May we practice emptiness, relinquishing all views and thus being able to respond to each other appropriately. A monk asked me, are we partners? I don't remember what I said. Are we partners? Are we partners? Howdy, partner. Are we partners?

[01:01]

If you say no, then are you a partner and not being a partner? Or is this non-partnership being forced on you and you're just like passive? But if you're passive and accepting non-partnership, you're a partner in that non-partnership. You can't be made not a partner by somebody else. Somebody can say to you, hey, man, I ain't your partner. You can say, well, I don't accept that. Sorry. I mean, not sorry. Being partners is not an option. But still, someone may ask, are we partners?

[02:15]

And somebody might say, well, I don't think so, or I think so, or I want so, or it must be so, or what is a partner? There was this Chinese man who was very good at playing, I believe, a Chinese instrument, something like a lute. And he had a friend who used to listen to him play. And then his friend died. And when his friend died, he tore the strings out of his lute. This person asked me, this person asked me, are we partners?

[03:25]

And then he said something about, what about this? I think he said, what about having no privacy? I think he said, what about this having no privacy? And I think I said, it's not that you don't have any privacy, it's that you give it up. It's not that you don't have any privacy, it's that you give it up. It's not that you don't have any views, it's that you relinquish them. However, there's one view that you probably should not have anymore, that you should destroy. The rest of them you can keep. Just the belief, the view of inherent existence, that's the only one you've got to get rid of, obliterate, destroy.

[04:28]

The rest of them, they can still be there. Just don't give them up, which means you can use them when they're appropriate. So then this person says, Maybe I should give up some of my privacy and tell you about some stuff. Should I tell you every private thing I do? And I said, well, not necessarily. But if there's something that if you told me you'd feel lighter, if there's something you're carrying around that you'd feel more free if you told me, then maybe those things would be good to not be private about. So he told me about something that she was a little bit embarrassed about.

[05:32]

But I think she may have some other things that she's more embarrassed about that I'll hear about later, but just sort of warming up to the big ones with this little one. And the little one is, you know, when priests use the toilet, they're supposed to take all their clothes off and put on a bathing suit. That's why it takes so long for them to... So he confessed that he abbreviated the ritual, kept some of his clothes on that he was supposed to take off, He didn't keep all of them on. Some of them that he was supposed to take off, he didn't take off. And he told me that. And so he told me about that.

[06:36]

So then I said, okay, good. So did you feel lighter? A little bit. So now you might consider whether... Now, you know, we can talk later, but you might consider about whether you're going to continue this occasionally not taking off something that traditionally you're supposed to take off, whether you actually are going to do it like you're going to do the traditional thing or not, but that you will talk it over and we'll talk it over. Maybe somebody might say, you know, I think this tradition is old-fashioned. It doesn't apply anymore or something. Like, toilets in Asia are much dirtier than toilets in America, so you had to take on more of your clothes than we do here. So we'll talk more, this priest and I, about this.

[07:48]

And maybe we won't agree. Maybe she'll say, well, I'm going to actually, every other time I'm going to take it off. Or I'm not going to take it off. Or I'm going to take it off. Maybe we'll disagree. So another priest came and talked to me about disagreeing. And he really thought it was important. He thought the only, I don't know what he said, but he might have said something like, the only way we can have X is if we disagree. Maybe he said the only way we can have harmony is if we disagree. I don't know what he said, but he said the only way something can happen is if we... I think what he said is the only way we can be brothers and sisters is if we disagree. Is that what he said? That's what he said. So fortunately, he was happy to tell me he disagreed with me.

[08:57]

He was very grateful to me for saying things this practice period that he disagreed with, so he could feel himself disagree. He feels that that's necessary. And when Suzuki Roshi was alive, I said to him one time, How come we never disagree? It's so easy. And he said, we will eventually. But then he died. So I never had a chance to disagree with him. So one of the things that people disagree with me about is this beginner's mind thing. So now I can maybe disagree with Suzuki Roshi. At last, I'll get him. But actually I don't so much disagree with him, it's just more a matter of interpretation.

[09:59]

Because he makes beginner's mind sound really good. Like beginner's mind is something you should never forget about. You should never lose your beginner's mind. And beginner's mind is compassion. And in a beginner's mind there's all kinds of possibilities. but in the expert's mind, there's few. These kinds of things makes beginner's mind sound pretty good. And I agree, beginner's mind's pretty good. There's two possibilities. Beginner's mind's pretty good, and it's like, when a beginner's mind's really good, or pretty good, or very good, and has all these possibilities, and is compassion, and in the beginner's mind, there's no thought of, you know, I've attained something. That kind of sounds good, doesn't it? No thought of I've attained something. And the beginner's mind maybe is like the same as our original mind.

[11:15]

So, but that, to me, that doesn't make too much sense that you'd say the beginner's mind is really the swell mind that's the same as the original mind, because we think maybe the original mind is kind of a swell mind, don't we? I think it's more interesting that the beginner's mind is deluded, really deluded and greedy. But, you know, you can be deluded and greedy and still not think that you know anything about Zen. You can still be open and still be deluded and greedy. But to me what's interesting is that the beginner's mind, if it is deluded and greedy, that it is exactly the same. Not exactly the same, but it is not different from the original mind. It is not different from Buddha's mind. That's more interesting to me. That more has to do with non-duality. But if a beginner's mind is swell, fine.

[12:22]

What do you want to call the mind that's below a beginner's mind? That's not as good as a beginner's mind. That's the mind which you must not forget. It's okay to forget your swell beginner's mind. I think it's okay to forget it. You won't forget that anyway. What you might forget is your stinky beginner's mind. And the openness of beginner's mind is that you're open to be deluded. You're open to be kind of like as deluded as the next person. So, My point is, no matter how advanced you get, even if you get an expert's mind that has few possibilities, at least have one possibility in your expert mind. All you need is one possibility and that is, remember the beginner's mind. Remember the lowest possible mind. The lowest.

[13:23]

The mind even before you wanted to practice. If you think that the mind you had when you came to practice was kind of above some other mind, okay. That's not the beginner's mind that I think you should remember. You should remember one that's more deluded than that. Now, if you think when you came to practice and you walked in the door of Zen Center and you were open-minded and didn't think much of yourself and you were pretty deluded and depressed and although you may have felt worse sometime, basically you were as bad as you've ever been, if that's what you think beginner's mind was, then that's the mind I would recommend you don't get out of touch with. But if there's any mind lower than that, don't forget that one. That's what I would say. I think that's... what beginner's mind's about, is about no matter how long you practice, don't forget, don't get out of touch with the lowest state you've ever been in, or the lowest state anybody's ever been in.

[14:33]

And remember that Buddha is never out of touch, that the life of Buddha is not being out of touch with the lowest state of misery, the most deep confusion. I think that's kind of where Suzuki Roshi was at, not to get away from that. And so, being willing to be that much of a beginner is compassion. Buddha is the one who is willing to be as beginner as beginners can get. And in that willingness to be that way, you are open. If you admit how deluded you are, you're willing to receive some instruction. Like that guy, the naked ascetic. He was pretty smart when he first met the Buddha. But after talking to him for a while, he finally could say, blessed one, would you please teach me about suffering?

[15:41]

Would you instruct me about the nature of suffering? He went down in that conversation to a place where he could be instructed. When he first arrived, he wasn't as much of a beginner as later. He got more to the beginner's mind after talking to the Buddha for a while. And the same with the director Tzu. He wasn't a beginner when he first talked to Fa Yan. He was... He was enlightened when he first started talking to Fa Yan, right? Master, what can I say? I mean, you know, the reason why I don't talk to you is because I have entry. Fa Yan helped him go back to the beginning. But at the beginning, not only was he open to Fa Yan, but he was open to his own delusion. And everybody else's.

[16:44]

So because of disagreement, now I can be in harmony with this person. Now we're in complete harmony and agreement and ready for the next disagreement. But again, you know, about this privacy business, giving up privacy doesn't mean there isn't any. There still is some privacy. There's some things which are even private from yourself. There's some things which will always be private. But still, you can give up that privacy, not put any energy into being in there to protect it. If you or anybody else should stumble upon these private zones, it's okay. So we've been on a little trip this practice period and some people are noticing that there's been a bump in the road or that there's been, somebody said there's been a kind of a radical shift recently in what's been going on around here.

[18:32]

And I can see that, that it might look like that. And if anybody's having trouble with this radical shift, let me know. I'll hold your hand. It'll be okay. Need any help? Let me know. I'm not saying I'll give you what you want, but I'll respond. I mean, that's my intention.

[19:38]

That's what I want to be up for. There is a kind of language which is, you know, that wisdom is to see or to know the nature of things and how things come to be. The Buddha said, I heard the Buddha said, you know, when you see how things come to be, you see Dharma. In other words, when you see dependent core arising, you see the truth. I think that's right. I think that's right. When you see emptiness, you see the truth. I agree. And in seeing emptiness, there is a relinquishment of all views.

[20:46]

And then hopefully there's also the relinquishment of the view of emptiness by not being out of touch with beginner's mind. Relinquishing emptiness, you're ready for the lowest mind to appear. I agree. Any problems? No. You're okay, right? this is all okay with with everything but another this is this seeing is not the fullness of wisdom for me today the fullness of wisdom is not only seeing equals relinquishing views, it is responding appropriately to the cries of the world.

[21:52]

Wisdom is responding. Wisdom is activity, not just seeing. The, you know, there's a Chinese word which means circle. In Japanese it's pronounced N and in Chinese it's pronounced, I mean, it's a Chinese character, but the Japanese pronounce it N and the Chinese pronounce it Iran. It means circle. And in Chinese dictionary, in Japanese dictionary, it says circle or round. But in the Buddhist context, when you put it with a word like enlightenment, It's often translated not as round enlightenment or circular enlightenment, but as perfect enlightenment. Like the famous Zen master, Yuran Wu. The commentator in the Blue Cliff Record, his name is Round Awakening.

[23:08]

Complete, round, full, perfect. Perfect means complete. But the character is round. So there's this roundness. And when you touch it, when you touch this roundness, there's a response. It's like an egg. You touch it and there's a response. It rejects. or there's fertilization. But either way, there's a response. Responding appropriately to our own suffering responding appropriately to others' suffering is Buddha.

[24:15]

Buddha is responding appropriately to our suffering. Right now, Buddha is responding appropriately to our suffering. Buddha is, right now, responding appropriately to our suffering. That's what Buddha's doing right now. That's what Buddha's doing right now. If there's Buddha, that's what Buddha's doing right now. I take refuge in Buddha who is right now responding appropriately to my suffering. And if there is here, right here, now, the appropriate response to my suffering, that is Buddha. then that is Buddha here right now. And if there is right here now appropriate responding to your suffering, that is Buddha right now. And whether you can see it or not, if there is Buddha, that's what Buddha is doing right now.

[25:32]

Enlightenment is right now responding appropriately to the cries of the world. Are you a partner in this relationship with Buddha?

[28:34]

Are you a partner in this responding appropriately? Are you a partner in this relationship with Buddha? And part of the appropriate response is that there's no difference between the cry and the response.

[29:44]

That's part of the appropriate responding. By the way, it's not an appropriate response for the response to be separate or from somebody who is separate from the cry. It's not an appropriate response for the senior practitioner to be responding as a separate being from the beginner. This is not an appropriate response. The appropriate response is just the response. The appropriateness of the response is the response. And the response can somehow be inappropriate if somebody separate from the other is doing the response.

[30:54]

then it's something held by this side doing to the other side. That's not an appropriate response. That's a pre-existing good idea. There's an expression, partnership agreement.

[32:40]

People sometimes draw partnership agreements. Is that the right term? Partnership agreement? But it's almost more, in the spirit of appropriate response, it's more like partnership disagreement. We should write up a partnership disagreement. I used to do this thing called theater sports, which is a kind of improvisational theater played in a kind of sports-like arena where you had like teams, improvisational teams.

[33:54]

And then like judges, the teams would send up players and the player from one side would offer the player from the other side something. And then the player from the other side could respond. And then from that respond, the player on the other side could respond. And there would be judges, you know. So one of the rules of theater sports was if somebody comes up and offers you something, you don't reject it. Like somebody says, you know, oh, Eleanor, you look real cute today. She doesn't say, no, I don't. you kind of lose immediately as soon as you're like... You facilitate the other team. What the other team offers, you facilitate it. You get points for facilitating what the other team offers. And then you can facilitate kind of half-heartedly, which is called wimping.

[35:06]

This is blocking and wimping. But to fully enable the other side gives you more points. If they do something, they get points. If they express anything, they get points. But if you take it and carry it forward and develop it to their advantage, you get more points than they do. And then if they can also take your response and do the same, they get more points. And one of the games, one of the theater sports games was called, I think it was called The King. But these days we probably should say The Sovereign. So someone would sit, they have a little chair, and The Sovereign would sit in the chair. And then people would walk up to meet The Sovereign. And you get points for how many, your team would get points for how many seconds you could stay in the presence of The Sovereign.

[36:12]

The sovereign, as you come to the sovereign, the sovereign can say, bye. Now the people who are sovereigns only get to be sovereign for like whatever, you know, 10 minutes. So they don't want to waste too much time with, you know, uninteresting visitors. So people come up there, they're trying to like, you know, they're trying to like see how long they could entertain the sovereign, right? How long they could like stay in the sovereign's presence. And people would come, you know, they would start coming up and the sovereign would say, bye. They just start approaching, it's their turn, you know. The turn starts, bye. And some people would get halfway up to meet the sovereign before the sovereign would say, bye, or out, or it's enough. The person who lasted longest was some little kid who didn't understand the game and wasn't trying to impress the sovereign.

[37:30]

Now, sometimes it's slightly interesting when someone's trying to impress you and get your approval and get you to let them stay for a while. That sometimes is a little interesting, but not very long, especially when you have other possibilities coming up. And then some of the people come up and say, okay, I can see all those people are trying to be ingratiating and the sovereign doesn't find that entertaining, so I'm going to be non-ingratiating. Don't even start that. Any technique you use to ingratiate, disingratiate, anything you use where you're trying to stay in the presence of the sovereign, the sovereign does not find that interesting. How about trying to entertain the sovereign without caring how long you get to stay? those people got to stay a little longer. But even so, they still had to be entertaining. So some people kind of gave up their gaining idea, but they weren't entertaining.

[38:34]

How about, you know, who's the one who really entertains the sovereign? And who's the one who wants to find out what it is they do that's uninteresting to the other? Who wants to find that out? Well, most people did. They played the game. It was a very interesting game. And now if a sovereign saw another sovereign, how long would the other sovereign last? Not too long either, maybe. Oh, another sovereign. Well, no thank you. I'll be the sovereign. You get your turn later. This is like partnership, right? How are you going to get a partnership with a person who is a sovereign? You may say, I don't want a partnership with a sovereign. Okay. Cross that sentence being off the list.

[39:42]

Who do you want to be in partnership with? Who do you want to be in partnership with? And... Are you going to let them know about this? Or is this going to be a silent partnership? I'm in partnership with a person, but I'm not going to tell them. And who don't you want to be in partnership with? And what's that called? That's called anti-Bodhisattva. Not like Uncle Bodhisattva, but opposite of Bodhisattva. I don't want to be in partnership with those people. I do not want to be in partnership with that person. I do not want to be in partnership with that person. I would consider being in domination of that person, but I'm not going to spend much time on it.

[40:45]

But, you know, occasionally I'd be willing to like tell him to leave or something like that. But to like be in partnership with that person? No. I do not want to have a life in common with that person. This is not... I'm not interested. I'm not a bodhisattva. Leave me alone. I do not want to respond appropriately to this person's suffering. I do not want to. Okay. Now we can respond appropriately to that. I do not want to have a partnership with this person. I do not. Well, that's something that can be responded to appropriately. What's the appropriate response to that? Do we want, can we be in partnership with this person who does not want to be in partnership with somebody else? Yes. We can work something out here. We do not have to agree.

[41:47]

Right now, it seems like the main question is, do you wish to be in partnership with all sentient beings? Do you wish to be in this relationship which is appropriate, which is apropos of their suffering, which liberates beings? At the same time, you understand that there is no being liberated. And that's where you give up your view... will help you enter into this kind of relationship. And entering into this kind of relationship will help you relinquish your views. Realizing emptiness, this way of responding. The same thing.

[43:07]

Same thing. Buddha. It is the activity of Buddha. And there's all kinds of studies that can be done in relationship to this kind of work. This kind of responding. All kinds of teachings, all kinds of meditations, all can be done. But the point of them all is this this relationship. And I think it's wonderful, really wonderful, that it's available to all of us.

[45:19]

And again, that's another key point of beginner's mind, that you're willing to come up on the bottom of this. You're willing to be totally... totally lousy at this. If you're not willing to be totally lousy at this, you won't be able to respond appropriately because you're going to be holding on to that view, I can't be this bad. I can't be this unskillful at this. But I am, so I'm not going to try it. I can't be this impatient, I can't be this disgusted with this person. I cannot be this disgusted. This is just like beneath me to feel this way about this person. I can't deal with how low I think they are.

[46:30]

Can't. Beginner's mind is I can. I can like have really sleazy thoughts. I can be really unskillful. Therefore, I can have a relationship with this person who I feel really unskillful with. I can be a partner with this person who I think they're skillful and I'm not. I can be a partnership with a person where I think I'm skillful and I think they are. I'm not so advanced that I can't be stupid. And I'm not too beginning, too much of a beginner, that I can't have a relationship with a great advanced one. Not just a relationship, but a partnership. I could have a partnership with a great such and such.

[47:33]

And the great such and such better be able to have a relationship with me. Otherwise they wouldn't be a great such and such. Hey, Buddha, you're supposed to be able to even relate to me. Like, you know, full attention. But it's okay if you kind of like wince. Buddha can wince when he looks at how bad our practice is. Buddha can wince when he hears about how we go to the toilet. But we can tell Buddha how we go to the toilet and we can shock Buddha. But we can also keep it secret and not tell Buddha. I'm not going to tell you, I'm not going to tell you anything, any bad things I've done. I'm not going to tell you one thing. It's not that the one who's horrified is the Buddha. It's that the Buddha is between the one who's horrified and the one who's horrible.

[48:41]

So we have one really bad Zen student here who's doing these really bad things, and this other Zen student who's really shocked by this behavior. The Buddha's in between there, responding appropriately to the suffering of the lofty Zen student and the sleazy Zen student. The Buddha's in between there, responding appropriately. It's the appropriate response between them. Can you see that appropriate response? And can you do your part of being the great one or the unskillful one? And a key thing in this, key thing in this is being able to fall down and not get hurt too badly so that you're able to get up again and willing to get up again or wanting to get up again. So in this relationship, you know, you're afraid, you're afraid of hurting them and then what they'll do to you after you hurt them or what they'll get other people to do to you after you hurt them.

[50:02]

You really think you're being nice. I don't want to tell you because, you know, you're going to, you're going to like, You're going to have a meltdown or you're going to have a nervous breakdown or you're going to commit suicide if I tell you this stuff. So I can't tell you you're too fragile for me to tell you what I think of you. I can't tell you. I can't respond properly because you can't handle it. Not only all those things but on top of that you're a wimp. So I can't talk to you. So I'm going to hold it inside because I am protecting you But really, I'm protecting me from what will happen to me if that happens to you. So how are you going to get it out there if things are all that fragile and dangerous? Well, you have to have this partnership disagreement. You have to have, like, waivers signed, you know. You can devastate me. You can devastate me. I sign right here. You can devastate me.

[51:05]

And I will tell other people, but also you have this piece of paper saying that I let you devastate me and that we're up for this. So anybody that you think you can't talk to, ask them if they want you to talk to them and tell them that you don't dare talk to them and get their permission to tell them the things you have to say. See who wants to play with you. But I guess, first of all, do you want to play? Or do you want to withdraw into complete perfect enlightenment? All by yourself, perfectly isolated and in touch with your own version of your beginner's mind and everything like that. Or do you want to come out and interact with these suffering beings, one of whom might be you.

[52:06]

And you want to declare that you want to do that and ask for people to play with you and agree how you're going to struggle together. And admit what you're afraid of to the extent that you think that that would be appropriate. and find out what they're afraid of. Get this stuff out of the basement. Get it above ground. No matter how poisonous it is. Doesn't that sound like a really good idea? I think, I don't know if it was Joanne Macy's idea, but anyway, she wanted people to popularize the idea of getting the nuclear toxic wastes up out of the ground, putting them up in the air, you know, above ground, and making a temple around them.

[53:16]

With, you know, Bodhisattva guardians of these toxic wastes. So we can see there are poisons in this earth. This earth has created people. People have created special poisons. And these poisons, it's good for us to know where they are. So let's get them above the ground. If you put them underground, people will forget where they are. So then we have this poison down there. And we won't remember necessarily it's there. And then the container might break, and then the poison will ooze, and then it'll really be hard to tell where it is. And then we'll all get poisoned. But if we can put it above ground, or we can see it and say, whoops, the container's leaking, got to fix it, put a patch on it. And these poisons will not last forever, but they last a real long time relative to human life, so... We have to take care of them. We have to take care of them, otherwise we're going to hurt ourselves, right?

[54:21]

So what's the best way to take care of them? Underground or above ground? Well, underground is safer in one way, but above ground is safer in another. But I think enlightenment is about when we're ready, let's bring them up above ground. When you're ready, bring your beginner's mind up above ground. And maybe you can get some people to watch it at night when you're sleeping.

[54:56]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_89.43