One day the World Honored One ascended the seat. Manjushri Bodhisattva struck the gavel and said, Clearly observe the Dharma of the Dharma King. The Dharma of the Dharma King is thus. The world-honored one got down from the seat. When I first heard this story, I thought it was pretty nice.

[01:08]

Pretty simple. Quite cute. And maybe useful. I feel that this is what we call When Dharma does not fill your whole body and mind, you think it's already sufficient. But the more I look at this story, the more troubled I feel. And I'm sorry to have invited you into this kind of Zen dead end. I probably should go on, but before I run away, I want you to know how much trouble we're in.

[02:20]

Who knows? You may want to stay here. When dharma does fill your whole body and mind, you realize something's missing. Or when it fills it a little bit more, you realize more and more something's missing. When you first get into this story, it's the first one in the book. When you first get in, when I first got in, I had some feeling that I was going to get out of it alive. Now I feel like the only way I'll get out of it alive is to go on to the next story. If I stay with this one. think I'm not going to survive. This is called ascending the seat and sporting devil eyes. I should say that's what I call it.

[03:38]

But before I go on, I want to make clear the basic work, very simple. It's understood, sometimes taken for granted. But I don't want you to take it for granted. And that is the basic work of simply settling into your experience, so thoroughly settled into it that there is, as much as you can do, there's no self carried to this experience. There's just the experience. There's just the sitting. However, We cannot even do that.

[04:46]

We can only do as much as we can do. We can only do as much as we see is there to be done. If you don't think you're doing as much as you have to do, you're right. And you should continue until you've accomplished all that you can see within your little circle. But that's not all you need to do. So that's why there should be someone else in the circle to say, to make some comment Once you feel that you've completely done your job, your work, as far as you can see, then say, I'm done.

[05:53]

And then let someone else in the circle say, well, I have a comment to make. And when you hear their comment, hear his comment or her comment, try to meet it. Try to not veer off from meeting it, veering off into defiance or submission in the face of their face, of his face or her face. So I'm not sure if you're settled, but I won't wait to be sure.

[07:05]

I'll just go ahead And I'll do what I would do if you were settled. Namely, I'll talk about this story, this unsettling story, this story which is hard to meet. But nevertheless, it's put out there at the beginning of this collection. So we have this verse, case, and the Zen teacher, Hongzhi Zhengzhui, Soto Zen, teacher who compiled this book of Serenity.

[08:11]

After the case he wrote a verse and the verse goes, the unique breeze of reality can you see? Constantly working her lumen shuttle. Creation incorporates the patterns of spring into the ancient brocade. But nothing can be done about Manjushri's leaking. This case and this verse I think were written, I don't know the exact date, but I'm pretty sure they were written after another famous, the other most famous collection of Zen koans was compiled, and that is the Blue Cliff Record.

[09:35]

The Blue Cliff Record has the same story. And the blue cliff record, it's case 92. Instead of being the first case that's given, it's the 92nd case out of 100. The same case is given, and then the compiler of that collection says, among the assembled multitude of sages, If an adept had known, the command of the king of Dharma wouldn't have been like this. In the assembly, if there had been a saindava man, a saindava person,

[10:40]

What need for Manjushri to strike the gavel? And this sign of a man is also referred to in the book of Serenity I mentioned yesterday. this verse, he sort of paraphrases the verse, if there had been someone there who understood the multiplicity of meanings according to this situation, as in the Sanskrit word saindava, what would have been the need for Manjushri to strike a beat? If there had been a sign of a person, he would have been able to speak or act before the World Honored One even got up on the seat.

[12:00]

This event of the World Honored One ascending the seat, some people say it happened before the time when the Buddha raised the flower and turned it and Mahakasyapa smiled. If there had been someone at this assembly, they say that we wouldn't have gone through that messy business with the flower. Now Manjushri, Manjushri, someone said yesterday Manjushri became a great bodhisattva. Well actually Manjushri at the time of this assembly had already been the personal instructor to the seven Buddhas before Buddha. Not only was Manjushri already the celestial bodhisattva and teacher of the Buddhas,

[13:13]

But also Sumantabhadra and Maitreya were also at this assembly. Yes? A man named Manjushri? Is there a man named Manjushri walking around now? There isn't? Oh, okay. Is this a dharma fairytale here? Or is this real dharma here? How do you know Manjushri is not here? How do you know? Oh, you would? Huh. Well, maybe you're Manjushri.

[14:24]

Could that be? Would Manjushri know? What makes you think Manjushri would know? Well, if Manjushri would know, and you know Manjushri would know, and I don't know Manjushri would know, maybe you're Manjushri. So the sandiva, the Sanskrit word, means four things. It means salt, water, a bull, and a horse.

[15:31]

And the sandaiva person is a servant to the king or whatever, so that in the Nirvana Sutra, It gives example of there was a wise attendant who understood well the four meanings of this word. If the king wanted to wash, he brought the sandalwood called water. If the king asked for sandiva while he was eating, he brought the salt. When the meal was done, he brought a bowl of hot water. And when the king wanted to go out and ask for sandiva, he brought a horse.

[16:39]

He acted according to the king's intentions without error. Clearly he must have been a clever fellow to be able to do this." So this Rinzai teacher, not exactly Rinzai, I think he's actually a Yunmen lineage teacher, and the Soto teacher, the two great compilers and great poets of the Zen school, they both seem to be a little bit down on Manjushri. Proposing that, and also indirectly, all the Manjushri kind of leaked. The other bodhisattvas hung tight, didn't do anything, but also they didn't come forward and help the Buddha out of this mess. The mess is he didn't give to give his talk.

[17:49]

What's the mess? The mess is there was no meeting. There was no face-to-face transmission. That's the mess. They didn't meet. Manjushri was kind of, what do you call it, was he defiant or was he submissive? You think submissive? Hmm? To the Buddha. Upstage. So you think maybe defiant? He jumped the gun. He jumped the gun. And none of the other bodhisattvas. So we have to wait till another scene where Buddha raises the flower.

[19:00]

Yeah, that's right. It was just right, but there's a problem here. What's the problem? Is it just right not to meet? Yeah, that's what happened today. We didn't meet. But they're saying, anyway, that they didn't meet, that Manjushri blew it, and that the Buddha's teaching was not what it would have been. But maybe the Buddha blew it by letting that heat give him his power. Maybe they did. Yeah, these are all possibilities. But what is it, I think the thing that I'm bringing up is what does it mean to meet something?

[20:30]

What does it mean to meet the Buddha, or to meet a person, or to meet a situation? Are you the, can you be the Sandaiva person? You don't think it needs an explanation. Yeah, Manjushri explained what I did. Yeah, Manjushri kind of pointed. He said, he's already teaching. But of course, before he pointed that he was already teaching, he was already teaching before he pointed to them, right? He was teaching before he came in the hall. So it's not necessary to explain. That's a big problem here. I always remember that another Soto Zen teacher named Dongshan, he was kind of a neat guy.

[21:31]

From the time he was a boy, he seemed to have a very intense honesty. And a number of Zen teachers recognized him when he was still young. But one day after he was a teacher himself, his disciple asked him, he was doing a memorial service for Yuen Yuen, and his disciple asked him why he was doing it. And he said, why did you honor this teacher when you had these other teachers who are even more famous? He said, it's not that my teacher was such a great teacher, or it's not that he was so brilliant, or understood the Dharma so well or anything, but he never directly indicated. So directly indicating is kind of a taboo in Soto Zen, to point

[22:43]

not just in Soto, in Zen period, to point at it, to say, this is it. Except as a kindness, when you're sort of, you know, as a joke, you can say, this is it. But even that's a dangerous joke, because they might not think it's a joke, or they might know it's a joke. So strict teachers don't usually point. Buddha doesn't point. They teach, but not by pointing at it, at this rather than that. Most teachers do point, but the ones, the most respected ones are the ones that didn't point. Manjushri pointed. Even this great bodhisattva pointed. But it's not that you shouldn't point or should point. It's that you should meet. And meeting is not pointing. Rather than come in point, Manjushri should have just met the Buddha.

[23:49]

I say that, you know. How dare we Zen monks talk like this? But anyway, in the tradition of these two cases, I dare to say that Manjushri could have met the Buddha, but instead he pointed to the Buddha. And it says that he made... What does it say? It said it made the World Honored Ones' sermons seem foolish. And Suedu says... The Buddha's sermon would not have been like this if he hadn't done that, that he disturbed it somehow. But what was there that made a fool of him?

[24:57]

What was it? The MC? The MC seems to be foolish. Well, that's different. I think that's appropriate. What he's saying here is that Manjushri made a fool of the Buddha. I think that the Sandhya person, that person can be foolish.

[26:02]

That person can be foolish and make the king real, like a court jester. Sandiva person is a servant, like a court jester, but not just sort of like a, not a really, not a, but a helpful court jester in the sense of serving the needs of the king appropriately. Not exactly reading the king's mind, but reading the situation. Like the king's eating. Okay, king's eating. So if he asks for Sandiva, what he means is he wants salt. So Buddha gets up in the seat. What does he want? What's he asking for? What does meeting the Buddha mean under those circumstances? Listening. Yeah, that seems reasonable. Well, I guess he would.

[27:18]

And I think these people are asking that of us. They're asking us to meet Buddha and do the appropriate thing in the face of Buddha, which means to do the appropriate thing in the face of anybody. And that's Buddha. That's called to act on and witness in the advent of all things. That's a definition of Buddha by Dogen Zenji. That's this Sandayaba man, Sandayaba woman. And as the Buddha comes forward, the first step Buddha takes towards the seat

[28:32]

the first step already. That's the Buddha's response to his students. He's taking a step, one step. If the students start rustling about, the Buddha might back away. If the students say, hey, he's going to come and teach, the Buddha might leave. Yeah. It makes it a little hard, right. I'm thinking about it. mountains and rivers again, and knowing, needing them both to just be. And what Coach Argonaut said yesterday was that the innocence went as soon as we started to separate from it and see that it was mountains.

[29:54]

And the same thing seems to have happened here with Buddha. They lost their vigilantly. They lost their vigilantly. They had immediately thought they died in separation for about five months. Yeah, right. There's the Buddha, and he's teaching right now, and he's teaching emptiness, as a matter of fact. So, and he even told them what kind of, what type of attitude they should have while they listen to the Buddha, while they watch the Buddha. That's good instruction. Manjushri knows what he's talking about. But he leaked. He leaked. He leaked in all three ways. Leaked by fixed views, leaked by emotionally turning people's head, and leaked by, you know, verbal leakage. So...

[30:56]

Anyway, the Buddhists right now, every move we make right now, Buddha takes a step towards us in response to our moves. And Buddha may walk right in here and sit right down with us, but still always responding to our needs and our energy. The question is, can we meet it? And somebody said to me the other day about what she said, she said, what in heaven's sake is happening? And it kind of like, what's happening is in heaven's sake, or for heaven's sake, or what in Buddha's sake or for Buddha's sake is happening? Each person we meet is in Buddha's sake or for Buddha's sake. It's Buddha taking a step towards us. How can we meet that person?

[31:59]

It's not just the teacher, it's every person you meet is Buddha taking a step towards you, and also you taking a step towards Buddha, and also you, being Buddha, taking a step towards that person. Why do they say we might meet? Sounds like leaking to me. I think that's what Pam said yesterday.

[33:03]

Didn't Buddha teach? Wasn't he leaking? And I think if I look at Shakyamuni Buddha's teaching, what did he say? He said stuff like this. Well, first of all, he started saying stuff about how, well, what does it say here? The pointer in the Blue Cliff record, the pointer to this story about the World Honored One getting up in the seat, it starts out by, one who can discern the tune as soon as the lute strings move. Okay? Again, that's this Sain Dabba person who can discern the tune as soon as the lute strings move. This is not just somebody, this is us, this is what we could, this is how we could practice, supposedly.

[34:03]

That we could be there, we could be settled, and we would know the tune as soon as the lute string was struck. This person is hard to find even in a thousand years. So it's not so easy to be settled enough And again, settled means not just sitting still, but also it means moving at that spot. It means unshakable stillness and total multi-directional flexibility simultaneously. It's still, but not static. It's dynamic, but not moving from the spot. Right in the moment, there is movement.

[35:09]

There really isn't movement, because if there was movement, it would be a different moment. But right in that one moment, at that one time, there is movement. When you're settled that way, then you have a chance to be this one who hears the lute song or tune at the first movement of the string. Okay, by releasing a hawk upon seeing a rabbit, are you ready to release the hawk when you see the rabbit? If you do, At once the swiftest rabbit is caught. Okay, now as for summing up, this is what I wanted to get back to when somebody asked me about this, as for summing up the universe in a single atom, okay, put the universe in a single atom, and gathering all spoken words into a single phrase, and dying the same and being born the same,

[36:18]

and piercing and penetrating in all ways. This is the way Buddha talked in his first lecture. He talked about how he gathered together all expressions into one phrase. He gathered together the universe into an atom. And he talked about this kind of thing. This was not leaking. This was not pointing to anything. This was not indicating anything. This was simply presenting himself. This is just good morning, breakfast clubbers. That's all. And he said, but people didn't understand that, so he said it again. He changed. And he said, the first truth is suffering, the truth of suffering. Suffering. And he explained that means that suffering is the, what do you call it, the clinging to the five aggregates of existence.

[37:32]

That's the way he taught. Was there leakage in that? Was he pointing to anything? What was he pointing to? Yeah, I don't think he was pointing. I think he wasn't pointing in a particular way. Anyway, I don't think he leaked on that one. I think if you look at Buddha's teaching, he wasn't leaking. But some bodhisattvas do leak to help people. It is okay. Sometimes you have to. But in this particular story, why was it necessary? Why didn't they just meet him? Bodhisattvas leak, but the main place they leak is they leak with other sentient beings in order to help them. In the case of having the Buddha there, the Buddha doesn't need you to leak. Right.

[38:33]

Exactly. Exactly. That's leaking. Leaking is not giving other people a chance. and saving them from missing the point. So showing them the correct point. Well, he was right, wasn't he? Of course he was right. Manjushri wasn't wrong if they said he leaked. He interfered with the Buddha activity. That's what these people are saying. Yes, definitely. Anyway, maybe even Buddha leaks sometimes, I shouldn't say. But if I look at his teachings, I don't see him leaking. I don't see him saying... I see him opening up a training without directly indicating.

[39:37]

I propose that not directly indicating... is the Buddhist style of teaching. The teacher does not do the work for the student. This style is to walk with, to meet. And people do their own work. But they don't do it alone. They do it with another, one or more. And the meeting is the means of the work. So the teacher walks with the students and wants to rescue them. But if you rescue them, they don't learn how to rescue themselves because they think you rescued them and you think so too, maybe. You stand there next to them and you let them get up from this place they fell by their own effort.

[40:44]

Then they learn how to get up without you pointing to how to get up or where to get up. They found out where to get up. They got up from the place they were down. They found that place. You didn't tell them where. They didn't know where it was. They found it. And then they got up. But if you weren't there, it would be different. Because then they would think that if you were there, or they might think that if you were there, you would have helped them get up. Since you were there and you didn't help them get up, they know that you didn't help. And they know then that they won't help when they are with someone who falls down. But that is called meetings. that's not submitting or rebelling on either side. That's what the person wants.

[41:47]

They want you to be there and not help. It's built into us that we do not want them to do our work for us, but we do want them there with us. And if you don't have Buddha with you, then if you take care of yourself, you don't understand that Buddha wouldn't help you do it otherwise. If you take care of yourself and you don't have Buddha with you, you don't understand that Buddha wouldn't help you do it otherwise. That Buddha would let you do it just that way. But if you think you're by yourself, then you'd lose doubly. Because number one, you don't know that Buddha was there agreeing with you. And number two, you think that you can decide for yourself how to do it. So you...

[42:49]

So you both lack confidence because you don't know that Buddha would agree with you because he wasn't there with you. And also you're arrogant to think that you could do it by yourself. Because you actually can't get up off the ground by yourself when Buddha's standing next to you. The fact that Buddha's standing next to you helps you get up. But Buddha's always there. But if you don't think Buddha's there, then you doubly lose. Because then, again, you think that Buddha, if you think, or you're not sure, maybe if Buddha was there, he would have said, do it a different way. So you don't have confidence in your own way. Plus, you think that your way is a way that you could do it by yourself. So you're both arrogant or defiant and also submissive if you don't have Buddha with you. So you should have Buddha with you and at the same time kill Buddha. or have Buddha with you and also do it yourself.

[43:57]

That's called meeting. And then neither party is pointing and neither party is leaking. But I think this story is also saying, I feel this story is also saying, this is not easy. Even Manjushri Bodhisattva slips. So, If the Buddha's tutor is going to slip, we should be realizing this is not necessarily so easy. And at the same time, I think they're saying we're supposed to be shooting for this level of perfection in our work. But again, it's not a one-sided perfection because at least two people are involved in this. you cannot do this magical trick. You cannot accomplish this wonderful feat by yourself. No, Buddha did not do it alone.

[45:09]

Buddha had a great enlightenment experience sitting by himself know i mean by himself means there was nobody like right nearby we don't know how far away the people were they might have been a mile away the nearest person might have been a mile away might have been a football field away we don't know how far away they were but he wasn't sitting talking to anybody at the time anyway he was alone under that tree But a couple things. Number one is, strictly speaking, he was not really a Buddha at that time. He was awakened, but not yet a Buddha. The functioning of his Buddhahood had not yet arrived, even at that time. His Buddhahood started to function, came into functioning at the moment he taught effectively and turned the wheel of Dharma.

[46:14]

Buddha is not just some enlightened being by itself, although he was greatly awakened. The primary birth of Buddha was, the birth of Buddha is the transformation of beings. When his disciples understood, the Buddha was born. So he really became a Buddha at the moment he taught. And not even when he first spoke after his enlightenment, because people didn't get it at that time. He was just an extraordinarily enlightened person at that time. But he was really the Buddha when he taught, when he turned the wheel at the deer park for his pals. They actually met him before he gave the talk. He was walking on the street and he told them he was Buddha before he gave his talk. He told them that he was awake and that he had actually got it all straightened out.

[47:16]

And at that time, they looked at him and he didn't look that much different from the last time they saw him. But I thought it was very interesting that they say That it wasn't, you know, they say that he had always been a person of integrity. He had never lied to them. So they thought he probably wasn't lying now either. And so they said, well, let's hear it. Let's have a little Dharma talk. So he gave a talk, and when he gave the talk, then they understood that he was the Buddha, because then they understood that But it wasn't like, wow, look at that guy. It was kind of like, oh, there's Gautama, our old friend, a trustworthy friend, hardworking ascetic and all that. And now he's telling us that he's awake, so let's listen to him, see what he's got. And Buddha never asked for anything more than that. Just listen to what I have to say and see if it works for you.

[48:23]

But also this Buddha said that that night of his enlightenment he saw many past lives. And he said that he studied with innumerable Buddhas. He was their disciple. And so although in this lifetime he didn't have another Buddha in this lifetime in the world that was teaching him as a Buddha, he had many helpers. His mother was a helper. His father was a helper. His aunt was a helper. Because you know Shakyamuni Buddha's mother died right after he was born, right? Seven days after he was born, she died. So he had his mother help him. His aunt raised him. A lot of people helped Shakyamuni Buddha. But we don't see another Buddha there teaching him. But he had Buddhas on the other side of that body. In the previous lifetimes, he had Buddhas teaching him. In many, many lifetimes. And mountains and rivers, yeah.

[49:30]

And also, throughout his life, he was very sensitive to the suffering of other beings. And when he was sitting there, under his tree, he was, you know... through many lifetimes of working for the benefit of others, he was very sensitive to the suffering of other beings, even though they weren't like, you know, right like in his eye, in his range of his vision or something. So he was with all beings and he was with all Buddhas as much as he could be. And that's why I say also Buddha with you, because it may not be that some person is standing right next to you all the time. But it is good actually to have a person there at least part of the time, an actual person. But sometimes you don't have a person, and so in that case, if you help yourself, it's good to feel like Buddha's there with you. Yes?

[50:41]

It's... Well, I shouldn't say means, I maybe should say it's a medium. So it's an end, yes, also. Means and end is the same as practice and verification, right? They're really one. When you don't carry a self to your life, then your life is your proof. There's nothing more than meeting, no. And in meeting, again, it's a two-way deal. So it's not just that you aren't rebelling and submitting. And, you know, there's two kinds of I don't know. One I don't know is I know I don't know. The other, and there's also I know. There's one, I know I can't be myself.

[51:47]

It's my opinion that I can't be myself. That's the level of knowledge I have right now. That's what I think. I'm not going to be myself. The other one, I know I can be myself. Real meeting is beyond that ordinary kind of not knowing and knowing. It's because the two people have to do it together. This is also called not leaking. That meeting. Yes, definitely. I mean, you know, Shakyamuni Buddha, I mean, I don't want to glorify him too much, but he did have, you know, he could see stuff that we can't ordinarily see. And the distance between him and other people was not particularly relevant.

[52:49]

So everybody else was with him, you know, in one kind of jello. And that's what Buddha is. It wasn't Shakyamuni Buddha there that was the Buddha, although it was there. The Buddha is the oneness of all sentient beings. That's what the Buddha realized. All sentient beings are one mass. But because of sense organs, each sentient being feels like they're separate from the other sentient beings. It's one mass of flesh, a protoplasm, with innumerable eyes all over it and innumerable ears all over it. And the sense organs are located. They're not at random places, they're located And so they have a certain point of view and they look at the mass, they see the mass in a different way.

[53:54]

All the different sense organs see the mass in a different way. And they're limited by the way they work. But it's all one mass. And the Buddha is that mass. It's not somebody outside who looks back at the mass. It is that mass awakening to itself. And we all have... we all are in touch with that mass at a deep level of our mind. And we also are at a higher level of our mind, or a more evolved level of our mind, we can't see back at that mass because that mass is in the realm of awareness, but not awareness of objects. What Richard was talking about yesterday, that aboriginal mind, that innocent mind, it's there with us all the time. So the poetry of the Mountains and Rivers Sutra is trying to integrate the mind that sees all these different people, our cognitive, conceptual mind, with this aboriginal, innocent mind.

[55:08]

integrate the two. This innocent mind is Buddha, yes, it's connected with Buddha, but Buddha is not just that. Buddha is also the integration of this upper mind, this conceptual mind with that mind. It's when an individual being in this mass, in the realm of knowing which sees separation in the mass, when the individual being through meeting can realize this mass, can prove this mass. That through your action you prove the oneness of all being. Which is simply, you know, being kind proves it, right? If you're kind to people, you're kind to people because we're all one thing. We're all one life, so therefore we should be kind to each other. And also being kind to people sometimes means that you, instead of helping them up off the ground, you let them get up for themselves so that they can realize the wonderful oneness of all life.

[56:13]

That's also kind. That's also proof that your practice is this. And that's why we're not doing... My practice, your practice as a Zen Buddhist is not your practice. It's your practice... in this mass. It's this mass's practice that's really your practice. It's this one lump of flesh that's practicing. It's not like this one little set of eyes goes back and the practice goes back a little bit from that one set of eyes and it stops. It goes all the way back into the flesh that backs up all the eyes. I see a hand rising over the blue stove.

[57:22]

Oh, it's Basya. She doesn't forsake her seat for anything. Hi. Right. Exactly. That's a good way to do it. Your skin, like, usually we think the skin's the limit of our... sense equipment in our touching but actually it's it's through your skin that you touch the other beings. Right? Well, I think I'm hearing your question as the same question that Richard asked yesterday about this aboriginal.

[58:42]

I think that the baby, at a certain point, its skin is not the way it joins other beings. It already feels joined already, and its skin is just a mode of celebration of that joining. They enjoy the oneness they feel through their skin and through their eyes. Their skin and their eyes and everything are the same. As soon as you start seeing objects separate from yourself, you do it with all your six sense organs. I think that's what I propose as far as I know from all that. You start thinking dualistically all at once in all dimensions. Okay? They are in.

[59:40]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_93.05