So I'd like to tell you my plan for tonight. I'd like to make some introductory remarks, which I hope I can be short about, and then go through the commentary and presentation of the Tenth Precept. And then, after setting the table in that way, make a circle and open up the discussion. So let's see what happens. The thing I want to start with was by introducing the term moralism and reading some definitions from the dictionary. Moralism is a conventional moral maxim or attitude. That's the first meaning. Second meaning is an act or practice of moralizing.

[01:01]

And third is principles of or belief in a system of rules or a system of principles governing conduct as distinguished from a religion. And a moralist is a teacher or student of ethics, a person who follows a system of moral principles or rules as distinguished from an established religion. So, in a lot of religions, the way people practice is by moralism. But that's my experience. That's the way I picked up moral teaching in church. Here's something else I was going to read from the book that Jim and Barbara loaned me.

[02:09]

My notes say, The Disease of Moralism. One part I wrote down was, after enough practice at role-playing and idealism, our whole way of orienting ourselves in the world depends on principles of orientation, rather than on the ability to respond as needed, based on what we perceive. Or I would say, rather than based on responding appropriately, we respond with rules. We're in a situation where we say, now what's the rule? What's the principle here? This is moralism. This moralism is the web of entrapment of human aliveness. It's a crippling disease. We all have it. To some degree, I think we all have it. What just popped in my head was one time somebody said to Suzuki Roshi, if I'm downtown, or I think he said downtown, and I come into some situation, I don't know what to do, should I think, what would Suzuki Roshi do?

[03:17]

Sounds kind of nice, especially to ask Suzuki Roshi. Suzuki Roshi said, if I'm Dantan and I get in a situation where I don't know what to do, should I think, what would Suzuki Roshi do? So, you know, here's our conduct, right? One place it can come from is, you know, principles or rules. Now, I think what they mean is, as opposed to religion, I think they mean, rather than coming from, you know, not faith, maybe faith and rules, but anyway, from your faith, from your light. Buddha and Jesus and all those guys didn't sort of like get these rules and then tell us the rules, right?

[04:26]

They found some light and then they gave the rules. But the rules they gave sounded a lot like the rules that people have, right? I mean, not the rules, but what they said, how they said to live was like the rules. The people who made the rules kind of like got them from them to some extent. There's some truth in these principles. It's not like a bad principle cannot kill. It's just whether you come from a principle or come from the situation. And I just, another thing that popped in my head when I wrote this was, I saw a movie once called Harakiri, quite a good movie. And this, I think, I hope I can tell this fast. What does that mean? Oh, he knows the entire plot. Okay, I'll tell us some short versions. During Tokugawa, they had all these samurai, but there wasn't enough jobs for them because there was no war, right? So there's a lot of guys walking around starving to death, a lot of samurai starving to death because samurai couldn't do regular work.

[05:35]

They weren't supposed to. So they were starving. If they had a family, their family was starving. So what they did sometimes, and if you were starving, not if you were starving, but if you couldn't find work, What you were supposed to do was, if you couldn't go on living, you were supposed to go to a samurai house and say, I want to commit suicide because I can't find work. You know, I've got no function. So, that's what this one guy did. He had a fat start. But, you see, what the thing is, what sometimes happens is when you go to these houses and say you're going to commit suicide because you have no work, they hire you. Right? A lot of guys get hired that way. But there's a rule that if a samurai comes and says he's going to commit harakiri, cut his balls open, and he's doing it in order to get a job, then he can't say, well, I'm just doing it to get a job. You don't want to hire me? I'm just kidding. See you later. Bye. He has to go through with it. So it was a kind of a test that developed.

[06:41]

Guys who had that much honor, that they would kill themselves rather than work, would often get work. Well, this is the story, right? So they said to the guy, okay, go ahead. I don't remember, did he hesitate or what? I'm going to tell you. They gave him a wooden sword. He had a bamboo sword. He pulled his bamboo sword out so they could see he didn't really want to kill himself, right? But they made him kill himself with his bamboo sword. So they could tell he was really faking because he couldn't even afford a sword. He had sold his sword probably. And so they made him use a dull piece of wood to cut himself.

[07:45]

And he also explained to them that he's sorry he did this but he was just doing it because his family was starving. And in fact he had this starving family who he was trying to take care of. He probably would have died himself. But they made him kill himself. And I think his family died too then or something like that, right? Anyway, there's more interesting things happening, but anyway, what the point is, the point is that they applied the rule to the situation. They applied a rule of honor, very nice rule, kept the country at peace, but they applied it regardless of the situation. Sometimes applying the rules, even at Tassajara, are not appropriate. That's why the letter killeth and the spirit giveth life. The letter killeth.

[08:47]

The letter of the law. Yeah, right. Moralism, the letter. So that's what religion says. Religion says the spirit is how you tell what to do. Because the letter, although what the person does may sound like the letter when they do it, to come from the letter rather than from breath or light, is moralism, and in these commentaries that we've been going through, a lot of the dialogue is between this letter point of view and the light point of view. And I'd like to just go through this Tenth Precept, and I'd like to read it pretty much, and again, I think I'll have to make a little commentary, but I'll try not to called not disparaging. We sometimes say not abusing. This is not disparaging.

[09:49]

Disparage means to belittle, I think, or devalue, or minimize, make small, the triple treasure. And Dogen Zenji's commentary is, this is a translation that I don't know what you have now, but this might be a change from what you have. This is the latest translation. The body is manifested, the Dharma is unfolded, and there is a bridge in the world for crossing over. So, Buddha, Dharma, Sangha. Buddha, the body is manifested, the Dharma is unfolded, and there is a bridge in the world for crossing over sangha. Their virtue returns to the ocean of all-knowing wisdom.

[10:51]

They are unfathomable and should be received with respect and devotion." The earlier translation, which is pretty good, doesn't make clear the Buddha-Dharma-Slang in the same way, and actually the order is not right, but it sounds very nice, it says, this is what I think you have, the Dharma unfolded in manifested body, is that what you have? That's true, the Dharma is unfolded in the manifested body of the Buddha. The Dharma unfolded in the manifest body of the Buddha. What does it say? Oh yeah, dharma unfolded in the manifested body is the world's path of crossing over, which is true, in the manifested body is the path. But this other way is, there's the manifested body, the dharma's unfolded and then there's this sangha which is the bridge for crossing over the world, the bridge in the world for crossing over.

[12:05]

their virtue returns to the ocean of all-knowing, they are unfathomable, and should be received with respect and devotion." And here's another translation which is very different, but it's kind of interesting to hear it. This is in Mind of Clover. The tesho, tesho means, I guess, I don't have the original here, but I guess tesho maybe is a literal, maybe literally what it says. Tesho means a sermon, it literally means to present the show. But most of the Japanese people, when they read it, they don't read it that way. But anyway, Ekinroshi has it here as the teisho or the sermon of the actual body is the harbor and weir. A weir is like a ... it's a little bit like some place water is flowing, to dam it or to divert it with a dam. It's not quite a dam because it lets the water run, but it diverts it.

[13:10]

Anyway, he says, see what I have here is a bridge for crossing over. He says, it's a harbor and a weir. This is the most important thing in the world. And then the rest is pretty much the same. If virtue finds its home in the ocean of essential nature, it is beyond explanation. We should accept and respect in gratitude. That's in the mind of Clover, yes? The body is manifested, the dharma is unfolded, and there is a bridge in the world for crossing over. The rest is the same, I think. Okay, here's Chogho's commentary. Chogho is Dogen's grandson. There are various aspects of Buddha. First is what is called the Dharmakaya.

[14:17]

This inconceivable body is the source of Buddha. This is the inconceivable body of Buddha, the dharmakaya, this is the source of Buddha, the source of all the other kinds of Buddha. All the different forms and manifestations come from this inconceivable source, this dharma body Buddha. Question from audience, what's kaya? A body. So dharmakaya means dharma is truth or reality and kaya is body. So there's a buddhi, there's a buddhi. of the reality body Buddha. This is the body of Buddha which is like, you know, what is it, like the Dharma Sutra.

[15:23]

Buddha as no Buddha is taught by the Buddha, therefore it's called Buddha. Okay? That no Buddha is the Dharmakaya Buddha. or light. So, if you have this Dharmakaya Buddha, this inconceivable Buddha as your source, that's good to start with that. Otherwise, Buddha is a problem. As a matter of fact, if you take refuge in the triple treasure, without understanding this Dharmakaya Buddha, you can actually break this precept because you start to make Buddha too small by forgetting its source. And people like Ru Jing when he was installed as abbot of this ten ton monastery, when you're installed as an abbot you're supposed to come in the gate and go in the Buddha hall and offer incense.

[16:26]

So he came by the Buddha hall and he covered his eyes and he said, I don't want to look at it, it'll be like an arrow in my eye. So he's saying, you know, I don't want to relate to that Buddha over there, I want to emphasize this formless Buddha first. But then, of course, he did recognize the other one by saying that. And Yuen Mun said, if you utter the name Buddha, you should rinse out your mouth for three days. In other words, if you make Buddha a conceivable thing and then you say Buddha, you should clean your mouth out. And if you have that kind of attitude and you hear someone say, this very mind is Buddha, you should cover your ears and run from the room. So, they're saying, first of all, we should have this inconceivable source in mind. And when we describe the all-pervading Dharma realm, we cannot say

[17:33]

that this is the Buddha of the West or of the East, rather it is a single Buddha. Only as a manifestation of this single Buddha are there Vaisharaja Guru in the East, Vaisharaja Guru is the Medicine Buddha in the East, and Amitabha in the West. When we say that there is no arraying of things side-by-side is described as not blue, yellow, red, or white, or black. So again, this Buddha is referring back to the description of light, the precept light, and light is not blue, yellow, red, white, or black. So this theme is repeated again and again throughout this text. as it is described as not coming, not going.

[18:37]

When we speak in this way, the Dharma body is easily understood. To understand the worldly realm, we say blue, yellow, red, white and black. In Buddha Dharma, it is explained as not blue, yellow, red, white or black. Sometimes it is explained as form is emptiness, emptiness is form. Sometimes we say all dharmas or true marks. Sometimes we say mind only, or dharma nature, or true suchness. When we say that all dharmas are true marks, there should be no doubt. To hear the dharma which has never been heard, not to understand this, is indeed regrettable. And I thought of that thing of when we hear the true dharma, no doubt will arise in us. We vow to do that because actually when we hear the true Dharma, doubt does arise in us, usually, because the true Dharma is not what we're used to hearing.

[19:48]

We should abandon our self which we normally see. We should abandon the self which we normally see. We single-mindedly wish to see Buddha without holding on to our own bodily life. Even in a bottomless pit where we might throw our body or the foot of a tree where we might bury it or a rice paddy or a village are all equally the Dharma body form. Is there anything to throw away? Is there anything to hold on to? It is just that we abandon our body and mind. And again, just to refer back to this, the source of our conduct, rather than coming from rules, coming from abandoning body and mind, and by that abandonment of body and mind, we have the ability

[21:03]

to respond according to the circumstances appropriately. If we hold on to body and mind or if we hold on to principles or rules we have very little chance of responding appropriately and we fall into this moralism trap. But of course it's much easier for us to have a package, a suitcase full of rules to handle situations than it is to keep throwing away our body and mind and figuring out what to do from that place. But he's just saying here, for this precept, not only is this the way to practice the precepts, but this is the way not to disparage Buddha. Even to go around with an idea of Suzuki Roshi or Buddha in your back pocket to try to figure out how to behave, what would Buddha do here? He's still holding on to your body and your mind. He's still holding on to your idea of right or enlightenment or Buddhahood as a principle to orient in the world.

[22:08]

They're saying, throw away your mind means throw away your idea of Buddha, throw away your idea of Dogen, throw away your idea of Suzuki Roshi, throw away your idea of yourself. Drop it. And then, try to figure out what's appropriate and it's not going to be easy. It ain't easy. But at least we have a chance, what do they say, You have a chance of having a little life then. A little life or light? A little life is what I said, but a little light is... You'll get a little light if you drop body and mind. And then with a little light, you might get a little life. With a little luck, I'll get by with the help of my friends. It's the same when you meet Buddha Krishna. Yeah, same thing. When you meet Buddha as Basically your own mind, your own idea of Buddha. That's a difficulty of practice is you have to kill Buddha and surrender to Buddha.

[23:13]

It's not easy to kill it and surrender to it. We'd like to just kill it, that's fine. Or surrender to it and hold on to what we think it is. Okay, I'll surrender to it. I got it. Or just get rid of it and then say, okay, I'm in charge. I got the rules here. but to do both. That's called just abandon your own body and mind. One, two, three. When we say that we should honor ourselves in the Dharmakaya form, sometimes they say honor yourself in the form of the Dharmakaya Buddha, or understand that the Dharmakaya Buddha is yourself, Quotes to honor means that we do not cling to what is called I. Later we can get into this ego stuff, but that's what it says right here now.

[24:14]

Then how could we not be awakened by seeing peach blossoms open? And how could we not realize the way upon hearing the sound of bamboo struck by a pebble? I was sort of spaced out and I didn't hear what it was, but it was called I. Whatever your sense of I, okay, to honor yourself, to honor ourselves as the Dharmakaya form. In that case, to honor means that we did not cling to what we call I. you do not cling to your egocentric sense. So then if you don't cling to what we call I, then how could you not be awakened by seeing blooming or dying tulips at Tassajara?

[25:21]

In this way, we do not disparage the triple treasure. So I guess the root meaning here of not disparaging triple treasure is to not cling to what we call I or abandon body and mind, drop body and mind. Going and coming within the dharmakaya, blue, yellow, red, white and so on are the one dharma form on top of the dharmakaya. That's not easy. Get the picture? Coming and going within the dharmakaya. The dharmakaya is described as not blue, yellow, red, okay? That's what it's described as. In the dharmakaya, it's not blue. What you're taught in the dharmakaya, in the dharma body, what you're taught is blue, blue, as not blue as it's taught by the Tathagata, therefore it's called blue.

[26:34]

harmonies of Buddha-fields, harmonies of Buddha-fields, as no harmonies of Buddha-fields are they taught by the Tathāgata, therefore we say harmonies of Buddha-fields. So, dharmakāya, no blue, yellow, red, white and so on. But when you're in dharmakāya, coming and going in the dharmakāya, blue, yellow, red, white and so on, are one dharma on top of the dharmakāya. So that's a koan. Got it? It's not easy to understand. Think about it. This is inconceivable. Now, these words are coming through me to Buddha, you know, coming from Buddha through me out to Buddha again, and the people here are very nicely sitting here and listening to this, and I told you.

[27:44]

This being so, we carve Buddha's image out of common wood and Buddha appears. we copy a scroll of scripture on an ordinary piece of white paper and Dharma appears. So this part is talking about Buddha and Dharma so far, okay? Now we're talking about Sangha. When we say monk, he or she is not a monk by origin, but rather a layperson who has left home. To carve an image of a Buddha who has attained the way simultaneously with the whole earth and all sentient beings is meritorious. What?

[28:47]

Brings you good fortune, makes benefit in the world, to carve a statue of a Buddha. And what is the Buddha? The Buddha is the one who attains the way with the whole earth and all sentient beings. That's what a Buddha is. So if you carve a Buddha of such a thing, If you make such a thing a form, if a person does that, we're talking about the sangha now, right? The people. If the people do that with their body like they carve a piece of wood, that is good, it says here. Okay? Therefore, since that's good, we should not say that Buddha alone is meritorious and therefore these forms are worthless. The principle which is expounded in the scriptures is meritorious, so it is meritorious as long as the principle is appropriate. The principle which is expounded in the scriptures is meritorious, so it is meritorious as long as it's appropriate.

[29:57]

Q. What is meritorious? principle gets expounded in these words, right? This ineffable principle gets expounded in the words, gets unfolded in, for example, words and paper, alright? And this principle continues to be meritorious as long as it's appropriate, alright? It's not meritorious forever if it's not appropriate anymore, okay? And because scripture is an accumulation of such principles, which are meritorious as long as they're appropriate, even discussing the scriptures is meritorious. This is the logic that's being presented here. Now here's another example. Shaven-headed monks wearing robes are just stupid monks if we do

[31:07]

I'll say it again, see if you can not laugh this time. Shaven-headed monks wearing robes are just stupid monks if we don't say that they are of value. However, if they imitate the form of excellent monks and are venerated, they become a field of happiness. Yeah, if the shaven-headed monks imitate the form of venerable monks, and they are venerated, they become a field of happiness. The principle here is that, basically, I'll tell you a story Gregory Bateson told. He was in Japan and he was talking to some Japanese woman about respecting her father. And somehow it came out that she said, it's not that my father is respectable, it's that I respect him.

[32:12]

And by respecting him, he becomes, not that he becomes respectable, but he becomes a field of where I can practice respect, which is very beneficial to him, me, and everybody else. So the Buddhist Sangha, the Buddhist priests, and of course the Buddha, no question about the Buddha, but the Buddhist Sangha, even the monks, if people venerate them, and if they're pretty decent monks, they become a field of happiness because when the people venerate them, it benefits the people and then the monks actually become a field where veneration then becomes more and more beneficial. But if the monks are being monks and nobody's venerating them, it's sent they're wasting their time. Now of course they should, they should, what do you call it, do their best to follow the good example of the ancestors, but even if they don't and you respect them, they are a field of benefit because you respecting them is good for you.

[33:18]

And what's good for you is good for them and everybody else. That's the principle here. You probably want to discuss this, but that's what they're saying here. That's the logic. The logic is you can make a thing, you can make a table, for example, into a field of happiness by venerating it. And there's also other interesting things here, like imitation. Like I just mentioned. Huh? Imitation. I remember one time, the Karagiri Roshi studied with Hashimoto Roshi, and Hashimoto Roshi had a student named Narazaki Roshi, and Narazaki Roshi's brother is also, I think, a student of Hashimoto Roshi, but not such a senior student. That's the one that came here last fall. So those two brothers are two of the main disciples of Hashimoto, and Kadoguro, she also studied with Hashimoto. And that school of Soto Zen basically says, Soto Zen is to copy. It's imitation. It's imitation learning, basically.

[34:20]

Like riding a bicycle. Ever heard of anybody trying to figure out how to ride a bicycle from a book? You could do it probably, but it would be really hard. Much easier is to watch the other kids. In Buddha Dharma, we have scriptures, but still, to learn how to do it from books is pretty hard, because, again, if you read the book, then you've got the book here, and you're trying to figure out from the book, the principle how to do it, right? It's much easier just to watch somebody do it, and copy them. Especially if they hold on to their feet. Yeah, right. Now, on the other hand, Thich Nhat Hanh said, you know, this is not, it's not imitation, this thing. And in Minnesota, where they had this strong thing of imitation, One of the students there organized a conference based on the idea of it's not imitation. So, you know, it's imitation and it's not imitation. Because like another story I remember was this guy, this Vietnamese monk was at a dinner party.

[35:24]

He was a noted monk. He was noted enough to get invited to a nice dinner party where people had fairly good manners. And he was eating very, I don't know, kind of sloppily or maybe, you know, I don't know like what he was doing, but he was outraging, he was outrageous from the point of view of the hostess. Like maybe he was like eating lots of pork and lots of dairy products and I don't know what else he was doing. But anyway, she was astounded because he's supposed to be a Buddhist monk. She said, you know, you're not acting in a very dignified way and, you know, I don't think Buddha would act like this, and you're supposed to be a venerable monk." And he said, I don't want to be Buddha, and Buddha doesn't want to be me. He was, you know, and this guy was one of the greatest Vietnamese monks of all time, who I'm sure did lots of imitation. You know, it's a dynamic there again, you know. Imitation is the easiest way to learn, but

[36:26]

once you use it to learn then you also got to drop body and mind, right? So these monks who are trying to imitate but also they're trying to not imitate too, they're trying to drop their imitation, they have a hard time folks, you know, but definitely these monks whether they're working hard or not, let's say they're working hard, let's say they really are sincere and trying hard, they're still stupid monks if nobody venerates them. If nobody respects them, they're stupid. Why are they stupid? Because they're not giving people a chance to practice respect with them. They're wasting their time. They might as well be lay people. They can venerate each other. Well, same thing. They can venerate each other, yeah. If nobody venerates them, they're not a field of blessing for people. They're wasting their time. They might as well just merge with the population and do their best there. Anyway, this is the logic. I don't believe this stuff. I'm just translating this text which I think is really interesting.

[37:30]

We can come back to this, okay? When Shakyamuni Buddha said, the great earth and all sentient beings simultaneously attain the way with me, Shakyamuni Buddha, he built a Buddha image of wood because since the trees attain the way with the Buddha, trees become a Buddha statue. In this way, although the names … this is a hard part, I'm going to read it to you, okay, but I don't understand myself, maybe you can help me. In this way, although the names, three pure precepts, and in this way, according to this logic, okay, in this way means the logic you've just been hearing, there's a logic here. According to this logic, although the names three pure precepts and ten grave precepts in themselves lack reality, they're just words, there is always merit in each precept and in the three treasures, by this logic.

[38:36]

It says in this way, but according to the logic which you've just witnessed by these other examples, according to that logic, although the names three pure precepts and ten grave precepts in themselves lack reality, or you could say, I can say it this way too, the three pure precepts and the ten great precepts are just stupid words if nobody venerates them. Although they're just empty and lack reality in themselves, still there is always merit in each precept and three treasures. And Dogen also says, even a sloppy monk is still a meritorious thing and should be respected. That's the logic here. Doesn't mean you should, and that's part of the difficulty for people. See, people, if they see a sloppy monk, they want to say, he has a sloppy monk, I don't respect him. I only respect people who come up to my standards. Well, who's going to come up to your standards? So then you're going to be walking around not being able to respect anybody. That's bad news, according to this logic.

[39:42]

I just said that. What do you want me to read? In this way, although the names, three pure precepts, the names, quotes three pure precepts, or quote ten great precepts, those names themselves, just the names themselves, lack reality. Still there is always merit in each precept and in the three treasures. Well, it didn't say about if they're venerated, no. There's merit in monks whether they're venerated too. When monks get ordained, the merit of becoming ordained has nothing to do with the monks. It doesn't belong to them. It's not theirs. It's just merit. And it never stops. And also, not just becoming a monk, but if you say, I take refuge in Buddha, there's a merit there, and that merit doesn't belong to you, but it never stops.

[40:48]

As a matter of fact, there's a fascicle called The Merit of Receiving the Precepts, and it has this example about this female dragon who came to see the Buddha, and she was completely, you know, She was a mess, she was like, you know, super, super like decaying, you know, she was covered with terrible cancerous ulcers, just oozing and puffing all over the place. She was, I mean, the description is horrific. She comes to Buddha and she says, help me. And so he says, regain your presence of mind, sister. And I think he, he takes a glass of water and drinks it and then sprays it on her. And she's healed. And he said, the reason why I could do this was because in a past life... Oh, excuse me, she explained why she got to be this polluted, horrifically diseased and miserable dragon.

[41:58]

The reason was she had been a female nun, not a female nun, a female priest in a past life, female monk, And she used her position in the temple to get sexual, you know, have parties and stuff with the people who came. So then she became this, got in trouble for that, and became this polluted dragon. So then the Buddha sprayed the stuff on her and she became a healthy dragon. And he said, the reason why I was able to cure you was because in that lifetime when you took the precepts, because of the merit of you taking the precepts I can now heal you. So the idea is, anyway, that these monks or nuns or lay people that receive the precepts, the merit of that is so meritorious that it's good to venerate it. You can also venerate lay people that have taken refuge too. No problem. But lay people who have taken the precepts are not stupid lay people for taking the precepts even if no one venerates them.

[43:00]

That's the sad thing if no one venerates them, and in fact some lay people who take the priesthood are venerated. I personally venerate some lay people, there's some fantastic lay people that I venerate, and a lot of people venerate them. That's not a problem. But if nobody venerates them, there's no problem, because they have a nice job at the university, you know, and they have a nice law practice, or medicine practice, or a nice grocery store, and they have a nice family, so they're not stupid for being lay people. somebody might venerate him sometime. But to shave your head and walk around with robes on and say, Zazen all the time and have nobody venerate you, that's really stupid. But it's not stupid if people are venerating because you're doing a big favor to them to let them venerate what? You're giving them a place to venerate the fact that they can see there's a place to venerate the triple treasure. Not that this person's perfect, but The merit of taking the refuges, I can think about that when I see this person. This makes worthwhile for a person to be a monk, because this person is a servant to these other people who are generating all this merit by venerating them. The triple treasure in the form of the Sangha treasure, which then venerates the Buddha and the Dharma too.

[44:07]

That's good logic, which I've just taught myself to believe in. I'm susceptible to reason. On the other hand, according to the understanding that pervades in the realm of sentient beings, even if we do not completely follow the ten precepts, even if we're not such good lay or monk bodhisattvas, when we have faith in not disparaging the triple treasure, nothing is lacking. Even if you don't follow the precepts perfectly, even if you don't completely follow these precepts, if you have faith in this precept, this last precept, nothing will be lacking. Because what is faith in the last precept?

[45:08]

It means that you drop body and mind. Again, we can discuss this, but basically what they're saying is, even if you are not able to follow these precepts perfectly, if you drop body and mind, you're really not lacking anything. You are? Yes, you are. But even if you aren't, I'm sorry, that's what it says, we can talk about it. Things are not set aside. This is called understanding the merit of the three treasures. As long as we take refuge in each of the three treasures, we do not discriminate between disparaging and not disparaging. That's hard too. On the other hand, when we abide in evil views and disparage the three treasures, even if we do not have a particular intention to do it,

[46:11]

Oh, I see. Oh, here. So, on the other hand, when we abide in evil views or mistaken views, we disparage the triple treasure even if we do not intend to. So, if you don't abide in wrong view and you do break these rules, you don't disparage it. And if you abide in wrong views, you disparage it even if you don't intend to. Also, even if we take refuge in the Three Treasures, not to disparage, it depends on how we understand the Three Treasures. Like I just said before, if you take refuge in the Three Treasures, but when you take refuge in Buddha, you take refuge in Buddha as a thing, if that's the way you understand Buddha, then you disparage the Triple Treasure. Even though in your heart you say, I want to take refuge still, Understanding of what the triple treasure is, is critical.

[47:27]

So basically what it is, is saying that correct understanding of what the triple treasure is, is not disparaging the triple treasure. If we don't understand what the triple treasure is, then that's disparaging the triple treasure. Although we take equally refuge, or take refuge equally in the three treasures, if we do so with the mind of getting something, wishing only for benefit for ourselves, this is somewhat meritorious, but not the true way. In other words, if you take refuge in the triple treasure thinking that's going to help your life, or like they have this thing, what is it called, the Soka Gakkai, chanting the name of the Lotus Sutra, Myoho Renge Kyo, they tell you if you do this you can get, you know, cars, better jobs, better sex life, and so on.

[48:28]

If you take refuge in Buddha to improve your financial situation or whatever, it's still somewhat meritorious, but it's not the true way. Of course, you all knew that, but that's what it says. Rather, clearly understanding the triple treasure is called taking refuge in the triple treasure. And being ignorant of the triple treasure is called disparaging the triple treasure. Although we should understand that originally the three treasures can never be disparaged, still, we have little merit if we regard disparaging the triple treasure as not disparaging. And in this way, it will be, quote, difficult to attain bodhi with its fruit. So here's this logic again, you know, originally there's no wrongdoing, but if you do wrong action, it's going to be a big block to your liberation. So here again, originally there can be no disparaging of triple treasure, really, because the Dharmakaya embraces everything.

[49:37]

We ourselves are the Dharmakaya. We can honor ourselves as the Dharmakaya, but honor ourselves as the Dharmakaya means to drop body and mind. So although you can't disparage the triple treasure if you don't draw a body and mind, somehow magically you disparage it. And then the last paragraph or something like that says, the ultimate point of Buddha-Dharma is to take refuge in the triple treasure. And of course the beginning is to take refuge in Buddha-Dharma too. So this precept is the last precept and of course the first precept too. And this precept is saying that the ultimate of Buddha Dharma is to take refuge in the three treasures. The mind-ground Buddha precept, and mind-ground precepts mean precepts that emphasize the source of the precepts rather than talking about action and non-action, or doing and not doing things.

[50:42]

That's the mind-ground style of Zen precepts. So the mind-ground Buddha precept is that among these ten precepts, it is difficult to tell which precept comes first. From the point of view of source, it's hard to tell which one comes first. And I think in our studying of them, maybe you felt this way too, I often felt like, why isn't this one first? Like I felt that way for the I guess the one about, you know, we got into psych, seeing that the precept was indicating that we're constantly sinning by creating subject and objects, and that that could be the first one. But that was seen as a positive reflex of the first one. So, like the seventh one should be the first one, the first one should be the seventh one, actually the seventh one is the first one, you know. The more you think about the source of where these are coming from, the more it's hard to tell, you know, what the order means. and which one really is first.

[51:42]

Maybe you should start with seven and go to one. When you think of them in terms of action, maybe you can say, oh, there's one, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten. But coming from the source, it's hard to tell which one comes first or last. This precept of not disparaging the triple treasure is placed at the end. He's explaining the reason why it's placed at the end. It's placed at the end, Dogen explains, because When we physically experience that the previous nine precepts are Buddha's body, we do not disparage the triple treasure. That's why this one's last, according to Darwin. These precepts predate Darwin, he didn't put it last, but his understanding of why this is last is because in order not to disparage triple treasure, you have to understand that the previous nine, physically experience the previous nine are Buddha's body.

[52:46]

So that's a pretty tall order. But remember, originally, there is not disparaging. So originally, we have experienced that these nine precepts are Buddha's body. and dropping body and mind uncovers that experience which we originally had before we were born. So the essay, as I said in the beginning, says, the body is manifested, the dharma is unfolded and there is a bridge in the world for crossing over, unquote, which means the body and dharma become a bridge or a raft for crossing over. The ocean of dharma nature, the ocean of true suchness, is the ocean of all-knowing wisdom. Quotes, its virtue returns to the ocean of all-knowing wisdom, unquote, quotes, is what is called the bridge or raft for bringing sentient beings to the other shore.

[53:59]

This bridge or raft is the Sangha treasure. It is the three treasures consistently manifesting the body, expounding the Dharma, and the path for crossing over. Triple treasure consistently manifesting the body, the Dharma, and this path in the world called the Sangha for crossing over. We should respectfully accept and actualize these three treasures of Buddha, nature, and true suchness. of the ocean of all karmic hindrance arise from illusion. Illusion arises from illusion. False arises from false. We say that if we want to repent we should sit up straight and contemplate true marks. When we contemplate true marks, Buddha and sentient being are not two, how could we be separated from the sacred heart?

[55:03]

So that day we did it, we finished the ten. So you want to make a circle and have a discussion about whatever you want? Before we make a circle? mind-ground Buddha precepts. Yeah, mind-ground precepts are precepts that emphasize source rather than action or source which see the precepts not as injunctions or imperatives but as referring to mind-source. And so these precepts are mind-ground precepts but they're also kind of absolutist mind-ground precepts. But the commentary, the way Dogen comments on it is kind of like absolute mind-ground orientation.

[56:20]

And Kyogo's commentary switches between mind-ground and, you know, he sometimes, like in the last one on anger, he says, you know, anger is really heavy-duty stuff, so watch out. But then he starts talking about it from another point of view, so he switches back and forth between different levels. So Dogen's commentary is kind of like on one level all the way across, and Kyogo catches Dogen's level brings it down and relates it to other levels, and then brings those levels back up to dog-eat-levels and stuff like that. Do you want to make a circle? It is now approximately 8 o'clock.

[57:24]

So, I heard that some people thought quite generously. Perhaps we could go to bed a little early tonight. So, I don't know what early means. Maybe early means before 9 o'clock, I guess. How far before 9 o'clock? 8.30. Okay, 8.30. So that gives us about 20 minutes. Is there anything you want to talk about in this little tiny world of Buddha's precepts? Yes, Stuart? Thank you, Stuart.

[58:55]

Would you repeat that? Was that recorded? No. No. I can't carry that one. At the end it was something about physical experience. Well, one way I would explain it is, in terms of these three levels of wisdom, okay? Shrutamaya Prajna, Chintamaya Prajna and Bhavanamaya Prajna. Insight at the level of hearing, like you hear and you see, you know, and you have like, oh, I get it, up here, I get it, ah, yeah. Senses, yeah, right, senses, but conceptual senses. Getting teaching by hearing and reading and physically seeing and all that.

[59:57]

The next level is you take it down and you reflect it in terms of your experience, your thoughts and your background. You say, oh! You get it there too, your emotions, you get it there too. And then finally you get it down to your, like your, you know, just the way you feel about life, the way you're living, your whole being, that's physical too. That's like, in other words, when you're on all three levels of insight, you understand that these first nine precepts are Buddha's body. When you can use these precepts to physically realize Buddha's body with these precepts, then that's what it means to not disparage the triple treasure. Which is, we vow to learn, you know, we receive these precepts, we vow to practice them, which means we vow to eventually understand them with our whole body and mind. We do not yet understand them with our whole body and mind, but I feel like we We made a good attempt, we got a good first run through and I feel like this community has a new understanding about all this stuff.

[61:01]

Not that we lost our old understandings necessarily but we have a new layer and there's deeper and deeper layers and I hope that in future years we can go through them again and again and again until we, you know, until they're realized. So that's why I said the thing about the three layers is that first we have to go through the first layer of intellectually putting them out there. It has to come in through talking and thinking and that's the first layer. We did that first layer to some extent. I don't know if all of us had insight at that level of the intellectual level but I felt sometimes in our classes like I felt the group kind of went In Sanskrit it's shruta. Shruta means hearing. And maya means actually abandonment and insight is prajna.

[62:05]

So shruta, maya, prajna. And the next is cinta. Cinta is like in citta. Cinta means mind or reflection. So wisdom of abandoning through reflection and then Bhavana means your being, or not just being, but being and cultivation of being through wisdom. So your being is being cultivated by wisdom about some teaching. Like if you want to be such a saint, you have to be such a person? Yeah, yeah. And so another way to put it is when you study religious teachings, first of all you have to hear them. You have to learn what the words mean, you have to get the definitions and etymologies straight and discuss with the teacher or with the book, get all the information you can until you've got all the information. Then you have to basically memorize it, memorize it by heart, get it into your heart and circulate it around there and circulate it around there until finally you are it.

[63:12]

This is all religious practices. do that, like the Jesus prayer that sometimes you read in Franny and Zoe, you know first you hear the Jesus prayer and you do it over and over until it's in your heart until it's going on all the time and first of all you have to learn it and get it straight and you start saying it and when you start saying it and saying it and saying it finally it's automatically in you then finally after it's in you and going on all the time and you don't have to work at it anymore you just get your mind then finally you are it you are the Jesus prayer. When you are the Jesus prayer then you can think about it and you can talk about it and other people can feel the instruction coming from your being rather than from your head. Of course some people get it in from their head and they get an insight in their head and then they feed it back out through their mouth from their head. That's still helpful because some people will hear it in the head and they'll take it down. So sometimes a scholar will teach a person, a teaching with the person then will take it all the way to the bottom.

[64:15]

So probably Jesus and Buddha heard in teachings which then they took all the way. So it's still good to understand things intellectually. It's like my uncle had bulbar polio and probably my father transmitted the polio virus from my uncle to me. My father didn't get polio but my uncle and I really got it. And sometimes you can convey a teaching from a Buddha over to another person who becomes a Buddha, even though you yourself don't necessarily practice it. Like Alan Watts was that way, somewhat. He conveyed Buddhist teaching to America. He did have insight, but he spent a lot of time just bringing Zen from Asia over to America, and he was a major bridge. He's actually part of the Sangha, and we should be grateful to him for bringing it over. But he himself didn't use it. Or Tom Cleary, if I can say so.

[65:18]

Galen says he told her that, what did he say? About being worried about the Mahayana. Well, not worried, he was dedicating his life to the Mahayana, right? Dedicated, even though he himself can't really practice it. He's a servant to it. Same with your ego. That's kind of an egoless statement. Your ego can't really practice all of Buddhism, but your ego can be a servant. Something like that. and ego can be part of the process of intellectually understanding and arranging for the books to be out, somebody hopefully will take it all the way to the bottom. Into the belly. Yes?

[66:00]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ