Studying this text and reading it, translating it, I am, I have been, I continue to be really inspired by the sense of integrity that comes through from these people who are involved in this text. a kind of softness and a kind of, I don't know, just real dependability and unshakable, unshakableness about them comes through. So we have this, we have these people, Dogen Zenji. Dogen Zenji. who lived in 1253.

[01:12]

He was a, I don't know what first, anyway, he was a person who had a lot of suffering in his life, lost his parents when he was young, and he was a very intense and proficient yogi, and great scholar and poet and world-class philosopher. But he was also a very scrupulous and upright person. All these things together is just amazing to find in one person. There he is. He had some problems in his life like we do, but anyway. It's just amazing that we have been able to become his students and study his teachings. The more I study him, the more I'm amazed, just like the more I study Shakyamuni Buddha.

[02:15]

I'm just amazed by his teaching. And then Dogen had He had four main disciples. Ejo Zenji, Zen Master Ejo, his first disciple, his main disciple. Senne, a Chinese monk, and one of the first, I can't remember right now. Senne had a disciple named Kyogo. We don't know Senne's dates exactly, or Kyogo's dates, but Senne and Kyogo both lived at the time of Dogen. Eijo's main disciple, and the disciple we chant in our lineage, is Gikai.

[03:23]

Gikai was quite close to Dogen, and was Dogen's jisha, and was sort of in charge of the monastery when Dogen died. But he wasn't a Dharma successor of Dogen. Senne was a Dharma successor of Dogen and Kyogo, who lived at the same time as Dogen, but was not a Dharma successor. He was a Dharma successor to Senne. Why do we chant the person who's not the Dharma? Because Gikai was a Dharma successor to Eijo. So Dogen, Eijo, Gikai. She said he was the jisya, but not... He was jisya to Dogen, but not Dogen's successor. But he was Dogen's successor's successor. He didn't become Dogen's successor during Dogen's life. So Kyogo and Gikai are Dogen's grandsons. And Kyogo also got dharma transmission? From Senneke. Senneke got dharma transmission from Dogen. And down many generations later, not necessarily from here, but probably from here, we have another man named Banjin Doton.

[04:44]

So Banjin's dates are 1698 to 1775. The people who are the creators of the texts we're studying are Shakyamuni Buddha, Dogen, Ejo, Senne, Kyodo, and Banjin. and the writers are Dogen transcribed by Eijo, Hyogo interpreting Dogen, and Banjin putting it all together and making additional notes. Did you get that? Kyogo, Dogen Kyogo, and Banjin. Those are the people who actually wrote the text in various parts.

[05:51]

Zen, when we say Zen, we mean Buddhism. So to study the way of Zen, or to study the Buddha way, is to study the self. And to study the self is to forget the self. And if you've forgotten the self, then everything enlightens you. And when everything enlightens you, everybody drops their body and mind. So that's Zen practice, that's the way of Buddha, to study the self. The entrance into the study of self is to receive Buddhist precepts. To get into the actual study of the self, you receive Buddhist precepts. To get into the study of buddha-way, you receive Buddhist precepts. Studying the self includes studying the precepts. Studying the precepts includes studying the self.

[07:05]

In this school of the Buddha way, the fundamental condition for the study of the self is to receive the precepts. So this text, I could diagram in this way. At the center of this text, at a point that has no size or no shape, And he said, in its fineness it fits into spacelessness. In its greatness it is utterly beyond location. The center of this text is what we call Buddha. Or the Buddha precept. The thing that's written before Buddha, even. That's the center of the text. Awakening. which is the same as Buddha's way, the same as Zen. This is also, you can call this, the center of the text, the Zen precept.

[08:13]

Around that center, the first layer around that center, an entrance into the practice of Buddha is, rather than try to write in a circle around here, which somebody might want to do, Rather than you try to do that, I'll just draw a line out here and say the next layer is the 16 bodhisattva. The circle around it is bodhisattva. 16 bodhisattva precepts. This is the structure of Buddhism. It's also the structure of this text. Buddha at the center. The next layer is the 16 bodhisattva precepts. The next layer is Dogen Zenji's teaching about these, teaching about, or instructions about, how to teach and receive these precepts.

[09:21]

In Japanese this is called, can you see this right in front of you? This is called which you have a copy of, right? Do you know that you have a copy of that? The Essay on Teaching and Conferring Precepts. That's Kyoju Kaimon. And you could say, also instead of essay, you could say instruction. instructions on teaching and receiving the precepts. That's the next layer. Alright? The next layer is called Kyu-kai-mon-sho.

[10:33]

Sho means essence or essentials. So Dogen Zenji wrote, Kyu-kai-mon and he actually said it, and Eijo wrote it down, and Kyogo wrote the essence of the instructions on teaching and conferring the triceps. The next layer is called, in Japanese, BU SO SHO DEN ZEN KAI SHO That's it, this layer.

[11:38]

This layer, which means BU SHO means BUTSU SO which means Buddha, ancestor. Shoden means correctly transmitted. Zenkai means Zen precept. And Sho means essence. And Banjin and Daumko wrote this. I'll put all this together. Okay? Did you get that? The whole thing? The last part. The English? The English is, Uso means Buddha, ancestor, correctly transmitted, Zen precepts, essence. The essence of the correctly transmitted Buddha, ancestor, Zen precepts. which Banjian put together by taking Buddha, the 60 precepts, Dogen's Kyoju Kaimon, and Shogo's Kyoju Kaimon Sho, and then he wrote an introduction to that, and then he wrote comments and notes on each section.

[12:57]

And now the plan is to make another circle around this, and I don't know what we call it, but we'll be trying to take this body and relate it to the 20th century somehow, bringing in our concerns for the planet and ecology and, you know, the world peace situation to try to relate it to all these different parts. All right? I'm going to read you, which doesn't usually work in class, but I'm going to try a little bit and see if you can possibly stay awake. I'm going to read you an introduction that Banjian wrote to this essence of correctly transmitted Buddha ancestors and precepts.

[14:09]

And he wrote this, he put this all together in 17... 17... 58. When he was 60. From the time before the sutras were compiled in India and translated in China, the correct dharma... was transmitted by the Tathagata to Mahakasyapa and through twenty-eight generations until it reached the great master of Shaolin, Bodhidharma. What has been transmitted is tentatively called the treasury of eyes of the truth, Shobo Genzo. The ineffable mind of nirvana. The correct dharma is called that.

[15:22]

This is also called the great matter of cause and effect. And it is also called the greatest thing from the time of the king of the empty eon. And this is called Zen. and it's also called precept. In this way, the phrase Zen precept is established here. And for this reason, this Zen precept is different from the precept, which is the precept of precept, samadhi, and wisdom. which is taught in the sutras, a precept, samadhi and wisdom, or ethics, concentration and wisdom. It's different from that precept. This precept is the precept which is the true dharma, which is not just part of the dharma, it's the whole dharma.

[16:28]

The name precept in both cases is the same but the meaning is different. Just as the source of water is one but the streams vary. However, the slightest discrepancy and there is a distance between the slightest discrepancy is as the distance between heaven and earth. And the difference between the precept which is one of the three learnings, and the precept here is such an example. Really a big difference between these two precepts. One is a precept which is Buddha itself, and the other is a precept which is a division or a section of Buddha. Departing from the character of the sutra, then it becomes like a demon's discourse. Can it be sutra? Within the universe and outside the cosmos, the entirety of phenomena, including feathers and fish scales, there is nothing that is not the actualization of Zen precept.

[17:51]

Because of this difference from looking at the sky through a pipe or measuring the ocean with a conch shell, in other words, narrow views of ordinary schools of thought, this is the thorough and complete realization of only a Buddha and a Buddha, or only a Buddha with a Buddha. It is the transformation of only an ancestor with an ancestor. The lofty ancestor Eihei went to China and received this in Tiantong's room. He came back to Japan and taught this for over 20 years. During this time, he discussed it in various ways, vertically and horizontally. His first student, Zen Master Eijo,

[18:56]

recorded his words and called it Kyōjū Kaimon, instructions on teaching and conferring the precepts. Zen master Kyōgo combined it with the teachings of the Brahmajala Sutra, the Indra's neck Sutra, hoping that in this way, later generations would find it easier to understand his teaching. He did all this with extreme effort and exertion. Ever since, the Soto school has become prosperous, flourishing with his descendants, raising the Dharma flag of the Ehe school with over 25,000 temples. Even at that time, there were 25,000 temples of Soto Zen at the time of Banjin. In each of the abbot's rooms, The kaimon, precept instruction, is individually transmitted, while at the same time the precept vein is entrusted by teacher to successor.

[20:06]

So in Soto Zen training, in each temple's abbot's room, the successor enters the room and this kaimon, this instructions on the precepts, are transmitted at the same time that the precept vein is transmitted. The precepts are also given to other students and laypersons. However, during the course of 300 years, the forms of Dharma practice have become loose and confused. 300 years from the time of Kyogo up to Banjin. During 300 years, the forms of Dharma practice have become loose and confused, but fortunately, the official mission of restoration in the Genroku period, which went from 1688 to 1704, when Banjin was a young kid, was achieved.

[21:16]

I don't know, let's read this, I don't know what it means yet. There's no leftover blood. Many have lost the instructions on precept, kaimon, and stopped giving the precept vein, kaimyaku, but announcing that the transmission of precepts is done. So some people, in other words, the tradition fell down and some people were saying that these things were transmitted and taught, but they weren't. Because of this fact, although the essence of precepts exists, Kyōgo's work, Essence of the Precepts, exists, some people regard this like some pebbles in the street and see it as a waste of time. In the end, it became excess baggage in the Sōtō school and worm food. In Japan, you know, texts that, you know, written texts that aren't taken care of, the worms, got a lot of worms getting into the written scroll, the scroll, calligraphed scrolls.

[22:37]

So it became excess baggage and worm food for 460 years. How sad and wasteful, Banjin says. Isn't this a great loss? At this moment, who has the strength to turn heaven around? And I think the question can be asked today too. I think that the teachings of Buddha's ethics, in some sense, have become loose and confused. And who has the strength to turn this around at this time in our history? This is our job. And hearing people like Banjian and Kyogo and Dogen, I feel, if you can feel the strength of the commitment to Buddha's precepts, maybe we can do it. Carefully, steadfastly, turn this whole thing around.

[23:41]

Somebody said to me once, if you're working with a big institution, what you've got to do is just sort of lean on it. Finally it'll move. You go run at it, it hurts your shoulder. Anyway, I just feel, you know, Banjin's effort to vivify his teachings of the precepts. Some time ago, the old man Shu of Daijo Monastery, that's his teacher, his teacher is old man Shu of Daijo Monastery, who was born at the time when the wheel of Dharma was stagnant. He reestablished the light of the precepts which had become dim. He wrote and revealed a sharp blade of precepts and said, sentient beings receive precepts and thus unite with all Buddhas.

[24:48]

All Buddhas Responding to the capacity of sentient beings, we unite with sentient beings. Sentient beings and Buddhas are merged and there is no outside or inside. Past, present and future are themselves actually complete Although we look at those who are called precept teachers and hold precept assembly, their explanation of precepts have fallen into the limitations of the tracts of the sutra schools. This kaimon, this precept instruction, is only chanted once at Daijo Monastery. and this is also, I've got to work on this, enshrining a chicken and thinking it is a true dragon. End quote. That's what Banjin's teacher said.

[25:53]

Banjin says, I was hiding in the deep mountains of Mikawa Prefecture for many years and happened to visit an old monastery in a dark valley. After an informal talk in the evening, the abbot of the monastery handed me a scroll of calligraphy. When I looked at it, I saw that it was Kyogo's Essence of Indra's Net Sutra. When I had time, I read it one hundred times and got a glimpse of the brightness. Finally, I copied the Kyōjū Kaimon Shō of Kyōgo and added some notes. So his teacher said, and Dōgen says, and it is the teaching of this school, when a human being, when a sentient being receives Buddha's precepts, at that time you become the same rank as the Buddha.

[27:03]

When you receive, when you open your heart and mind to Buddha's precepts and receive them, you are the same rank as perfect enlightenment. And the Buddhas respond to this reception by uniting with the sentient beings. And there's no more inside or outside of Buddha. At the same time, we must correctly transmit these precepts and have the proper understanding. So that's the problem. In order to receive them, do you need to understand them? No. Really? I mean, you could receive them and misunderstand them. But if you receive them, then you will continue to study until you do understand them. But still, even before you understand them, the person who receives them is equal to Buddha. Is it a matter of understanding?

[28:09]

It is a matter of understanding that those who receive the precepts work, you know, completely to understand them. But it's not a matter of understanding. It's like, it's something that those who receive it devote their lives to. Just, you know, those who receive them want to read this 100 times. and get a little glimpse. Is that ideally what they want to do or is that what in fact actually happens? It's what they want to do. It's their vow. It's the vow you just read there, same vow. What actually happens is a matter of, again, anthropology. And it gets questioned whether Buddhist temples let anthropologists in to study them, or whether there's any Buddhists who are part-time anthropologists who are actually practicing.

[29:15]

And what is actually happening, what do you mean by what's actually happening? I don't know at what point to bring this up, but last week we were talking about this business about what about the commitment, the vow, and then what you actually observe yourself doing through your own eyes. And again, there is looking at the sky through a pipe and measuring the ocean with a conch shell. We do do that. But we should remember that's what we're doing. And if we do that, we will observe, perhaps, ourselves doing something less than our intention. But I propose to you that our intention is to do and to live the way we are really living. in the face of the fact that we have narrow views and we will see ourselves doing various things that we're ashamed of or remorseful of.

[30:24]

But I think I'd better throw some words out here and offer some definitions which we could actually discuss. And I forgot the book I wanted to bring. It was a book called Ethics by a Christian theologian named Dietrich Bonhoeffer. He's a German, he was a German, he lived during the Nazi times and he was arrested and hung by the Nazis because he wouldn't cooperate, he wouldn't join the Nazi party. And his last work, which he didn't finish before he died, but that was his last work, was called Ethics. And in Ethics, towards the beginning, he talks about shame and conscience. And I forgot the book, so I can't remember exactly what he said, but he said something like, shame is the ineffaceable separation that a human being feels between herself and the

[31:30]

Her origin, or the origin, or the source. The ineffaceable separation that human beings, that a person feels with the source or the origin. This is shame. Or, he also says a little later, the sense of separation or alienation between the person and God, and between the person and all other men and women. That's shame. This is just proposed to you, we can discuss it. He says, shame is different from what he calls conscience. Conscience is the separation or the alienation you feel with yourself. Conscience, when you say on your conscience, it means something causing you to feel remorse. Conscience has to do with the difference between the way you are, you observe yourself, and the way you would like to be.

[32:39]

Guilt and conscience are related, but guilt is a more of a sense of responsibility for offenses or wrongdoings that you yourself have done. Conscience is, the first meaning of conscience is a recognition and an awareness, or actually a recognition of the legitimacy or the recognition of right and wrong of your own conduct. That's the first meaning of conscience. Guilt is, first of all, the fact of being responsible for wrongdoing. And the fourth meaning of guilt is the remorsefulness or the remorseful awareness of having done something wrong.

[33:42]

But conscience is, aside from being aware of some wrong that you've done, is actually the recognition of the difference and the distinction between right and wrong. And Bonhoeffer, and I agree, says that shame is closer to the source than conscience. So conscience, the recognition of the difference between right and wrong in your own behavior, that is something as part of what we have to deal with. And we do observe a difference between those two types of actions. And then if we have done a wrong action, we feel remorse at having done it, and we're sorry we did it. We feel that what's wrong is what we are versus what we want to be. At some point, yeah. We feel remorse that we are behaving in a way different from what we believe is what we really want to be.

[34:47]

So that's a feeling of, that's what we call on your conscience, or that's a feeling of guilt. But shame is closer to the source. However, at the source, there is no shame. And the Buddha said, these precepts which I have given you people are for you, not for me. And the disciple says, what? You don't have to follow these precepts? How come? it's not that he violates them, but he said, it's like someone who has a, what do you call it, a game preserve, a king who has a game preserve, and makes rules for how people should conduct themselves in that game preserve. But the king does not have to follow the rules. These precepts are essential to entering Buddha's world, but in Buddha's world, Things are different. And another thing I want to say before I forget is that what you hear in this text about the precepts is intended for people who have received the precepts.

[36:00]

And I don't say that so that those of you who have not received the precepts feel excluded from the discussion, but rather to say that at certain points you may have some difficulty with the discussion, and it may very well be that you haven't received the precepts, which is the source of your difficulty of understanding. It's not that a person who's received them understands better, but you wouldn't understand why someone was talking to you that way if you hadn't received them. You talk differently to someone who's made a commitment or has opened themselves than you do to someone who hasn't. This text is written to those who have received the precepts. So, I... I just want to say a couple more words about this Buddha precept, this Zen precept. The Zen precept is not to grasp the true marks of things and also not to be involved in evil thoughts.

[37:17]

It's the middle way between transgression and non-transgression. In the precepts, you don't get into non... In practicing these precepts, you don't get into non-transgression. That's holding to something. Also, you don't get into transgression. You go this middle route. And Dungsan... says that to have a judging mind is a transgression of the precepts. The Buddha mind is not judging. But maybe before we get into the three treasures, we want to talk about this guilt and shame stuff a little bit, and repentance and that kind of thing.

[38:28]

Do you want to? I have a question. Yeah. I noticed something here, but the way that the precepts are written, there's no I statement, so it seems to be leading you towards a way from guilt and shame. It seems to be rather descriptive. not stealing, not a statement of I won't steal. That's an interesting question. I don't know if they're always written this way, or sometimes the vowel is stated personally. There's many ways. They've been written many ways. Sometimes we say, I will not. In Chinese and Japanese, they don't have it. There's no kind of pronoun there, I, in almost any kind of vowels or statements like this. That seems helpful. Yeah, it does, doesn't it? These are precepts of the forgotten self, after all.

[39:31]

At the same time that these are precepts of the forgotten self, you do say before you receive these precepts, you do say all, you do say all the ancient, all the karma ever created by me from beginningless greed, hate and delusion, born through body, speech and mind, I now fully evolve. So when it comes to the purification process and repentance, you do put an I in there. And there is this unaffaceable, ineffaceable separation between the I and the source. Human beings irrevocably create a sense of identity. You must do that to be a human being. Therefore, separation is created. You can't get away from it. And that's why Buddhas and Zen ancestors and people like us constantly, frequently, sometimes confess the fact that I am involved in self-centered view.

[40:48]

At least. And I am involved in activities which emerge from my sense of clinging to my own identity. I create a sense of identity moment after moment. And as soon as this sense of identity occurs, various afflictions called belief in that self, pride in that self, ignorance of that self arise with it. I do that all the time. So therefore I confess this. But when one confesses this, as it says in the vow we chanted, the obstructions are removed and you can receive the precepts. And when you receive the precepts, you are the same as Buddha. And the Buddhas do this too. The Buddhas say, I have a mind which constantly produces a sense of identity. which is then immediately accompanied by these afflictions. I confess this. Now I confess this and right after confessing this, my obstructions are removed by this confession. Now I receive Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. Now I am one with Buddha, Dharma and Sangha.

[41:50]

In the next moment again, I slip right back into the sense of identity because if a human being has that sense of identity, afflictions arise again. I confess them again. I take refuge again. I'm Buddha. I'm at home again. And round and round we do this forever, moment by moment. This is called Zen precept or Zazen. And we even confess that we forget to do that sometimes for some period of time. We forget to admit the sense of self has arisen, the afflictions have arisen, and we forget to admit that. The great ones are aware of this and acknowledge it. Enlightened ones are always confessing. And because they're always confessing, they are greatly enlightened ones. When they confess, they say, ìI.î When they take refuge, they don't have to say, ìI.î When they receive the precepts, they just receive them, they don't have to say, ìI.î But you can say, ìI.î Because actually Buddha can say, ìI.î

[42:54]

But the one who's free of all conceit can say aye. Yes? Could you talk about what it means to... You say the gray ones are the gray ones because they're constantly confessing. What does constantly confessing mean beyond... Beyond saying the confessions, what is that? Well, actually you can't even say the confession all the time. It happens too fast. So once in a while, once a day or twice a day or whatever, you actually actually confess. Some people actually, like I heard Martin Luther, wore out many confessors. So he actually spoke. But the Buddha mind is actually doing it so frequently that it doesn't have time to say anything. The Buddha mind just notices the self and forgets the self and is awakened by everything.

[44:02]

It's a moment by moment noticing the self and the afflictions that arise with it And reflections that arise with the self are the imagination that the self really exists. It happens every moment. The Buddhas notice that every moment, so every moment they have a human life and they're also going beyond. Every moment there's delusion of a permanently, independently existing self, every moment there's that delusion, every moment there's noticing that delusion, every moment there's liberation from that delusion. And therefore awakening by that delusion That delusion is then what wakes you up. That's the thing that wakes you up. But ceremonially, with your friends now and then, you do a formula. All the ancient twisted karma ever created by me from... You say that. But you can't... That takes... You know, during the time you're saying that, you've committed probably innumerable... Fractions of the Buddha precepts.

[45:03]

because of the nature of having a human consciousness. This is called... I have one. By the way, after that I want to tell you about something I just got here. Yes. The whole idea of evil. I find it hard to fit into this. I always mention all the comments I put down. Were you here last Sunday? No, I wasn't. Well, I propose evil is lived backwards. Okay? That basically human beings have an endemic habit. I also mentioned that some kid asked a teacher, what's the most powerful force, the greatest force in the universe? And the teacher said, the force of habit. Human beings have the extremely powerful force of habit of constantly imagining a self and that the self exists independently. This is our great habit. This is the way we usually live. In other words, we live backwards. We take something which is unlimited, and we make it limited. That's sin.

[46:05]

That's evil. That's basically, that's the basic evil. Self-clinging. Clinging to something which is completely ungraspable. Clinging to light. The radiance of the true self. How do you do that? That's our habit. We can't stand to leave it alone. We've got to mess with it, and we do it. As soon as the sense of a self arises, these four afflictions arise. That's what evil is. Then you can also do things based on that clinging, on that ignorance. Those are karmic acts which you do based on the basic backward from life way of thinking. The deadening way of living of imagining a limited self. So someone just gave me this official karma violations booklet of the karma police. Now, there's only about a hundred of these things, so we won't be able to, you know, take care of people for very long, but it says, notice of karma violation, and then it has a date and time.

[47:14]

It's very important to notice the date and time. It's very important. The person and or institution perpetuating karma Perpetuated against and then it says this sighted behavior was a violation in the spirit of karma and a karma police code section such and such so There's barefaced lying cheating Disgusting disgusting thoughtlessness borrowing with intent to keep Intentionally hurting using destructively a person or the environment, avoiding an issue, pompously prejudiced, thinking you know what's right and wrong, and so on. So I don't know who the comic police are, but not me. I just get tickets.

[48:28]

Karma is different from evil. Karma is different from this basic misappropriation of our life. Karma is what you do based on this understanding. And if you have a proper understanding, your karma is wholesome, or even, we say, beyond karma. If your karma is based on misunderstanding, it can be wholesome or unwholesome, but all unwholesome acts are certainly based on this misunderstanding. Self-cleaning. Yes? When you're talking about a cycle of having a vision and then pronouncing it, Admitting it first. Admitting it. When does this cycle end? When does it end? When all beings are enlightened. In other words, it's going to be a while. So that's why we have practices called giving.

[49:35]

And giving is something which, if you do properly, gives you tremendous joy and And then we have the precepts, which we're talking about here. And we have patience, you've got to be patient with yourself, continuing this way indefinitely. And you have to have enthusiasm, which is delight in all these wholesome practices you're doing. And then concentration, flexibility to adjust to the constant changes, where you get presented new challenges of your own delusions. And wisdom, which sees that the whole thing's empty. But how do you know that there will be a time when all beings are in line? You don't know that, you just think that's a good project. That you actually think it would be nice if everybody was happy and free, and you're willing to put your whole heart into that project. And meantime, you have to do various practices to make yourself happy, because you can't wait to be happy until the project's done. So you have to do all these practices to give yourself joy and enthusiasm. You have to think about and remember the acts of the ancestors which make you feel so inspired to live like that.

[50:42]

And you can feel how wonderful it would be to be dedicated the way they were. And with all that support, you can stand to be a human being. Do you think it's a realistic or an idealistic project? It's our ideal or our highest value, and it's realistic because the value actually has to do with realistic problems, real problems like human suffering. It doesn't have to do with... It has to do with really, basically, finally just being yourself and getting all the help you can from the Buddhist teaching to be able to stand to be who you are. If you can stand to be who you are, in other words, really admit who you are, you immediately are liberated from who you are. And that's called studying the self and forgetting the self. Studying the self means admitting completely who you are. If you admit completely who you are, you will be liberated from and relieved of who you are. You will forget who you are. And when you forget who you are, as you walk through this world, everything will enlighten you.

[51:45]

And when you're enlightened, you're very happy to work for the welfare of others and to encourage them also to make this commitment to study themselves and therefore forget themselves and therefore be enlightened by everything and so on. But it isn't easy. The hard part, forgetting the self is a gift. You don't forget yourself on purpose. It's a gift that comes to those who are willing to be completely who they are. It's a gift to those who are willing to admit that they have the self-clinging habit up to your eyeballs, you know. Yeah. You really have this tendency very strongly, and to admit it, and then when you start to admit it, you start to notice also how much suffering it causes you and other people. To get in and admit your neurosis completely, moment by moment, is not that pleasant. That's why you need all these practices to help you do that. The precepts help you enter the world of admitting who you are.

[52:46]

Without these precepts, you won't have a chance in hell. But with these precepts you can even do the work in hell. With the support of these precepts, when you receive these precepts, you are one with Buddha and the Buddhas are helping you face who you are. Which is not pleasant work. Because basically you're facing that you're limited, selfish, troublemaker. Or not even that you are, but that you have habits of limiting and troublemaking. How do you not get discouraged? How do you not get discouraged? Well, when you get discouraged, there's a practice called enthusiasm to balance that. Discouragement is laziness. That's all. You don't have time to be discouraged. It's just laziness. And you have to arouse yourself and say, I'm just not going to be lazy.

[53:47]

I don't have time to indulge in self-pity. I've got to get to work here. Anyway, study parmig of enthusiasm and part of it is to be delighted in what you do wholesome and to watch out for laziness. And one of the main kinds of laziness is self-pity and saying, I can't do it. When you tell a bodhisattva who's practicing enthusiasm, well, what you got to do, see that mountain over there? You have to pulverize that mountain. What the bodhisattva says is practicing enthusiasm is they say, yes, I'll do it. Or yes, I will. Of course they can't imagine doing it, but they say yes. And they have the problem of doing it. And they're enthusiastic and delighted at the proposition because it's going to help everybody. The other kind of laziness is laziness of wanting to stay in some particular pleasant state. Indolence. Clinging to sleep, for example. But another kind of laziness is laziness of thinking that you have the opportunity, you can take the luxury of pitying yourself and saying, you can't do Buddhist practice.

[54:56]

It's too hard. It's going to take too long. It's just too immense. I can't do it. Forget it. That's it, isn't it? What is the other side of the coin? To say that you can't do this practice, the presentation of this is untold intensity. As you say, it's, I don't know if you said it's drudgery or perhaps... Not drudgery. This is drudgery. You're arguing it wrong. It is... The practice of enthusiasm is taking delight in this immense task. If you're not delighted with the work, you're not practicing enthusiasm. You are practicing laziness. To say this is drudgery is laziness. To work hard and call it drudgery is laziness. Forget it.

[55:58]

Drop that thing about drudgery. If other people think it's drudgery, you can have compassion for them and try to find a way to get them to see how to be enthusiastic about their work. But there isn't drudgery in this path. That's a side road. It's hard, but you need to be enthusiastic and delighted in the hard work. It's hard to take an exhaustive inventory of your neuroses. But you can be delighted about the prospect of doing that because you can say, I'm doing the same thing Shakyamuni Buddha did. Read his scriptures. He was very embarrassed about what he saw in himself. He said, I look at these people, you know, and they're into this and that and that. Just ordinary people, they're into all this crap. And I am too. He was ashamed and embarrassed about himself. He did that work, though, with tremendous joy.

[56:59]

But that's it. I mean, what else is there to do? Don't do this. What other possibility? You can try anything else, but what other possibility is there for happiness? For enlightenment? To stop all that, other than to continue to look at it, to continue to admit to it, to continue to take an inventory of it. Is there anything else to do? Yeah, suffer. That's all there is to it. And if you suffer long enough, you'll start to get compassion for yourself and you'll start to notice other people are suffering and you'll give rise to this tremendous aspiration, this wonderful aspiration to do this thing. But you may have to suffer again. Sometimes we do all right for a while, we coast on our... Basically we're all doing great, we're human beings, you know.

[58:01]

We're all like just a tiny bit different from Buddha. It's a slight discrepancy. We're very close to enlightenment all the time. We're in great shape. And so we can coast for quite a while. Especially people like in this room, very nice people here. Yes. Yes. Could you go over again this point about Buddha saying, this is my game preserve, I don't have to follow the rules. I know that's not accurate, what he said, but that's a troublesome statement to me. These precepts are here, but I don't follow them the same way you do. He didn't say, I don't follow them. He says, I don't have to. How do you understand it? It doesn't feel right. It feels that unless that's said in order to keep the circle open so that they can continue to develop and you don't think you've got it and it's all worked out. It seems to me it stands out. It doesn't make sense to me. You want me to make sense of it for you?

[59:05]

No, I'm just saying... He did say that, really. He did say that. I can live with that. I can live with a robot that's fainting like that, but it does great. Well, what good can come of that grating? Well, the only thing that I can feel strongly about is the sense that this is not all worked out, what I just tried to say. Let's keep it open so that we can continue to develop and understand the concepts and not think that it's That's part of it. That's part of it. That's part of it. Another part of it is the inconceivable mind of Nirvana. That Buddha can talk like that. And we wonder about that because we think, oh, does that mean that... So then our mind says, oh, does that mean that Buddha is beyond cause and effect? Right?

[60:06]

Right? If Buddha says, these precepts are for you, not for me, in fact, he made those precepts for his disciples, and he didn't make them for himself. Alright? That's what he said. He gave them to his disciples. He gave the disciples the Divinity. He did not himself create them for himself. He did not need them. Does Buddha violate those precepts? No. Does he need those precepts? No. Do his disciples need the precepts? Yes. Do they violate them? Maybe. Maybe not. But they definitely need them. They must receive them. If they don't receive them, they cannot do his practice. He said that. You must receive these precepts in order to enter the practice that I'm teaching you. I don't need to receive them, he said. That seems like breaking the precept right there. Which one? Where Buddha says, I don't need them. But he is the precepts.

[61:06]

He's postulating an I separate from... Well, again, he gets to say I and nobody else does. Because he or the Buddha at the time of Buddha does not believe in that. He's the center of the circle. But anyway, the question, the famous Zen story, the monk came to see Baijian, right? And he asked Baijian, does an enlightened person fall into cause and effect or not? And Baijian said, does not obscure or does not. turn away from or blind oneself or neglect cause and effect. Buddha is completely of, for, by and through karma. Nothing but. Buddha is simply what's happening.

[62:08]

Therefore Buddha does not need any precepts, but Buddha does not fall into the precepts, but also Buddha does not fall not into the precepts. Buddha is the middle way between transgression and non-transgression. That's what Buddha is. But maybe he didn't mean to say that. Maybe that was just, you know, something that somebody made up. Maybe they heard him wrong. All I know is that It's up to each of us to see if that's true. Right. And also, I don't feel so bad about the fact that I do need to receive the precepts in order to enter Buddha's world, because, so what? I receive them and then I get to be with Buddha. And then also Buddha comes to meet me. So it's a good deal. The fact that you said this, I think, is another little thing to maybe think, well, this is a little bit more complicated than I think.

[63:14]

When the monk said, no, the enlightened person does not fall into cause and effect, he became born as a fox for 500 lifetimes. But if you say that the Buddha does fall into cause and effect, rather than not, you may not be born as a fox. But that's not Buddha's understanding either. Buddha's understanding is the enlightened person does not obscure cause and effect. Does a Buddha fall into cause and effect or not? Yes and no is not the answer. The Buddha does not obscure cause and effect. The Buddha is completely united with cause and effect. Always concentrating on cause and effect. That's the Zen precept. To always be mindful of cause and effect. Deep faith that that's what we should be absorbed in. Cause and effect. Cause and effect. Self-clinging. Suffering. Self-clinging. Suffering. Cause and effect. That awareness is Buddha.

[64:15]

Receiving the precepts helps you enter that awareness. Opening your heart to the precepts, you enter into awareness of cause and effect. And receiving the precepts, at that moment you stop obscuring and blinding yourself to cause and effect. But to say Buddha does or does not fall into cause and effect or to say you do or do not fall into cause and effect, is actually veering away from simply watching cause and effect. Buddha's primary teaching is dependent colorizing. That's the Zen precept. And now this text is to look at not killing, not stealing, and what do those mean in terms of approaching them from the point of view of entering into and studying cause and effect.

[65:19]

Not slipping into I don't kill or I do kill, but using that as a way to understand. Not killing is a way to understand what is meant by it in that way. Yeah. I thought I heard you say at the beginning, when you were talking about the precepts, this sort of goes with what you were saying, is that these particular ones don't say I first. Is that the precepts as they are, are the essence of the forgotten self. And that when we enter into our self-cleaning, we either violate them or don't violate them in our self. But that these... Would you say that again, please? Well, that not stealing is. I mean, that that's the essence. And not stealing is the essence. Right. And when we... Not stealing is the truth. It already is there everywhere in us. That's right. And when we enter into our delusionary self, we either violate it or don't violate it.

[66:29]

We get involved in the violating or not violating of it. But all we really have to do is let go... We don't have to practice these. They are there already. And that's sort of what Buddha was saying, that I don't have to do this, because it is, and I am. Who we really are is the practice of these things. And what's really happening is there is no wrongdoing, there is no stealing, there is no killing. However, if you steal or kill, you're going to get in big trouble. And your practice is going to get smashed to smithereens if you break these precepts. But, in fact, there is no wrongdoing. This is the dynamic we have to work with. But it's different than there is no wrongdoing. There is not stealing. There is not taking right. There is right conduct.

[67:30]

Right conduct is what really exists. These are people that haven't been called on yet. Yes? Where does shame come from? I think our sense that we're separated from our source. It seems like when babies are born, they're innocent and don't have shame, and at some point we become shameful. It is possible that the baby's sense of self is not yet developed when they're born. And because the sense of identity is not there, there's not this clinging to the root, this sense of independently existing thing, and then this independently existing thing, idea, is not then projected on everything. So, in fact, there's no problem when that's not going on. So it's related to when we develop this sense of self.

[68:31]

When the mind finally creates an identity, which new minds need to do, And I've talked about this little boy who I know who does not have a sense of self. All his whole life is simply dedicated to somehow developing a sense of identity which he can't do yet. In order to be a human being you have to be able to do that. In order to be a Buddha you have to do that. Because you can't have compassion if you don't understand what it's like to fall into that trap. You're still aloof from ordinary people's misery until you can go through that gate yourself. Is shame wholesome? Yes, same as wholesome, and actually, conscience is wholesome too. The ability to... the recognition of the difference between right and wrong is a wholesome function of mind, and shame is even more wholesome. And shame is closer to Buddha than remorse. I'm sorry for some things I've done, and I'm sorry that I'm probably going to do more bad things.

[69:35]

I'm sorry about that, I'm remorseful about that. But at a deeper level I'm ashamed that I have to even be concerned with such things. That I'm so far from Buddha that I have to be always watching this stuff. That's deeper, yeah. Is it possible to keep a precept? I don't know. Are we free to do something or not? What? Are we free to do something or not? Well, if I say yes, then if I take the position that we are, I think that people who have that position still suffer. And if I say we don't, I think it also doesn't really bear on the suffering. So what philosophical stand I take on that, either way I think I still have the same problem. Do precepts have any meaning there? That's the question. If the Buddha doesn't need...

[70:36]

the precept, because the Buddha cannot err, then could the disciple even keep a precept, or could a disciple err? Really, a disciple cannot err. But, there's a big difference between a person who receives the precepts and one who doesn't. One who doesn't receive the precepts can't do the practice. One who does receive the precepts, then from that time on, the notices that they think they heard. Can a person freely receive a precept? Yes. All you've got to do is say yes. When you're asked, will you want to receive them, you say yes, and then you chant them, and then you say, now you've received them, will you continue to receive them and not lose them, and you say yes, and you have received them. you have opened your heart to the Buddha's ethics.

[71:38]

And from that time on, you're grounded by that reception. And you're just like a Buddha at that time, when you receive them. But you couldn't violate one. In fact, you cannot violate one. However, if you do get into violation, if you do see yourself doing that, If you imagine yourself... If you imagine yourself doing that, in fact, your practice suffers as a result. Therefore, you confess it, and by confessing it, you remove the obstruction which was caused by that, and you start over again. And if you don't have... If the obstruction is not removed... By the confession, that means you have not confessed enough. So all the problems are in our mind and not in any suffering that cause others.

[72:42]

And when does suffering cause others? Precepts normally cause other people suffering. Breaking the precepts cause other people suffering. Precepts are about the things that cause other people suffering. Right. And if I cannot actually err, I cannot break a precept, but I could imagine that I could break a precept, And the fault would be that I could imagine it. Can it be that I can cause people suffering? Yes, definitely. Intentionally? It doesn't have to be intentional, because if you simply believe in the self, you will hurt people. So there is only one fault, which is believing in the self. That's the main, that's the sin, which causes all the damage and hurt to other people, is self-clinging. which then gets projected on everything and therefore causes you to hurt people and yourself. But if self-clinging didn't hurt you or other people, then we could cling to self. It just turns out it does harm other people. Self-clinging also causes us to think we know what the precepts mean.

[73:49]

Self-clinging will also be projected on the precepts and you think, I know what's right and wrong, and that means I know if I'm right, then you're wrong, and therefore you will be punished by me. or you guys, I'll make war against you guys because I know what's right and wrong. That kind of attitude in that I could go to war to defeat bad people is based on self-clinging. If I don't have self-clinging, I will never hurt anyone. Self-clinging makes you think you can break the precepts. It makes you think you can break the precepts. It makes you think other people can break the precepts. So, if you think that you're breaking the precept, then at that time you probably feel sorry, which is good. You should feel sorry you break the precepts. That your mind, the way you understand it, has caused you to think you're breaking the precepts. But if you think other people are breaking the precepts and you think you know that they really did break it and you know it's right and wrong, then you're in a judgmental mind and that's much worse than thinking you're breaking the precepts. That's really, that's the worst. Because then you're going to be tempted to break the precept number six, which is to speak of the faults of others.

[74:58]

And when we study number six, you'll find out that it really doesn't ever make any sense to speak of anybody's faults. You should never speak of other people's faults. Buddhas never speak of other people's faults. Why? Because there's no self-cleaning upon which you would establish that somebody else was at fault. You just cannot think that way because there is nobody else. Because you don't have any self-clinging. Only through self-clinging can there be anybody other to criticize. Without self-clinging, there will be no criticizing other people's faults. Speaking of other people's faults, in an uncritical but objective way... What about me speaking of something which you would call a fault on somebody else? Say that over again. Like you might consider, for example, me to be overweight. And I might speak of my weight, myself, but not consider it to be a fault.

[76:13]

Whereas actually, according to him, I would be speaking of a fault, because I'm overweight. I could speak of that. We were talking about the Green Gulch basketball team, and you couldn't qualify because you were overweight, but we weren't holding it against you. I couldn't qualify because I'm not tall enough. Well, if you weren't too fat, that would also have been the same thing. Thank you. You can say you can't be on the Green Globes basketball team because you're not six feet tall. You can say that to me, and you can say that to me without criticizing me at all. As a matter of fact, in your mind, it could be a compliment. laughter [...] Buddhists are aware of their own shortcomings. They notice them and they acknowledge them.

[77:14]

And they don't notice the shortcomings of other people. And if they notice the shortcomings of other people, they notice a shortcoming of themselves in noticing the shortcomings of others. They notice they've just violated a precept by noticing the shortcomings of others. Then to speak of it on top of that would really be heavy karma. So where does evaluating qualifications come in? You know, I mean, just, you know, like... You might say to somebody, you might be a Buddha or something, and then somebody is applying for a job, and you might say about them, well, I don't, I really don't think I want them for that job, because they're pretty inclined to be mean to other people. So I don't want them for that job. Is that sort of what you mean? Yeah, I mean, you know, this is kind of a high-person impact type job, and they should... You know, somebody else could flow better in this job and it'd be better for this person's practice to be doing something else. There's a way to deal with situations like that without speaking of the faults of others. It's called Buddha.

[78:17]

It's the way Buddha would handle it. Buddha would handle that situation without speaking of the faults of the person. Somebody else would say, that person's mean, you're going to put them, carry these people, they're mean. Buddha is the mind that can find a way to talk about that in such a way as to speak of the situation without talking of the faults of others. Think about it. How would you do that? That's called Buddha. It's inconceivable. It's inconceivable. Like, for example, you know, things like this. Like I said last week, you know, imagine selling your car and somebody comes to buy it and you try to give them a good deal. They offer you $600 or do it the other way around. Somebody's trying to sell you a car, they're trying to get you to pay as much as possible and you pay them as much as possible. And plus you say, here's some more. That's not the usual way. Or somebody's stealing things in the monastery, and they find out who's doing it. So the teacher says, okay, everybody bring all your possessions and give them to the guy. This is an unusual, you know, creative approach.

[79:23]

Rather than say, this is a bad person, he's stealing, you know. So if this person's a mean, you might say, well, you don't say mean, but you say... Well, first of all, if you think of another person, the one, if the answer is yes, then you've already got that going for you. Then, are you associating this person, when you think of over there, with the behavior? You can say something's bad without talking about criticizing another. There are bad behaviors. You can speak of that behavior without talking about another person having that behavior and talking about that person's faults. It is possible to do that. You can do it. For example, teaching a kid, your daughter, how to ride a bicycle. You can talk about her before she knows how to ride a bicycle as though there's something wrong with her. You can think she's defective for not knowing how to ride a bicycle.

[80:26]

It's possible. Or you can see she doesn't know how to ride a bicycle and I'd like to teach her how to ride a bicycle and I'd like to be there when she learns and before she learns how she's a perfect being and after she learns how at the moment she learns I can watch her learn and enjoy the pleasure of her learning that. Same way with people's any behaviors that they have that they have anything that they've learned or not learned you can enjoy the person as a perfect being that you love completely as they are and then watch them change and enjoy that too. Yes? When you have compassion for someone or for yourself, is that not that you notice a shortcoming? Compassion is not to notice shortcomings. Compassion may be known as suffering. Right, but also... And you may notice... I guess noticing suffering, you're noticing shortcomings. And I can imagine that the reason why the person is suffering is because they have self-limiting. Yes. So you can notice... Buddha looks at everybody and sees everybody... Buddha sees that all beings have the wisdom and virtues of Buddha.

[81:34]

That's what Buddhists see. And they also see that people don't believe that because they have prejudice... prejudice views and attachments. Buddha can see that. But Buddha does not think, as Buddha is talking about this, that he's speaking of the false of others. He feels he's describing... the goodness of people and the reason why they don't realize it. That doesn't seem to me like the Buddha's going around speaking of the faults of others. Problems with the whole shame issue, I guess. For me, shame has a certain really negative self-hating, maybe just the way it's in our culture, but the idea, I don't feel shame for someone else repeating, you know, seeing what someone else is doing that's hurting them or that's keeping them in a suffering place. Why would I do that to myself? Why would I feel shame? I would feel... Bad? I mean, you want to notice it, but you don't want to feel bad. You know what I'm saying?

[82:35]

I'm trying to... So I'm using shame a different way. So if you want to use shame that way, it's a free country. No, like I said, I'm just used to that. The word shame that I'm using is a sense of separation and alienation from my origins. And also a sense of longing to be united. That's part of shame. And it's a wholesome thing. To feel, I don't know exactly what you said, self-hating, that's laziness. That's not shame. In the way that I've seen... I know, that's the way the word's used. I think shame is associated with self-pity and self-deprecation and those kinds of things. That's not what I mean by shame. It's not the way I'm using the word. Shame in Buddhism is a wholesome state of mind. It means being aware of the fact that you think you're qualified, that basically you're close to Buddha and you feel some separation from Buddha. You're actually an enlightened being and somehow you feel some separation from that. You're dedicated to the way of enlightenment and you feel some separation from that.

[83:38]

That's a wholesome thing to feel for a human being. It's not the same as enlightenment, but in terms of mental state, it's a good mental state. It's not shame. That's what I'm calling shame. Is it being humble? I certainly like humble, but humble is a little different. But still, you know, it's getting late. So I think we don't want to torture people and cause people to stay longer than they want to. So we sort of have to end the class, but if people that don't want to end the class want to come over to talk some more, that's okay. So we didn't get to talk about the three precepts this time, I mean three treasures. So next time, I'll try to start with that. And I have a question. Yesterday was Rosh Hashanah, right? But next week, I think, is Yom Kippur, right?

[84:39]

Now, does Yom Kippur function in such a way that some of you won't be able to come to class? You dance at sundown. Can you come to class after Yom Kippur? Yes. So does this mean that people who are practicing Yom Kippur can't come to class? Technically? So, I'm sorry. Unless they're Buddha. I don't know. You know, it should be clear from the beginning that for Dogen Zenji, who says that the entrance into Zen practice is to receive the precepts, that this person who's saying that is a person who believes that Buddha is primarily, fundamentally, a compassionate being, that the whole thing here is about compassion.

[85:50]

Precepts are about compassion. And the entrance into the practice of compassion is to receive these precepts. So, self-clinging is the main problem, which is causing our lack of compassion for ourself and for others. And I guess the Yom Kippur is atonement for sins, is that right? So, if people can't come, they'll be doing the same thing in another form. You've got to sin or atone. And fortunately, we do. And Jordan will take care of us. And they are intention...

[86:32]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_83.67