where you go and practice on things, in that realm, then your practice is Mahayana, or Hinayana. But in the realm of light, your practice is not Mahayana, and not, not Mahayana. It's not Hinayana, and it's not, not Hinayana. Your practice is light. And you don't own it, and I don't own it, and the Buddhas transmit being in this light, being absorbed in this light. So, the ancestor says, leap into the treasury, or the womb of light. This is a

[53:45]

gift from the ancestor, trying to help us find the conditions, you know, not the way we're going to concretely jump into the light, because that's, when you try to concretely jump into the light, you're basically just sitting down deeper in your nest of delusion. And yet, listening to the teachings, the conditions are accumulating. You're hearing the teachings, and maybe you're letting them take over your life and make you into this leaper. This leaper beyond your thoughts into the inconceivable, which, you know, it's a leaper that leaps through the power of others, through the power of Buddha's words, and all other Buddha's disciples, and all beings support you to enter the inconceivable.

[54:52]

And if you notice that you're doing it by your own power, you're just going backwards, which is fine. Then just confess you're going backwards. And if you keep confessing you're going backwards long enough, the conditions for leaping will accumulate. Yes? The conditions that came to my mind

[56:03]

were practicing moment to moment, making oneself available to that opportunity of leaping. Also, it comes to my mind that fire in the practice is fire, and there must be fire inside. And when you say that this is other dependent, I'm not sure, the karmic, that this fire would be burning to take the opportunity

[57:10]

of allowing oneself to be in the condition required for this leaping. I'm not sure if I understand. Thank you very much. I have no complaint whatsoever. How about you? I usually have a complaint. Pardon? I usually have a complaint, so I try to be honest and looking inside. I feel a tremor inside. Not much, not much. Thank you very much. I have no complaint.

[58:14]

How about you? I have no complaint. Thank you very much. Any other complaints? Oh, yes. Yes, yes, yes? What does it mean? I don't know. Do you? No, I have no idea. Yes? Sometimes when you describe this meditation in terms of not getting excessively involved, sometimes I can't quite tell how it's different from shamatha. Not getting excessively involved really isn't this meditation. That's practicing virtue. As a result of hearing this teaching and meditating on it, you will realize things are impermanent and you will start to do things without excessive involvement.

[59:18]

Now, if you're wondering how that's different from shamatha, it would be like, you know, that you would practice shamatha, okay, without excessive involvement. In other words, you'd practice shamatha in a virtuous way. You'd brush your teeth, which is not necessarily shamatha practice. It might be toothbrushing practice. Or you'd practice giving. Or you'd practice precepts, which, you know, are not necessarily done in shamatha practice. Or you'd practice patience. But you do these practices, just like you do brushing your teeth, without excessive involvement. You do these practices understanding the teaching that, number one, these things are not arising and your practice with them is not arising by your own power. And, partly because of that, all this stuff is impermanent, unpredictable, unreliable, and uncontrollable. And these things, toothbrushing, and even patience practices,

[60:21]

these things are not reliable. But if you care for them, care for toothbrushing, and care for patience practice, care for enthusiasm, care for diligence, care for samadhi, care for precept practice, care for giving, if you care for these with an understanding of their other dependent nature, of their lack of production in terms of self-production, if you care for them that way, all these practices become virtue. But if you do even these so-called nice Buddhist practices, or spiritual practices, like giving, with basically a sense that, you know, you're driving the giving, and you're using the giving as a control technique, and you think that the giving is permanent, and it gives you this kind of attitude, then it's not really virtuous giving. So, this teaching is a wisdom teaching, it's a teaching which helps you understand

[61:23]

how to do all other practices in a way so that they're really actual spiritual practices, rather than just a further unfoldment of the self-centered idea. So, you know, it's like, we sometimes talk about practice having two sides, a compassion side and a wisdom side. You can call maybe my right hand the compassion side, and sometimes compassion is presented in terms of giving, precepts, patience, diligence, and concentration. The wisdom side depends on all those practices, depends on giving up to concentration. But also the wisdom side turns these practices, which are good, into virtue

[62:24]

by touching each one of them with the teaching of the production lack of own being. So you do giving, or you participate in giving, knowing that this giving practice is not produced by you. And also, since it's not produced by you and it is produced by all other things, it is unstable, unreliable, unpredictable. And if you practice these wonderful practices, knowing that they're not worthy of confidence, then they're beneficial. But if you do them thinking that you can be confident that they're going to give you something by you doing them, then they backfire, just like everything else you do that way. Okay? So we have to bring them together. We have to bring the compassion together with the wisdom

[63:25]

so that the compassion practice becomes purified, all these virtuous, compassionate, all these compassion practices really become virtue. And the wisdom can't happen without them. They must happen together. Okay? Yes? Unstable, unreliable, unpredictable. Are you saying that all phenomena are unstable, unreliable, unpredictable? All compounded phenomena. All compounded phenomena. So when it says here all phenomena are unproduced, unceasing, plastic from the start and nasty in the beginning and the bottom, is that uncompounded phenomena? Or how do those two statements equate? How does the impermanence equate with unproduced and unceasing?

[64:32]

You mean? It's not all phenomena are unstable. It's that all compositional, all compounded phenomena are impermanent. Okay? No. The first statement is, what sets this chapter up is the question, first you taught the own characteristic of all these phenomena, and then later you taught that all phenomena lack own being, all phenomena lack own being, all phenomena are unproduced and so on, quiescent from the start and in a state of nirvana. Okay? So how come you taught those two different ways? And then he says, well, what were you thinking of when you taught that?

[65:33]

Then he says, well, I was thinking of these three types of lack of own being, or when I taught all things lack own being, all things lack own being, are quiescent from the start in a state of nirvana and so on. I was thinking of these three. Then he explains how he was thinking in terms of these three, how that led him to say that these phenomena are lack own being, are quiescent from the start. Okay? That perspective of the way they lack own being, the way they're quiescent from the start, that's kind of like the thoroughly established character of them. But the thoroughly established character, which you can realize about all these impermanent phenomena, these impermanent phenomena also have a thoroughly established character. So we're trying to tune in to the base.

[66:35]

The base is the other dependent phenomena, which means impermanent phenomena, which means phenomena which are produced but not by themselves. So we're turning into the production center here. But what are we looking at? We're looking at things that are produced that don't really exist. But in order to see how they don't have own being and how they're quiescent from the start and always in a state of nirvana, first of all we have to look at how they happen. And how they happen is inconceivable. You have to enter into the inconceivable realm of dependent co-arising. There we will be then able to hear the teaching of how we impute false existence to them and how actually that false existence doesn't apply and therefore they don't really appear and disappear. They're actually always cool and beyond suffering and they don't have any own being. So the teaching that they're impermanent means, first of all see how they're impermanent and other dependent

[67:36]

and how they lack own being in terms of self-production. Then, based on that, you can learn the rest of the story. And the thoroughly established story is that they never really happen and never cease and always in nirvana. That's a little bit later in the chapter. So there's quite a bit more to learn in the next few pages, not to mention the whole chapter, not to mention the rest of the book. So you can see Buddha's teaching is really like, this is pretty comprehensive. This one little sutra is very comprehensive. Lots to learn and so I'm sorry to say that some of you may be studying this for many years. Others of you will escape, I think, soon. May our intention equally penetrate every...

[68:40]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ