On the way over here this morning from Green Dragon Temple, I thought about Noabode and how when we first came here or after being here for a while, we became aware that kind of like the underpinnings or the underbelly. We became aware of the underbelly of Noah Bowen, which has lots of moisture in it. And actually the building is kind of rotting in certain parts around the base. And we've lots of junk also under the deck accumulated over time. And also the deck was a lot to fall down. And Bernard rebuilt the deck and Jerry and his friends have kind of like water situation so the water's not so likely to rock the place.

[01:04]

Paul and his crew have cleaned up all the stuff under there and Cecily and his crew have rebuilt the hillside and other people have rebuilt the retaining wall. sort of like the unconscious of Noah Bowen has been addressed. I just feel that we've really cleaned the temple so we can really sit here. Thank you very much for all your work. as a kind of, I don't know what, hors d'oeuvre for this, for this, how do you say, how do you say the French word for the work itself?

[02:11]

Au revoir? No, how do I say it? What? Oeuvre. The hors d'oeuvre for the oeuvre. Before the oeuvre, I want to give you hors d'oeuvre. Does hors d'oeuvre mean before the ouve? Yeah, so before the ouve they give the hors d'oeuvre. The hors d'oeuvre is a story about somebody telling me a story. So, the story was, this person says, stories, which of course I often mention is the normal condition of living beings that they They have minds which create stories and then they believe them and then they're trapped inside their story like, I'm a good person. I'm a bad person. I'm good and they're bad, they're bad, I'm good. Republicans are better than Democrats and so on. And then the person said something like, it's just a game.

[03:21]

And I thought, that's an interesting turn of the phrase to change from story to it's just a game. So if it's a game, let's play. Let's play the game. Before we can really play in the liberating sense, the kind of play that leads to creativity and understanding and freedom. Before we can play, we have to relax with the story. We have to relax in the game. For example, the game of having a temple, of sitting cross-legged, of sitting still, of being quiet. We have to play. That's a game too, one could say. but to be playful with that game, with the forms of the body and mind. And then I also have suggested that in order to relax, we need to trust that it's okay to relax.

[04:32]

And in order to trust that it's okay to relax, we have to be compassionate with the story that we're going to relax with. To relax before you're before you're feeling compassion for the game, for the story, for the story, for the game. Reading human beings, they have a kind of ethical sense that they should be compassionate, that that's our real way to go. And if we don't take care of that and commit to that, some part of us say, it's not safe to relax because we've overlooked something. Something, what do you call it, as I think Kant said, what's it called, the manifest destiny, is that what he said?

[05:36]

Huh? Huh? Yeah, Kant said there's a categorical imperative, which is that human beings, anyway, have a sense of moral obligation, a sense to be careful of their karma and to be compassionate with their karma and what other beings are related to. If we try to relax, some part of us is really not deeply relaxing. So, again, part of relaxing in no abode is we cleaned up the rot. We took responsibility for the building. We didn't just say, eh. We also had termites people come. And the termite is just to take care of the rot around the base of the building. As ancient teachers said, are you following me? So, yeah, so

[06:37]

If we can commit to compassion, then we can relax with the story and play with the story. And then if we can play the story, we can enter creativity. And entering creativity, we will understand the story. We will understand the game and be free of it. And I said this to the person who told me about it. And when I got to the creativity part, he said, but the creativity is dark. You know, I think creativity is dark. You can't really see it. It's like dark water, dark flowing water.

[07:41]

You can't really see it. To see it is not the creativity. But if you can dance with the forms you're dealing with, you can enter this dark water of creation of our life together, and then enter wisdom and liberation. So this is the hors d'oeuvre to the oeuvre, and the oeuvre is a meditation on compassion. I'm going to give you a text on compassion. a meditation called compassion. This will be something to be compassionate towards, and the text will tell you how to be compassionate towards the text.

[08:47]

And also I just want to mention, which I've said to you before but I want to say again because I think it might be helpful. Here's another text. The text is meditation, the word meditation. I was surprised when I looked it up a while ago that the first meaning in the English dictionary I looked in for the word meditation, the first meaning was a scripture which is offered for contemplation, often a religious text, contemplation. And then, I don't know, I don't remember now if actually then it had, that's a noun, I remember it had the verb that meditation is also the act of contemplating a meditation.

[09:59]

In fact, I would suggest that we often do use the word meditation for the contemplation process, which we apply to... Do you need a chair? You can bring a chair. Put it by Laurie. Susan, why don't you take this? It's easier to get to. So, a lot of people think of meditation And also, a lot of people think of meditation as, there's two types of meditation, basically. One is meditation which develops tranquility and concentration. And actually, it actually goes and the playfulness part.

[11:03]

The practice of tranquility develops a relaxed and playful body that's ready to enter into creativity and wisdom. Following me? And that kind of meditation, that tranquility meditation, is what a lot of people think about as meditation. And it is, it's part of it. But another part of meditation is contemplating teachings, contemplating . So today I offer you a meditation to contemplate. And this meditation is, yeah, it includes also meditating on tranquility. But the topic, the next text is the text, the meditation of And I just offer, for starters, that sometimes we, I, speak of three kinds of, guess what?

[12:19]

One kind of compassion is a compassion that has the object of living beings, that sees living beings. The next kind of compassion has object elements which come together to create the appearance of living beings. And the third kind of compassion is compassion which doesn't have an object. It's objectless. So now I'll talk about these different types of compassion. The first type of compassion whose object is living beings and living beings suffer to some extent, more or less. The first type of living beings as objects and it refers to a compassion of one who believes or thinks or thinks and believes beings are real.

[13:36]

substantially existing, and delusions are real, substantially existing, and who wishes to liberate real beings from real suffering and real delusion, or real delusion and real suffering. And this is what is called, sometimes, sentimental compassion, which is limited by the sentimental feelings. It's not deliberative compassion. And I also want to say that this topic I would, when I thought about talking to you about it, I thought, I think I know about what I can talk about this. I would hesitate to talk about this, what I'm about, these things I'm talking about, for example, at a big public lecture, because I think some people might be shocked with some of this stuff.

[14:39]

I hope you can listen to this and relax with it and play with it. And, of course, I also wish that you have committed to compassion, which will help you relax with my talk about compassion. Be compassionate. Talk, please. So sentimentality is like, oh, let me say, also if you look up the word, when I look up the word compassion in the dictionary, I think it said, what did it say? It said sympathetic pity and concern for the sufferings and misfortunes of others.

[15:47]

So I think that this definition, the first definition in the dictionary I looked in, sounds to me like what we call where you're looking at sentient beings as real and their suffering as real and also you have pity on them. You sympathize with them and have pity. The first definition in this English dictionary sounds like sentimental compassion. And also the root of the word, which I think many of you know, is compati, which means suffer with. But although the root is to suffer with, the denotative meaning is to pity. So, Buddhism has two words that are often, in Chinese actually, in Sanskrit we have karuna, which is often translated as compassion, and the other one is maitri, which is often, or metta, which is translated as loving-kindness.

[17:13]

The loving-kindness is a feeling of well-wishing, wanting people to be happy, but it doesn't emphasize so much being impacted by their suffering. I've heard the etymology of the word karuna is dented happiness. Karuna is basically happiness. It's basically happiness, but it has dents in it. And the dents are the suffering of others. that actually we are affected, we are sensitive to it. So it's possible that the Buddhist word compassion might be better translated as empathy, possibly, or it's two together. The word sentiment means a cast of mind, A habitual way of feeling.

[18:28]

Sentiment. A general disposition. And I think our general disposition is to see others as separate. To play the game of them being separate. and to see them as real beings who have real suffering. That's our usual custom. And then to feel compassion for them as separate beings is the sentimental compassion. And this is and I must say I feel this, I sometimes see things suffering and I think, oh, they're over there suffering rather than I feel impacted by them, rather than a sensitivity in me to their suffering, which is not separate from me now.

[19:34]

And a lot of people I talk to are The word pity, they don't like the word pity. They don't want to pity people. And I think that's kind of a harbinger of wisdom, of wise compassion, of compassion that's joined to wisdom. Not pitying, but more like feeling what it's like to be with beings. If you're ready, perhaps I can move on to the next type, which is the kind of compassion that might that bodhisattvas might be into to some extent in their practice, but also might be characterized by other types of spiritual practices where it's a compassion whose object is elements so that you see beings as compounds of elements.

[20:53]

compounds of the appearance of a being. And you see that in beings, you look at them and you don't see a real substantial person when you look at somebody. And you understand that the compassion also is made of elements. that it's the kind of imaginative being that you're seeing and an imaginative compassion that you're feeling for imaginative beings who have imaginative or illusory suffering. And this type of compassion that has its first object is free of the sentiment, the ordinary sentiment of human beings who see other beings as real and who have real suffering and real delusions, real liberation, substantial liberation of substantial beings.

[22:05]

Substantial liberation of substantial beings and That type of compassion is not liberative. And this type, although it's free of the other kinds of compassion, has an image of compassion that it understands is an image, and it has an image of beings which it understands as an image, and an image of their suffering which it understands as an image, but it still has the image. The beings still look like they're separate. is not truly liberative. The truly liberative one is what we call great compassion, which is joined to wisdom, which not only understands that we're made of, we're composed beings and we don't exist on our own, but the image that we have of this composition is actually not the composition and not

[23:08]

there's nobody out there to save. So the actual liberation of Buddha's wisdom entails completing the welfare of beings while also realizing that there's no beings to find. Working for the liberation of beings and realizing that when beings are liberated, no beings are liberated. This type of wisdom, this type of compassion is joined with wisdom. effects is affected in liberating beings. So again, the Buddha's compassion is a feeling. The Buddha's compassion is a feeling that doesn't have objects. And this feeling which doesn't have objects is born of a wish. for all sentient beings who are not objects.

[24:15]

There are wishes for sentient beings, but the Buddha does not see sentient beings as objects of the Buddha. The Buddha sees sentient beings, but there's not a Buddha over here seeing sentient beings. There are just sentient beings and a wish for them. And the wish is not The Buddha has a wish for sentient beings, and that wish gives rise to a feeling. So there's a wish and a feeling that's not separate from the beings that the wish is for, and that the feeling is arising from being touched by the beings. And there's no separation, there's no object there. It's actually the compassion is the relationship of all these beings. And the wish comes from the relationship. And the Buddha is not in addition to the relationship.

[25:21]

And the feeling is not in addition to it. So the Buddha wishes for all sentient beings to be free of suffering and to attain supreme happiness. The Buddha wishes that. The Buddha is that wish. The Buddha is not something you wish. which then that wish is joined to a wisdom which doesn't see the sentient beings as separate, and that wisdom is not something in addition to the Buddha, and the Buddha is not something in addition to that wisdom. So the Buddha does not think, all those poor creatures out there separate from me. The sentimental compassion does not arise in the Buddha.

[26:23]

The Buddha is sensitive to beings, nothing but sensitive to beings. There is the appearance of duality, But it's not entertained. It's released. This is the beginning of the meditation text on compassion. There's even the proposal, which I've made before, that if you feel a wish to devote your life to the welfare of others and you see them as separate and you have this sentimental compassion for them,

[27:52]

that that type of compassion not only doesn't liberate them, but puts you at risk of a program. Because that way of seeing beings in this sentimental way drains the being who is trying to develop compassion. So most of us have had some experience of that. And maybe we'll continue to have some experience of that, and understanding that it may take us a while to get over it. And until we get over it, we are subject to getting tired out while we're trying to help beings. And we do get tired by trying to help beings that we see as out there, separate from us, objects which are separate from the subject. So this meditation on Compassion is talking about objects of a subject.

[28:56]

The subject is the beings, the observation of their suffering, and the suffering is the object of that feeling. There is subject-object, but there's no duality in Buddhist wisdom. then you don't get tired, you don't get exhausted, you don't get burnout. So when we feel burnout, it's a wake-up call that we're probably involved in sentimental compassion. And then somebody who's involved in sentimental compassion, the Buddha, wishes that that person would become free of the suffering of sentimental compassion and would realize supreme happiness.

[30:03]

But the Buddha can see the duality as conjured up by sentient beings' minds, the Buddha does not conjure up the duality. The Buddha just sees, but there's no duality between the Buddha's vision and the... There's a shadow of some trees moving, and I thought it was Fred waving his hand. Anyway, the Buddha doesn't see the duality except through the beings that the Buddha is inseparable from. The Buddha's wisdom is seeing how sentient beings see duality. But the Buddha doesn't entertain that as real, and therefore the Buddha's wisdom does not get . Some people aspire to that kind of wisdom in order to realize the Buddha's wish, which is to liberate living beings from suffering.

[31:14]

Now, I said that that's the beginning of the meditation, the text on compassion. And part of what I mean there is you're welcome to work on it with me now by however you want to. Yes, Breck. How do empathy and sympathy relate to the three types of compassion? I would say sympathy maybe still has a little bit of, it has the word with in it, you know, the sim part kind of means with. So the sympathy has a little touch at least of of separation. Empathy is more like the way you feel about somebody's suffering as your suffering.

[32:22]

It's not their suffering, it's not your suffering, it's the way you feel it. But, you know, as they say, not to make too fine a point on it, I think as long as a sympathy, as long as when you feel sympathy and you see this specter ...separation between self and other. As long as you say, uh-oh, I confess I'm a sentient being and I see separation, okay, and now I want to practice compassion with that image of separation. So I want to be gracious towards it and careful of it because it's a dangerous illusion. And I want to be patient with it. And now I want to relax with it and play with it and be creative with it and be free of this, of the image of duality of subject and object. In that way I'm dancing with it but not entertaining it.

[33:26]

I'm entering it so completely as to become free of the sense of separation so my sympathy is freed of duality. Yes, Homa. My understanding is When there is no body, there is also no image either. What are we talking about? We are talking about the bodies. When there are no bodies, we don't have any job here. This compassion I'm talking about is a compassion for living beings who have bodies. Any other comments? Yes. I'm imagining that trying to express the second kind of compassion might actually be irritating to people

[34:34]

Yeah, that's why I said, that's why I thought maybe I could talk about it here, because if I did on Sunday, I can't see people wincing. And also, it's a group where it's easy for people to walk out. It's harder to walk out of here. You don't want this posted. Huh? I do want it posted. People who go to the posting, they can turn it off. It's fine with me. But I don't want, in a big public talk, I can't keep track of people's irritation. But here I can kind of see your face. I can see them with all your faces. But like in Green Gulch, there's so many people, I can't see their faces. I can't see how they're winning. and shrinking back from the experience of the implication that the kind of compassion they've been involved in is not really liberative. They may not want to hear about that. That may make them feel insulted by such a teaching.

[35:36]

I'm also thinking about either somebody expressing to me or me expressing to somebody, you know, all that stuff that you're feeling is really just the story, right? No, no, it's not really just a story. I guess it really is just a story, yeah. It really is just a story, yes. If somebody said that to me, I might feel offended, or if I said that to somebody, if I wasn't skillful, I could really... Yeah, this is not saying it to the suffering person. It's saying it to the person who's trying to practice compassion. You want to help people? Well, if you want to help people, Are you open to some feedback on your living? So when the person is in the caregiver's seat, we're not telling them that their suffering is just a story. We're telling them that their story about the people they're trying to help, look at the story of that and understand that they have a story.

[36:39]

They're seeing this person as a real person and they're a real helper and they have real help for real problems. And so a lot of people are being compassionate that way and they're amazingly compassionate. And so this is a teaching for the people who are in the compassion business to point out to them that that type of compassion is not actually liberative, although it's still amazingly good and it may be somewhat helpful. It doesn't liberate. But you can help people from that type of compassion. generous and gentle and careful and patient, still thinking that they're real people with real suffering and you're a real helper. You can still be helpful. It's just that the sentimentality of it prevents it from liberating. This is a way of taking care of people that actually will eventually liberate them, rather than just take care of them endlessly, take care of their suffering endlessly.

[37:52]

It's not just take care of their suffering, it's show them a way to take care of the suffering which will liberate them. I'm wondering about how that type of compassion might express itself, though, because Wondering how it might express itself is part of what opens it up to the next stage of looking at the elements, watching how it works. People are amazingly diligent in their expression of compassion, but they don't necessarily watch how they're doing it. and how it works, and how the beings and the relationships are put together by elements. They aren't listening to that. They are busy. Good work. It is good work. So that question, it takes you to the next step. That question will start setting you free from the sentimentality. Is it watching how it's operating in me or not?

[38:55]

How it's... It starts there. And then when you get into that study of yourself, like some people are amazingly diligent in helping others, but don't look at themselves while they're doing it. If you start looking at yourself, you start to unravel the habitual way of doing it that you're so good at. And then you set up the possibility of realizing that you're still working with your imagination and you still do believe it. Can I say one more thing? And then you have a chance of becoming free of the illusion of the compassion process and enter into the actual dark waters of creativity where actually compassion is already going on.

[40:05]

And in that water we will become free. We'll understand and become free. Yes. It sounded a little bit like codependency, sentimental. I think it does sound like what they sometimes call codependent. Yeah, in some sense it does. This points out that codependency is actually a kind of compassion. It's often done by people who really, really want the best for somebody. And not just for that person, but for a whole family. And I think the word that people... I find some consensus about a word that applies here. In codependence, in this codependency, there is colluding with the process.

[41:09]

And colluding means playing along with it. So, which is kind of, again, kind of compassionate, that you play along with the person's suffering, but also you play along with what goes, kind of going along with it. And then there's often a denial of the colluding. So if you start to admit the colluding, I think you start to wake up to the process. And it's not, the codependency starts to back off a little bit. And some other kinds of compassion might come forward. Some more questioning of what you're doing and so on would come forward from that. I see your hand, but before I call on you, anybody else before Karen? Yes? The organization that I work for, I think basically that's what it's about. for a great number of people doing that work, and that is, I don't want to go into any detail, but this is what I'm understanding about it now, and some of us were actually that the way that it's being gone about, essentially, is doing what you're saying, and the response was, yeah, that's right.

[42:30]

Wow. So, again, what you pointed out was what? Was the sentimentality? Open to that feedback? Open to the feedback and see how it actually creates more work. That creates outflows, that's what it does. It creates outflows and that creates the draining of energy in the process of helping. We do what we do. That is, we have this in us. And this is the interesting thing, and immediately after that, more reinforcement to do it even harder was the response and the answer, the final answer being, but what else can we do? What else can we do that is fair? What else can we do that's what? Well, that was my thought about that, that was just interpreting. What else can we do is that was the despair that makes it too frightening to let go of that and necessarily reinforce that behavior.

[43:38]

So are you saying that when of the sentimentality of their caregiving, that they can sometimes accept it, but then they reinforce trying to do the caregiving harder? And in enforcing that others should do it in a specific way because Others should do it in what specific way? In the way that it's been done. So it could reinforce the status quo, it could reinforce the separateness, and that might be part of the process of becoming more and more aware of the drawbacks of the sentimental compassion, to see more clearly how it burns out before the person actually burns out and leaves the field. and this thing of what else can we do, one answer to it is basically there's nothing else you can do. We are going to keep doing the sentimental compassion.

[44:38]

We're not going to get rid of it. We're not trying to get rid of it. We're just saying this type of compassion which this type of compassion, which is kind of a stepping stone to the other two types, this type of compassion, we don't need to get rid of it, we just need to be compassionate to it. And part of being compassionate is to move to the next stage, but another part of being compassionate to it, even before you move to the next stage, you don't have to wait for the next stage, you can just start being compassionate to this draining type of compassion and start to relax with it and play with it and enter the creativity of the sentimental compassion. When you enter the creativity of the sentimental compassion, you enter the third type. You understand that the sense of separation

[45:39]

an illusion and you give up believing the illusion. So you can actually skip the second stage. The second stage is not actually necessary. You can go from stage one. Almost nobody skips stage one. It's almost impossible to go directly from, I don't know what, seeing suffering suddenly and caring about it to suddenly drop off a sense of separation. Because everybody's born with this sense of separation. And many people with a sense of separation still really want to help the beings they feel separate from. And then becoming aware of that problem would be part of realizing that you can't just keep doing things from the separation stance. you need to relax with it, which will lead you to play with it, be creative with it, and be free of it. So in order to free beings from suffering, we need to be free of our sentimental approach to freeing them from suffering.

[46:44]

I'm suggesting that. Johnny? When I did the second part of it, I came up with three intentions. The intention that my actions and speech be helpful and harmless. And the second was that I fully experience what I'm experiencing. So that's maybe the sympathetic part of it. It's also kind of generous. The third intention was that I take none of it personally. And what that gave rise to was a sense of Just contributing presence and trying to make an appropriate response. Yeah. Want some feedback? Yes. Contributing presence sounds good. And trying to make an appropriate response. I would caution you against that one. Of course you want to make an appropriate response, but trying to make an appropriate response hinders making an appropriate response.

[47:50]

But if you see somebody who's trying to make an appropriate response, contribute presence to that. And if the person is you, do it there too. Trying to make an appropriate response is not appropriate. Wishing to make an appropriate response Yeah, I wish to make an appropriate response. And since I wish to, I'm going to offer my presence to that wish. See, watch out for the appropriate response rather than me make it. But if me making an appropriate response is sentimental compassion, like me, that's a real me who's going to make a real appropriate response, Okay, well, that guy. And then really be compassionate with him and his really good-sounding agenda, except that it's dualistic.

[48:51]

So these intentions precede any particular object, and they don't need an object. No, they don't need an object, right. We don't need an object to live, but even though we don't, we do. We haven't. What that does is it makes me realize that if I'm looking at the conditions of the world... Excuse me, I take it back. We do need objects, we just don't need objects from subjects. We don't need that. We can live with subject-object not being in a dual relationship. But we do need objects. The enlightened person still has the subject-object thing there. It's just that we need self and other. We do. But we don't need them to be separate. We're scared when they're separate and we're scared of them not being separate. But actually when they're not separate there's no fear. Well, the only place we're not separate is in the present moment. The only place we're not separate is in complete enlightenment.

[49:55]

Which is, the only place where we're not separate is our actual life is that way. Really, right now, we are not separate. And we're trying to enter into the way we really are. In the present, which includes all of eternity, past and future. You all agree with that, I can see that. Now, let's realize this, shall we? Alenia, and can you wait in line for all the other people to go ahead of you? I'll never forget you. Yeah, they're lining up ahead of you. Yes, Alenia, and then my old friend. Welcome to New Abode. Yes. There might be also an element to add The end might be something around supporting the receiver of compassion to what feels like to be on the receiving end of those kinds of compassion.

[51:05]

That could be one of your gifts. It can affect both sides of that equation, the giver and the so-called receiver. The so-called receiver, the giver, is a sentient being who enlightenment wishes to benefit. It feels very different to be on the receiving end of profound compassion versus upright compassion. Really different. Two different teachings, two different examples. And that, in turn, from my view, was for the caregiver, so to speak, to work through offense. Which kind of offense? Offense.

[52:08]

You said a fence, and I thought you meant a fence like a wall. Is it the best offense is a good defense or vice versa? Ken? I felt like I heard you say in one of your answers that I guess all three kinds of compassion are conventionally necessary. Maybe like food, like the food verse. I was thinking of the food chant where we say that, you know, I'm eating this food for the enlightenment of all beings, to prevent greed. Absolutely, I don't need food. Conventionally, I need all three forms of compassion. Absolutely, I don't. that need the first time? Conventionally, I need all three kinds of compassion, and absolutely or ultimately, there's no compassion to need or no me to need it.

[53:27]

But it's not that I don't need it, it's just there isn't anything to need, because we're already where we want to be. That's ultimately where we're at the ultimate Ultimately, we're at the ultimate. But conventionally, we have to take care of everybody's story about compassion, even mine. So conventionally, please be compassionate to my stories of compassion, and I'll conventionally be compassionate towards yours. Hannah. I wanted to know if you could speak a little bit more about having the person on the receiving end receive liberation. Because I think when I was younger, I was a hospice nurse, and I know I only knew the sentimental type of compassion.

[54:30]

But when I was the most present with them, they would let go. And not that they don't know that, but it made me feel that way. And they died right away. And so I was always concerned about being too compassionate. So a lot of times... Because assuming you show up, they would die? Don't bring her in here if you want your client to live any longer because as soon as she leaves, let's go. That's what I thought of. Yeah, I think at the moment of death, there is a kind of liberation. And then it or at the moment of liberation, there's a kind of death. And part of the death is letting go, and part of the death is just letting go. And then it depends on our background whether there will be another birth.

[55:35]

But maybe I missed your point by that. No. I take into consideration the family, where they are. And sometimes I just play the game with them. Oh, you're going to, you know, this is what we're going to do now. You're going to be okay. And I don't be, I'm not present with them when I actually want to be. And it is draining when I do it that way. Yeah, yeah. That's an example of where it sounds like she loses her uprightness with the family. And then you feel drained. You don't want to be with them that way, but you feel conventionally or sentimentally like you should be. That I should be. Yeah. To protect the other person from relaxing into wherever they're going to. Not protecting, actually. Wait a second. you're with the family and you're tempted to not be upright. And you're not sure the uprightness will help them relax.

[56:44]

Even though it will. The uprightness is what makes you feel like, okay, I'm upright here and I'm going to stay upright with you. So since I'm going to be with you and I'm never going to abandon you, I'm not going to abandon you, but I'm also not going to lean because if I lean, I can't relax. I shouldn't relax if I'm leaning. I should not relax until I'm upright. If I try to relax before I'm upright, I'll try to take it back. Because, you know, I realize, so to be upright with the people means you're really in a balanced way devoted to their welfare. And then maybe you wait in that uprightness. Don't relax maybe ahead of them. Because if you can stay upright with them, I shouldn't say stay, but be upright with them moment after moment, as Johnny said, give them your presence.

[57:53]

Just keep giving them presence and don't be sentimental of giving them something. Because presence isn't the sentimental gift. They kind of want you to give the... They seem to be saying, give us the sentimental gift. And you're saying, in your mind you're saying, if I give it to them, I'm going to feel not good about being with them. To give them that gift. That's the second best gift. But the gift I'm going to give them... the sentimental one, and I'm going to keep giving them the upright one. And I'm going to keep giving that until they're ready to be upright with me. And when they're ready to be upright with me, then we can relax together. And then we can start playing with each other and with the person who's dying. The person who's dying also has to be upright before they can relax. Because some people die, but they don't really relax and play as they're doing it because they didn't take care of their business uprightly.

[58:55]

But we're still trying to show them, if the family's not around, we're still trying to be upright. And if you can be upright now, you can play with the situation. And as you say, as she said, when she was upright, when she was present, they died right away. And I think they're ready to pick up the whiff. They're like the horse with the shadow that goes. At that state, they've done enough work, so a little bit of help in uprightness, they take it and when they do, then they play and they create and they understand and they let go. But that process isn't done just once, so they may have to do it quite a few more times after they let go. And if the family is around it, it makes it more complicated. Because maybe they're not into letting go. Maybe they're not into being playful. And maybe it's good that they aren't because they have to be upright first.

[59:59]

The person staying and going, the person living and dying, the person who's living and dying, for them to enter into liberation with their living and dying and find their real life in the dark waters of creativity. They have to be upright. So that's a very good example, thank you. at the end of each sentence, there was no space. It's like, this sentence is over, but I'm not waiting for the next one for very long before I start. I'm definitely not going to, like, take a, you know, breathe out and breathe in between sentences. So there was a kind of breathless, rushed quality things the person was saying.

[61:02]

And I said, with me, you don't have to worry. You can actually, you don't have to try. If you want to say this whole big paragraph and you say it without rushing, it may take you a much longer time. And it's possible it's so long that I say I have to go to breakfast. But if you rush what you're saying and don't breathe until you finish this, I may raise my hand and ask you if I can give you some feedback that you're rushing. If this is an important message, please don't rush to tell me. Breathe and relax while you're telling me. And show me that I can give you that feedback. And the person accepted the feedback and started speaking more on, you know, saying a sentence or, you know, but like not rushing to the end and trying to get to the next one so that she could get And then I thought of, what you said reminded me, is I was on the radio one time, and Michael Krasny said, and on the break, Michael Krasny said, it was about, I was on there to talk about things like silence and stillness, right?

[62:17]

And then during the break, silence and stillness, he says, but of course, on the radio, silence is deadly. you know because if you you know if i was on the radio a lot of people would get very anxious because they think is the show still there you know and then which is fine with me and then they start changing that the the station doesn't want people to be changing this channel so they want the continual message we're still here you know we're going to slow down a little bit now but We won't stop completely ever. They'll never lose contact with us. That's kind of sentimental. So to have a radio show that was like that would be more like a Bill Viola installation, right? It would be a work of art. But a lot of people would walk out or turn off. But when you're talking to me, I'm not going to walk out when you stop talking.

[63:19]

...upright with me. But if you're in the Green College office, maybe you could, you know, the people who are calling maybe are anxious, and if you have a pause, they make it really... Are you still there? Yes. I'm here. Would you please answer after the next question I ask you? What time is the lecture? 7.30. That was too slow. I went through a lot while I was waiting. Well, then I'll talk faster if you want me to. Is that what you like? I'll do it. So, from now on, when I ask a question, and if I take too long, say, faster! And then I'll say, I hear you. And so on. We can work this out. We shouldn't force uprightness on people. At the same time, we should honor it, but not be rigid about it, because that's part of uprightness, is not holding on to it.

[64:29]

So when the family comes, maybe say, okay, if it helps you to lean, I'll lean for a while, but I'm going to Come back to uprightness because that's what I think we need to do. I'm not going to force you to do it by forcing myself to hold that position. But that's kind of my center of gravity. And it is our center of gravity. Uprightness is our center of gravity. That's what it means. Uprightness means enact your center of gravity. Put your body in a position where you're centered. But don't hold on to it. It's not a rigid holding. Like, I'm centered? No, I give it away, find it again. Are you following me? Well, that was the meditation that I wanted to offer, and I appreciate your contributions very much, very good contributions. Karen what?

[65:37]

What? Oh, Karen. See, I didn't forget. Yes. She didn't say the collusion, did she? She said co-decision. I got the collusion thing. That was me. I did the colluding thing. But she served it up and then I did the collusion. So what came up for me? Sometimes somebody will say something to me that's of the form of, I'm a bad person. And out of probably seven minutes, I want to say, no, you're not. That's colluding. And that's a really unproductive conversation. That's colluding. No, you're not is colluding. Because it creates an argument?

[66:43]

it plays along with it. It actually kind of supports it. And then if you say, yes, you are, that doesn't necessarily... The sentimental thing is to say, no, you're not. Yes, you are, like, you know, finally you admitted it. That's also sentimental. But like, yes, you are, yes, you are could be not colluding. But also, what's the other one? A person says, I'm really a bad person, and you say, did you just say that you're really a bad person? That doesn't need to be colluding. It's more like, did you say that? Did I hear you correctly? You're responding, but not necessarily colluding. To me, that didn't look at themselves. Colluding means not getting them to look at themselves. Keeping the thing going rather than... But also, if you slap them in the face to get them to look at themselves, push them back too hard, that's kind of colluding too because people who aren't good should be slapped in the face to look at them.

[67:54]

Did you say that? You might say that to a Buddha. And the other thing is, one time this person came to see me, and she told me what a bad person she was, and I said, you're not. You're not. And she told me more, and she said, you're not. I said, you're not. And I finally realized she wanted me to say she was. So finally I said, oh, you're a really bad person. She said, ah, yes. You got it. She didn't really, I don't think she really thought I agreed, but she saw that I got that she wanted me. Yes. And then she could say yes. It took me a long time to get that. And I also wanted to mention that in the koan class at Green Gulch, I was teaching two types of Zen, which I maybe could teach this afternoon, too.

[68:55]

One type is called Buddha Zen or Tathagata Zen. The other one is called Ancestral Zen. I was teaching the class, and then I keep getting them mixed up, the two. And the people kept correcting me. And in the process of correcting me, they learned what I was teaching. So thank you very much. May our intentions equally extend to every living and place.

[69:28]

@Transcribed_v005
@Text_v005
@Score_85.05