In the presentation of the Four Noble Truths, you know, the third truth about cessation is the cessation of what? Cessation of suffering, right? Which means also, I think you could say, the cessation of samsaric existence. The end of samsaric existence, that's one way to understand what that truth is about. And so, people like us, hearing the end of samsaric existence, that might mean that's the end of suffering, that's the end of the misery that arises from clinging. So I think we can understand clinging, right?

[01:00]

And we can understand, to some extent, that clinging causes problems for us and other people. Is that right? Most of you have some feeling of that? I'm willing to, a little bit later, get distracted by anybody who really doesn't see anything to that. But it's also, another part of that samsaric thing is that to put an end to samsara means also to put an end to rebirth. We chant here, as you know, every morning, all my ancient, twisted karma from beginningless greed, hate and delusion. The reason why I say beginningless is because it isn't just that it started somewhere less than a hundred years ago, for some of us. Beginningless means that it's before, that this karma doesn't have a beginning like 1943

[02:11]

or 1937 or 1958 or something like that. So you chant that every day, right? How do you understand that beginningless greed, hate and delusion? And also it says, born through body, speech and mind. Well, that's kind of a truism because karma is body, speech and mind. Same thing, action of body, speech and mind, that's not particularly troublesome. What's the reason for confessing this? In one sense, the reason for confessing it is because we feel bad about it, we feel bad about karma, we feel bad about the karma we've done based on greed, hate and delusion. Someone wrote me a letter and she said various things in the letter, but the thing that I felt like she really felt bad about was I felt she felt bad about her karma.

[03:15]

Now, in one sense what she told me was she said she felt like she blew it, she blew something, she blew some situation in her life, and there's two senses I took that. One is I did the wrong thing so I didn't get what I wanted, but I happen to know her situation and from my perspective it wasn't what she did that made things not go the way she wanted them. She thought I did this, this and this and then I lost that and that, but I happen to know from the side of that and that that she lost that that and that, she couldn't have done anything about that and that going away. So, for example, you have a relationship with somebody and you do various things and then the relationship goes badly and then you think, oh, I did the wrong thing so it

[04:19]

didn't go the way I wanted it to and if I had done this or this it would have gone differently, but the person that you have this bad relationship with comes and tells me that the reason why they broke up with you is because, you know, I don't know, like you have bad breath or they found out that they changed their sexual orientation or something like that, it's got nothing to do with you, but you don't know that maybe and you think that you had some, what you did controlled the situation, you lost control, you did the wrong things and therefore it didn't go well, but somebody else who knows more about the situation can sometimes just happens to know that, you know, this person, there's nothing you could do, this person wants to get away from you, I mean, well, you know, maybe if you got super super super spectacularly rich, you know, and I don't know what, and bought this person

[05:22]

a whole harem or something or, you know, there's various ways you might be able to keep the person around and make them say, oh, I'm really happy with the relationship. If you had certain universal power or something, but ordinary people sometimes don't know the reasons and sometimes people lie to you, you know, you do this, this and this, and they say, well, I'm leaving you because you did this, this and this, but actually they're leaving you just because you're getting old, they don't want you anymore, they want a younger spouse or whatever, and they won't tell you that. They'd rather tell you that you did something bad than that they're so petty that they don't like old shriveled up people anymore for sex partners, something like that, you know, but maybe they tell somebody else and so the other person has a perspective of saying there's nothing you could do about it. But what she really felt bad about, I felt, was that during the relationship she felt

[06:22]

that what she did was the relationship. She felt the relationship was because of what she did. And that's what I think really bothered her, is that she made this relationship which didn't start from what she did, but from just the way she was, into something that was maintained by what she did. People, some people, especially the people who we have like what's called loving relationships, which sometimes happen between us, it isn't what we do that makes them have a relationship with us, that's not it. The relationship goes on regardless, a relationship goes on regardless of karma, a loving relationship. And often at the beginning you can see that's what it's about, it's nothing to do with what you… a person can actually love you and be attracted to you for the way you are. Then you get in the relationship with them and you start doing things to make the relationship

[07:27]

happen or go on or be the way you want it to. At that time you destroy the love, at least temporarily by that action, you go against love at that time. That's what she felt really bad about. And in fact there's no way… she can't not feel bad about that because she did, you know, day after day, whatever, week after week, she related to the relationship in terms of what she could do to keep it going and what she could do to, you know, keep it healthy rather than what, rather than what? Trust the relationship and trust herself. And trust that… someone talked to me about giving a relationship a chance. Giving the relationship a chance means… give the relationship a chance means see if you can be yourself. See it being yourself, not see it being yourself, be yourself, that gives the relationship a

[08:32]

chance. If you're not yourself, you destroy the relationship. Giving the relationship a chance means be yourself, that gives it a chance. Not being yourself does not give it a chance, but what we… you know, the language of giving a chance means, well, you know, we've got this nice little relationship, you know, it's very fragile, you know, so I'll pretend like I'm somebody else and give it a chance. I won't say what I actually feel, like, you know, you know, I don't know if I like you after all. I won't say that because that wouldn't give the relationship a chance, right? That would destroy it right like that. Or it would hurt the other person and then I wouldn't be able to stand facing the fact that I hurt them, so I'll run away after I hurt them or whatever, you know. But I think, actually, the way we talk is that kind of weird, upside-down view that giving the relationship a chance means, I'll lie for a while until it gets stabilized and then when it's nice and strong and he knows I love him, you know, and he's confident

[09:35]

that I love him and he trusts me and then I'll tell him the truth. Of course, you have not given the relationship a chance, so when you finally tell the truth, you've already destroyed it, so there's nothing there to really handle the truth anymore. It's over with anyway. But if you told the truth first of all by saying, I want to tell you first of all that I destroyed from my side, I blew the relationship before by converting from love to karma. I didn't trust the relationship. I didn't trust, it isn't that I didn't trust you, I didn't trust that you were going to stay with me or whatever, therefore I switched from love to power. I switched from the relationship, which is not under my control, but which I was enjoying, to power. I switched from enjoying the relationship to controlling and maintaining and making sure it lasts because I like it. And part of that was, well, you know, anyway, I switched to power, I switched the relationship

[10:38]

in terms of what I can do. Of course, I've got to mention that just before you switch from, I don't know what, the pain of a relationship, right? Relationships often involve pain, like the other person looks like they're never going to come back because they walk out the door, or the other person looks like they don't like what you said and they're either going to say something mean to you which is going to hurt you, or they're going to split which is going to hurt you, or they're going to maybe take control of you and manipulate you or, you know, dominate you, or all these things. You ever heard about any of this kind of stuff? And when those thoughts or those perceptions arise, do you feel comfortable? No, you don't, right? Not too comfortable anyway, or maybe sometimes you feel comfortable, but sometimes you feel uncomfortable and anxious, and that intensity, then you lean into the future and say, what's going to happen next? Is it going to get worse?

[11:39]

Is it going to get better? Are they going to leave me? Are they going to not let me leave them? Then you get afraid. So when you get the pain and the fear, then can you trust that? Well, who can trust that? I mean, that's hard to trust. So then you say, somebody's got to take, I've got to get control of this. So you switch to power, personal power, in other words, you switch to karma. Karma. And I could not take away her karma, I could not take away that she did karma, I could not take away that that's the kind of relationship you had with this person for that time, and I could not take away that she should feel really bad that she had a karmic relationship with this person, when she could have had a loving practice relationship with this person. She blew it. She did. Because of the way she thought. Now she has to take responsibility for the fact that she thought that way all that time. But that is good, to take responsibility.

[12:41]

And she was taking responsibility for, not so much what she did, but the fact that she was into doing things. Like I said before, I was talking to somebody here, you know, and she was talking to somebody on the phone who was upset and she basically gave the person the advice of, well, you know, things are the way they are and there's nothing you can do, and then she hung the phone up and she switched into, things are not the way they should be and I'm going to do something about it. She gave the person good advice, but then when she got off the phone, she switched right over into, it's not okay, it's got to be different and I'm going to do something about it. That's not, that is a kind of relationship, but it's not a loving relationship. A loving relationship is, this is a difficult situation, but I trust it and I can't do anything about this. That's not what a relationship is, I do something about it. This thing of switching over to, you know, it should be different and then I'm going

[13:49]

to do something about it, it should be different is delusion and I'm going to do something about it is karma and that delusion and that karma are a more, what do you call it, precise way to talk about how clean, you know, how thirst works. We say, you know, Buddha said that thirst is the origin of the cycle, but this delusion and karma are a more articulate version of that. So we get driven in this cycle, now the question is, again, does this cycle actually go beyond this life? And again, Ana brought this thing about dependent co-arising and her point I think was a good one, but I wanted to say that dependent co-arising is a universal principle, it's a cosmic principle,

[14:53]

it applies to everything, but a particular application of dependent co-arising is very important in Buddhism and was the content of Buddha's enlightenment under the Bodhi Tree, and that he applied dependent co-arising to twelve links, you know, the twelve-fold chain of causation, but that twelve links was a twelve links of the causation of rebirth. It wasn't just twelve links of the causation of any old thing in the universe, it wasn't the twelve links of dependent co-arising of oak trees or acorns or autumn, it was particularly about the twelve links, and as we talked before, sometimes it's presented as eight or ten or five or… anyway, some process of dependent co-arising of rebirth, and of course death

[16:02]

and then rebirth, it's the dependent co-arising, this twelve-fold thing of samsara, it's how samsara works. Of course, a key factor in this thing about not trusting what's happening, thinking it can be different, and in thinking you can do something about it, you've got to have the idea and belief in individual self. Individual self is what feels separate from the thing that you're trusting or not trusting, and the individual self can think that it can do something about what you don't trust. If the individual self trusts what's happening, then the individual self, in a sense, is saying, well, maybe I'm not individual.

[17:04]

When you trust what's happening, it's almost like you're saying, you could be implying, one could infer that you understand that what's happening is supporting you. Even though you may be having a hard time, what's happening is supporting you, you are dependent on it, you're not independent, you're not independent, you're dependent, you're co-dependent, you're dependently arising with what's happening. When you trust what's happening, it's as though you understood something about interdependence. When you don't trust things that are happening, it's as though you don't understand interdependence, and you do understand independence. Many people do understand independence. Independence is not that difficult to understand, actually. You just think, I'm independent, you got it. When you trust what's happening to you, when it's difficult or easy or pleasant or unpleasant,

[18:15]

whatever's happening, when you trust that as what you should work with, it's as though, again, that you thought it was supporting you. You might not actually still believe that, but it's as though you believe it. And then, based on trusting, you're less likely to get into, well, I should do something about it. Then, if you don't get into, I should do something about it, it's again as though you don't think you're a karmic operator. And by not slipping into saying that this shouldn't be the way it is, but rather the way it is, is difficult, but it actually is giving me life. Therefore, I don't want it not to be that way, because this is the way of my life right now. This is my life. I want this life. And this is the way it is. I take this one. And it's really hard, and it's hard for me not to lean into the future.

[19:18]

It's hard, but if you lean into the future, you're more likely than to say, forget this thing about accepting. You already didn't accept it when you leaned into the future, then you're more vulnerable to try to do something about it. The fear that arises there is more likely to drive you into karmic action, and around you go, and you'll feel really bad about it later. Because in fact, when you don't trust, you don't believe that the universe loves you and you don't love the universe. You don't. Now at that moment, you don't. You say, universe, if you're going to treat me like this, it's over. I don't want this relationship anymore. However, if I could fix it a little bit, and it would be like that, then I'll go for it. If I can have my health back, or my child can have her health back, then I'll go with you on this one. This does not mean, somebody told me about St. Teresa, she was riding along in a carriage

[20:20]

or something, I think a lightning bolt hit her carriage and knocked her out of the carriage, or she's riding along on a horse and the lightning bolt hit her and the horse fell on the ground, and she started screaming at God, you know, and said something like, you know, what's the story? Now here I am, totally devoting myself to you and not to be on my horse. I think that's okay. That's okay. It isn't like she's trying to talk God out of doing this, or saying it's not supposed to be this way. See, I don't like it. It's okay not to like it, maybe. But to think it shouldn't be that way, that's not loving what's happening. It's not loving what's happening, I think it should be different. Having difficulty, that's fine. I think a woman giving birth to a child is difficult, that's fine. Thinking that you shouldn't have difficulty delivering babies, that's weird. It's just weird. It's just sick, and so on. It's just not loving life itself as it's happening, right?

[21:20]

Isn't that, that's the way to, and then to try to do something about it, well, you know, sorry, you'll regret that, because it's not loving life. But to act from accepting it and loving it, you can act from that place, you can do things from there, but they're not karmic, they're not like, okay, this isn't right, and I'm going to fix it, and da-da-da-da-da-da-da, that's karmic. It's more like, this is difficult, I accept it, this is love, and da-da-da-da-da-da. Could be the same action, could be the same action. Could be like, I'm going to the toilet, see you later. I got to go potty. It's not like, you know, there's a pain down there, it shouldn't be this way, and I'm going to fix it. And I know just how to fix it, so here I go, you know, zippity-doo, up to the toilet, and I fixed it, I got everything worked out there by my own power. You live that way, that is samsara, that's samsara, and that will drive rebirth.

[22:27]

In other words, it's going to come around again, and so what happens there, you see, is when you act that way, I forgot to tell you about this next part, right? When you act that way, there's a result, there's a result of acting that way, there's a result of betraying your love and your love relationship with the universe. You betray it, there's a result, the result is a world, you get a world back for this one. The Abhidharmakosha says, in Chapter 3 of the Abhidharmakosha it says, it tells you about the world, right? I'll talk to you about that later, but anyway, it tells you about the world. And then at the beginning of Chapter 4 it says, where does the world come from, Vatsubandhu asks. The answer is, where does the world come from, folks, what's the answer? Action. Action comes from karma, that's where the world comes from. The world that you live in comes from karma. Your world is not the same as my world, although we share the physicality of it.

[23:31]

Your experience of these mountains and rivers and my experience of mountains and rivers, that's our world, and our world is born of our karma. The Abhidharmakosha Sutra says, this chapter on the formation of the world, where does the world come from? It comes from action, it says action and aspiration, but action and aspiration are very close because the definition of action is your intention. So what you want, the world you want, the world you intend to realize, your motivation together with your action, that makes your world. So then you get this world, you know, and these people who are in your world that don't like you because you're old, or do like you because you're old, or want to get away from you because you have bad breath, or want to be near you because you have bad breath, anyway, all these people and all these plants and animals that surround you, they are your world, and you will really be upset about that world, and that world will be very oppressive to you, or happy to you, depending on how you act.

[24:34]

But no matter how you act, whether it's wholesome or unwholesome karma, the world that's created around you basically traps you and is unsatisfactory, and not only that, but it goes on forever until you change this mode of power-tripping on the world that's giving you life. So part of what might be necessary, which has been traditionally proposed as necessary, is we need to understand, although we may not be able to stop our addiction, and not all addictions are habits, I mean not all habits are addictions, our habits and our addictions to samsara, although we may not be able to give them up right away, we could

[25:42]

at least realize that they really are absolutely no good, and that it really would be better for everybody for us to abandon them. So I wanted to talk about something else now, which is a little difficult, but anyway I want to talk about how do you take some of the things which are proposed, how do you take these four noble truths, how do you receive them, what do you think about them? So the truth of suffering is that all this stuff is suffering, right? Basically, again, you have an experience, the five aggregates with clinging are suffering,

[26:46]

so if you or I mess with what's happening, mess with samsara, that's suffering, and because of messing with it we get samsara back in our face, if we mess with it again we get samsara back in our face, in other words we get a result from messing with what's presented to us, and then if we mess with what's presented to us we get another thing and it goes round and round. That's a truth, I mean, that's actually two truths, that's the truth of suffering and that's the truth of the origin of the suffering, I just told two truths there, and there's an unassailable, unshakable, non-decaying bliss that makes samsara even look much worse than we… we actually can't even know how bad samsara is until it ends, that's just

[27:54]

only the people for whom it ends realize how bad it is, we need to know kind of how bad it is otherwise we won't abandon it. We need to open up to the fact that even the joys are unsatisfactory and, you know, we need to open up to that. After we're liberated from samsara by abandoning the conditions for it, then we'll see even more how bad it is. If we could see how bad samsara looks to Buddha, well, of course it would be Buddha, so that's part of the little trick there, is that how to see how bad it is before you can see how bad it is, is not possible, but how to see that it's bad enough to abandon it before you see how bad it really is, we have to sort of work up to that maximum level of seeing how bad it is prior to being able to see it from the enlightened point of view where it's really bad. And then there's the truth of the path.

[28:56]

The truth of the path has these five, well, you know, there's the Eightfold Path of the early teaching, there's also Five Paths, there's also Bodhisattva Paths, there's all these paths. Buddha's first presentation was Eightfold, and in the presence of Eightfold, part of the Eightfold Path is accepting the teaching of dependent co-arising, which means the teaching of rebirth and karma. So tonight I'm not going to get into the details of rebirth and karma, but basically you kind of already know a little bit about rebirth, right? It's basically that after you die, that's not the end of anything really important religiously, that your spiritual evolution will continue beyond this particular body incarnation, and

[30:04]

that the evolution will go in relationship to your karma. And liberation from that evolution is not karma. And that's basically rebirth. So you already know that, we can talk more about it, but I think the thing I like to of all is how that's true, how that truth is part of the fourth truth of Right View. Right View is part of the fourth truth, part of Right View is rebirth, that there is rebirth, that there is death and life and death and life and so on. And how that works, how that rebirth process works, if you can see that, then you become liberated from the process. If your karma is good, that helps you be able to see how the process of good karma works.

[31:13]

And also if your karma is good, it helps you see how the process of bad karma works. It also helps you see how the process of neutral karma works. One of the benefits of good karma is it helps you see how karma works. Once you see how karma works, that's the actual practice of the Buddhas, and that's not karma, that liberates you from the karmic cycle. But if you don't practice good karma, we won't even be able to see how any kind of karma works. So the fact that some of you, I guess probably all of you, can see a little bit about how karma works is a sign of your good karma. The fact that you're human is a sign of your good karma. Now that you're human, if you can do more good karma, you will have more chances to see more about how good karma works, and also how bad karma works. When you understand how good, bad and neutral karma works, when you understand thoroughly,

[32:18]

you have the right view, you have the view of a Buddha. You see the twelve lengths of causation, you wake up, and you're free from the chain of karma and rebirth. Okay? Now in what sense is that true? And so I propose to you three kinds of ways of looking at how it's true. One way is that things really are that way. That dependent co-arising is actually the way the entire universe works. Not just at Buddhist centers, but also at Christian centers, and Jewish centers, and IBM, everywhere dependent co-arising works. If dependent co-arising is the way things really are, the way things are really being, then it's universal, and it pervades all situations, and that's what the Buddha was saying.

[33:24]

I propose to you that that's what the Buddha was saying. And the subset, the sub-clause, the corollary of dependent co-arising relevant to our situation of samsara. Samsara is not the whole universe, ladies and gentlemen, it is a little cesspool. It's not the whole story, but we live in that cesspool, it's a really crowded cesspool. It's not a big, spacious place, Stephen. It's not spacious, except when you don't want it to be spacious, then it's spacious. Samsara. But, even though it's not about the whole universe, even though this is a story about

[34:30]

part of the universe, in that universe of samsara, this is really the way things are. They're really that way, that's one way to take this truth, of these four truths, that this is really the way it is. Another way to take it, which I must admit, you know, is attractive, is to take it as ... I remember when I was a kid, I don't know if I really saw the quote or read it in German or anything, but I heard that Nietzsche said, truth is what works. So another understanding is, rebirth is a truth that works, in other words, if people hear the teaching of rebirth and take it as true on the level of, hey, this works, try it, that's one way that it works, that's one way it could be true, it could be true that if people hear this teaching and take it in, that their lives will be better.

[35:36]

They'll be happier, they'll be nicer to each other, you know. It makes sense, because rebirth would say, if you're mean to people, you will be born in a situation where people are mean to you. That's part of the story, actually. And if you're nice to people, you'll be reborn in a situation where people are nice to you. If you're nice to people, you'll be reborn in a situation where people are nice to you. Now, you might be reborn as a dog in a situation where people are nice to you. But basically, because you might have done something else, it made you be born as a dog. So you might, if you do certain things, if you're a human, you get reborn as a dog, but if you do other things, you get reborn as a dog with nice hooners. Or you get to be born, yeah, like Sanji and Zori. You get Eva as your, you know, your masseuse, your barber, your doctor, you have a whole

[36:42]

staff of assistants because of some good karma you do. So, you know, it's a good deal. That's the way, that's the story. Those are the stories. And they are stories. There's these stories of rebirth. And if you listen to these stories and you use them as a practical guide, they could be helpful that way. And another way to take it, which I think is really interesting. Helpful in what way? How is that helpful? How is what helpful? To believe those stories. Oh, because right in this life, you'll be nicer to other people, you know. So, it's helpful. If I tell you those stories, it's helpful for me if you believe that story, at least

[37:43]

on that level, because you'll be nice to me and then I'll be nice to you. And even if you don't, like, literally believe that you're going to be reborn as a person again or as a dog who has a nice caretaker, you still, in the immediate situation, things go better for you. That's part of the story. I mean, that's part of the story, is that that's the way it goes. And also another story is that that's the way it's true. It's true because it works that way. Another thing nice about that way of understanding this teaching is that it's not so dogmatic. So, that's in some ways nice. You don't have to be dogmatic about taking things as actually the way they are, but you can go that way. You can get into that. Also, it's more rational that way, too. It's more rational because you don't say, well, really, you know, really you have to figure out how do I get to be a dog and stuff like that. It's hard to rationally figure that out.

[38:43]

For ordinary people, it's hard to rationally see that. As a matter of fact, it may be impossible for ordinary people to rationally figure out about being born in hell and stuff like that. Like I said, the world, I didn't talk about the world yet, but the world, as presented in Abhidharmakosha, the previous chapter before karma, talks about animal world, hell world, hungry ghost. We'll talk about that later, maybe. But anyway, it's more reasonable. Namely, this truth is good because it helps you right now and helps other people right now. It's reasonable. It relieves you from the dissonance and pain of holding an actual truth which is universal. That's somewhat painful. It has certain painful things about it because if you say it's universal, you're kind of on the spot-a-roo. Because anybody can come up to you and say, well, prove it in my case or prove it in their case or prove it in that case or prove it in that case. And poor little me, with my level of spiritual development, how am I going to be able to

[39:52]

prove that? Now, Buddha, we had a Buddha around a while ago, and Buddha could prove it. Like he said to this guy, this guy came over to him, had a little wife next to him. The little wife gave Buddha some homemade sweets. Buddha said, thank you, Mrs. So-and-so. As a result of this, you will be a Buddha in such-and-such a number of lifetimes, and you're quoted, your name will be such-and-such, and you have this kind of, like, Buddha on it. And her husband says, please, sir, don't say that. In other words, I don't know what he thought. Maybe he thought that would kind of mess up his home life now. You know, he was in charge before this. Now he's got a future Buddha in the house with him. And the Buddha said, he said to the guy, it's like this. You take a seed, you know, one little seed, tiny little seed of the, you know, Bodhi tree. You plant it in the ground, and it will grow into a tree that can shade 500 chariots.

[40:57]

In the same way, this little tiny thing your wife did will blossom into this incredible benefit. And the man could see that, and he understood. The Buddha could see that. He could see the woman's thing. He could see how it's like, how it works like other things, and then he could convey that to the person. This is, this is kind of, he proved it in that situation. And any situation he could do, you know. You could bring him any kind of thing, and he could prove it. The Buddha could even, like, go up to somebody and just go, you know, beep, and give them a little vision of their future lives, their past lives. How do you prove it? Hmm? I mean, how do we know that it's happened? How do we know what, that, that, that happened? Predictions actually can be proven. Oh, well, that takes you back to how do we know there even was a Buddha? You know? I mean, I've, I've, you know, I've believed in rupes, but I'm just wondering if anybody ever, you know, was able to actually check out any of those predictions.

[42:00]

Laughter Well, that, that particular prediction, it hasn't been enough lifetime yet for that woman to come back and say, you know, to us, we won't be, we won't be in these bodies when that woman comes back and says, I am now such and such a Tathagata, and Shakyamuni predicted me doing this when I gave him those, those homemade candies. We might be in the assembly of this, of this Buddha someday, and hear that. But the thing is about these Buddhas, these ones who can demonstrate, actually prove on the spot these universal truths. There's a big space between these Buddhas. In the meantime, there's the disciples of the Buddhas, which have, which get pretty close, and they can demonstrate a lot. They can also teach you how to do things which help you be able to verify them yourself. For example, this is one of the main things, you know, just for your information, is that if you practice the jhanas, coming with the jhanas, if you want to develop supernormal

[43:01]

powers in conjunction with the jhanas, one of the supernormal powers you can develop is retrocognition, or, you know, knowledge of past lives. And, you know, so if anybody wants to actually check it out, I'd be happy to, you know, sponsor you on this kind of scholarship, and tell you how to do it. It'll take quite a bit of time, but, you know, it's okay, it's kind of sidelined for zazen. I wouldn't want you to, like, give up your zazen practice for this, because that won't liberate you. Okay? You already know this, right? Well, I told you this before, didn't I? That's just one of the supernormal powers leading up to the big one. What's the big one? Liberation. Huh? Liberation. The knowledges. Now we've got divine eye, divine ear, you know, what do you call it, retrocognition, knowledge of others' minds, you know, being able to fly and stuff like that. And then, what's the big one? Knowledge of the cessation of suffering. Yeah. Knowledge of the cessation of suffering.

[44:02]

That's what liberates you. Now, the people who go through the, you know, the supernormal powers thing, which Buddha did, that's the last one. But you don't have to go through the jhanas to get that supernormal power, that supernormal knowledge. You can go directly there without going through the jhanas. Fortunately, the Buddha said that. You don't have to do the jhanas. Okay? But if you don't do the jhanas, you're not going to be able to, like, see for yourself, actually witness retrocognition, and actually see your past lives, and also be able to see past lives of others, because you can also know their minds, and once you know their minds, you can also do the retrocognition for theirs, so you can see other people's past lives, and your own present ones. So, this is not omniscience, though. This is enough to liberate yourself, this knowledge of the end of the outflows. Okay? So you could actually, who asked me about proving something? Rebecca. Yeah. So you could actually see it for yourself. Now, how could you prove that that vision was correct?

[45:06]

Yeah. Well, that would be, to do that one, you might have to get a little bit of omniscience beyond this one. Have you seen any of your past lives? Have I? Yeah. Well, you know, I must say that I only have a foggy view of them. I do have a foggy view of them, but I have not, I have not, I think I'd have to do this. I'd have to actually practice the jhanas, and actually apply myself, for some period of time, on actually going through this retrocognition. It says in the books how to do it. You basically look at today, and then you look at yesterday, and the day before, and the day before, and you work your way back to birth, and you take the time when you came out, and you go back into the womb, up to the delivery canal, back into the womb, you go through your embryonic stage, and you go back up to the beginning, and you jump before that, back into the past life. And you have to do this, basically, whatever number of moments you need to go back to death. But when you get in the jhana, you get so concentrated that you can do a very large

[46:11]

number of these things going back. And our evolution is, you know, the evolution of me is the evolution of me, so I don't have to check with anybody else about that, because it's my own story, right? It's your own story. You get to go through your own story. It's not like you have to check with somebody, because this really happened. You don't have to talk to your mother about it. It's your own story. Because before, when you were an embryo, you weren't checking with your mother either. Mother can't tell you what you were thinking through that time. You have to go all the way back, in terms of your own experience. And there is a continuity. And so, I didn't do that. So I had these vague things, like other people did, too. Jhanas are, if you go to India, even today, you'll be able to find various teachers of jhanas that aren't Buddhist. And so some people go to India and learn about jhanas, or something like that. They practice them. I mean, they have life experiences, past life visions. That can happen. That's really new age, actually. There's some new age stuff, too. But I haven't actually talked to these people. I don't go to those conventions that they have. You know, those big things with all these people who have these booths and stuff and workshops.

[47:14]

I don't go to those things. I'm busy, you know. The most important thing is, for me, is the practice of liberation. Which is not karmic practice, but we cannot skip over recognizing this stuff. As I said, we have to deal with this stuff. We practice liberation on something. So what is it going to be? So anyway, I just wanted to say, the next level, I talk about these two levels. But these teachings, these four truths, this thing about rebirth, the cycle of samsara, all this stuff, that it actually is the way things are all over the sentient world, in all religions. This is not just a Buddhist thing. This is a universal truth for sentient life, or it's just something which we tell ourselves in this group, which actually makes us nice to each other and makes all of our lives better.

[48:15]

In fact, to some extent, that level is already operating, I think, to a little bit. There's a little bit of that going on in Zen Center. And Zen Center is not just a good thing for the people who live here. I think a lot of people come to Zen Center and benefit by the fact that we have some belief in karma, and some belief in rebirth. There is something like that here. And so I think it's a pretty good place for the country. The next one, though, is that what these truths may be, these Four Noble Truths, and Eightfold Path, and the Five Paths, and Ten Bodhisattva Levels, and all that stuff, and rebirth, and karma, all these teachings, dependent co-arising, that what they are is they are a communal language. They're communal rules for discourse. They're the way we talk to each other, and they're rules for how we talk to each other. And by having these communal understandings of how we talk,

[49:21]

we create a certain kind of a world among ourselves. And this also has the advantage of, it's not dogmatic. Why not? Hmm? How can you say that? Well, because we know it's only in our own house. If we have rules of discourse in our own community, we don't think that they apply to other communities. Oh, we agree on it, or we don't. If they're communal, we have rules of discourse. Right. So, for you, rebirth isn't even a communal discourse for you yet. Yet. The yet thought is. Well, how so? Well, it means that you're holding out hope of perhaps.

[50:23]

Holding out hope for, no, no. That perhaps my karma hasn't developed enough at this point. No, no, no, no. This is projection, what you're doing. Okay. So, I'm telling you it's projection. I'm saying I don't have the hope that you will, you know, join the fold. So, what is the yet? The yet means you could join. You could join the group that talks this way. There's a group of people who talk in terms of rebirth. Right. You haven't joined that group yet, apparently. I'm willing to talk about it. Yeah, you're willing to talk about it, but you haven't yet necessarily adopted the rules. Okay. No, no, I'm not saying. These aren't dogma. Yes, they aren't dogma. That's right. They're not dogma unless I would say that these rules would apply to you prior to you joining that particular rule. Like I would say, you are wrong not to join this communal rule of discourse.

[51:26]

That would be dogmatic. Right. I'm not quite sure. To me, it sounds like you have an idea of what truth is and somehow you hold on to that. You being whom? Like you. No, what I'm talking to you about is different ways of dealing with truth. And the one that I brought up last is the most undogmatic. Namely, that this is just a rule of communal discourse. That we agree certain things mean certain things. And we use these terms of discourse and we have rules for how to use them. And we do not think in that case that somebody in another system who has different rules of discourse in that community, we don't think that they're wrong and we're right. We don't think that because we just said it's rules for communal discourse.

[52:27]

It's only true for a community. The one I said... What is discourse? How do discourse and belief systems interact? How does discourse... Belief... What you believe in is... I'm sorry to ask, but... It's okay. It's okay, don't worry. It's all right. It's all right. Laughter Not in this level of discourse. Laughter I just... What I said earlier was... If I'm telling you that rebirth, that the Four Noble Truths are universal and you don't agree with me, then you're out to lunch. You're excluded from reality. You're in trouble. You're in trouble because here's the truth and you don't agree with it. I'm sorry, but that's the way it works.

[53:31]

That is rational and there's no way to avoid it. However, the problem with that is that it can be dogmatic. What I propose to you is another way to look at these truths which removes that dissonance of, like... in a sense, damning people who don't go with it. And it removes the dissonance of that damning. It also removes the... not being able to rationally prove some of this stuff. It removes... Well, it removes the discomfort of what it's like in the time between when you state something and when you can prove it. In many cases, it's easier, it's more comfortable to just take this other approach which is, this is just a rule of discourse among a certain group of people. For example, koans too, you know. I think koans are like that too. That there's stories and there's rules of discourse of what they mean.

[54:32]

People... Koans are around the world now, but in certain Zen centers, in certain communities, there's rules of discourse about what those stories mean. And when you have a group of people that have rules of discourse by which they can discuss something, they create a certain world by doing that. And that world has a kind of... what do you call it? Integrity. What? Integrity and what was the word? Intimacy. Intimacy, yeah. Intimacy and checks and balances and it has a certain objectivity, it has benefits and you can start talking to each other because you agree on some... you make some conventions about how to talk. So now, what's your question? That's the one I... It sounds conventional sometimes. What? It does sound conventional. Well, it... I use the word conventional, but it sounds conventional, but actually the first one is the more conventional one.

[55:34]

Now, here's something else I want to just put out there. It's getting... It's getting out. I want to put out the fact... The fact. I want to put out as a fact that we, as human beings, the true-false dualism is unavoidable in our life. That the true-false dichotomy, the dichotomy, the dualism of true and false is part of being human. Without that, we're missing... we're overlooking part of what it means to be human. I propose that to you. And then again, what does true mean? And what we sometimes would like to do, especially today in this world, is we would like to soften and weaken what we mean by true.

[56:37]

And one of the ways to weaken what you mean by true is this is not... this is not like true, like universally true and true beyond even the situation. This is just... we find this useful or this is just the way we talk about this koan in Zen center. That softens it. Well, for the person who's presenting it, it softens their presentation so then they don't... and other people... they either will be less likely to be dogmatic themselves or they will be less likely to be seen as dogmatic. Both are kind of like... can't avoid entirely necessarily, but it lessens that dogmatism thing a little bit. And also it's more rational. I mean to have a story about the way things are that seems rational and reasonable how that would... if people believe that story at least on the level of it being a story about a good thing to believe

[57:39]

because it's beneficial, that's rational. People can talk about that and then they don't feel like they have to be that way. It's more like they try that on or think that way and that's maybe helpful. But it's either true or false. I mean, how do you... But see, that's... You see, that's... that's the conventional thing. It is conventional for human beings to really when they come back yes, but it's either true or false. I mean, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's nice to think that way but is it true or false? Well, you can't function from... even in the second reality just that it works that way. If you either take it on as this is the way it is and function from this is the way it is or you don't function from I suspect maybe this is the way it is. You can do it to a certain extent. But it isn't... Then you weren't really... You're right anyway but before you said that last part you were right. You can function with maybe it's this way. You can. That's called relativism. You can function on relativism but you can't do it indefinitely. Eventually it comes down to are you or are you not

[58:40]

going to shoot me? Am I or am I not going to get paid? Well, you know depends on what you mean by that. And you say oh, okay, okay, okay, okay. Then you go on for a couple of hours like that and then a couple of days later well, are you or aren't you? Eventually we are built actually in such a way that eventually we want to come down to is it true or false? Say so. And that then things get tough. Is this person enlightened or not? Have you seen your past lives or not? Now do I say well, it depends on what you mean or do I say no? And is that true and do I think that's true or false? Or I say yes and what do you mean by that? Prove it. Instinctively, you know genetically. And conventionally

[59:42]

we actually do have this duality and true does not sort of fudge over into false. They are actually separated. This is not a happy world, however. This separation here. Even though this separation of true and false can be applied to the truth of samsara the question is again this is Buddhist truth, right? Is that true or false? Prove it. Prove it's true that there is suffering. Really, not well, you know really, this is true. All samsaric existence is miserable. Prove it to me even before I'm a Buddha. You tell me I have to believe this as true in order for me to be a Buddha but prove it to me a little bit before I'm a Buddha. Now if you start proving it then it's going to be a problem. Somebody's going to get dogmatic and then the people who aren't Buddhists are going to be in trouble. Maybe because they think

[60:43]

life's really full of cherries and they're going to think we're negative and blah, blah, blah and they won't come to Tathagata anymore or people drop out of practice periods but you can't get out so easily now so here I'm telling you this. And you're putting up with it a little bit anyway. Pretty well. Not so bad. Just a few reactions here. That's the thing though. If I don't get into this cool it. We've got these four truths but really we don't mean that they're true. They're called the four truths. You could call them actually the four statements. The four suggestions. The four stories. The four rules for communal discourse. It's just the way we talk around here. Don't let it bother you. Not the four assertions. Not the four assertions of truth. No, no, that's too much. Take away the assertion. Don't get so... The problem with that is

[61:44]

is that when you soften this thing the problem of that is that they've become a relative. And then it's like well then like I just said this when I was talking to Sarah. If we have rules for communal discourse about what the four truths mean about what rebirth means about what the koans mean about what the sutras mean it's just in this little group Zen Center, not even Buddhists maybe or expand it to the Buddhists. Anyway, if we have these rules then we don't say that the other people are wrong. So then our rules are just relative. And they're just as right as us. So then they're right, we're right, everybody's right. Even people who have just tiny little groups are right. Like one person is right. This is my communal, my small community view of what the reality is. So individuals are right. Small little sects are right. Jonestown is right. The Nazis are right. That's not necessarily what happens if you set up conventional realities. Not all conventional realities

[62:45]

have equal validity. I mean there are ways that you can talk between conventional realities so you don't have to say that they're all right. You don't have to say they're all right? That's correct. I mean you can exist within conventional reality and recognize that you have conventions of discourse without acknowledging that all conventions of discourse are equally true. Oh, but some are less true? From what? You're done. If some are less true, that's good enough for me. Less true is good enough for me. This little group here has a truth and that group over there has a truth that's less true. Is that what you're saying? That's possible? You don't... I'm saying that you don't have to be compelled by their conventions. They don't... You can sort of look at their conventions and look at the conventions

[63:45]

you have an opt to stay in your conventions. Yes, definitely. So there's not really an issue of truth about... I don't understand why in that situation you'd be particularly concerned with saying that what they said was true or not. Because it's different from you. You have a truth. We have rules here. They have different rules. And either I'm going to say we have our rules and the truth of our rules is that this is just our rules here. That's as far as I'm going to go. Therefore, if that's as far as I go, then if they have the same system, I won't say that they're less true than me. But you can have compelling... I mean, you might not want to say that it's ultimately true, but you can have sort of compelling reasons why you want to go by the conventions that you go by. And using those reasons for whatever reason why they're compelling to you, the other group's conventions may not be compelling. And so you might not opt to have them. So you're not going to say that necessarily

[64:45]

that your conventions have absolute truth and some of the group's conventions have sort of equal absolute truth. You're going to say there are compelling reasons why I want to adopt these conventions and this is what they are and that's why I'm going to have them. And for whatever reason you have those compelling reasons and you can talk about that and you can even change those in the process of talking about them, you cannot go by the other people's conventions. So they're not sort of at equal truth levels because you've got these reasons for choosing the conventions that you choose. Do you follow that? I do. I do. But you know, I don't think that makes sense what you just said. I'll tell you what I think. With the group I'm in, if I go to the trouble of adopting, you know, the truth of this group because I have compelling reasons to do so and I realize the reason why I'm doing this the compelling reasons are not because this is true in any other sense than it's true for this group. If I think this is only true for this group and I like this group but I'm not saying anything more than I like this group and I want to talk with this group

[65:47]

and I want to play with this community. If I'm not saying anything more than that then what I'm saying is just that. That's all I'm saying. And that's not dogmatic. But you might have reasons other than that. I mean, you might have reasons other than you just want to be in this group. Well, what are the other reasons? Without putting the other group down. What are the reasons? Depends on what type of truths you're talking about and why you wouldn't want that. Oh, the four novel truths. We have four novel truths in this group. So, I just assume you probably want to use the criterion of suffering or freedom. No. I'm not using that criterion. I'm saying this is just what fits with this group. That's all that's being said here. That's all that's being said. Right. I understand what you're saying. That's... So, what I bought that though was you're saying that just because you've chosen... Just because you acknowledge that the conventions you go by are conventional that it doesn't mean that you have to say that all other people's conventions

[66:48]

have sort of equal truth value. You don't have to say that. But in fact, if you say that they have less truth value then you just nullify what you just said about yourself. Well, it may or may not. But, you know, it begs the question of what is the basis for making a determination of truth and falsity. So... There's no determination. Yes. There's no determination of truth and falsity. Other... In this situation, the only determination of truth and falsity is does it work within this reference system. That's the only criterion you're having. You're saying you're just making up rules for that group. Yeah. And if you go against the rules of this group that's the only way that you're false. Well, what about someone being like, let's say, for example, Sarah, and she makes this an example and says, well, I want to be part of this group but I don't believe in the group. So then what? Well, then she'd have to keep talking until we arrived at a new community rules of discourse. But how many beliefs

[67:52]

can you drop to be still part of this group? How many beliefs can you drop? Yeah, or not as we were. I mean, how... In this whole discussion I'm just asking myself how open are groups? How do you avoid I guess this is... Okay, I get... Okay. In the Koan class, you know, we start studying these Koans and it's taken us many years in the Koan class to come to something like communal rules of discourse. We've been studying Koans now a very long time at Green Gulf Koan class. We still haven't quite hit the communal discourse level after all those years. But just the Koan class. Okay? Now, to arrive at communal rules of discourse for studying the Four Noble Truths and so on, it would take quite a bit of time even to arrive at the communal rules. That takes time. One of the nice things about American Buddhism is we haven't yet got our communal rules of discourse. Which is part of the reason why there's a lot of permeability

[68:52]

in the Sangha. Once the communal... And once communal rules are established, once there is an understanding of what this Koan means in a certain community, then things are set for that community. And then it's hard... You have to be initiated into that in order to function in that community. Okay? So, you're wondering what do you have to drop in order to be a member of the community? Well, that's not even being asked of you quite yet in terms of the level of truth I'm talking about. I didn't say you said that. I'm just telling you that. You said, what do you have to be dropped to be a member of the group? Okay? Didn't you say that? How much can you drop? How much can you drop to be still accepted Well, how much... Oh, you mean, when you say drop, you mean how much can you not accept? How much can you not accept? Yeah. And it's not been determined yet in this group how much you can not accept. Well, for example, if you don't accept the schedule, then you can't be in the group. That's sort of one of the rules here. Well, yeah, that's what I asked you before you came. I asked all you, do you want to follow schedule? If you say no, I say, well, fine,

[69:53]

come back when you do. That's one of the communal discourse things is the schedule. But I didn't say, you know, how do you feel about Four Noble Truths and rebirth and so on? How do you feel about the Bodhisattva vows? Have you taken refuge in Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha? Some groups do that, right? There's a way to define the group. But anyway, I just want to finish this thing about what I'm saying that one level, one way to look at these Four Noble Truths is they are a source of communal discourse and we have ways of talking about them and that's in people who don't talk about them or who don't believe in what happens in our system. They have, in that system, they have their rules and if they follow their rules, we follow our rules, then we do not say that they're less true or more true than us. If we do, then we're talking about something other than me following the rules in my system. Then we're shifting over back to the first one which is this is the way things actually are and it goes beyond the group and that's the way people basically are is they have a sense of a truth which is not just

[70:54]

in this little group but goes beyond the group and that's difficult but what I want to say before we stop tonight is that if you try to to lessen that side of things you switch into relativism and also the realm of where this is true and this is false it's not like that's a good place that's still samsara that duality the four noble truths can be proposed you could understand that they are being proposed as true in the universal sense and that they are dual with the false four noble falsehoods or whatever you know life is not suffering there is no cause of suffering which there isn't any suffering anyway there's no end to suffering because you know there's no path to become free of suffering

[71:54]

because there wasn't any in the first place to talk about or there is suffering but there's no cause or there is suffering and a cause but you still can't end it or there is suffering and you know anyway these are the four truths and there's something that's not true that goes with them that's one way to take it that's hard you know so we want to back off that and lighten that up a little bit soften it but if you soften it you still aren't dealing with the duality of the world true and false and if you don't deal with that you can't become free of duality so the thing about the value of becoming free it's questionable whether religious truth can skip over that first one because that's the hard one that's the one where this really is true and that's sorted and this really is false it's not that that's that that is really true but it's really true that this is the dualism that we live with as humans and we want to skip over that and move to these other realms where you know the four noble truths are not like

[72:54]

it really is so there really is a rising really there really is a condition for suffering really and if you remove that condition you really do become free of the suffering and there actually is a path that you can practice that removes the condition and ends the suffering that is really true and it's true not just for Buddhists not just at Zen center but through the entire sentient realm but that's rough to say that because then if you don't like that it's not just a matter that you're not going along with this little group and you go to another group and maybe you get along with them but you're not going to escape this truth so then you hear well we don't want to talk like that and you push people out of the world but you're not really pushing them out of the world of salvation by saying that you're just perhaps being dogmatic and also there's tremendous dissonance and also you're putting yourself in a spot because those people should be able to come up to you and say well prove it if you're proposing it

[73:56]

prove it if you're making an assertion prove it and it's hard to prove this stuff if you're not a Buddha so then everybody shut up you know if you're not a Buddha don't talk about it but we can't wait until the next Buddha comes to do all the work Buddhas have specifically not stuck around and left big space between them for other people to get in on the program so we get to talk about it between the times when we have someone who can like easily prove it like demonstrate you know pull demonstrations of universal truth into manifestation to help people once in a while we have these people go around just to help out but other times it's tough so yes are you proposing I'm not clear about this but are you proposing that we adopt the rules of discourse this approach or are you is that what you mean in this discussion am I proposing

[74:56]

that we that we that we think of these teachings in terms of the rules of discourse as opposed to absolute truth no I'm not I'm trying what I'm trying to do is show the relative strength and weaknesses of these three approaches do you have do you have a personal preference for one approach over another no I think I have one of my personal preference is we need to understand the different ways the truth can be understood we need to understand the strength we need first of all since we're human we have this basic thing of we do think in terms of the dualistic true and false that's where we are I accept I would like us to accept that and deal with that but also realize that there's problems with that namely can you prove this and realize that you sometimes can't so if you can I would like us to be careful

[75:56]

how we apply what we think is something that's not just true for us isn't that where faith comes in faith how in believing that you don't have to prove it and just oh well it's not again that also hasn't been I haven't got into that yet but the fact that I haven't just said whether we have to prove it or not it's not it's not that clear that we do or do not have to prove it but you will get questioned if you say things that apply to if you say things that don't just apply to people at Zen Center but apply to people all over that people outside Zen Center say wait a minute I didn't sign up for this you're talking about me now you're telling me that my life is suffering what do you mean and you're also telling me that or some people say oh I like that part but I have to like abandon this okay that's fine too but that it really can end and so on different people have different points where they'll have trouble with these truths but maybe

[76:58]

you shouldn't prove it maybe sometimes it's good not to prove it I don't know but maybe it is good to prove it the Buddha did kind of like have some conversations with people about this stuff but was he proving it or this is something we can talk more about that was he proving it there is this thing in Soto Zen you know we have delusion in Soto Zen we have delusion about that we have liberation from delusion which is called Satori and we have liberation from liberation which is called proof Satori is you know just hey man I'm free well prove it one of the ways you prove it is to drop your Satori it's one of the proofs that you can do in other words you show what it's like you prove Satori in other words you're a nice person in other words you're you know you can see

[77:58]

past lives you can like you know do a little kind of like zip around a few cycles of birth and death for people you show them how it goes there's a proof and the proof is you see again the proof is the proof is not I'd like to prove that I can get along with other Zen center people I prove that I know what Soto Zen is and that's one kind of proof not just prove that this is practical but prove this is a universal truth prove it show show people like the Buddha did he showed his first five disciples he showed them his truths and they understood them and then they proved it to them because they became free they got liberated from their suffering that was the final proof no he didn't prove by his presence that's part of it yeah but he had his presence but that wasn't enough for them he had to talk to them and he had to tell them his four noble truths

[78:59]

his presence was not enough and even when he told them four noble truths that wasn't enough they had to talk with him for quite a while and practice his stuff for quite a while but his presence had something to do with why they would listen to him in the first place practice part I mean I don't think you've mentioned or maybe I missed it but you haven't talked about knowledge or truth that comes from personal experience or from intuition I did I talked about how you can see past life directly yeah I'm not talking about you know I'm talking about the four noble truths and I'm not talking about oh like oh before this class tonight I've been talking the whole practice period about how you see the four noble truths right exactly but I'm saying you might not be able to prove that as a community here you might not be able to prove that to people or even you might not be able to prove it but you might know it to be true and it's not just the you know a little discourse the way the way of proving the proof

[80:00]

will be when when when the person practices the path and becomes free of the outflows and sees the four noble truths themselves and is thereby experiences the realization of nirvana that would be the proof that would be the ideal proof in terms of the Theravada view right yeah that would be the proof of the pudding so to speak and having gone through that process yourself you might be able to encourage people to try it themselves and another part of the proof would be your presence but your presence wouldn't be enough his presence wasn't enough I mean this is the Buddha his presence was not enough some people wouldn't even listen to him the first person he talked to wouldn't listen to him his old friends did listen to him but they didn't like immediately like say hey this is totally true what he's saying they listened he had enough charisma to get them to listen but he didn't have enough charisma to get everybody to listen when I was when he was still alive you know I used to spend some time with him and I knew

[81:01]

some other people that he liked you know some of my little Dharma pals he liked them he said to me where is so and so and I'd say where is so and so I'd like to see so and so I like so and so why is so and so here with you blah blah blah I'd just think how come so and so is here I mean here I am I get to be with Suzuki Roshi you know 25 years from now people would like give their eye teeth for that you know here I am getting to be with him it's so great and some people who he wants to have around aren't here can you believe that I mean wouldn't some of you like to spend a few minutes with Suzuki Roshi if you could well when he was alive there were people who he knew who he knew and liked and who lived right down the hall from him and they weren't around when he wanted to see them he's like where is so and so I'd like to see him can't find him I could never get that to me his charisma was enough to prove he proved to me but it doesn't necessarily prove it but even though his charisma was enough to prove it to me from the first time I saw his feet still he gave me

[82:02]

instruction and the instruction was not necessarily easy to listen to sometimes difficult to listen to but you know I would try to practice it and sometimes I did and sometimes I would understand what the instruction was so charisma is sometimes helpful but it isn't enough the Buddha can't get us to do the work that the Buddha can help us practice Dharma so what I'm just proposing I think it would be good to clarify on what level do you take these truths do you take them as just the way the Buddhists talk or the way Buddhists at Zen center talk do you take them as kind of practical folklore or do you take them as like they're actually true and what isn't them is false think about that I'd like you to think about that and figure out where you come down on that and I kind of think that they have to deal with them on all these levels it's the most sophisticated way the way it's most appropriate this time in history 2,500 years ago this issue of you know what works is true or you know communal rules of discourse

[83:04]

people didn't there was no sign of them talking about this at the time of the Buddha the Buddha's discourses weren't kind of surfacing this the people weren't asking questions which were surfacing this there wasn't schools of philosophy which were surfacing this outside of Buddhism or inside Buddhism the world was not as sophisticated in some ways as it is now now it is but that doesn't mean we can skip over the genetic similarity between us and the people of Shakyamuni Buddha's time that we genetically feel like there is such a thing as a truth and a false which are dual and when the Buddha says true I mean you either avoid that and don't apply that duality to the situation I've got this true false duality but I'm not going to use it on the Buddha's teaching I'll just suspend it for some other situation like my paycheck I don't want to stop anyway that's sometimes what bothers me is that people don't apply the true false dichotomy to the heart sutra but they do apply it to something else like their paycheck or their insurance or something like that

[84:04]

or what people say to them you know say that again say that people when they hear the heart sutra you know blah blah blah blah no eyes no ears no nose no tongue no four noble truths they often just sort of say well that's you know that's probably because of emptiness if they said that or something so don't worry about it no attainment no nirvana no end of suffering they don't say that actually is true well wait a minute no it's false they don't apply it and that softens the heart sutra quite a bit but they do apply it when it comes to their paycheck this is not my paycheck this is your paycheck this is yours not mine that's not my paycheck I don't want that mine's bigger and it really is you know there we're willing to sort of like say this is true right this is really my paycheck this is really my name this is not just communal discourse rules this is not just like practical and sort of like works out let's just say I'm Rev okay

[85:05]

that'll be best for everybody concerned it's not like true and you know I can say that and I can kind of mean it they just call me that no big deal you know call me Fred if you want but when they say oh would Rev would Rev would Rev please come up and get this prize that's not that's not that's not necessarily me you know would you should we shoot Rev sure I'm Rev call me Rev not Rev I don't care and suddenly the real truth false thing gets real strong you know and it's it really is true I really am I really am Rev yes I must admit I am or I really feel like I'm lying when I say I'm not when I'm going to get in trouble for it you know then we some how come we feel that way about those things but not about the teaching hmm but that's what I find I find that that it's not just at Zen Center it's all over the present day world that people do not apply the same intensity of dichotomy of true and false to religion as they do to their paycheck to their address

[86:07]

to their name to their telephone bill and stuff like that they don't therefore religion has lost some of its it doesn't compete with you know the guts of your life because you don't apply truth and false to it I'm sorry I know this is very personal about what I'm saying but I think there's for example this religious rhetoric especially in this country which for example tells me that my entire existence for example as a gay man is simply false and shouldn't be which is primarily religious rhetoric saying this yes I don't want to say that I mean right I'm not saying you're wrong what do you mean to say I'm wrong you're saying you're saying I'm right because you're showing you're showing the problem you're showing the tough side of people who actually say it is true that gay people are bad that's not just like a communal discourse that's not just like a practical thing they don't say

[87:07]

well I think for the overall society it's a good idea if we just sort of say gay people are bad because that would probably be best for the family situation it would be better for making sure that single mothers have support and so on and so forth so let's just say gay people are bad and straight people are good because that would be practical that would be best for everybody it would be a little hard on gay people but you know they're a minority in the population so for the overall population let's just say that that's true but we really don't believe that like it's absolutely true like true beyond our present situation so if situations were different it might be different you know but if you say that then it's just relative so they don't really mean it so then it doesn't really hurt you so then people people want to lighten it up because they don't want to hurt you they don't want to not be friends with you, right? so then they lighten up on that a little bit but the people who don't lighten up on it it hurts you it's dogmatic so you agree with me that you're supporting what I'm just saying but that realm of holding to that thing

[88:08]

it can become fundamentalist and dogmatic but then I'm also saying that I think something like communal discourse it doesn't exist it exists as an idea of communal discourse I think or I believe it does not exist as factors of reality because it is unfortunately I would say what you just said it's in the nature somehow of human beings it's part of the suffering that we want to be right and we want it to be true and that's why I can only see that between all these groups and single islands there's war going on yes well I agree with you completely and so what is communal discourse? I think communal discourse is we'd like to stop now, right? because of the schedule that's communal discourse and it's also kind of practical and we can do this tomorrow morning we can continue this I think we're on a very important line here tomorrow morning we're going to go into it more if you come 8.45 8.45

[89:07]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ