I've heard that the Venerable Kacchayana asked the Buddha, to what extent is there a right view? And the Buddha responded, in this world, Kacchayana, this world, Kacchayana, is generally inclined towards two theories, existence and non-existence. If I may rephrase that, Buddha said, this world is generally inclined towards two views. The view of all phenomena inherently existing and the view that things don't exist at all.

[01:01]

And I'd like to also point to the word incline towards these views. Incline means or could be understood to mean not being upright, leaning. Being upright towards these views towards the view or theory that all phenomena... Yes? Being upright towards or in the face of the theory of existence, the view of existence, of inherent existence, to be upright in the face of it, and also to be upright in the face of the theory of nonexistence, or that things don't exist at all.

[02:35]

Just being upright is the middle way. Being upright and being on the middle way, there's no leaning or inclination towards any views of existence. So we don't lean towards the view that things inherently exist. We don't lean towards the view that there's no existence at all. And even the theory that things are dependent co-arisings, we don't even lean towards that, even though that's not an extreme view.

[03:43]

We're even upright with regard to that. in the middle way. For him or her who perceives with right wisdom, the Buddha said, so got somebody perceiving with right wisdom the uprising of the world as it comes to be, the notion of non-existence, or the idea that things don't exist at all, will not occur. So, is that clear? If one observes the arising of the world, the arising of phenomena as

[04:47]

they come to be. In that observation one will not lean towards or come up with the idea that things don't exist at all. Kacchayana, to him or her who perceives with right wisdom the ceasing of the world as it comes to be, the notion of existence or inherent existence does not occur. If one who observes or perceives with right wisdom the ceasing of the world as it comes to be the notion of inherent existence does not occur.

[05:57]

The middle way is settling into the experience of this arising and ceasing of empirical phenomena. It's giving up, distracting ourselves from this empirical experience, distracting ourselves by indulgence in sense pleasure, addiction to sense pleasure, and distracting ourselves by devotion to self-mortification. It's also giving up, distracting ourselves by searching for some permanent entity. Searching for a permanent entity or trying to grasp for some inherent existence, we miss the empirically given

[07:25]

experience. Put positively, if we do direct our attention towards what is immediately given, empirical phenomena, then in that attention these metaphysical things, these searchings for permanent and inherent things, doesn't occur. Our attempt to practice the middle way, to practice being upright in the midst of empirical experience and not distracting ourselves, this is something which we are trying to learn and train ourselves at.

[08:50]

But we already have a very powerful habit and tendency to grasp, to search for is something permanent, something substantial. To grasp after some inner ground. This is the essence of our, you know, ego-self clinging. And it's the source of our ongoing frustration. we may be able to appreciate that this grasping after some inner ground is part of a larger pattern of grasping after or clinging to an outer ground, to a pre-existent world.

[10:04]

Can you see that this grasping after a ground, inside or outside, is the source of your frustration and anxiety? And the mind, like a wall, is being upright even while its tendencies are still there. the tendency to grasp after outer grounds, outer substance, or the tendency to grasp for an inner substance. This is exactly what Bodhidharma taught us to give up, to cease grasping, to cease involvement with trying to find something substantial outwardly. trying to find some ground inwardly to cease that. And even if the tendency is going on to somehow sit upright in the middle of this activity and on some level not be involved in that.

[11:27]

Being upright in this middle way. Dealing with empirical phenomena, some of which is the empirical phenomena of distracting ourselves from empirical phenomena. In other words, one can empirically observe oneself distracting oneself from empirical phenomena. One can empirically observe somebody who's looking for something that's not happening. one can watch oneself searching for some ground. And watch oneself do this without trying to find some ground in this observation. Something substantial about this person who's trying to find something substantial. There's something poignant about this person who's trying to find something substantial.

[12:34]

We may feel pity and concern for this person who's always frustrated because he's distracting himself from what's going on. We can observe such a person. Such a person is often right nearby. Matter of fact, all persons that are nearby are usually like this. But some people are not, which is nice. Some people are like actually not distracting themselves and they're actually paying attention to what's happening. And, again, if we can watch, if we can perceive the arising of phenomena, the arising of pain, the arising of pleasure, as it comes to be, as it comes to be... It's somewhat redundant for the Buddha to say to perceive the arising of phenomena as it comes to be with right wisdom.

[13:41]

To perceive as it comes to be is to perceive with right wisdom. But anyway, to perceive with right wisdom a phenomena as it comes to be, one does not then look for some theory like things are annihilated. don't exist at all. And if you watch things cease, as they come to cease, as they come to be ceased, the idea of inherent... Excuse me, I got it wrong. Yeah, I got it right. The idea of inherent existence will not arise. So this is early teaching on emptiness. So one of the, is it worldly affairs that we're going to renounce?

[15:11]

Renouncing worldly affairs is to give up the search, be upright and give up the search for the beauty king or the beauty queen. Again, the Buddha says, the world, for the most part, Kacchayana, is bound by approach, grasping and inclination.

[16:22]

And she who does not follow that approach, grasping and inclination of mind, that inclination and disposition, and does not cling to the view or adhere to the view, this is myself, this is my permanent, inherently existing self. Such a person does not doubt, is not perplexed. Do you want to be such a person who does not follow approach, grasping, inclination, who does not cling to the view, this is my permanent self?

[17:41]

Suffering that is subject to arising arises. Suffering that is subject to ceasing ceases. Observing in this way, one does not doubt and is not perplexed, is not anxious. Thus far, Katiyana, there is right view. Are there types of suffering that are not subject to arising and ceasing?

[21:54]

Suffering that is not arising is not subject to arising. Do you understand? The suffering that you haven't experienced yet is not subject to arising. The suffering which you'll never experience is not subject to arising. But the suffering that is subject to arising is arising. And you get to see it. Now, that one, you can be sure, is subject also to ceasing. But unarisen suffering is not subject to ceasing. But the suffering that's arising right now is subject to ceasing and will cease. And you get to watch it if you want. And if you're on the middle way, that's all you've got to watch.

[23:01]

Because you're not distracting yourself by other programs. It's not necessarily pleasant to watch this arising and ceasing of suffering. However, if you do watch it, undistractedly, you will not be perplexed and not be in doubt. And there'll be joy there. And eventually, freedom from the sources of the suffering One can be on the middle way and observe as the Buddha just said, but still, even though you're not inclined towards the view that things inherently exist, there still is such a view. In other words, you still see things appearing and they seem to appear as though they're actually existing there.

[24:07]

And not only that, But you may conceive them as truly being there. So the appearance of these truly existing or inherently existing things may still be happening to you, even though you're practicing in the way the Buddha said here. So if these... appearances are still happening and if you conceive them to be, if the appearance of inherent existence is still arising and there's conceiving of it as true and you have the conception also of true existence of self or things, there will be some problem, some pain. But you are observing this

[25:12]

as it comes to be. And in that observation in the observation in the observation this appearance will not be arising. This theory will not be living. Was there a hand over there? Yes? Is unenriched suffering something that you just imagined might happen? No. It's not something I imagined might happen. Then what is unenriched suffering? How can it be something that's never going to happen? No, it's not something that's never going to happen. It's something that hasn't happened yet. All the suffering which you're going to have from now on hasn't happened yet. Right.

[26:27]

That's all. That's why it says the suffering that's subject to arising arises. Also, some kinds of suffering are not going to happen to you because, you know, when you're a woman, certain kind of suffering won't happen to you. And when you're a man, certain kind of suffering won't happen to you. Just, you know, certain kind of suffering can't happen to you because it's not subject to arising because there aren't the conditions for it. So that's not going to happen either. But the suffering that is subject to arising arises and you get to watch it. Yes, was there somebody else? Yes? Can you talk about observing phenomena as they come to be or as they come to see something?

[27:29]

Oh, I see. You can see the arising and ceasing, The as it comes to be is not clear to you? Well, just one thing that comes to my mind is... And again, the coming of this to my mind has something to do with the fact that you asked this question. But what came to my mind was that you may be able to see that given certain appearances and given certain conceptions, a certain type of suffering arises.

[28:42]

And you can see there's the arising of that suffering and it comes to be in association with these conditions. That's how... Well, in fact, if you saw the arising of a certain kind of suffering, and then you saw that it was dependent, that something else was associated with it, and you saw, and it seemed to you that maybe that was a condition for it, that would be, in fact, you would be examining, but you wouldn't necessarily be intending to examine. You might just see that. Your mind just might be able to see, oh, there's suffering, but also this suffering doesn't arise all by itself. It arises with this sense of my inherent existence.

[29:45]

Right, the coming to be and the idea also could be empirical in the sense of you could empirically Observe, it's introspective for now, but you could empirically introspect that this thing really seems to appear to be substantially existent, truly out there on its own. You really feel like that. That's your sense. That's an empirical phenomenon too. So you see the arising of suffering and you see simultaneous with it the condition of which I think you could empirically observe, that you think that something, perhaps the face of another person, is really there. And you also conceive it to be true, that it seems to be there, but it's not just a mirage.

[31:07]

You actually think it's really there. So those factors are there accompanying the impact of this suffering. All of them could be empirically observed. Or just one of them. You could also just see the suffering arise without seeing the conditions for it. Or even see associated things, but not necessarily think that they're conditions. And that observation, in a sense, if you see them separately in their relationship, there's some analysis there, but the analysis might not be an analysis where you're intentionally analyzing, but it couldn't be that you're intentionally analyzing. And the intentional analysis, in the end, should be given up. And in place of intentional analysis, which is slightly disturbing of the mind, there should be an uninvolved, non-conceptual presence with these phenomena.

[32:10]

And bringing with it is more like your analytic understanding your understanding which came from the insight of that association from the past when you maybe were conceptually analyzing. But as it comes to be, sometimes you can see the arising of something, the ceasing of it, or the arising of something, and you can't see how it comes to be. You can just see that it is come to be, but you don't see the how. You don't see the... conditional, that you don't see the dependency. I think, first of all, is to empirically observe and not worry about the how. Because worrying about the how is, again, searching for something other than what's given. So, I think the first thing to do is to have this mind like a wall, which is to take, receive what's given.

[33:17]

And if you're not being given the information about the conditions that this phenomena depends on, if that's not given to you, even though you've heard that that would be good to see, because that part, that next part of the line, as it comes to be, is crucial. So then you might go looking for that. In the past, you might have been looking for the permanence of things that were arising, even though that wasn't given to you. So if something's arising and you look for the permanence of it or the inherent existence of it, you miss the empirical reality. This is a bummer. This is an unfortunate thing. If you give that up, then you might say, well, now that I've given that up, now I'm just watching empirical phenomena. This is good. And it is. But then you might say, what about this as it comes to be? And start looking for that. And that's a little bit off track, too.

[34:19]

So, if you're observing empirical phenomena without getting involved with them, with this mind like a wall, having no involvement in the Arisement, just clearly observing, there's a certain phase where you maybe compromise a little bit and slightly start to examine. But it's a little bit of a kind of defilement there. to like look for something other than what's given. It's better in a way if you could just observe what's given and then wait for the moment when what's given is, not only is this thing arising, but here's the conditions that comes with it. So you're given the phenomena and its conditions. I sometimes think that the meditative meaning of the second precept is this, you know, not taking what's not given.

[35:24]

So, if in fact you're given the arising of something, but you're not given the as-it-comes-to-be part, you don't try to get that part. But it has been given to you that the Buddha said that line. So, you might be sitting there thinking, oh, here's something that's arising. What about this as-there-comes-to-be business? But that might be just given to you. You weren't going to look for it. And then sometime it might become to you that, oh, here's something arising. Oh, and it depends on this. There's an analysis going there, but you aren't, you know, you aren't looking for something else. You're not looking for something that's given. So then that analysis is not so disturbing. Does that make any sense? Yes? No, I didn't quite follow what you're saying.

[36:33]

You're talking about observing empirical phenomena arising? Yes. Yes, how do you see the dependent core arising? Yes. What you call empirical view might be sharing the way to look for equalization or what you know like equalization chain and then you can call it this and you can call it that. Like, it's playing out the way things start to be. It might be just a metaphorical thing, but it's relational. Yeah, but the metaphorical relation might be how it comes to be. In other words, metaphorical relation might be another word for mental imputation.

[38:01]

So, you might become aware that some phenomena arises because of a metaphorical relationship. Namely, some phenomena arises because And it depends on the mind imputing a metaphor on the world. And that's how it comes to be. You might see that. And then you'd see, oh, this thing that's arising, it looks, you know, even if it arises with this sense of being solidly there, actually it depends on this metaphorical relationship. You might see that, and that's a kind of analytical understanding. But it might be all in the spirit of not going to look for something other than what's happening, but just revealed to you in your renunciation of worldly affairs, this is revealed to you.

[39:06]

And you're not looking for something revelatory. There's a revelation. of this as-it-comes-to-be business. So that's what the Buddha said, you know, in talking about the First Noble Truth. He said, I saw this is suffering as it comes to be. This is dukkha yatha bhutam. he saw this is suffering as it comes to be. Not just this is suffering, this is not just the arising of suffering, this is the arising of suffering as it comes to be. And right next, this is the origination of suffering as it comes to be. Even the origination or the source of suffering comes to be. Of course, that the second truth is the yatha bhutam of the first truth, is as it comes to be of the first truth. But all this might come to you without trying to get that.

[40:11]

In this case, you're not trying to get the ground. You're trying to get freedom from grasping at the ground by seeing the truth. Yes? It's not really very related. It's not related? Oh, really? You don't see the Yatabhutam. You don't see how it comes to be. It seems like an independent thing rising all by itself, right? No, no, not that. It's related to this, but not that. Okay. For me, it seems to be that there is a mother or so for every human who looks for the self. Maybe first is to look for, in the sense of pleasure, the continuation of the self, and which doesn't work. And then we try to look in the outside of those founders, the self.

[41:20]

And it seems to be quite common. And you said yesterday, The innate view is to look in the scholars. I didn't say that the non-innate is not common. I just said you learned that one. You learned it from non-Buddhists. Most of the religions try to present people, well, you will have a self-realization. Right. Yeah, that's right. That's right. Exactly. You got it. It's the non-Buddhists teach that one. I heard on the... Right, but... There, you know, some Buddhists... Buddhists are like people, right?

[42:25]

And some Buddhists, some people who are Buddhists, they adopt, you know, the teachings from other religions, which are sometimes given to them by Buddhists who are people. So I'm just saying that this looking for it outside the five aggregates is quite common, and people who want to be Buddhists can learn that. You have to learn it, yeah. It isn't innate, but you don't have to teach someone to look for it in their five skandhas. This is innate. But to learn to look for it outside, somebody, some philosopher or some teacher of another school of religion, it could be a Buddhist who's teaching you about something other than Buddhism, teaches you to look outside the five skandhas. But for Buddhists, in Buddhism, there is no such thing, right? But Buddhists sometimes talk like that. Because Buddhists are people. I've been raised in a society where Catholics were saying that myself wasn't in my body.

[43:38]

Right. Because body is not good. right and if if the self was inherently outside the body and outside the mind is it just outside the body but in the mind because if it's in the mind it's still in the five aggregates see in the mind or outside the mind too you didn't check on that yet any catholics here to tell him Anyway, if it is completely outside the mind, that means it's outside of mental imputation, then it really is independent. Then it comes to be, and actually it doesn't even come to be because it doesn't arise, it just is. The self is. Because it doesn't depend even on metaphorical relationships or mental imputation. So that would be, that would be, the Buddhist would agree, if there was such a thing, if there was such a phenomena or a self like that, that would be an inherently existing, truly substantial thing.

[44:57]

Something that exists even without mental imputation. So the Buddha by himself, he proved to passively. Yes, he did. So, do we have to? Do we have to? He said no. He said, well, you know, he said no, you don't have to. And I don't know, the problem is that a lot of other people tried it too, even after he said they didn't have to. And some of those who tried it also found out that it didn't work and that was really good for them. But then most of them said, I did it, but you don't have to. Yeah. Still doing self-mortification? It's very possible that we are. So you have to watch. You have to watch and see, is the pain you're experiencing, is this pain that you're going through really for the welfare of all beings?

[46:00]

Or are you just doing it for the sake of suffering? Which is it? The middle way.

[46:07]

@Transcribed_v005
@Text_v005
@Score_89.18