Last week was Memorial Day. Was it Memorial Day last weekend? Last time, last Monday? April. So a lot of you were not here because it was a holiday. And so we had a smaller class. And during that smaller class, everybody expressed their understanding. of the koan, everybody got a chance to teach the koan. And that's, I think that's the best way for everybody to be teaching. Again, as I said, the first class, in all of America there are no Zen teachers. But I think there is Zen teaching going on.

[01:05]

But everybody has to be involved, otherwise it's not Zen. It could be like... Trying to be Zen, if everybody wasn't involved, that would be okay. But it's only when everybody's teaching. Now, the people who weren't here, it's okay that you weren't here, because you hopefully were teaching somewhere else. But that doesn't mean you're Zen teachers just because you were teaching. Okay, now we have this case 74, which is called, this translation is Fa Yan's Substance and Name. And we have, there's quite a few other cases of Fa Yan in the Book of Serenity.

[02:15]

So you might look at the other ones to get a feeling for how Fa Yun works with his students. The introduction says, plenty. has myriad virtues. Swept clear, there's not a mote of dust. Detached from all forms, identical to all things. Taking a step atop the hundred-foot pole, the universe in all directions is one's whole body. But tell me, where does it come from?

[03:28]

A monk asked Fa Yan, I hear that in the teachings there is a saying, quote, from a non-abiding basis are established all things, unquote. What is the non-abiding basis? Bhayan said, forms arise before substantiation, named arise before naming. It says named arise . Pardon? Names arise from before naming. Say it again. Names arise from before naming.

[04:33]

Say it louder. Names arise from before naming. Names arise from before naming. You're right. That's what it says here too. Names arise from before naming. That's right. Another translation. All things arise from a non-abiding basis. What is the non-abiding basis? Maybe I missed a line. Oh, no. And then Fa Yen says, form arises before substance, name occurs before name. Yeah, name occurs before name. So names arise from before naming.

[05:40]

Sounds like there's a condition called before naming, called before naming, that names arise in dependence on this condition of before naming. So I watched that movie about these bodhisattvas, these Chinese bodhisattvas, and when I was watching it, I was thinking, what does this case have to do with the way these bodhisattvas are behaving? How is this case relevant to the activity of bodhisattvas?

[07:03]

How is this case relevant, how is studying this case relevant for us who are, well, I don't know, us, but anyway, to a bodhisattva, someone who is looking after the welfare of all beings, one by one. So that movie has the story of a little girl who is looking after an old man. Did you want to say something, Michael? I was thinking that, well, its relevance towards the Bodhisattva way would be our interpretation of the Bodhisattva way and how it's relevant to this case.

[08:09]

As we're still here talking about the case, it's something that happened. And we're conceptualizing, we're creating form out of it. We're making something out of an experience that two people have. Which is the Bodhisattva way, is presence, taking care of the one in the womb. And maybe that's our study, is to look at their relationship, not to help us understand our relationship. So we don't necessarily come up to each other and ask each other questions like this. Well, this is an example of one of us coming up to another one of us and quoting a scripture.

[09:12]

Now, do we go up to, do we approach each other and raise scripture in order to help each other? Do we do that? If you want to help somebody or if you want to have a beneficial relationship with someone, does it work for you to use a scripture as a mode of of entering into beneficence. I don't think so. Well, sometimes. You might. Yeah, sometimes. It depends on the situation. Very occasionally. Just occasionally, yeah. Very. Yeah. I sometimes meet people and I sometimes think of a scripture, but then I think, nah, later. My mom has terrible scriptures. She could use better ones, like, well, what can you do? I'm not saying we should be raising scriptures with each other, but...

[10:21]

I'm not saying we should. But in this story, is the monk trying to help the teacher? Or is the monk trying to get the teacher to help the monk? He doesn't have a name. Doesn't have a name, but even somebody without a name could be trying to help their teacher. Couldn't they? I mean... Absolutely. Yeah. Just some ordinary sort of unrecognized bodhisattva could like go to their teacher with the agenda of helping the teacher. Do you ever... Does it ever occur to you to go to your teacher to help your teacher? Does it ever occur to you to help your teacher and then in order to help your teacher go to your teacher to help your teacher? I'd like to help my teacher now. And I'll go to my teacher to help my teacher.

[11:45]

I was telling somebody today, you know, I used to, like, I, you know, like, for example, when I lived in a building at 300 Page Street, I just happened to be the director at one point, so I assigned myself the room next to Suzuki Roshi. I mean, I had to assign myself some room, and that room was vacant, so I assigned it. And I left my door open during most of the day. So whenever he walked by, if he wanted to, it was easy for him to see what I was doing. And he would sometimes stick his head in and see what I was doing. So I was quite available if he wanted me to help him. I wasn't like going and saying, is there anything I can do? But I was available. And I also carried a little notebook around with me with questions. So if ever I did run into him someplace in the building and he wasn't busy with something else and I couldn't remember my questions, I did have a whole list of them in my pocket.

[12:51]

What kind of questions? A lot of times they were about scriptures. So I actually would ask him questions like this. In the Prajnaparamita Sutra it says blah, blah. That was sometimes in my question. Or in the Lotus Sutra it says, such and such. I actually had questions like that. But, you know, to be honest, I wasn't exactly thinking, how can I help Suzuki Roshi? But I would like to actually change my mind and look back on that time as my way of trying to help Suzuki Roshi. I'd like to sort of see it that way. Not to say that I didn't see it that way at the time, but to see that that's what I was... I was doing that to help him. And that was Neil, you know. In other words, I was doing that because I thought that would make him happy for having somebody asking those questions.

[13:56]

And I do feel like I did try to ask the questions, among my various questions, I tried to ask the question that I thought would be most appropriate to ask him in whatever situation I would have an opportunity. And I had several, so I could kind of choose. And then maybe I would ask one that I didn't even have on my list that I would think would be more appropriate. But I didn't ask him questions like, how are you? Maybe I should have, but I didn't. I almost never said, how are you? Even when he was sick, I didn't say, how are you? As a matter of fact, when he was sick, I told him that I wouldn't ask him questions anymore. I would just be around. So anyway, that was my way. I'm not saying that is the way, but I'm just saying I did kind of think of what would be the kind of questions that he would like to hear among the ones that I was interested in asking.

[15:12]

And sometimes I actually would have some questions and he would be available, but I wouldn't ask him. Not because I thought he didn't want me to, but because I just felt like I asked enough questions. Yes? Did you do that because you wanted to help him or did you do it because you wanted to please him? I did it because I felt a little bit... I felt like... I was maybe just getting too much. I didn't really know, but he never said, well, that's enough questions. I don't want to hear any more questions. He never said that. He never said that. But I did feel sometimes like, well, here I am. I have this chance to ask him these questions. And I sometimes said, where are the other students? I did sometimes think that. Where are they? How come I'm standing here and nobody else is asking him any questions? I mean, now, if he was alive, can you imagine?

[16:19]

But he was like, you know, he wasn't so famous then. And so one could just keep asking him and asking him, asking him. And I wasn't even thinking of tiring him out either. Somehow, I wasn't aware of him getting tired from these questions. But I just felt like I guess I felt like, well, don't ask all your questions. Not to save them, but just don't take up all that space. But then when I became director, actually, I had all these questions which weren't my questions. So then, because of having that position, and also I was Eno, because having those positions, then I usually didn't have any, then I just kept asking questions about, you know, the things about Zen Center and so on. I didn't feel like they were mine, I felt like they were his as much as mine, or Zen Center's questions. So then I didn't so much stop because of, you know, that I was taking too much.

[17:22]

Does that make sense? I didn't really ask my question. It didn't answer your question? No, not really. When you said that you were kind of checking out when you were choosing your questions and thinking what kind of questions would you like, was there never the thought that you wanted to please him, that you wanted him to think that this question was intelligent and stuff like that? Because to me, this happens all the time, so that's why I'm asking. Let's see, well... I did want to please him, but not... Certainly sometimes I did want to please him, but not to please him to necessarily think something of me. I had a similar experience with Gregory Bateson. who I just happened to have the opportunity to spend time with just before he died. In the last six months of his life, I was at Esalen during, well, actually during the last four months of his life, I was at Esalen for two months.

[18:29]

I mean, I was at Esalen, he was at Esalen, and his wife is a Zen student, so I got to be around his house a lot. And he liked to talk about various things, but he also liked to play chess. So we used to play chess together. But I just felt like somehow it just seemed, I hadn't played chess for a number of years, and I just felt it was funny for me to try to beat this very intelligent old man. Partly because, you know, people get older, not maybe as sharp at games like chess. But also, it just seemed to be beside the point for me to try to win. I mean, even if I beat him at chess, still he's as Really great guy, you know. Not just smart, but, you know, one of the kind of creative people of the century, I would say.

[19:31]

Really important. So for me to, like, you know, beat him just didn't seem like really the point. The point was just to be playing with him, really. That's what I was really doing. Right? I mean, he wasn't that good a chess player. If I wanted to play chess, I could go to the San Francisco Chess Club and meet guys that are a lot better, and women are better, too. And they would beat me easily. But even if he was a much better chess player, The point was that wasn't what impressed me about him. So I was playing with them. But I didn't try to win, but I still tried to make the most interesting moves that I could imagine, which are not necessarily the stupidest moves I can imagine, but actually sometimes the most creative moves, but not necessarily the moves that were from the point of view of trying to win. Maybe the most surprising moves that weren't... so unconsidered that he would have to take my pieces.

[20:33]

He could do a lot of things with some of the moves I made. And he really did like to play chess with me because I really, I did offer him these kind of interesting opportunities. So he did like to play chess with me. And I was doing it to have him have fun and me do what I thought was appropriate, namely to have the most interesting, fun game rather than to try to beat him. which seems kind of ridiculous, you know, in a way, in this case. Now, I can see that playing chess may be, under some circumstances, trying to beat the person is one of the most interesting things you can think of, but somehow in this case it didn't seem appropriate. So I didn't play that way. But I was trying to please him, but I wasn't necessarily trying to get him to think that I was a good chess player. In fact, sometimes he might have thought, what a strange move, you know. And then also, not only was it a strange move, but he didn't beat me. Yes?

[21:38]

Are we still talking about the monk and Phayang? We never were talking about the monk and Phayang. I mean, somebody was probably, but I... What I'm talking about is, do you go up to somebody and ask them questions about scripture? Would you approach someone this way in order to help them? Or would you approach someone in this way in order to help yourself? Or would you approach someone in this way in order to help somebody who's neither one of you? Would this be the way you would approach somebody? Do you approach people in order to help them? Do you approach people and ask questions in order to help them? Do you approach people and ask them questions to help yourself? What do you do when you go meet people? You go out of your way to, like, bring things up with people in order to help them. That's what I was talking about at the beginning. Thank you.

[22:40]

And I thought, and that's sort of, I use the example of Suzuki Roshi, and then he asked me the question, and I thought of Gregory Bateson as an example of bringing something to him, not to, you said to please, and I was trying to please him, but I don't think I was so much trying to get him to think that I was a good chess player or that I was smart. You know, I kind of felt like the fact that he was playing chess with me was already a sign that he was kind of interested in me or my mind or whatever. I already felt pretty much in the family. So I guess that's part of it. Do you feel like you're in the family and then are you trying to get in the family? And once you're in the family are you trying to help your family members by your questions? And And is this monk trying to do that? And is this style of questioning a way to play?

[23:43]

And can you ask a question like this as a way to play? And if not, what's your version of this question? So somehow maybe you would help to understand what the point of this question, how someone would be trying to be helpful by asking such a question. So in that sense we might want to like study the Vimalakirti Sutra to try to help us understand what's the context. And in fact the context of this is the context of Manjushri going to visit down below they give the example of Manjushri going to visit Vimalakirti and asking questions like this. But there again who's trying to help who? Is Manjushri trying to help Vimalakirti? Is Manjushri trying to help the Buddha? The Buddha sent Manjushri to Vimalakirti.

[24:46]

He was trying to help his boss because his boss couldn't go. Yeah. As you were talking, I've noticed there's two things that are characteristic about these cases, especially the cases where that started off with a monk asking a question. On the one hand, the track record of these monks is pretty bad. Like, what is the esoteric meaning of Bodhidharma coming from the West? And, you know... Excuse me. The track record of these monks is bad. That means that the monks lost on the track? You know, we sort of giggle at them. But again, that's my point. What are these monks trying to do? Did they fail at what they were trying to do? Well, but the opposite side of this coin is they created stories that were worthy of putting in the blueprint record. Right, so why do you say they had a bad track record? That's... Suddenly I'm wondering why we all sort of snicker at these monks, these, you know, sort of lame-brained monks.

[25:54]

On the other hand, they've created... Do you snicker at idols? I mean, I do. Well, so I can't... I guess you do snicker at them. Yeah, I would. What's the esoteric meaning of Bodhidharma coming to wash his mouth out? Well, I think that it seems to me you might snicker at someone who's trying to help a Zen master. That might be kind of amusing to you to see the Zen master as a monk comes and tries to help the Zen master be famous by giving him, what do you call it? What do you call it? Is it called a straight line? Straight line. These monks, this monk is one of the people who made Fa Yan famous. Well, the straight man would be the monk, I think. That's what I'm saying. This monk, the straight man, offers the teacher the line for the teacher to say this. And the line is a scriptural citation, which is, for a monk, a scriptural citation is kind of a straight line. Because monks often bring forward scriptures. Except the Buddha's disciples, who didn't have any scriptures, so they just asked some question about what Buddha said.

[27:00]

Yes? Yes? in terms of, you know, who's helping whom, I think that in a moment of questioning and answering, both people are helping each other. If it's a question that comes from, say, in this case, the monk, and the monk is the question that comes from his well-being, then it will elicit a response from by end from his well-being, and it goes back and forth and back and forth. And so both have helped. Right, but you just said it wasn't a question of who's helping whom. And then you just told us who's helping. You were saying either or. Is the monk helping the teacher or the teacher helping the monk? You're saying both. You're saying both. Yeah. So do you do that? Yeah. What do you do? I try to. What do you do? I try to come up with questions that mean a lot. That mean a lot?

[28:00]

Now, do you mean a lot or that are helpful? Some people, some people do that. They ask questions that mean a lot, rather than questions that they think would be helpful. Some people, like some children, ask questions that they don't think would mean a lot, but they want to be helpful. And in fact, their questions don't mean a lot, in a sense, but they're being helpful. Some other people are really trying to do something, really, that mean a lot. Not to say that they aren't trying to be helpful, but maybe it's more important for them to say something that means a lot than to say something that would be helpful. And if they had, somehow they might even choose, this would be a helpful question, but this would be a really meaningful question.

[29:02]

And I'm the one who's asking the meaningful question, so there's that opportunity. You don't know, but you might choose the one you think is meaningful over the one you think would be helpful. You might do that because you'd rather be the person who asked the most meaningful question rather than the one who asked the kind of not very meaningful, helpful question. Like, would you like a glass of water? I'm not saying you're that way, but you did say that, and so there it is. Which is the highest priority? To ask what's helpful... or what is most meaningful or very meaningful, which makes you the one who asked the very meaningful question, which makes you associated with very meaningful, rather than you... Why is it either-or? Why is it either-or? Did I say either-or there? Implying it?

[30:07]

I don't answer why questions. So, but I asked, which is highest priority? And so I just ask you to think about that. Yes? It seems like questions that try to clarify the current subject are helpful. You think that? Yeah, so? So you might ask a question that would clarify a situation in order to be helpful? You might do that? So this monk might have been trying to clarify something with his question? So here's a quote, and he's trying to clarify this quote to be helpful.

[31:11]

Is this something that anybody else here would like to clarify, that they think would be helpful? Do you think it would be helpful? Jimmy? I guess I'm confused about... Why they are trying to isolate naming when it seems like naming something can invoke dualism? Does naming can generalize? Or are they using a different I think maybe they might be doing, like you say, using names. What was the way you were saying, the way most people use names? Sometimes names can invoke a sense of dualism by generalizing.

[32:29]

Like, this person is such and such, or this subject is such and such, so to assign a name. Right. Names. Can names, you say, can invoke? Evoke or... Evoke what? Dualism. Dualism, yeah. And dualism, is dualism something like out in mid-air, or dualism something that's a state of mind? I think it's in the nature of language. Well, but is dualism something in the nature of language? Is it a certain kind of mind? Or is it something that's out there all by itself? It's something about the mind, right? There's something about mind that has dualism.

[33:31]

And words, you could say, evoke dualism. dualism, but the dualism that it might evoke is a mind, a certain kind of mind. If there's just a word, it doesn't necessarily evoke dualism unless there's a mind around to hear the word, and then when the mind hears the word, the mind comes up with dualism. But I wouldn't say exactly that the word invokes dualism. I would say the word is dualistic consciousness. I would say word is dualistic consciousness. Susan? Does it reflect the dualistic mind? Does what reflect the dualistic mind? The word. I don't think it reflects it. I think it is the dualistic mind. What do you mean by that? Let's see. What do I mean by a word reflecting a dualist... that a word is dualistic consciousness?

[34:37]

It is. I have a problem with that. Well, give me a word. It would be no word. Give me a word. Car. Okay. What's a dualistic consciousness at the same time? Was there dualistic consciousness at that time when you said car? I didn't really think when I said it, so there wasn't any consciousness. There you go. So? So, you didn't necessarily even think that, there was just the word. Okay? Was there consciousness? Not much. I don't know if there was some. Well, couldn't you tell, wasn't there an awareness that you said the word? Well, there was a sound. I heard the sound. Right. And wasn't there consciousness of that sound? Pardon? Wasn't there consciousness of that sound?

[35:38]

Wasn't there an awareness of that sound? Yeah. And wasn't there awareness that that sound was not just a sound but a word? Like if you had mismanaged the vocalization and come up with... There would have been awareness that you didn't quite get a word, because I asked you for a word, right? But the awareness would come out there. Pardon? There was first the sound, and then the awareness comes. Yeah, I don't know about that. What I'm saying is that I think that right at the time there was a perception that that was a word, There was, first of all, maybe an intention to say a word, and that also, even before you said the word, I would say there's dualistic consciousness in the intention to say the word. Then when you said the word, I would say that the dualistic consciousness was not another thing besides that word. I think Rasi is dualistic. I think you're right. I think Rasi is dualistic.

[36:39]

But I'm not saying that you can't have dualistic consciousness without words. I'm just saying words are dualistic consciousness. They're an example of it. But it's also the case that words liberate dualistic consciousness. Dualistic consciousness doesn't have to have words, but when there are words, that is dualistic consciousness. And that word, which is dualistic consciousness, can liberate dualistic consciousness. That's why asking questions is part of liberating dualistic consciousness. Is there something different going on with other perceptions, say, when we hear words, that mind perceiving, right? What about hearing if there's... If there's no word attached or sight, if there's no word attached, or maybe the question is how often isn't there a word attached with hearing or sight or sensation?

[37:50]

I would say that very, very often during a day there is awareness of things like a sound without there being a word for it. But that awareness, I would suggest to you, is, what do you call it, it's not... Sensory awareness. It's not known to the mind, the ordinary conceptual mind doesn't know about that. And what we usually call knowing, in some sense the place where we know things in a sense of you knowing something, then it's words, it's concepts. But there is a level of awareness where we're not working with concepts, we're working with sensory data. That is part of our, I say part, it's actually, I would say, a tremendous amount of our life is direct sensory perception.

[39:03]

And that direct sensory perception is unmediated by concepts. Therefore, there's no conceptual awareness. Therefore, these experiences hardly even count. They feel discounted. They feel discounted. But you wouldn't know that you're discounted. You wouldn't know that you're... Right. It's only to think about them that they seem that way. But this is going on. And so one example I've been talking to some people about is that you cannot actually concentrate on direct sensory experience. It happens by itself, almost. It happens by itself?

[40:05]

Well, when I listen to you talk about the sensory experience, for instance, there have been quite a few times in my life where I was driving and all of a sudden something happened in front of me and I had to very quickly avoid an accident. Well, there was no naming involved, what is this guy doing? There was just stuff happening. Right. That's right. But what I meant was, you can't have sustained concentration at that level because you cannot direct your mind to have the sensory consciousness stay on some object. Could I move that? Without the conceptual coming in with you, without that coming back, trying to grab it? Well, directing your mind to that particular topic, you'd have to do it conceptually, and you can't do it. You can't transfer that happening because the presentation of direct perception is totally out of control of the meditator.

[41:15]

But you can, you can concentrate on a conceptual image, but you can't stabilize your mind and concentrate on an external sensory object. You can do it for a little while, three seconds maximum. And the way you test it is not by asking the person if they're concentrating on the object, because the person might imagine or conceive of, that they're concentrating on an object, you test them by things you're talking about, where they would be able to turn to avoid an accident if they were aware of it. If they were getting certain information, they could perform certain tasks. And if they weren't getting that information, they wouldn't be able to. So you could give them that information and see if they could concentrate on it, and they wouldn't be able to. And all this would be going on at a level that, you know, you could test them on, but they wouldn't necessarily be aware that they're able to do it.

[42:23]

But you could respond if you change the stimulant, and you could respond if you could stay with it. But you can't. Yeah? Would you say that the same thing could happen with the arising of the question of consciousness? How do you mean, the arising of question? So, I'm going back to this notion of helpful questions. So questions could arise in the middle of experience. Yes. Yes. And so without labeling whether they're helpful or not, or just let them arise. Yes. Without crafting anything. Right. And have the willingness to ask it. Well, that's another matter. Like, No, but out of consciousness, out of the open field. Right, the question can arise. I know the question can arise, right. But asking it, saying it out loud, is something I might think about, whether that would be helpful or not. I'm not saying you have to, but it could just arise as you said, but I wouldn't necessarily ask it.

[43:30]

Because at the level of asking, I might use language, and then my dualistic consciousness comes up, so then I think in terms of, is it helpful or not? Or would it be helpful to talk to that person? Would this language be helpful? But the concept could arise. But as soon as the concept arises, consciously, it's dualistic consciousness. It feels like the censorship. I'm trying to understand that part. Censorship. Censorship. I think that dualistic unconsciousness can arise, in other words, a word can arise without there being any censorship. I don't think you have to have censorship in order for ignorance to arise. I think ignorance can arise It seems to be that ignorance can arise.

[44:39]

In other words, the consciousness of duality or dualistic consciousness seems to arise. And that can be in the form of a question. From a non-abiding basis are established all things. So he said it's a basis, a non-abiding basis. What is a non-abiding basis? Isn't that a little bit of a contradiction? A basis is non-abiding. So another way to say it, which doesn't have such a contradictory quality, is depending on non-abiding, all things arise. So depending, you can depend on something on a non-abiding without that being a basis.

[45:40]

What do you think of that? Could you just define non-abiding? Non-abiding. Let's see, non-abiding. Not even temporarily residing. But something can arise in dependence on something else without being in the thing it depends on, but depends on it. In other words, without A, B does not arise. But A is not in B. And B does not have within it the power to make A happen. And it says all things. So all the things are established on non-abiding. Take away the word abasis for the time being, it makes life easier. All things are established in dependence on non-abiding.

[46:45]

Because of non-abiding, all things can be established. Isn't it just another word for emptiness? You could say it's another word for emptiness, yes. Uh... Endless possibility. Impermanence. Where'd you get the endless possibility thing? I just came up. LAUGHTER Well, he's channeling me. But I was just holding this impermanence thing. Um... I, uh... May I interject? Yeah. According to the dictionary, abiding, it says to stand fast, to go on being, so non-abiding could have impermanence.

[47:46]

Non-going on being. Right. So there you go. Maybe you're okay over there with impermanence. Maybe impermanence is an aspect of... You know, one way to talk about non-abiding. Yes? So I saw it in something like that, but then it says in here that, you know, it's the basis of erroneous conception. So now that doesn't make sense to me. What's the basis of erroneous conceptions? Non-abiding. Non-abiding is the basis of erroneous conception? Right. So now it doesn't make sense to you? No. Well, but before it said all things. One of the things that there is is erroneous conceptions. All kinds of ignorance, all kinds of erroneous conceptions arise in dependence on non-abiding.

[48:55]

All kinds of correct perceptions also arise in dependence on non-abiding. Not abiding is a condition for the arising of ignorance and correct understanding. They both arise in dependence on the same nature. the same non-abiding nature. All things depend on this for their arising. Yes? What if we didn't have words? Yes? What would we have? What would we have? Just experience. Could we have experience without words? Um... This is a lawyer asking this question. LAUGHTER LAUGHTER So anyway, baby doesn't have words.

[50:01]

Do they have any experience? Well, they seem to have experience, but they don't, they even have ignorance, but they don't yet have words. What I'm trying to do is bring this koan home. Good idea. But I'm having a difficult time with that because, you know, when I read this koan, what came to me was the Harsha Trips. Yeah. But... It's still abstract. I have difficulty internalizing it. Yeah, I think that's... You're probably not the only one. I'm not? Right.

[51:02]

That's what we have this class for. Particularly, this is a rather abstract statement. Don't you think? From a non-abiding basis, all are established, all things. That's kind of abstract, isn't it? Or is it just contradictory, or is it also abstract? It's both. Yeah, so you've got contradiction and abstraction. All right? Now, is contradiction an abstraction? Mm-hmm. Okay, so you've got that abstraction, too. So how are you going to bring the abstraction of contradiction and other kinds of abstractions, how are you going to bring them home? That's what you want to do, right? I do. Okay. So how are you going to bring them home? By going to a place you can please ignorance. Have you got there yet? Well, if I think I get there, then I'm not there.

[52:06]

No, not necessarily. You might actually get there and be right that you got there. But do you think you've got there yet? I don't want to think about it. I want to feel it. You want to feel it? Fine. Do you feel it? Sometimes, but not very often. Well, how about now? Now. Well, so you want to feel the complete ignorance, right? And you're not there now, right? So that's a way to bring it home, is to feel complete ignorance. That would be one way to bring it home, wouldn't it? Yeah. Yeah. So how are you going to get to a place of complete ignorance? By going to some cave somewhere and singing it for You're getting closer to complete ignorance there. That's closer because you just showed, I think, I just heard you talk about that you need to go someplace to find complete ignorance. So that's a sign of ignorance, that you think you have to go someplace to find it.

[53:10]

It's probably closer than that. Don't you think? Doesn't that seem reasonable? And non-contradictory? Yeah, and what is directly in front of you? It's the same for each person, too. And how is it the same for each person? We'll mark him, tell you. We think we know, but we don't know. Yeah, we're ignorant. Everybody's ignorant, aren't they? Anybody lacking ignorance? But although I don't know of anybody that's lacking ignorance, not that many people are aware of it. Aware of what the ignorance is.

[54:14]

What's the ignorance? The ignorance is... What's the ignorance? Go ahead, tell me. I don't mind. Tell me the ignorance. Belief in an abiding self. Yeah, belief in a... What do you call it? An abiding. It's belief in an abiding. It's a belief that a thing has an abiding basis. That's the ignorance which we all have. I think everybody's got it. Huh? Belief? You can stop there if you want to. That would be another kind of trick, another ignorant maneuver. But why don't we just admit what we're up to? Why don't we just admit our ignorance? Why not do that? It's a charged word for most people. That's one problem.

[55:16]

It's a charged word for most people. What's another problem? Not even being able to see what it is. Not even being able to see what it is is another problem. As a matter of fact, it's a lot of work to see what it is. But let's work at it, shall we? Yeah, so like Mark offered me this nice little example of how he would get closer to what he wants, which is to actually be completely ignorant. What you've already got, but you want to be closer to that, right? And I think that's really a very healthy vow or a very healthy motivation. Because that's exactly where Buddhas wake up, is in intimacy with ignorance. That's exactly where they are. They're not like a little bit sort of away from their ignorance when they wake up. They're right there with it. So that's part of our job. Now, asking about a non-abiding basis...

[56:18]

Maybe the monk's asking about this because he would like to know something about this non-abiding basis. Because maybe he knows something about his belief in an abiding basis. But maybe he doesn't. And maybe you can find out whether he does or doesn't. Maybe you can find out whether he actually knows that he believes in an abiding basis, and that's why he's bringing this story up. Or maybe he doesn't know that, and this story is just an abstraction for him. So in some ways, to make this first question not abstract, it wouldn't be abstract if you found out that you think there is an abiding basis, and then this sutra would be a real kicker for you. Because it would be like speaking right to your belief. And now you're going to go talk to somebody about a scriptural passage that actually talks about this.

[57:25]

Now, he could have come and said, I see that I think things have an abiding basis. I actually see that that's what I think. But the sutra says, blah-de-blah. but he didn't quite say it that way. So I think Mark's question is an opportunity for us to make this first line very relevant by finding our belief in abiding. an abiding basis for things, rather than things arise in dependence on non-abiding. I'm going to the toilet now, so I hope you use your time well while I'm going.

[58:31]

Somebody can come up and sit in that seat. No, thank you. I really loved your talk. You like his talk? You can pretend like this seat, you can pretend like Grace's seat. It's cold, mate. She's going to bed. They're not telling me anything. She'll be back in a second. That isn't easy. It is, yeah. It's a little tall. It's in there. It's somewhere like six feet. Let's all go to the bathroom. But not just that. What's your understanding of... All things are arising and not abiding.

[60:02]

All things are arising and not abiding. What's your understanding of that? Yes, there are no tangents. There are no bases. So, like, when Niall was studying, like, the five skandhas, right? In the classrooms. So what's your understanding of how consciousness affects that and how that affects mind? The possibilities are always endless, but it is true that in the moment, the skandhas are pulled together by the consciousness created. Would nobody ask any questions? So how does that work? Is that helpful? Well, I meant it to speak. Was it helpful? Yes. Mayor, would you mind sitting? Come on. Attention.

[61:46]

A monk asked Ho-san. Ho-san? Ho-san? Hogen. Hogen. I have heard it said in a sutra that all dharmas arise from a non-dwelling base. What is this non-dwelling base? So what is this non-dwelling base? It's a matter of timing. What time is it now? It's time for you to retire. Thank you.

[63:08]

That's wonderful. You should come and try. There's an answer to that question. There is? Yeah, right there. I was trying to tell Maya that she didn't listen. Hozon replied. Hogan. Hogan? Form arises before substance. Name occurs before name. I have this funny feeling. I want to go back to this question I have about all questions that arise in consciousness are, there's kind of a purity about that. And sort of truth about it, it seems like.

[64:47]

What do you think? Can you say that again? Any question that arises seems kind of pure and true. You mean if you don't question it or question its motivation? Yeah, without any blocking or categorizing or... So Pat, you were saying just ask the question instead of what Brad was saying before about whether the question is helpful or meaningful. You were saying if it comes up in your consciousness, just throw it out there. Yeah, I still, I'm not clear about the difference in how I'm experiencing that and what he was saying. So maybe you could help me. Well, I'm not sure either. I can kind of often feel that if a question comes up, there's probably a good reason why it came up in my mind, so I just ask it. But a lot of times questions don't come up as much. being in the meeting with different people, opportunities arise, and sometimes they're tasked with other questions.

[66:03]

Yes? Yeah, I feel the same way you do, if I understand you correctly, that the right thing is always happening. Yes. A strong pattern in me is back from the third grade or something, I'm wanting to please the teacher. And I see all kinds of questions, answers, all kinds of stuff coming up, which is basically motivated to try to please the teacher. And it's actually not anything that I look at would actually help me or help anybody. So for me it's useful to examine the things that come up that I might want to say and examine before seeing.

[67:06]

I agree, I have the same experience because I think purity that you're referring to I'm not sure what that means I guess in a certain way you could say if it comes up and you naturally see it without examination that ought to be spontaneous and pure but then what about the intent and what about the skillfulness in that Well, I can feel this difference if a question arises that just comes without a lot of focus on it. When I use the word pure, I don't know what to say, but valuable or true or broad. And so some of you are saying you take a couple more steps before you ask the question. Yes.

[68:10]

I think there are lots of different kinds of questions. I think they arise in different ways, but the kind of question I'm thinking of that has a kind of purity to it is sort of what Mark was talking about earlier about ignorance and those times in class, like in grade school, where the teacher is talking about something and nobody understands what's going on and nobody opens up their mouth except for the one, you know, the kid who's sort of a dumb kid that everybody knows is going to ask that question that everybody needs to know the answer to. And there's a kind of, tension that builds in the classroom until that person finally and ethically asks the question that everybody really wants the answer to. And at the same time, the person who asks that question is somehow not accepted into the group, and that holds the actual question of the group. And so it speaks from that kind of ignorance of not knowing, which is really what everybody else is experiencing, too. See, I feel like that in that exchange that Rebbe and I were using different language for the same thing, and I noticed that when I was trying to respond to him, I started coming out, I came out with the word censorship.

[69:31]

Did you hear that one? And so right away, I took the dialogue that we could have kept having, and I shot it out into left field. Because the word censorship was like a wet blanket on the dialogue. And I could feel that. But that word came up like you're talking about how the questions come up. So what was the difference between that coming up in a pure way and a question coming up in a pure way? It wasn't, but it did arise, but then I started thinking about it, and I felt like it was unskillful because it sidetracked the continuing dialogue that we could have had about it. What's he having now? He's very quiet. All right. So you censored yourself for a little while? Back there?

[70:32]

It was very interesting to try to drop all of this thinking and try to stay with the class, because you all kind of moved on to another topic. Well, same topic, but different track. And I was still back with this, trying to understand what happened. I have a question about helpful and what we're talking about. Helpful for what? And what is helpful? I sort of have this feeling that what is truly helpful might be questions or things that deal with the understanding of the basis of suffering or the release from suffering. And I have a question of what are all these questions I could do with that? I had that same question. I kept talking in my head, but I can't feel it.

[71:35]

Well, then what's the question that makes it matter? That's the question. I'm sorry, I didn't hear you. What's the question that makes it matter? That's the question. I don't know what the answer to that is. What do you think the answer to that is? The next question. Somehow this comment, things are getting real bad, that we're getting closer and closer to by pursuing the levels. And that's pursuing is what the third question feels like it's doing. No, the pure question doesn't pursue. You're saying that in the dialogue with someone else the question comes up because you're further helping to fight each other? You were saying, how do you get to that question?

[72:39]

Is it when you start to ask questions that the other person then responds, and then questions back, and then you kind of zero in on what it is? Some questions seem to close the door, and some questions seem to open the next door. The thing I was thinking about when Matt brought that up, or when Pat mentioned about Lisa mentioned about someone wanting to ask a question, but not . Waiting for the tension to arise meant someone finally asked it. And is that the point of understanding what everybody knows in the class, or just a couple of people go ahead and they know? At what point is the question answered for everyone in a teaching situation? Does everybody get to come along? I think we all know. And that's my belief. I think that we all know.

[73:41]

My experience is that we all approach it from all the different facets of our experience, and the entry points are different for all of us, but we all know. I guess just for me, a lot of time is quite on its own, and I feel... I have a wonderful question. I'd like to invite Rep to come back here now for the end of the class. It's almost over. Would you please come back? Well, you want me to come back here and you ask me a question? No, that was your question. That was my question. Would you like to come back? Would you like to come up? I don't have to, I won't give up. You can go if you see anything. So what's non-abiding basis? Go on. Oh, that went fast, that class.

[75:06]

What's the non-abiding basis? He doesn't know. Tell us. The non-abiding basis. What is the non-abiding basis? What is non-abiding? It's one foot down and one foot coming forward. One foot down and one foot going forward. Thank you very much. What's non-abiding? Sitting on the couch. I don't know. What's non-abiding? It's the backwards step. Did you show it to me? Now is it non-abiding?

[76:12]

The forward step. Would you tell me? I don't know. Is it coming home? It's there, almost. Tell us what's missing. Thinking about it. You mean you aren't thinking about it? Well, no, no, no. Nothing. Is it home now? Yes. Is it home? Yes, it's home. My son told me the answer to this question. It goes like this. Hong Kong food, egg, food, young, fortune could be always wrong. What? Really? It's a sweep? No, it's got a sprain. So, let's go. voltage is jumping to my closest ground.

[77:41]

Oh, I see. Is that a place where you can get new portals? Do you really? I didn't want a hard-footed idea. Well, Doctor, I... Can I give you examples? Yeah. Question. Now would you show me? What's non-abiding? I don't know. What's non-abiding?

[78:43]

I don't know, sir. Your answer? What's non-abiding? The answer before that. What's non-abiding? This breath. What's non-abiding? Now. Sit down. That would be non-abiding. What's non-abiding? How rare is it? It's non-abiding. Your question? It's non-abiding. Can I hear my head? What's not abiding? [...]

[79:50]

What's non-abiding? Us. What's non-abiding? What's missing? What's non-abiding? What's non-abiding? No, it's not. Sorry. It's class. My heartbeat. Attention. Eyes. That's not mighty. He's going to tell it if you're... Was he?

[81:05]

That's not mighty. Nothing. What's not abiding? Nothing. What's not abiding? Nothing. What's not abiding? Something. What's not abiding? Letting go. What's not abiding? Who's dead? He's just letting go. Yes. Is this letting go? Show me. Let it go. There you go. Is this non-abiding?

[82:20]

It is. What is it? Whoa! Is this non-abiding? What is it? What's non-abiding? What's non-abiding? What's not inviting? What's not inviting?

[83:21]

What's not inviting? What do you know? What's not abiding? In all the great times there are no teachers such now. Oh, that's not abiding. What about tomorrow morning, Tom? That's not abiding. what's non-abiding? I had a question actually what's non-abiding?

[84:24]

so if there's no more discrimination do you still receive a body? will we still receive a body if we stop discriminating? no What's it on the body? Greg's ponytail. Renee, what's it on the body? All right, what's it on the body? It's a nice view. What's not a body? What's not a body? What's not a body? What's not abiding?

[85:32]

What's not abiding? What's not abiding? Nothing. What's not abiding? That I don't know that I'm with you. Pardon? That I don't know that you and I are one. What's not abiding? I don't know that you have an air one. What's not a body? Shit. Did I miss anybody? You didn't ask me that. Me? Me? What? Carol. But you answered. Didn't you see? You answered that question, didn't you?

[86:35]

Didn't I ask, what's non-abiding, and you clapped your hands? I, I, only. That was your answer. French toast. Well, Kara, didn't you understand your question? The question I'm... Didn't you understand that that was non-abiding? I did. I mean, you. I was talking about you. What? What? What's not advising? Non-advising is our friend. That's non-advising. Right? I said, what's non-advising? Our friendship is non-advising. That's our real friendship. Hey, Jackie, what's not abiding?

[87:40]

What's mine? Thanks for looking it up. Yeah, you have to repeat it again. What's not abiding? My hair. Okay, we have one more class on this colon, so... Please, understand what non-abiding is. What was the answer, Jeff? My hair? No, no, no, the real one. It kind of comes to you, like you said earlier. You just kind of know it. Archie? The universe.

[88:37]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_81.63