A number of people responded to my question last time by saying that they would like to study in a style of reading through the sutra, and maybe discussing things as they come up, but try to read the sutra mode. So, tonight let's try that one, okay? And we have read in class, I think, up to about page 56. Let's read together.

[01:28]

Everybody have something to read? Do you have something to read? I'm done. Shariputra asks, How then, Spirit of Bodhisattva? And why?

[02:30]

Because of what he thought of creating is actually empty of one being equal to the outside. And why? And why? Or if not, it is just one and so on that thing. We already did it. [...] We may have kind of seen our 12th year old for our motherly only thing to believe.

[03:34]

A bad business of international science, well, if you want to hear me today, that's the point is not that a great thing, of course, to finish the wisdom. Also, we can't begin the production of Indiana, but it's not that they can glorify it to the great glory. with my god on the trip to organizations. He invited me to the board of control, but when I replied to him, it was always a fight to me. And for I, if you ask the words to our official, it was not a subject of a common drama, but in his rights conventionally by me, but I had a visit to the nation who could give up to my hand even on me. And they can settle down with my intellectual expression. I believe that I look For 380, the purpose is perfect with this. I don't have to use my hand as to send for a sign to all of the words. In fact, it happened.

[04:35]

If not, it didn't happen. It didn't happen. It didn't happen. It didn't happen. For 380, of course, was a great issue with them. But the fact of sitting in the back when he's on your word, as it And why? Okay. The next section, anything like to talk about?

[05:39]

Adventitious. Do you have some question about that? In what way? What's the meaning of contradirement? Well, there happens to be a footnote on that, too, that he says that it means it's something which looks like reality, but in fact is the very opposite of which mislead the part from expressing reality, but the

[07:24]

what they refer to, in fact, are encountered to. And that's what he said. First of all, in the sutra, I remember one time I was reading the 8,000 ones in the section of what would you do if Mara came up to you and looked just like a Buddha. And what would you do? What would you do? If you know that Mara can take on such porn, what would you do? Some nice 16-footer came up to you and gold and webbing and so on and started talking and sounding just like a sutra, but actually with Mara. What would you do? Would you believe it?

[08:25]

So that's a counter-dharma. It looks just like the dharma, looks just like a Buddha, but actually it's not a Buddha. And it takes advantage of adventitious designations, which is imagined unreal, and they settle down in a conventional expression. In conventional, they express conventionally by means of adventitious designations. But conventionally, Buddhists are supposed to look a certain way and talk a certain way. So set up the counter-darmament, they use conventional, they use a conventional talk, conventional Buddhist speech, both conventional speech and the usual conventional, but also conventional, what you expect from a Buddhist. So such a dharma can be presented to you when it looks just like the dharma, but actually is not the dharma, it's counter-dharma.

[09:38]

Now, it constitutes the opposite, but I don't think you have to say it's the opposite of exactly what. to talk more about this, but do something to just talk to what you're thinking about it all? What? Words explain it? What words explain the meaning of what? What about what I said? Forget about the footnote. Because he met around to defend himself. See, if it's a counter-darm, if it's too counter, it's not really a counter-darm.

[10:53]

Like a counterfeit coin. Monopoly money isn't really counterfeit. Counterfeit looks a lot like the real thing. But there's some difference. The counterfeit domino will be a domino that looks a lot like the real one. That's right, that's important, isn't it? That's why I asked, what would you do? If we run into it? Oh, you know. It's another one by the fruits. You can say that. So what if the fruits are just like what you would expect? You know, back up a step.

[12:17]

I think what you said is good. You know them by their fruits. But, then, yeah. What? What are you doing? Is it? It's necessary to believe in the Buddha, not the Buddha. Maybe not. What is necessary? That's necessary? Not to say that. Or it's the other. Is it necessary to say it's not that and it's not the other? Is it necessary to not say it that and not that the other? Is it necessary?

[13:30]

It's smart. It's smart, that's for sure. but is it necessary to be smart? Not necessarily to be smart, fortunately. It's not a matter of smartness, but that would be smart. This practice does not depend on smartness. You don't have to say no to it or yes to it or need it. You don't have to do either one of those. It couldn't be dependent on that, because it's not dependent on anything. Now what about this expectation business? If you know it by its fruits, then how do you know by its fruits? If you've got the fruits, how do you know these are the fruits you want?

[14:33]

How do you know? She said, and I don't mean to quote her, but anyway, she said that if they're not the proof you'd expect, you know what she said, that maybe it's not the right one. Is it possible to have a correct idea what the proof would be? I don't know whether it's a country banner or not, but anyway. Yes. It's possible to watch all the politics that affect you, yes.

[15:36]

Which place do you want? Is that one? Yeah. Yeah, that's pretty good. I think you're right about the fruits, but the thing is about the fruits, I still ask you how you know, but he said it's just what you want. Now, Dogen Venti said that you cannot imagine, cannot really expect what Satori would be like. You can imagine. what it would be like, but what you imagine what it's like is not what it's like.

[16:51]

Now, I think that actually, you know, he's carrying things farther because we might just have, somebody might strike upon it by accident. Positive. But usually people wouldn't. Usually you can't imagine it. but I think you know about that you can't imagine what it's like to what do you call it do a double flip and doesn't do it I mean you can imagine it but when you actually do it it's a bit different it's not what you expected it's its own thing as a matter of fact You can't even imagine what it's like to shake hands with an end up present tomorrow at 6.30. You can't imagine it. But you can't imagine it, but what it's going to be like if you try it tomorrow, you'll find out it's not what you imagined.

[18:02]

And that will be the same for awakening. You cannot imagine what it's actually going to be like. You can imagine what it's actually going to be like, but that's not what it is. So when actually you shake hands with me tomorrow at 6.30, you take turns. You'll find out that, we find out how you know whether that's the real thing or not. So it must be somehow a non-comparative way to know by the fruits. Know by the fruits. How do you know by the fruits? So, there's this other story about EQ. He was awakened, he went back, told his teacher, but his teacher says, oh, this is only such and such a stage. Down here, it's like up to here. Still haven't got up to here. He says, well, maybe this fellow's down here, but I like it.

[19:04]

And I care about him. He takes a higher stage, this is the one I like. So in that way, you can tell by the truth. But then the teacher will say, but that's a very low one. It's got all kinds of these things, it's got all these problems in it. You're attached to this still, you're attached to that still, you've got this problem in that path. And the Rinzai then is, as you know, typified by that method of pointing out all the errors in the awakening. But still, whether it's approval or disapproval, still you have to, I think as you say, you have to judge by the fruits. Then again, how do you judge by the fruits? It's non-comparative, yes? Why is it not?

[20:15]

A practice? Well, I guess because people, they want to know where to sort of, they feel like If they say yes to something, and it's not the real thing, that they'll be mislead. They'll get lost and afraid. When you come to that problem, it's the young man. No problem, not the cognitive side. There seems to be this thing that can happen of someone putting out something before you, some dharma, some teaching.

[21:55]

And this teaching that they put out there, they can't take it away because they believe in it. And this teaching that they put out there may look a lot like a teaching, a lot like a dharma. but in fact they think so. If they give that to you and you take it, then who's gonna take it away from you? Who's gonna show you that this isn't really there? They can't. Who's gonna do it? Well, who's gonna do it? Huh? You have to do it. So, if you meet somebody who gives you a bunch of stuff Some Buddhist teacher or some, anyway, teacher of some Dharma. They give you some stuff. Unless they can take that stuff away, they've just given you more junk like they do.

[23:00]

Here's the Bodhisattva. Here's concentrations. Here's perfect wisdom. They give you this stuff, okay? Unless they can take that away from you. Unless they can give you that stuff as just near words. then it's just junk. It's not dharma, it's counter-dharma. But where does the responsibility lie? Are they supposed to come and take it away from you? Well, sometimes it happens that way. You can see in some stories, they give this stuff, and then they just take it away. They say, here. And they say, that's not there. I was just kidding. Or, that's really not there. You look more careful. So then sometimes the teacher gives you these things, these Buddhist stories, And the teacher shows you that, so the teacher can, once the teacher gives you the Buddhist Torah, the teacher can take the Buddhist Torah away because they belong to the teacher. Like, the teacher knows how to use them very well, so the teacher can say, well, that's just not how you use them.

[24:00]

So you think, boy, he came down pretty heavy on me there, didn't he? Really straightened me up. My ideas about Arhat's or Prajika Buddhas, or Streamliners, or Never Returners. You may have put him down. But did he? How can he put him down when he didn't say anything about him? In relationship to the Ahad's Prajika Buddha, and so on. So I think this is a really good section here. You learn, in a sense, you learn a technique. A technique of Buddha talk. He's in the world of comparison. He's talking in the world of comparison, of conventional speech and comparisons. And yet, actually, he also is talking about the world of non-comparison, of emptiness, of no marks, of unbornness.

[25:04]

And he somehow encourages you to practice the Bodhisattva way as opposed to the other way. without really comparing, but you feel like you did compare because he encouraged you to do that one rather than the other one. And you might say, now this sounds like the real Dharma rather than the counterfeit Dharma. You only say that when you feel this way about the teaching, you see. I feel that way, when I feel that way, when I feel that this is what's being said, then I feel like this is the real Dharma. But if I read it the other way, I say, this sounds like the real Dharma, but it has these problems, so I think it's a counterfeit Dharma. But where did the counterfeit dharma come from? In my way of understanding this. In fact, my way of understanding it, that would be the counterfeit dharma. See? But where does the counterfeiting dharma exist? In my head? Well, it didn't exist totally in my head because it's on a page, too. Here's a Buddha violating his own precepts, putting somebody down. Where does it exist?

[26:09]

Here or here? But you don't have to find something that's illusory, because there is no counterfeit diamond, it's just an illusion, just like bodhisattvas are, perfect wisdom is. The point is, can you find the real diamond, the one that works for you, the one that makes it so that when you turn these pages, you keep hearing the real diamond. Even when it's presented, in such a way that your mind first takes it as a counterfeit dharma. Then how do you go back and say, hey, wait a minute, that didn't work? And make it work. In other words, make yourself happy reading this book. Get bored, you're missing something. You can stay on one of these pages for the rest of your life. And if you can't, there's some problem, but still returning pages, because that's what some people said they wanted to do. How does the body start?

[27:15]

Yes? Outflow means, outflow is this word. And outflow means, basically, that basic meaning is outflow or leak or flood. And the flood can be in or out. And so it basically means that you think there's an in and out. OK? If you think there's an in and out, then you could have a leak. Or a flood. Flood in or flood out. So outflowers or outflows are the circuitry that's possible in a A system that has pluses and minuses, or insides and outsides, or rights and lefts, rights and wrongs, me and yous, buddhas and deluded people.

[28:27]

When you take these entities as real, then all you've got to do is wait. And when the switches are open, you have flow, current, electricity, excitement, et cetera, birth, death, and so on. Well, the outflows are hot to dry them up. Now, we characterize the difference between the are hot. The are hot sort of way seems to be to kind of go in there and suck the blood out of them. They're dried up by just drying them up. Where he sought this way is actually not to suck the blood out of him, but leave them all full of blood and light and see that there's no inside and outside. There's no two things. Therefore, the circuitry is impossible in the first place. And in some ways, what the bodhisattvas first do is they may see that the circuitry is impossible in a situation of what he called 10 pounds per cubic centimeter of blood in it.

[29:36]

And they see through the inside and outside there, and then they just keep filling up the pressure. because oftentimes you can see that there's no inside and outside when the pressure is of 10 pounds per square in cubic centimeter. Or cubic, but not per cubic centimeter, but cubic centimeter. But you just have to do that. Anyway, then they pop up to 100, and they start to say, wait a minute now, maybe there is no blood in the outside. No, no, no. And then they pump it up to a thousand and they go, oh my God. Well, maybe there really is. Pretty scary. Better believe that there is. This is the real thing. I mean, that Buddhism, that's okay for ordinary beings.

[30:39]

But now, I mean, gosh, this is There's no time to fool around with this theory. You can scare anything. I was willing to try it back at school, but right out here in the world. You know what I mean? If somebody's coming at me with a knife, try it out then. I won't try it out now, I'll try it out later. After I get out of this mess, I get back to Zenson and I'll think about it. No, really, when it's like that, you know, life and death situations, those are the ones that actually you really penetrate. If you can do it there, you penetrate it there, and then all the other ones will be easy. It comes right down to the real critical life stuff. Then, if you can see, then you're really great.

[31:42]

They sort of, they do it in these more rarefied situations, and then the blood comes flowing back in the situation, and they sort of go, ooh, God, they're disturbed. Or another way to put it, if you take an R-Hot, you put an R-Hot in the body of a drug being, okay? I would have a quote that says, put an R-Hot in the body of a drug being without telling you beforehand, you know, so the exactly which drugs are in there, what you should expect in terms of hallucinogenic phenomena and so on. their heart will be confused now usually I don't get in that situation but it's the first place people are rocking and inject chemicals and they don't jump in so many pools with blindfolds on and put around there for several hours so these things don't happen to you but in fact it shows that they haven't totally penetrated into the knowledge basis, the thought basis of these outflows.

[32:46]

They've cleared out the outflows by drying them up, by removing their affliction, but the basic source dualistic ideas that are possible have not all been eradicated. Therefore, change their body into somebody else's body, for example, by giving them lots of drugs, and they'll become disturbed, disoriented. Whereas Buddhas, no matter what you pump into them, It makes no difference. No matter how big the monsters get, they look pretty much the same. Namely, whatever way you say they look, I mean it can be anything, but it doesn't make such a big difference by altering the situation. So Zen masters being baby Buddhas, their reaction to I think LSD is something like I did poison.

[33:47]

Boy, they go to bed for days. They say, oh, my state's been changed. I'm not feeling well. And this guy, this guy that Baba Ram does, and those guys, and there are dope themes they went to study with in India. They gave them all their LSD. They gave them all their LSD. And he said, give me your car. Actually, I don't know if they asked for the car before or after they drank, paid all their drugs. And then, you know Swami Satchidananda and Muktananda? One time they were having tea or something and Muktananda gave Satchidananda pepper ball. He gave him this ball full of, I think it was full of hot peppers, you know?

[34:49]

But he thought it was just a rice ball. He ate the whole thing. And then he was rolling around the floor a little while later. He looked in on and said, what's he doing? Why are you letting that disturb you? Well, we didn't know what looked in on to what he'd done. A few was hitting the ball, but I didn't know. He kept a lot of concern with these issues. whether they're Buddhist or Hindu or whatever. The point is, altering your body and mind, can you still sort of just say, well, this is another one here. So the arhats actually dry them up. The bodhisattvas don't dry them up because the bodhisattvas are conscientiously working at learning all the situations and seeing through them, you see. Bodhisattva is trying to take the view of members of the opulent sects, trying to take the view of people with other socio-economic backgrounds, with people with other kinds of amounts of sugar in their system, and so on and so forth.

[35:59]

And then seeing from that point of view, can they also see through those ways of seeing, and that kind of servitude. So they're busy learning all the possible dualistic modes trying to see through them, rather than proceeding along to the drying up of one particular pattern. So they don't dry up. Anything else on this section? OK. You're right. Well, first you do what practices and then you lead to them? Okay.

[37:07]

Protecting his own powers. Right. Those are the ones.

[37:13]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_63.09