I feel that we have a little bit of a not completely settled understanding of the first 15 or so karakas, but I'm going to resist the temptation to go back and try to make it more firm and move forward, even though I know there's still many questions. I hope that later we can go back and ask questions about all the little subtleties. So, I also promised Tom that I would start with a story, the Bodhidharma story, which you can sort of hold in your mind as we discuss this material because it's a, I think, living example of this teaching that's presented in the 30 verses.

[01:04]

The story goes like this, the dialogue, Bodhidharma said to Akhveka, outwardly, cease all involvements. Inwardly, have no coughing or sighing in the mind. That was outwardly, no problem. With the mind like a wall, you can enter the way. Then Akhveka said, we don't know how much later, I have no involvements.

[02:18]

Bodhidharma said, doesn't that turn into nihilism? Akhveka said, no. Bodhidharma said, can you prove it? Akhveka said, I am always clearly aware. Therefore, words cannot reach it. The great master Bodhidharma said, this is the essence of mind, which all Buddhas have realized. So,

[03:28]

doubt no more. So, I hope to present maybe about six karakas and then try to show how they are demonstrated and how they can be mapped onto the story. Yes? Where is the story transcribed? One place it's transcribed is in the Transmission of the Light by Kezan. I'm always clearly aware. Therefore, words cannot reach it.

[04:29]

I'll just give you one hint in that. What do you think it is? Direct experience? No. Dependently co-arisen being, which words are not reaching. That is suchness. Dependently co-arisen consciousness. And by being always clearly aware, words don't reach it. And when words don't reach this dependently co-arisen being, or in that case, dependently co-arisen consciousness, in that case, this is dependently co-arisen suchness.

[05:33]

But I'll go into detail on this later. Also, I want to look at this thing here. Bodhidharma said, inwardly, no coughing or sighing in the mind. This is inside here. The ability to think is the mind. That which is thought of is objects or the environment. And after class, Lee said something about, asked me about these characters. And this character, if you can see it, this character right here means mind or heart. And it's related to this character up here, which has the same, the bottom of this character is the character for heart or mind. The top of this character is the character for a rice field or rice paddy.

[06:35]

Which is, as you see, a pattern. Mind in a pattern is thinking. This character means thinking. Mind with rice field, or mind in a pattern, or the pattern of mind. This character means thinking. But this character also means, this is also the character that's used for chetana, which is also, which is the word that describes the pattern of consciousness, of a moment of consciousness, the shape or pattern of a moment of consciousness. This is also the definition of karma. This is not karma, this is the definition of karma. All action takes its definition from the shape or the pattern of a moment of thought. Or thinking is the shape or definition of action.

[07:40]

So this is all thinking here. So the active kind of pattern thought is what we, excuse me, consider mind. The passive type of thinking is what we call the environment. So Bodhidharma says, outside, in the environmental world, in the world of objects, have no coughing or sighing in this thinking. Inside, the realm of what we usually think of the ability to be aware, outside have no involvements. In other words, outside, this thinking, this passive kind of thinking, which is the outside, he said, have no involvements. Have no involvements in the type of passive thinking, which is the environment. In other words, clearly observe this type of passive, this passive aspect of thought.

[08:44]

Don't do anything more, don't have any involvements with it, just clearly observe it. And inside also, no coughing or sighing around this type of active thinking. That's what it means to make your mind like a wall. You let this thinking, this passive thinking, and you let this active thinking, both of them, you leave them alone, just as they are, and you get the functional, internal awareness, and that which is aware of, functional, leave these alone, that's making the mind like a wall. That's how you enter the way. Okay, so if I can, if I can not go back to 16, but just now see if I can zip through, not zip through, but go through 17, 18, and 19 again to build up a little momentum here.

[09:50]

Okay, 17, thus thought involves this transformation of consciousness, which the third transformation. For that reason, what has thus been thought does not exist. Therefore, all is mere concept. Again, this transformation of consciousness is a discrimination, and as it is discriminated, it does not exist, or it does not discriminate, it does not exist in the way it's discriminated. So everything is just concept. Okay, everything is just discriminating, discriminating the concept.

[11:00]

Is it everything is discriminating thought? Everything is mere concept. What you're thinking of, what you discriminate, is just a concept. That which it's supposed to represent does not exist. All that exists here is a concept, and that exists, as it says later, by codependently arising. The consciousness indeed, consciousness indeed possesses all seeds. Its transformation occurs in a variety of ways. It proceeds on the basis of mutual dependence, as a result of which such and such thoughts are born.

[12:11]

Or consciousness is only all the seeds. And transformation takes place in such and such a way, according to reciprocal influence, by such and such type of discrimination, by such and such a type, no, by which such and such a type of discrimination may arise. Consciousness is only all the seeds. And transformation takes place in such and such a way, according to a reciprocal influence, by which such and such type of discrimination may arise. So here is another kind of thoroughness here. So one interpretation is that the consciousness,

[13:15]

the threefold, the variously transformed consciousness, possesses all seeds, or all dispositions, which are due to past experience. So when an experience happens, when we experience a concept, that concept which we experience is never something which is independent of all the past experiences. So when the mind is bifurcated and the passive part of the mind is reflected and called an object, that object is not a thing which exists by itself because it depends on

[14:23]

all the other dispositions present at that time. And the consciousness is nothing other than all these dispositions. And the consciousness of the object is not looking at the object all by itself as something which it pulls up, which exists by itself. So the consciousness is nothing but all the seeds, and each seed is nothing by itself because it's always influenced by all the other seeds, plus the way it's seen is influenced by all the other seeds, because consciousness is nothing but all those seeds. So the awareness of it and the thing itself, all of which don't exist by themselves. So the idea that alaya is a container that has all the seeds, again, we should drop that idea, although alaya has the ability to both to, what do you call it,

[15:29]

to grasp all the seeds, and alaya is also what is grasped by all the seeds. Alaya is that which is created by all the seeds, and it also relates to all the seeds and holds all the seeds, but it doesn't hold these seeds like a receptacle, because it is not a receptacle sitting there by itself, it is simply all the seeds. Plus, again, whenever a seed is separated out from the others and thus becomes a potential object, it is not something by itself because, again, it is influenced by all the others, plus alaya itself, which is nothing other than all the seeds, the way it works with that thing and the way the seed appears is also totally mutually dependent. So in this way the whole process, although we can describe the function, hopefully there's no substantiality anywhere in the whole process by this kind of

[16:33]

another thoroughgoing twist that he puts in it on Tarka 18. Yes? I'm confused about possessing all the seeds. Does that mean that, um, no, if that means that you've already got, that alaya already has all potential experience within then there's a big logical... Yeah, it's funny that Kalupahana uses the word possesses, isn't it? Because then he goes around and says it doesn't possess it. So why did he say possess? Maybe he's forced to. The other one says, consciousness is only all the seeds. That's not quite true because consciousness is also the process of transforming itself. But the process by which it transformed itself is totally due to the seeds. It's due to the seeds. There's more there than just... Yeah, so the words are having a hard time conveying the truth. Maybe the two translations

[17:38]

catch it because, again, alaya is that which is grasped by all the seeds and it's that which grasps all the seeds. But something that grasps all the seeds and has nothing more than all the seeds, it's just the grasping of all the seeds. But it is also that which is grasped by all the seeds. But that which is grasped by all the seeds is not a thing in itself. So what I'm confused about is whether, on the one hand, alaya... Try it again. Here it goes. I understood what you just said. And what I'm confused about is whether alaya, all possible experiences are already in alaya, or whether our experiences involve some, although based on past experiences, also then add new seeds to alaya. In other words, is it something that accretes more seeds as we experience things that are sort

[18:41]

of mutations of what's already been experienced? Well, I don't necessarily think it accretes, but it evolves. It evolves. Whether it's getting bigger or not, it's hard to say because it's not a stockpile there, which now you have a new experience, so it gets added. Because as soon as you add a new experience, all the other things change, so it's not necessarily a growth. Everything re-constellates by the current experience, then has this perfuming effect, so all of alaya is changed. Because every new element in there has a relationship with all the other ones, and all the other ones then have a new relationship to each other. So the whole thing is revolutionized every moment. And yet, it has no substance. It's not a fixed thing that contains all this stuff. It's nothing other than the seeds, and the seeds are nothing other than it.

[19:44]

But I want to just keep going a little longer, okay? The karmic dispositions together with the two dispositions of grasping produce another resultant when the previous resultant has waned. Or, the residual impressions of actions along with the residual impressions of the dual apprehension cause another maturation of seeds to occur, where the former maturation has been exhausted. That thing about the last part of that arc is what I just said, okay? Now, so you have this two-fold … so it's saying the karmic dispositions, in other words, all the seeds, together with two more dispositions, two special dispositions, the dispositions around grasping, those together, in experience, then they go back

[20:53]

and create a new resultant, a new alaya, when the previous alaya has waned, okay? And what you have here is two kinds of … you have two kinds of two, or two kinds of pairs of dispositions. One is grasping and grasp. The other is grasping and grasper. These two kinds of ways of breaking up the function of grasping into grasping and grasp, and grasping and grasper, produce the two kinds of obstruction. Namely, that which is grasped as an independently existing thing, not taking into account that it's related to grasping.

[21:55]

And the other one is an independent self, which is the agent of grasping. Again, not taking into account his dependence on grasping, plus all the other karmic dispositions at that moment. So again, depending on these dispositions and how you understand things, this double duality of grasping, namely, grasping the grasp and grasping the grasper. The grasping the grasp leads to the wrong impression of independently existing elements, independent of grasping. If there's an element out there all by itself, forget about that it depends on grasping. That leads to the belief in the self of dharmas, of elements. And then the other one is, leads to the belief of the existence of a self-existent self,

[22:58]

as the agent of grasping. Okay? And these two go forward, causing effects, until finally, working continuously in this way, that the effects of this are such that the vijnapti the mere concept of love is now taken as something more than vijnapti matrata. It's verified in itself, just like these things are verified. This process of seeing objects which exist by themselves and a self which exists by itself is then mapped onto these concepts. And this sets the stage for kāyaka 20 which says, whenever a thought through which an object is thought of as a substance, that indeed is a mere fabrication,

[24:07]

it is not evident. So after what's talked about in 19, you're now ready to have a thought, a kind of thought, a kind of cognition through which this object which we just talked about is thought of as having a substance. Okay? And that follows from kāyaka 19 and it also follows from way back in the earlier part where we saw that a sense of self arose with the object. But this projection of the object as having a substance is not evident. And this kāyaka 20 introduces the first of three, what we call three natures.

[25:11]

This is the beginning, now he's introducing a theory of Yogacara called the three nature theory. So kāyaka 20 introduces what's called apari kaupita. Apari kaupita means imagined or constructed mentally imagined, of course, mentally constructed, or fabricated.

[26:21]

Mentally imagined, mentally constructed, mentally fabricated. This follows from the previous, this is generated by what's described in Tarkin 19, and this is not evident. The next one is called paratantra, or other dependent, paratantra-svabhava, other dependent nature, nature. And the third one is hari-nishpana-svabhava, which is the accomplished, which is the accomplished

[27:55]

or fulfilled, or consummated nature. Okay, I'll just say briefly, this is dependently co-arisen being. This is basically the world, the middle one. This is the world subject to imagination, subject to fabrication, subject to attributing substance to that which dependently co-arises. And this is the world of suchness, which happens when the world of dependently co-produced

[29:07]

being is seen just as it is, and left alone, just being dependently co-produced being. And these three natures are introduced now in the next three cards, in 20, 21, and 22. Whatever thought through which an object is thought of as a substance, whatever kind of thought looks at an object as a substance, that type of thought is mere fabrication,

[30:07]

is not evident. Or whatever range of events discriminated by whatever discrimination is just constructed on being, harikalpita-svabhava, and is not really to be found. The thought which looks at an object, which discriminates an object, the thought through which an object is thought of as a substance, that's the same as saying, having involvements outwardly. If there's an external object and you have a thought through which that object is thought

[31:08]

of as having a substance, that's what's called outwardly having involvements. Inwardly a thought through which an inner object, inner consciousness, inner awareness is thought of as having substance, that's called coughing or sighing in the mind, by Bodhidharma. Okay? Ready for 21. This is paratantra-svabhava, other dependent. A dependent or other dependent self-nature is a thought. It's actually a thought, a dependently co-arisen thought. A dependent or other dependent self-nature is a thought that has arisen depending on

[32:10]

conditions. However, the absence of the one prior to it, namely the one presented in Karika 20, the absence of this imagined nature, the absence of attributing substance to this thought which has dependently co-arisen, is always the accomplished. So Karika 20, Karika 21. There is an other dependent nature which is a thought, which is a cognition, which is a consciousness, which is an experience, which is a being, which is dependently co-produced, and the absence of this one, this one here, without this one, is this one.

[33:14]

This one is this one without this one. Yeah, I have some other ones. An interdependent own being, on the other hand, is the discrimination which arises from conditions, and it is fulfilled in its state of being always separate from the former. Okay, so, I'll point, I'll point with my finger, you can imagine the line connecting by that finger. An interdependent own being, interdependent own being or other dependent own being, on

[34:21]

the other hand, is a discrimination, a thought, a consciousness, which arises from conditions, is dependently co-produced, and the fulfilled, ready watchman, the fulfilled is its, this is its, state of being always separate from this. There is a dependent own being, this arises co-dependently, and its fulfillment, its fulfillment is the fact of this being separate from this, or this being absent from this. Yes, there is, but they're both perfectly good translations, and, yeah, absent one and

[35:25]

separate, here's another translation, yeah, live with it, okay, here's another translation. When the other dependent nature obtains a state absolutely free of the imagined nature, it is then the consummated nature. Let's hear it for the last one. Why couldn't you read the last one? Where did the last one come from? It came from an article by Gajan Nagao, which is in a book which is now available at your local bookstore, called Madhyamaka and Yogacara. There it is right there, get it, get it! Don't read, don't suffer more than you paid for it.

[36:30]

When the other dependent nature obtains a state absolutely free of imagined nature, it is then the consummated nature. When you're not attributing substance, you're attributing substance. Right, this is dependently co-arisen being. This is dependently co-arisen birth and death. This is dependently co-arisen suchness. This is dependently co-arisen enlightenment. Is this going to distract you?

[37:33]

Okay. Over here is a non-discriminating wisdom of the Buddha, which simply leaves this alone, as it is. Dependently co-arisen birth and death is to put being into dependent co-arising. That's what dependently co-arisen birth and death is. Dependently co-arisen suchness is not to put anything into dependently co-arisen being. And that is the same as non-discriminating wisdom. And as I said last night or whenever it was,

[38:40]

the karmically created world, the dependently co-produced world, is the contents of and inseparable from non-discriminating wisdom. Non-discriminating wisdom is about dependently co-arisen being, is about karmically created being. It's inseparable from this, this is the contents of it, and it is just to leave it as it is. And similarly, discriminating wisdom of birth and death is to overlay this with being, contributing existence to it. Okay, now, are you ready for the next one? Twenty-two. By the way, before we do that I'll say this other thing.

[39:45]

This world, this accomplished world, this world of purity and enlightenment, becomes manifested when this world is recovered from this world. This is the world where the dependent nature is over here. Okay, it's over here, and over here this dependent nature is overlaid and lost. The dependent nature is covered by these thought constructions. The recovery of this dependent nature, pulling this dependent nature free of these overlays of imagination, manifests the world of enlightenment. Okay.

[40:57]

Later, man, okay? Twenty-two. Thus, it, that is the accomplished, should be declared to be neither identical nor different from the dependent, like impermanence and so on. Okay, you got that already. The accomplished should not be said to be different from this, nor identical with it. Because, again, this is the contents and inseparable from the accomplished. When that, that is the dependent, is not perceived, this too is not perceived. When you don't perceive this, you don't perceive this, because this is the contents of this. If you ain't got this, you ain't got that.

[41:59]

And this is about a bodhisattva. You can't have enlightenment without this. That's why the bodhisattva path is not to annihilate this. We don't put energy into getting rid of this, because if you get rid of this, you don't get this. However, if you get rid of this, you do get some good stuff. Get a good little saint drops out of the bucket. To get rid of this is a high, high spiritual achievement. It's not enlightenment, though. Buddha does not mess with the world. Buddha leaves the world as it is. And if you don't have the world, if you don't see the world, you do not see enlightenment. If this is not seen, this is not seen. And Stephan Aniker's translation seems to be a mistake.

[43:01]

He says, So it is to be spoken of as neither exactly different nor non-different from the interdependent. That's correct. Just like impermanence and so on. For when it isn't seen, the other is. That seems to be a mistake. Myo translated this as something like, That not being seen, the other is not seen. That not being seen, the other is not seen. Now, I said to you before, That not being seen, the other is not seen. That's true. You don't see this, you don't see this. But that's actually not the proper reading of the Karaka. Vatsubandha is not slouch.

[44:05]

Okay, so the previous Karaka says, When this is completely freed of this, when the Paratantra, when the other dependent nature is completely freed of all imagination, of all thought construction, of all imputation of existence, then, the other dependent is the accomplished. Identical with? Is it identical with the Paratantra? No, it says, the next Karaka says it's not identical. It's not. It is, but it's not. It is, but it's not identical. It is, but not identical. It is, when it's separated from this, it is. But it is not the same. It's when it's separated from this, that it's this. Okay.

[45:06]

Now, it is true, that if you don't see this, you don't see the dependently co-produced being, you don't see the accomplished. That's true, but that's not what the Karaka says. So, once again, I'm going over again. When this is completely freed of this, you got this. The Karaka doesn't say this, but it's true. When you don't see this, you don't see this. What the Karaka says, is something which is quite interesting, the Karaka says. When you don't see this, you don't see this. I said that to you at the beginning of last class, and you made these faces, but I can understand why you did. When the accomplished is not seen, when the world of enlightenment is not seen,

[46:08]

the world of dependent co-arising is not seen. This says, enlightenment precedes the appearance of the co-dependently produced world. We sought the story. This is not our hot story. And we have more Chinese characters. For this, I take out a new piece of chalk. Maybe a yellow one. Okay? Right? Okay. So, the Karaka 21 is This means going up.

[47:14]

This means attaining or accomplishing. That's Karaka 21. Going up means get out of here. Get out of this world of delusion. How do you get out of this world of delusion? Drop all them imaginations. Drop all those thought constructions. Stop imputing existence of things, and fly up and attain nirvana. Buddha-ville. Okay? Going up. Going up, sir? Yes. Going up and attaining the accomplished. Karaka 22 is I'll draw that one nicer. Going up. Going down.

[48:20]

Going down and transforming. Starting from enlightenment, you go down into the world. This is the Bodhisattva path. 21 Drop all imagined things. Drop body and mind. Make your mind like a wall. Outwardly have no involvements. Inwardly have no coughing and sighing. Up you go. Then once you've attained non-discriminating wisdom, then down you come, back into the pendant they call risen world. Okay? So there it is. So, I don't know what, maybe I could

[49:28]

write something on the board. But I can also stop now and could have some questions and stuff. But since there aren't any questions, I'll write, I'll say something. And that is, there's a Zen expression which I've seen both in Madhyamaka treatises and in the Yogacara treatises. There's a Zen expression which is, willows are green and flowers are red. Willows are green, flowers are red. Willows are green, flowers are red. That's this. That's dependent, dependent on the co-arisen being. Willows are green, flowers are red. That's the world, right? Right? That's the world.

[50:37]

That's it. When that's it and there's nothing more than that, that's enlightenment. But as you know, people then do stuff to willows are green and flowers are red and then that same wonderful little world of willows are green and flowers are red is a world of birth and death. But willows are green and flowers are red, just as they are, just letting it go at that, is not just willows are green and flowers are red, it is non-discriminating wisdom. And a Soto Zen version of this that I ran into one time is saying, delusion is really delusion. It's the piss. Enlightenment is really enlightenment. It's really great. These two are not the same and they are different. They're separate

[51:41]

and they're not together. There's a big space between them and there's no way to get across. When you're deluded, you're deluded. When you're enlightened, you're enlightened. When you're deluded, guess what? Willows are green and flowers are red. When you're enlightened, willows are green and flowers are red. The difference is simply, in one case, you're leaving them alone and in the other case, you infect them based on the tendency which has developed over this long time of, you know, watching the grasping of objects and attributing independent existence to them or watching the grasping and the grasper

[52:43]

and attributing self to that person. This tendency then becomes almost impossible to stop and therefore we attribute those two kinds of own being to the willows and the flowers and therefore we're in birth and death. So our practice is to make our mind like a wall in the midst of this strong tendency to make flowers, willows and walls into something. So now, that's kind of like, you know, now comes refinements of this but I can stop now for a while and if you want to start asking questions. Do you want to do it that way? Maybe Jim is very enthusiastic, maybe we should call him, maybe he has something to say. Yes, Jim? I'm trying to understand it by asking this question. So suppose a human being has an experience, a visual perception. Yeah. And with that perception comes

[53:46]

obviously a line of all of the past experiences, all the concepts. And this human being doesn't see what Kalubha Hanukkah is as it is. You don't see the thing as it is. You see the concept that you sort of project out onto it. Is that the right... Well... Is that the right answer, Brian? Well, it's all right but I could also say that to see a concept here is okay and the concept you see and the way it appears is because of all these dispositions in a laya. The way the concept is, is because of all that stuff and because the concept is due to all those things, the concept has no inherent existence of itself. But the way it appears is due to all that stuff you just mentioned. But it is just a concept and that's fine. That's what the world is. It's a karmically produced concept.

[54:48]

So that is if you see that rather than thinking that it's something other than a concept. Exactly. That's when you don't see the other details. Just to see the concept and say, Man, this is a concept and that's all there is to it. As a matter of fact, all this is just concept and the reason why it's all concept is because there's nothing you can put up there that's not dependent and mutually dependent on everything else that's happened and ever has happened. When you see concepts that way, then you have just dropped the imputation of the imagined. You have now pulled this wonderful, this concept, dependently co-produced concept, this other dependent nature, which is a concept, it's a concept as an object and it's a consciousness or a cognition which can see this concept as having these imagined attributes or just being merely a concept.

[55:50]

If the consciousness sees it as having some inherent existence or any kind of imagining overlaid on it or if any word reaches it, then it's infected, it's polluted and you're pulled by that one thing back into a full residency in birth and death, at least for that moment. But if you clearly observe the concept, clearly observe it and no word reaches it, then you have no involvements. And this is the mind of the Buddha. And Vasubandhu and the yoga practitioner Vasubandhu recommend doing what? What do they recommend? Well, one thing is when you see a concept, try to see that it's always separate from

[56:51]

this imagining, this imagined nature. Try to see the separateness. Try to catch yourself, try to catch and see how the dependent nature is always separate from the imagined nature. In the world of reality, they're all separate. You can have those too. The potential for attributing substance to things is always endemic. You've always got it right there. Anytime, there it is. But that's here and the concept's here. They're always, actually, they're always separate. It's only by confusion, which is primed by the way our nervous system works, it's only by that confusion of past karma that we tend to confuse two things that are actually perfectly separate. Namely, the world where we attribute, where we create imagination of existence and then we put that over with something which is codependently produced.

[57:55]

And we put the two together and then we go down in trouble. But actually, even down there, they're still separate. It's just the confusion that makes us in trouble. And as soon as you see they're separate, zip-a-dee-doo, you're over in the accomplished, the consummated, the fulfilled world. But, you can also, once in the fulfilled world, just go blink and go back over to the world of birth and death. Just think that they're not separate. Just attribute substance and you're right back over in birth and death. What kind of yogic practice is that? I just told you it's a yogic practice. Just sit and watch the dependently co-produced phenomena appearing

[58:56]

and then notice that there is this other nature. Okay? It's not evident. It's not evident but there is the appearance of the not evident. There is the potential. Yeah. There is this appearance of this non-evident and you can see that that's right there all the time. Ready to jump over onto innocent little dependently co-produced world. Which, just as it is, is the world of enlightenment. And then, subtleties on this meditation are now given in 23 up to about 29. So, you're well to

[59:59]

to try to see how this is now meditation instruction. How this is instruction in how to settle into other dependent nature. Just sitting, the just sitting practice of Soto Zen is simply to quietly settle into dependent co-arising. So, from now on, try to think about how this text is telling you, giving you hints about how to settle into this other dependent nature. How to settle into dependently co-arisen appearance, dependently co-arisen concepts.

[61:00]

To develop a consciousness which can settle onto dependently co-produced objects. Just that. With, and that can, that you can watch the co-dependently produced phenomena in such a way that you're so clearly aware that no words, no imaginations, no imputations can reach it. As soon as they come close, they just fall off. You never let them reach it. And all, you don't push them away, you just watch so clearly dependent co-arising that you also see words trying to get there and you see them drop away and they never catch. That's called outwardly no involvements.

[62:02]

Here comes an involvement, whew, it missed. Here comes an involvement, whew. Inwardly, the mind becomes a coughing. Nope, not here. So coughing still goes on. Coughing's all over the place. But, when coughing happens, coughing never infects here. What happens is that you got this and then you got coughing. And then you got sign. But no word reaches coughing, no word reaches sign. And if there's involvements, you got into involvement. You don't have an involvement infecting this. To imagine that is to see something independent over here coming over here. Making this into an independence. So watch, try to settle into dependent co-arising. So the integration of the two types of DCA that you were talking about

[63:04]

actually involves observing separation. The integration of the two types of DCA, the DCA of birth and death and the DCA of suchness. Well, I haven't finished it yet. Can I speak to you in a minute, sir? Okay. You talked about the yearning and so on from integration. Two types, there's two, the DCA of birth and death and the DCA of suchness. And that in order to achieve an integration it actually requires an observation of separation. The dependently co-arisen birth and death is not to be integrated with dependently co-produced suchness. They are not integrated. That's not the integration we're trying for. They will never be integrated. What will be integrated

[64:06]

is dependently co-produced being and dependently co-produced suchness. Those are integrated. Those are not separated. But birth and death is separated from enlightenment. They are separated and we don't want to integrate them. The integration I was referring to is integration of direct experience with conceptual experience. Which is a, what do you call it? It's one of the ways of talking about what the world of the accomplished is like. That in this world the world of direct experience and the world of conceptual experience are integrated. That's why it's happy here. This is our whole life. Is that the same as emptiness and the awareness of the arising of empty phenomena? Is that the same as emptiness?

[65:10]

You talk about two truths. That everything is empty and that there is the continual arising of empty phenomena. Is that an integration that you're trying to achieve? Well, the the fact that there is the continual arising of non-existent phenomena that fact is this. The arising of these and believing that they are existent phenomena is this world. This is the world where things that don't exist arise and you think they exist. This is the world where things that don't exist are appearing. Not to exist, but to appear. And is the other one... This world does really exist. This is the world. And is Parinirvana this emptiness?

[66:11]

Is Parinirvana emptiness? Parinirvana is realizing the emptiness of this. Which means just leave it alone and it's emptiness. Okay, well that took... Now it's time to stop. So tomorrow we can go a little further and you might have some further thoughts on the matter. May our intention...

[67:13]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ