Did you enjoy the chat? You did? At the beginning of studying the Heart Sutra on the perfection of wisdom, I'd like you to consider what is the ultimate concern of your life. This sutra, it seems to me, is within a tradition

[01:22]

of beings who are actually seeking to realize the greatest state of being that can be achieved, that of Buddhahood. And so I ask you to look within yourself and see if you can feel a request in yourself to realize a state where all skillfulnesses,

[02:35]

all forms of skillfulness have been realized, and all forms of unskillfulness have been released. Can you find in yourself the wish, or the vow, or the request? Can you feel the request within you to realize Buddhahood? I have mentioned many times that people actually sometimes sincerely tell me that they didn't really come to Zen Center to become enlightened,

[03:36]

or that they wanted to be enlightened enough. Some of them say, well I'd like to be enlightened enough so that I would be free of suffering. I actually do not feel that interested in saving all beings. It's too much for me. I appreciate that honesty, and still I ask, is there a request for you to realize a way of being that you would want to benefit everyone in the most complete way, that they could be benefited at a given point in time? Even Buddha cannot enlighten people who are not ready, but people who aren't ready, still Buddha has the skill to help them as best that they can be helped at that time. Do you

[04:42]

have any resistance or question about being able to help people in the most appropriate way, moment by moment? And do you have any question about letting go of anything that doesn't promote the welfare of every being you meet? Of course, part of what promotes the welfare of beings is to notice our unskillfulness, but noticing my unskillfulness is part of responding to the request to be really beneficial to beings. I'm not going to talk too much

[05:43]

about that tonight, maybe I'll talk about that more next month in preparation for the Bodhisattva Initiation Ceremony, but it's because of wanting to be a Buddha that one could do the practice of being aware of your own unskillfulness. If you don't want to be a Buddha, you might think, well, I don't want to be a Buddha so I don't have to examine in detail my own shortcomings. I didn't say I wanted to be a Buddha, so I'm not going to look at that. So if you see any shortcomings in terms of your wish to realize the supremely beneficial state of Buddhahood, then part of that wish would be to also be aware of any resistance you have to that realization. But I ask you again, from now on, to look

[06:49]

at that, that question of your basic motivation in life. What is your ultimate wish, your what is being asked of you inside? Does that make sense? Any questions about that? Not so difficult, just a difficult part is to keep asking the question, to be mindful of the question, in moment by moment. That's not so easy. And I know regular people around

[07:50]

the world who have asked that question and gotten the answer, and actually got the answer which I think everybody really does come to finally, that they do want to be the best that they can be, and they do want to let go of what really isn't worthy of them. So in studying the scripture, I think my feeling is what's appropriate to study in the scripture is not to try to get anything for yourself, but to study the scripture in order to realize the greatest benefit for all beings. And again, that goes very well with a scripture that's

[08:54]

very deep and very difficult, because if it's difficult and you're doing it for your own temporary benefit, then the difficulty would be a problem, but if it's difficult and you have the aspiration to become a Buddha, it's not a problem that it's difficult. This class, we're only going to have, I guess, four meetings on Monday nights, but of course the study of this teaching of perfect wisdom goes on. It's been going on all year so far, and it will continue indefinitely. So although we only have four Monday nights, the study of this, the heart of perfect wisdom has no end, there's no end to it. So this is just

[09:54]

a little, not even a start for some of you, this is just a little squeeze on the study of perfect wisdom, a little four-week squeeze, and then see what happens later. To realize Buddhahood, there's two basic kinds of modes to the body of the Buddha. One mode is what we call the truth body, and the other mode is the phantom body, or the form body, the body that appears in the world, which you can see. The condition for the truth body is the practice of wisdom, and the truth body of the Buddha, the actual body of the

[11:02]

Buddha, and the condition for the realization of the form of the Buddha is the practice of skill and means, compassion practice. So, the development of wisdom and the development of the truth body of Buddha comes through various kinds of wisdom practices. So there can be wisdom practices about the conventional world, conventional phenomena, and there can be wisdom practices about ultimate phenomena. And the supreme form of wisdom is what we call wisdom gone beyond wisdom, or perfection of wisdom, and that form of wisdom has for its object what we call emptiness, or the lack of inherent existence of phenomena is

[12:15]

the object of supreme perfect wisdom. The object of skill and means practice are conventionalities, conventional phenomena. So in order to become fully a Buddha, we need to meditate on ultimate truths and conventional truths. We need to practice with conventionally existing things, and we need to practice with the ultimate way that conventional things exist, which is that they exist empty of inherent existence. This sutra that we're talking about is actually

[13:22]

teaching both types of practices, teaching compassion and wisdom, but the wisdom practice is explicit, because it's explicitly offering us teachings on emptiness. It's explicitly proclaiming emptiness. So that's the focus of the sutra. But the sutra is implicitly teaching skill and means. It's implicitly teaching compassion. So when studying the sutra, we need to be actually, in order to realize Buddhahood, and even in order to realize an understanding of the sutra, we need to be practicing skill and means together with wisdom, in order to realize the wisdom. So I want to just say, you know, can you see

[14:35]

how the sutra, do you have any sense of how the sutra is teaching skill and means, how it's demonstrating, how it's offering teachings in skill and means implicitly? Skill and means is sometimes expressed as the practices of giving, the practices of discipline and ethical precepts, the practice of patience, the practice of diligence, the practice of concentration. Can you see how the sutra is teaching these practices? You can? Of course you haven't seen the sutra yet, but anyway. Yes? It takes patience, concentration and diligence to read or try to understand the sutra. You have to give your time and attention to the

[15:38]

sutra. You have to be patient with the study of the sutra. You have to be patient with the development of your understanding. What else could you see there? Anything else? No? Yes? You have to be gentle with yourself if you don't understand. Yes? Anything else? Yes? Yeah, right. There's a skill and means by putting this teaching about emptiness into a form that you can conceive of. So it's

[16:42]

offered up, the ultimate teaching is offered up in a conventional package for you, which is a gift, and it's also a patience with people, you know, hey, people need it offered in a conventional form. And it's kind, and it's diligent of the Buddha and the Bodhisattvas to offer it this way. You have to be flexible, yeah, which comes with concentration. Yes? Practicing virtue will help you understand,

[17:48]

and also, the sutra, the actual sutra itself is an expression of virtue. It's an expression of the virtue of the Buddha. Yes? Say it again? Yes? Yeah, but what you're talking about is more like a benefit of realizing the wisdom. That would be one of the benefits of realizing the wisdom. Yes? Uh-huh, yeah. Want to start passing that sutra out, Albert? I'm trying not to be distracted

[19:04]

by this paper that's going to be circulating. Okay, so there may not be quite enough, so you know, you have an opportunity to share. It's a different one. Oh, yeah, so people who live here can get more copies tomorrow. People who don't live here want to take some with them. Take one with them. One per person, okay? Another thing I would mention about that, now that we're going to look at the sutra, and what I'm passing out here now, or what's being passed out now here, is a different version of the Heart Sutra from the one we chant here at Zen Center. I'd like you to see this other version, which

[20:12]

in a sense is a little bit more, what do you say, it's a little bit clearer in this version how skill and means are being offered in this sutra. This version that you're receiving is the Heart Sutra in, I believe, 25 slokas. A sloka is 32 Sanskrit syllables. So this version of the Heart Sutra is a little bit longer than the one we usually chant in actually East Asian Buddhism. In China and Japan, a shorter Heart Sutra has become more popular. This one is not chanted so often. This one gives more conventional, historical, geographical personality to the sutra. And this, to me, is an opportunity to highlight that the sutra

[21:24]

itself, even the shorter version, it's offered, as Berndt pointed out, as something concrete for you to take a hold of, in your hands and look at, and read, something you can touch, which is actually an expression about the teaching about emptiness, about the teaching about what's the object of perfect wisdom, but in a form that you can actually see and touch. So the sutra is, first of all, an object of devotion, a piece of paper, and these words are, first of all, an object of devotion. It's a wisdom teaching explicitly, but it starts out in a kind of non-rational, non-intellectual way. In this sutra, the exposition

[22:34]

of emptiness is just coming out of the heart of the Bodhisattva, just speaking her mind about the emptiness she sees. There's no argument, there's no reasoning with you, they're just telling you. And the question is, does this help you? Does this touch your actual faith? The other work that needs to be done in order to develop wisdom, the more penetrating examination of the nature of the teaching and phenomena and how to apply the teaching to phenomena is not so faith-oriented, but if it's not based on the faith, it's not based on this conventional event, this concrete thing, it usually will dry up. The wisdom meditation,

[23:36]

the wisdom practice will dry up. We need to right away put a taproot down into devotion to this text, not the text itself, but the devotion to the text as a concrete access to the Buddha's teaching. Without this concrete expression, this basis, again I think you lose a kind of, what do you call it, a dimension of the kind of consciousness which realizes this wisdom. Later, maybe even later tonight, I will talk with you about the Sutra and that

[24:40]

talk will also have an element, there will also still be an element where your faith can come to your assistance in listening to the discussion, because your listening to the discussion will be based on whether or not you think it's worthwhile to listen to what I'm saying, and to listen to the discussion in the class. And whether you see that actually we're having this class so that you have a concrete way of studying the Sutra. So now, we have this scripture before us, and I'd like to just start by chanting it. You're not familiar with it, so the chanting may be a little rough, but I'd like to have

[25:41]

someone hit the mokugyo, and... Is someone at the mokugyo? Yes. And to chant this longer version here. Where are you? There you are. Can you read it? Do we need more light? Can you read it? It says that it's the Lord's teachings, the Buddha's teachings. You could

[34:14]

think of it as referring to Avalokiteshvara, but this is a Sutra, and so a Sutra means that it's actually under the auspices, or through the auspices of the Buddha. In this particular Sutra, in the beginning of the Sutra, we hear the description of the scene, and we're told that the Buddha has entered into a Samadhi. Some other translations say that the name of the Samadhi is this deep splendor, rather than he gave a talk about the deep splendor, that the deep splendor is the name of the concentration he entered into. So the Buddha is in concentration, and the merit of his skill and means of being in the Samadhi gives rise to Shariputra. Also, while the Buddha is meditating this way, Avalokiteshvara

[35:15]

is also meditating at the same time that the Buddha is in this concentration. Avalokiteshvara is meditating and sees that all phenomena lack inherent existence. Then, through the power of the Buddha's meditation, Shariputra comes forward and asks Avalokiteshvara, how should a son or daughter of good family train themselves if they want to course in the deep perfection of wisdom? So Avalokiteshvara's question is also coming from the Buddha. So, if Buddha's disciples were talking, but their talk wasn't actually empowered by the Buddha, then their conversation would not be called a sutra. Now, I'm not saying that there's

[36:17]

ever any conversations between Buddha's disciples that aren't empowered by the Buddha. I'm just saying that what we mean by a sutra in this tradition is a conversation either directly from the Buddha or from a disciple of Buddha empowered by the Buddha. So this is an example of the Buddha did not verbally give this teaching, the Buddha gave this teaching by being in the virtuous state of concentration and having two of his disciples have a conversation which delivered the sutra. Then he came out of the concentration and praised his disciples. That's why it's a sutra. It really is, it's the Buddha's teaching that's going on through the Buddha's children. And it says also, son or daughter of good family, and the way I

[37:22]

would suggest to you that good family means here is that you're in the family of those who wish to be like their parent, who are the Buddha's children, that's what we mean by good family. In other words, they wish to become, they wish to realize their family tradition of Buddhahood. So that's the people who want to practice perfectional wisdom. Again, some other people who are in pretty good families want to practice some other kinds of wisdom that aren't necessarily the wisdom which comes to fruition as Buddha. Buddhas depend on the perfection of wisdom and other kinds of wisdom. But some people who do not wish to become Buddhists could develop other kinds of wisdom and they'd be in a different family then. So there are other lineages of wonderful spiritual people but they just don't want to be in the Buddha's family. So again, I ask you, can you feel that you would like

[38:28]

to be in Buddha's family, you would like to be Buddha's child? So when we have Bodhisattva initiation ceremonies, this is like a ceremony for people to receive precepts who want to be Buddha's children, which means they want to grow up to be Buddha. Another difference in this sutra and the other one which I'd like to point out is in this sutra it doesn't mention that when Avalokitesvara saw that all the, it says five skandhas here, that means all phenomena, five skandhas means the five different collections of phenomena which embrace all phenomena, I should say all conventional phenomena, and saw that they lacked inherent existence, in our usual version we say, and thus relieved all suffering. In an old translation it said, and thus was relieved of all suffering, or thus was saved

[39:31]

from all suffering, but that sounds like Avalokitesvara was saved from all suffering rather than all suffering was relieved. Avalokitesvara's vision saves all beings, not just Avalokitesvara. This rendition doesn't mention that anybody was saved by that vision, that's another difference. Yeah, it does, doesn't it, in a way. So I guess in some people's understanding of the

[40:38]

teaching of the Christian tradition is that Jesus saved all beings quite a while ago, you're already saved, right? And that if you believe that, then you will realize what's already the case, is that correct? Not in all branches. So in the Gnostic branch, for example. Okay, well they have some wild differences then. But in the Buddhist tradition, it isn't just that you're saved, okay, it's that you're saved and you wish to become a Buddha. It didn't say that when Buddha realized the ultimate truth, and Buddha saw that all beings were saved at that time, and all beings actually attained the way of enlightenment, it didn't

[41:42]

say that Buddha saw that all beings became Buddhas. So Buddha actually not only saw the truth and experienced a contented heart and freedom from suffering and the Dharma nature of all things, but he also understood that all beings are relieved in the same mode that he was in. He was in the mode that we are saved. He saw that. And he saw that everybody had the stuff that it takes to be relieved. However, he also understood that not all beings realized that, and at first, supposedly, he didn't even think that they would be able to understand the method by which he had realized that they're already actually free, or actually free of suffering, but only Buddhas fully realize how we are. So there still is the issue of whether we want to realize this. And realizing this means also that we would be able to demonstrate,

[42:52]

to prove to our own satisfaction and to other people's satisfaction that this had been realized, because there would be a form body that people could see, where you could actually prove to people that salvation was possible. Prove to them, and if they listened over and over to the proof, they would actually become convinced and realize it, if they wanted to be convinced and realize it. Does that make some sense? I don't know, I'm not sure. I don't know if I can say the last part again. I don't know if I can say the last part again.

[44:27]

I don't know if I can say the last part again. Well, I started with asking you what your motivation is, and so, do you feel the request to realize what we mean by Buddha? If you don't, then I would say, what is the deepest

[45:36]

request you can find, and then what problems do you have with realizing Buddhahood? I don't know what it would be, we could talk about it, but in some sense when you wish to become a Buddha, you have to some extent said, well I guess I'll do the Buddha way. So you do kind of think that the Buddha way, I guess the Buddha way would be the way that would be apropos of realizing Buddhahood. Pardon? Those who don't cross the threshold of what? Oh, to say those beings who are not Buddhas are not Buddhas? Doesn't say that? Somebody who didn't formally take the precepts that they would be excluded in some way? Somebody

[46:45]

who didn't take the precepts would not be Buddha? Let's see, how can we get out of this trap? Just a second before you save me. I think that the Buddha way, I think that in order to realize the form body, there are various practices available, and so it's not that you're excluded, but what reason would there be to overlook some virtuous practice, and if you had a good reason then that would be a virtuous practice. So, do you wish to realize all virtues, and then if yes, then fine, and if no, then we can talk about that,

[47:50]

what's the problem? So it's only by your own unwillingness to do the practice would you seem to not do the practice. The Buddha would see you as fully possessing these virtues, but if you are tightened up, then you feel like you're not doing them. It's really an illusion that you're not, because you're part of this whole thing, that's what the Buddha sees, and yet if you don't feel that request and follow through on it, you may feel like you're exiled. So you exile yourself by your own, our mind is the thing that exiles us, we're not actually exiled or excluded, but if we think in a certain way then we can experience a lack of virtue, but it's an illusion. Virtue is real, and non-virtue doesn't exist, really. Were there some other comments? Yes?

[48:59]

Well, it came up to me that Buddhism, all beings... Buddha saving all beings? Well, in that moment of realization, you know, all people were saved, all people were... Buddhism, it was a thought outside of time. It's a thought outside of time, yeah, because time is also a phenomenon which lacks inherent existence. So, in that time, there's no time which exists apart from the mental imputation which creates the conventional thing called time, right? So that also takes care of various things when there's not...when time has been, what do you call it, when we've been relieved of time, we're also relieved of suffering. You need time for suffering. No, thanks. Yes? Are you going to go down through the text?

[50:02]

Am I going to go through the text? Yeah, sort of line by line. I'm not going to go through this text line by line, but if you have a question, go right ahead and ask. I'm still thinking about what you said about the sutras being the words of the Buddha, and I'm a little unsure... I don't mean that they're the words of the Buddha, because obviously in this case we're under the auspices of the Buddha or through the Buddha's function that this is happening. If we don't see it that way, then we wouldn't...we just wouldn't call it a sutra, that's all. But Shakyaputra presumably doesn't see this, whereas... No, actually, Shakyaputra does see it. Shakyaputra is usually seen as a person who does not represent perfection of wisdom. He's the archetype of an earlier form of wisdom, which still saw...didn't see, for example, an inherent existence of people.

[51:08]

Most people see that their personality has an inherent existence. But he didn't...the early Buddhists understood that that was an illusion, but they still, to some extent, thought that the aggregates, the components of the experience of a self, that they existed. In the old text, Shakyaputra was the teacher of that type of wisdom. He was a wisdom master, and he taught people... Also, Buddha didn't teach people sometimes in detailed class situations, he did it for the Buddha. But in this sutra he can be seen as actually... He's acting as a bodhisattva to ask Avalokiteshvara about bodhisattva practice. So he does... Yes, right. He's a bodhisattva monk in this sutra. That's why we revere this, because it does... In fact, without going into detail, Avalokiteshvara,

[52:09]

kind of, excuse the word, divine to Buddha's meaning and justice. Exactly, right. And if we didn't feel that way, that would be okay. If we had an argument, then we would just have a debate about whether we would class this as a sutra. Then we'd put it in some other class of phenomena. But we have received this now, as people feel that we're looking at this as a sutra, because we feel this does represent the Buddha's truth. And the actual power that's... That's why I wanted you to read this one partly, because the power of this is... Not only does it give a context, more context, but it also tells you that this sutra is supposed to be coming from samadhi, or concentration, which again, is part of the reason why it also makes sense for us to be chanting it in Zen tradition. Yes?

[53:13]

I feel a huge resistance to helping people. Pardon? I feel a huge resistance to helping people, and I wonder why I find this scary. Do you find it scary or uncomfortable? At the prospect of helping people? Yeah. Sometimes, if I like, for example, if I, again, think of sometimes washing people's feet with my tongue. You know, sometimes I think, well, some people's feet, okay, but some other people's? You know? I don't know about that. But, although I may feel some resistance to washing some people's feet with my tongue, I do not have resistance to learning how to be happy to wash people's feet with my tongue. I would be perfectly happy to be able to, like, wash anybody's feet with my tongue, not to mention with my hands. I don't have any problem about being able to do that.

[54:18]

Matter of fact, I like to be able to do stuff like that when I am able to do it. I used to be, when I was in college, one of my jobs that I did to work my way through college was I was an orderly in a rehabilitation clinic where I was a patient when I was two. In Minneapolis, there was a... This is an example now, what you're getting now is a sutra, okay, in a sense, and I'm giving you something concrete to get a hold of so you can have faith, you know? So, when I was a little boy, I went to this place called the Sister Elizabeth Kenney Institute. It was the first Kenney Institute in the world. She was an Australian nun who had this new idea about how to treat poliomyelitis, particularly in children. They used to put braces on them, and she had some experience of, according to the movie starring Rosalind Russell, which is also the name of my dog.

[55:23]

She was an Australian nun, an Episcopal nun, who was also a nurse, and she was out in the bush in Australia, and there were no doctors around, and she was called to somebody's house, and this little boy was paralyzed. Her intuition was to keep his legs, to put hot packs on his legs, and to massage him, and she did that, and after the inflammation went away, he was okay, he just walked, you know? The infection lasts for a certain period of time. In my case, it lasted for 21 days. It can last longer or shorter, but if during that 21 days, you would not give any exercise to those muscles, and the paralyzed ones can't move. If you don't keep the blood circulating through them, and keep massaging them, the ones that are still working start to bend the little young bones out of shape, distorting the bones, and also the other ones go atrophied.

[56:28]

So she massaged the ones that were paralyzed, and massaged the ones that weren't paralyzed, so that the bones stayed straight, and anyway, she had good results, and she tried to tell many doctors about this, and they wouldn't listen to her, because she was just a woman nurse, right? She traveled all over the world, trying to get some doctors to sponsor this, to spread this teaching, and then she, in the movie, and it's true too in certain other ways, conventional world, she went to a convention in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and gave this talk, and most of the doctors said, but one doctor afterwards came up and said, I think I'll sponsor you, and they started a little clinic in Minneapolis, in 1943, and after two years, I was there, paralyzed, and got that treatment. If I'd lived a little, if I was a little older, lived in a different city, I wouldn't have got the treatment,

[57:30]

and I would probably be, you know, limping still, but actually I am limping, but that's from another thing, but anyway, so I was a patient in a hospital when I was two, and then when I was 21, I went back there, as an orderly, taking care of the patients, and one of the things I did for people that were paralyzed, was I reached inside of them, up inside of them, and pulled their excrement out of them, because their muscles were paralyzed, they couldn't move their bowels, so I did that for them, and at first I thought, I had a problem, but after a while it was okay, really okay to do that for them, no problem, and giving baths to these people who had bodies that were kind of having some problems, after a while it was really fine. So, I know that it doesn't feel good not to be able to serve beings,

[58:31]

but still sometimes there is some queasiness, especially if you are allergic to the person, some people you are allergic to, some people smell a certain way that really drives you into kind of an allergic reaction, so it's really hard, or some people do various things that make it hard to embrace them, but I have no resistance to learning how to do that, I just, these limits, I'm not wedded to my limits, now this teaching is about how to become free of all limits, and then it doesn't mean you do everything, it just means you can do anything that's appropriate, and you have no personal problem with anything, because you are not in the realm of time or personality, you are in the realm of emptiness, which is what this teaching is about, and you are always in the realm of emptiness, but we are trying to realize that, realize the mode in which

[59:37]

beings are freed from queasiness about whatever happens. Emmanuel? Because this is one of the prime teachings on emptiness, is this an example of a definitive teaching? Is it a definitive teaching? According to some, it's a definitive teaching, according to others, it's interpretable. But, I would beg you to let me just say that for now, rather than getting into a discussion of these different types of scriptures. Yes? Is it love? Is what love? Is it love? Yeah. That's exactly what it is, it's compassion. And, but, part of love is also to wish to realize part of what love can become

[60:38]

is not just hoping that people would really be free of suffering, but also wanting to facilitate that and realizing that because of a lack of wisdom the facilitation can be undermined because if we don't understand the nature of phenomena, we do all kinds of things which are not skillful because we have unskillful emotions arising in us, like liking people too much or too little can arise from not understanding the way things are. If we understand the way things are, we like people just the right amount, you know, not too much or too little. In other words, we're devoted to all beings but not excessively because we understand their nature. So you just naturally have the right amount of concern which is like unlimited and appropriate but just because you understand correctly what you're looking at

[61:39]

and its relationship to you and how its relationship to you makes you see what you are too. So you understand what you are and what other people are so naturally you can fulfill your compassionate feelings. So my intention is not necessarily to go through the line by line but to go right into the basic teaching of emptiness. But in order to go into the basic teaching of emptiness tonight I'll just start you off with that. Again, emptiness means that all phenomena lack independent existence. The acronym for independent existence is I.E. And the acronym for inherent existence is also I.E. So all beings L.I.E.

[62:42]

All phenomena L.I.E. Lack independent existence or lack inherent existence. So that really is their ultimate nature but in our sense all phenomena lie because all phenomena appear to H.I.E. to have inherent existence. That's the way they appear. Our nervous system naturally coughs up an appearance of things existing independently and that's part of the situation of life for us is that things appear to exist in a way that they don't. So we have to now train ourselves by listening to this teaching which says actually these things which appear, all these phenomena which appear to inherently exist actually lack this inherent existence

[63:47]

which they appear to have. We start out by just listening to Avalokiteshvara tell us that. And he's in the sutra. He's not going into detail about how that's so and reasoning with us how it's so but he's actually telling us a little bit about the relationship between emptiness and the things that are empty. So he's telling us a little bit about it but not kind of like talking us into it. He's just telling us something about emptiness. So one of the things he tells us is that right away he says everything has this characteristic of emptiness by the way everything has the characteristic of emptiness but emptiness is emptiness is an characteristic emptiness is an is an characteristic of phenomena. It's not the characteristic of phenomena. All phenomena have this characteristic but they also have another characteristic.

[64:48]

Forms have the characteristic of lacking inherent existence. They have the characteristic of emptiness. So that's why he says all things all forms and all phenomena are marked by or have this characteristic of emptiness but all phenomena have another characteristic and that is that they have the characteristic of existing conventionally. All phenomena exist conventionally. All phenomena exist conventionally. Some things that aren't phenomena that don't exist don't exist conventionally. But everything that exists has a characteristic of lacking inherent existence and it also has the characteristic of existing conventionally in other words existing dependently not inherently. So the way things exist dependently is actually

[65:51]

it says like for example form the form it says right away form is emptiness the nature of things that exist dependently is that they lack inherent existence and lacking inherent existence is form the nature of things that lack inherent existence is that they are conventional existences the nature of things that lack inherent existence is that they exist conventionally So things have these two ways of being the conventional way which is where we read the sutra and chant the sutra where there's buddhas and bodhisattvas and practice and then there's another way things exist where there's no sutras and there's no buddhas and bodhisattvas and there's no forms

[66:52]

there's just the lack of inherent existence and then it says this lack of inherent existence is none other than the conventional way this lack the way form lacks inherent existence is not different from the way form conventionally exists namely form so form is not different from its lack of inherent existence form is not different from its emptiness of independent existence and its emptiness of independent existence is no different from the form okay that's what it's telling us it's just telling us that now we can discuss that and we can look at that and we can reason about that until we're convinced until we know for sure that that's true I just read this example

[67:58]

a couple of days ago of the difference between a scientific proof or a scientific experiment and a mathematical proof an example I heard was you take a chessboard and then you break off two corners of the chessboard like you have a chessboard or a checkerboard with 64 squares 32 are black 32 are white if you break off two white ones in the corners okay then you take a domino which is big enough to cover two squares then the problem is if you prove that you cannot cover the chessboard with 31 dominoes if you have 64 squares you take off two that leaves you with 62 so if a domino covers two squares

[68:59]

you could theoretically maybe you could cover the 62 squares with 31 dominoes because each domino covers two squares right if you try that if you do try that you will be able to find out the first time you try it you will be able to find out that you were unable to do it and you can try again and again and continue to not be able to do it then you might have a theory that you can't cover the chessboard with these 31 dominoes but you never know and that's like a scientific proof you make a theory and anybody can come and try it and if anybody is able to cover the chessboard with 31 dominoes your theory is out, right but you know it's not really true it's just a theory does that make sense because you know that if somebody comes by they could disprove it

[70:00]

by doing it you have no way of knowing that nobody would ever be able to do it you just know that you couldn't I don't know if it's induction what you can do is you tell me if this is induction so you have on the chessboard every other square is next to a different colored square so a domino no matter which way you turn it unless you have it go off the board but you can't have it go off the board otherwise you lose part of your domino potential you'd miss a chance so you want to use a domino to cover so it's going to cover two different colors so if you put the dominoes down you're going to cover one black and one white always however we just took off two whites from the corners so how many white squares do we have now 30

[71:00]

how many black do we have 32 you can't cover 32 black spaces with 31 dominoes because each domino always covers two different colors so I don't know if that's deduction but that's the way you know that nobody's ever going to be able to do it however you can't see that but you know you can't yet see it but you know it's true you can be certain we need to like look at this teaching of Avalokiteshvara until we're certain that the way we see things is not so otherwise our natural habit of misconstruing phenomena what do you call it carries the day carries the moment it's always there

[72:02]

and then that restricts our ability to interact in the appropriate way so but the sutra is not actually reasoning with us okay the sutra is just something for you to look at and just keep taking in that teaching which tells you about the relationship between form and emptiness and just Avalokiteshvara just expressing your heart and just telling you some things about what emptiness isn't and it's not something that's really ever separate from conventional existence it's never separate from the realm of compassion it actually is the true nature of the realm of compassion so by emptiness understanding emptiness we really understand the conventional world we understand how the conventional world really is

[73:03]

it is but it lacks inherent existence so I also keep reiterating that we need this devotional attitude towards this text to give yourself the dimension of your being that can stand the kind of examination which is required to transform your attitude so you need to have this warm virtuous practice going along and reading the sutra and listening to the sutra and reading the sutra and listening to the sutra and taking in the teaching is an expression of giving patience, precepts diligence and concentration can you see it? that's why we have this thing to work up the compassion side of the practice so that we can stand

[74:06]

the wisdom side which is a little bit hard on us to actually change our mind have our mind changed dislodge and challenge the way we usually think yes no that wasn't a hand raised there no any other questions before we dedicate the merit and virtue of this meeting yes do you have some suggestion of how we can take care of these objects the way you were talking about this object of devotion you tend to feel like you forget does anybody know how to be

[75:20]

devoted to a piece of paper not folding it in half I was thinking that I saw some people fold in half but then I thought well actually this came out of a book where it was folded in half actually it was in a book so folding in half might be ok but can you fold this in half as an act of devotion I said to somebody actually she was talking about something she was doing and I said can that be that thing you told me about can that be an act of devotion and she came back and saw me about a month later and she said I remember at the end of the last conversation you said to do everything devotedly and I said well actually I said more like do things as an act of devotion it's slightly different so rather than do this devotedly sort of like put the devotion on top of this have holding it be an act of devotion

[76:22]

does that make any sense to you that you pick it up as an act of devotion rather than try to figure out a devoted way to do it and if you don't feel like picking it up as an act of devotion well just don't pick it up so you know as I think about this class and what I'm suggesting to you as this kind of devotional base for the kind of analytical penetration that we're going to try to set up I think you know I feel bad because I feel pain because I don't feel bad I feel a pain because I often miss coming into the Zen Dojo to chant the Heart Sutra

[77:26]

in the morning because I'm talking to people about the Heart Sutra in the other room but I kind of miss you know I kind of want to be where the people are chanting the Heart Sutra where they're doing that so partly I ask you all to please chant this every day if you would please no it could be this version but at Zen Center now we're chanting a different one right you know we just chant the Heart Sutra whatever version you want but do it every day so we do it here so I ask you who live here to do that I mean I think some of you are going to do it anyway whether I ask you or not but I'm also now asking you to do what you're already doing for me and for all beings so when you're chanting here in the morning remember you're doing it for everybody you're doing it for all the people that can't be in the room to do it like even the teacher

[78:28]

of the class on the Heart Sutra might not be in the room and you're doing it for that person and you're chanting the sutra for that person's teacher who's dead and you're chanting that sutra for that person's teacher's teacher and you're chanting that sutra for all the Buddhas that's why we dedicate the merit of the chanting to all the Buddhas because they want you to chant this because that's what they live for to give you this piece of paper and have you chant it so that you become a Buddha so please chant that for all beings and those of you who don't live here try to find a time in the day when you can sit down and chant it not read it read it's okay read it that's good read it but recite it also say it out loud if you can say it out loud sing it copy it memorize it these are acts of devotion which will sustain and support the development of wisdom

[79:29]

just the chanting itself isn't the same as actually being able to overthrow your ignorance but it's necessary to do it I think and all those Buddhist temples where these people did in the history of Buddhism where people actually did realize some wisdom about this emptiness were places where they did the chanting too and I think you will find too that if you do the chanting you'll be more there'll be some energy there some energy or enthusiasm for also for the reasoning side of it thinking about how emptiness actually works or how emptiness is the way things actually work emptiness is the way things actually work without emptiness nothing works everything would be frozen nothing would function only because things are emptiness can there be life to understand that

[80:30]

is hard work and unfamiliar work that's why you need to be well nurtured you need to take this teaching as food spiritual food but it's also that you're taking of it is a spiritual food too you're receiving it you're devotedly thinking of it so please try to do that as part of the study on a daily basis or less than a daily basis but try to make some commitment if you can to some time you can do it some number of days of the week if possible every day and do it for do it for me do it for everybody that can't do it somebody has to keep the Dharma alive please you be the one you be one of them I mean and if you can't then you practice

[81:31]

the virtuous practice of saying well I couldn't today and it hurts that I couldn't I can't do everything but I wish I could have chanted it and if you can please do and when you're done chanting it you can do the chant that we're going to do now which is to dedicate the virtue of what you just did to the beings that you did it for and Diana can give you if you don't know this chant by heart you can get a copy of it to recite may our intention equally penetrate every being and place with the true merit of Buddha's way beings

[82:32]

are numberless I vow to save them delusions are inexhaustible I vow to end them Dharma gates are boundless I vow to enter them Buddha's way is unsurpassable I vow to be kind

[83:01]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ