So these three learnings and one way to look at the Samadhi in a sense, Samadhi is kind of like a mode of transformation of bringing, you know, a bridge of communication between the precepts and wisdom. or it's a place where precepts and wisdom meet and live together. Now often, I've thought of, you know, Samadhis, you practice precepts and because you practice precepts you can practice Samadhi and because you practice Samadhi you can enter wisdom.

[01:03]

I think there's truth in that. It's hard to realize, really, wisdom without having the state of mind of mental one-pointedness. It's hard to really understand non-duality if your mind isn't manifesting non-duality. You can understand non-duality somewhat, even though your mind is mostly seems to be concerned with duality. But the way to fully realize non-duality is to have a mind that has duality going on in it, namely, ideas of duality, and also has samadhi, which is realizing the fact of non-duality. To have both, then your mind really is just like non-duality.

[02:04]

It's got both, totally non-dual. So, you can study, even without realizing Samadhi, you can study the teachings of non-duality and understand them somewhat, but to bring them into your state of being, you need to practice this non-dual Samadhi. Also, you have non-dual Samadhi, but without the teachings of non-duality, it's hard for you to understand that you have non-duality as your nature. So we have teachings on wisdom about non-duality, teachings about ultimate truth of non-duality, which then become the topic of the Samadhi practice. And they also can be the topic of ordinary discursive thought, too. That's how we usually first start hearing about the teachings of the Mahayana, of non-duality. but also not only is Samadhi necessary for the full-bodied realization of wisdom, Samadhi brings wisdom into our life and it brings it into our life in terms of our understanding, actually of our body being like that, but also then it brings it into our life in terms of our conduct.

[03:20]

which is the way we practice the precepts. Precepts are describing our actual conventional life together. So, precepts are necessary in order to try to practice the precepts even on a conventional level is necessary to start to practice Samadhi. After Samadhi is realized and integrated with non-duality, then the Samadhi brings the non-duality into the precept practice. So our precepts are practiced in a non-dual way, in other words, they're practiced not by me separate from you, but they're practiced by the harmony of the whole community, which is the true meaning of the precepts. Precepts are then practiced and realized by all of us through samadhi. So the samadhi brings this wisdom into our behavior Now we try to practice the precepts, most of us, as best we can, but Samadhi will allow non-dual understanding to come into our precept practice and really purify our precept practice, purify it of duality, purify it of I do it and I don't do it.

[04:40]

You do it, we don't do it. It becomes then all of us together receive the benefits of all beings and by that inconceivable assistance the precept practice is realized and as the precept practice is realized it resonates off the realization back to all beings who helped it be realized. So the Samadhi then becomes the way the precept practice is working. And then the precepts are also then brought through the samadhi into non-dual realization and so on, back and forth. So that's one way to look at, again, the way samadhi, shila and prajna work together. Now I want to tell a story. This is a story that's, you know, maybe some scholars would agree to this story. Maybe some wouldn't.

[05:43]

In broad outlines it's a story which I told partly before, and it's a story of this movement arising in India called Mahayana, and it was a movement that put more emphasis on the teaching of emptiness and the teaching of non-duality. At the same time that the Mahayana lived in India there was another kind of Buddhism which was more monastic and apparently, to some extent, not entirely, but apparently there was a feeling of duality among the monastic community, that the monastics were doing the practice and the laypeople weren't, and the laypeople were supporting the monastics, and the monastics realized nirvana, and nirvana

[06:53]

of course is a wonderful thing, but the feeling started to develop that nirvana was in a dual relationship with samsara. And there even seems to develop a sense that samsara is kind of like a yucky place, of course it's a place of pain. but it started to be that the place of pain became sort of like something that the people who were interested in nirvana started to like want to get away from. Does that make sense? I mean, some of us are like that, right? Kind of want to get away from like samsaric misery. My grandson says, E-U, E-U. He opens the compost bucket and goes, E-U! So they developed this thing in Buddhism, it looks like, I can't be sure, it's just hearsay, I wasn't there, maybe I was, but anyway, it looks like the monastics who were kind of interested in all swell nirvana, got into E-U about samsara, about ordinary people.

[08:10]

In other words, they kind of lost track of the love that Buddha had for people in samsara. Buddha wasn't like, oh, I'm enlightened, and oh, God, these people, get me out of here. It was more like, before Buddha was enlightened, it was more like he looked at the people and he went, oh, God, these people, E-U. But then he was embarrassed, you know, that he was going E-U about the people. Because he said, you know, look at these sickening people. Look at these sick, miserable, dying, wretched, frightened, pitiful, angry, greedy, confused, miserable humans. And I'm going to be like that too. And even though I'm going to be like that, I find them disgusting. How embarrassing. I've got to get my thing together here. So he did, and after he got together, he wasn't frightened of people anymore.

[09:13]

He didn't find them disgusting. But he was happy. He was happy that he didn't find them disgusting anymore, and he wasn't afraid to be old and sick anymore. And so he wasn't embarrassed anymore. He wasn't embarrassed that he found human suffering repulsive. Because he didn't find it repulsive. He was cool, he was content. And so anyway, one thing led to another and he started to help the people understand how they also could be content and not be repulsed by other suffering people. And he gave his whole life to hanging out with suffering people and giving them this Dharma, this truth. which would help them deal with old age, sickness, and death, which is still kind of a difficult situation, but, you know, without our modern medical assistance, it was tougher in some ways in India in those days.

[10:21]

You know, they'd throw you out in the street when you became, if you weren't a king or something, and let the maggots get you before you're dead. Anyway, it looks like they kind of lost sight about love there, and some people said, hey, how about love? How about a practice that doesn't exclude the world, that saves the world, like the Buddha did? How about being a Buddha? Remember? Remember Buddha, how he didn't run away from the world? So there's this amazing idea of not just being liberated and going to nirvana and then supposedly from nirvana you're supposed to use that nirvana to benefit all beings. Again, I'm not saying that the early Buddhists were all like that. I think a lot of them attained nirvana and then devoted the rest of their life to helping all beings.

[11:22]

but there was a tendency to lose sight of that that was, nirvana's a tool that you use that makes you able to like go into the sewer, you know, joyfully help the rats. They lost sight of that, not all of them, but enough of them, so a lot of them ran away from that situation and started a new movement, which was really like focusing on compassion. And, in order to realize compassion in the purest sense, they also focused on these teachings which came up around that time, these teachings of perfect wisdom, teachings of, you know, really worked out teachings of emptiness. which make it so, well nirvana is great but it's empty just like samsara, so they're really basically indistinguishable in terms of their ultimate nature. So we don't get that upset about nirvana and samsara because we have access in both cases to their emptiness.

[12:25]

And so we're free of samsara and we're free of nirvana and we can use nirvana to help those in samsara and we can use samsara to help those in nirvana. So this Mahayana developed, okay? It was never number one in India. It was second or small in India, the Mahayana. The main thing in India was the big monastic institutions where they were emphasizing attaining nirvana, personal liberation, and then from personal liberation be a happy arhat and benefit all beings. And of course, prior to becoming an arhat, be harmless to all beings. So Buddhists were still wonderful, harmless practitioners. The monks were still walking around not hurting people and not, you know, and if they were trained well you could like spit on them and they wouldn't like beat you up.

[13:31]

They would say, you know, well, you want a little Dharma or what? Chop them up into little pieces, they wouldn't hate you. They might say, would you stop chopping me? But they wouldn't hate you, because they were well trained. That was the big movement, and they had great learning, and they were wonderful, enlightened beings. And the lay people were happy to support them as authentic, highly developed religious beings, spiritual beings. But then they got this idea of this Bodhisattva thing. They never took over in India. But when Buddhism spread to China, and the monks came, the monastics came, And some of the monastics were also teaching this Mahayana. They were in the monastic thing, but they were teaching this Mahayana. And some of the non-monastics that came also taught the Mahayana.

[14:36]

And some of the monastics came and taught the personal liberation thing. The Chinese saw all this stuff coming, and gradually they thought, this non-duality thing is really the coolest. And this compassion, bodhisattva thing is really great. And also, These people who started this Mahayana gave themselves, gave their group a really good name. They had this creative breakthrough of calling their movement within Buddhism, the Great Universal Vehicle. And the other people didn't call themselves Nirvairavada, well they called themselves Theravada or Staviravada, I don't know what they called themselves, but anyway. And then some of the Mahayana people called them the Narrow Vehicle. So they were not very nice in that way. And when the Chinese saw these two forms of Buddhism coming, they really almost all, eventually they almost totally went for the Mahayana. They liked the great vehicle.

[15:39]

And also they liked the teachings, they really liked the teachings of the Prajnaparamita, which are really, you know, they're much more sophisticated in a lot of ways than the early teachings of Buddha. philosophically and artistically in some ways. They're really fantastic. And they're not so monastic. They're not about monastic life. The mass of Chinese never really got into that that much, although lots of people became monks and nuns. So at a certain point, maybe around, especially around the time that this great translator who was a Mahayanist named Kumarajiva, so that's an important historical thing I think, that this great scholar, brilliant translator and exponent of Mahayana Buddhism, was brought to China and got this big translation project going and made these beautiful Chinese translations. I mean, they were Chinese literature.

[16:48]

A lot of the other people came over, the monks came over, the actual transmitters came over, they didn't speak Chinese. They told Chinese people how to translate what the scriptures. And a lot of the stuff, a lot of the translations of the Indian monks telling the Chinese what to say, were not really literature. Like one of the things they say about Freud is one of the reasons why Freud is so influential is that he's a very good writer. So like it's fun to read Freud in German. It's beautiful. But Kumarajiva was not only the transmitter, but the story is that the emperor kidnapped him and kept him in prison for quite a few years, maybe a decade and a half, and kept him surrounded by Chinese ladies.

[17:53]

And so he learned Chinese very well. So he's a linguistic genius, understands Buddhism better than almost any Chinese person, Mahayana Buddhism better than any Chinese person had prior to him. So he comes over and he makes these Mahayana translations, mostly, in their literature. So a lot of these Mahayana scriptures, of which many translations were made, only his translations now exist, because they were so popular, so beautiful. I think he died in like 412. Before Bodhidharma, by what we usually say Bodhidharma is, yes. And so then he did the Lotus Sutra, which is still the Lotus Sutra that's almost always used to translate He also did the Shurangama Samadhi Sutra, and the Shurangama Samadhi Sutra was translated many times into Chinese, and only one version survives, Kumarjivas.

[19:14]

He also did the Vimalakirti Sutra, which is translated also quite a few times, although I think there's still more than one of those left. So he did these translations which then became literature so people could read them and like to, and they loved them. He also translated meditation texts, but most of the meditation texts he translated were basically of this monastic sort of individual vehicle style. because he couldn't find any Mahayana meditation texts really. Even the Shurangama Samadhi Sutra doesn't have that much meditation instruction. It's mostly a meditation on what it's like in the Samadhi.

[20:18]

So it's wonderful to read because as you read it, you're actually like kind of entering into a vision of the Samadhi. But it doesn't exactly tell you how to get into that vision, other than read the sutra, which actually is one of the ways to get into the samadhi, is read the sutra over and over. Give up your attachments to everything, including reading the sutra, and then read the sutra, and you'll enter the samadhi. There's a little bit in there about how to practice it. but not much about how to practice, but there weren't many texts on how to practice Mahayana Samadhis. And so in this chart here of these four kind of levels or meanings of Samadhi, the Chinese got this, are hearing and becoming really more and more interested in Mahayana Buddhism and they want

[21:25]

some instruction about how to practice Samadhi in a way that's commensurate with the teachings of non-duality. So what happens is the Chinese start making scriptures and give teachings orally or in writing. They start giving teachings of Samadhi practices that are in accord with the Mahayana teachings. So part of what happens in these meditation texts the Chinese Buddhists created is that it looks to me, and again this is just my story, it looks to me that to some extent they kind of ignored or didn't mention, in some cases they didn't mention the Theravada meditation practices because

[22:31]

Well, I guess they didn't want to confuse people, they wanted to put the Mahayana out there very clearly by itself. The Mahayana practices by themselves, they didn't want to put out the Theravada much, or the individual vehicle ones much. So to some extent, the Theravada meditation started to disappear in practice more and more. Not completely, but more and more. in these early texts particularly when they're trying to make this stand for the Mahayana. And the Theravada meditations again will include, the Theravada teachings will include the recognition of the meaning of Samadhi number one, they will convey teachings about Samadhi number two. Samadhi number two are those practices of concentration which promote the realization of a non-dual state, but usually start talking to people from the point of view of duality.

[23:41]

Like you do this and you do that, you count your breath. So in number two, in circle number two, you have meditations like counting the breath or following the breath. which aren't particularly Buddhist. Non-Buddhists also in India practice meditation on breath and other topics. And these meditations, these samadhis, these dhyana practices can be done without any reference to the basic teaching of selflessness, teaching of no-self. And again, the products of the Samadhis under Samadhi number two for Buddhism and non-Buddhist schools are virtually the same. Those Samadhis are limited, there's a limited number of them, basically, and they can be what do you call it, there can be some creativity there.

[24:46]

As a matter of fact, counting the breaths is a kind of creative thing. For example, if you look in the Mindfulness Sutra, the Buddha doesn't say to count the breath, right? He says, when breathing long, the monk knows breathing long. When breathing short, the monk knows breathing short. He doesn't say to count the breath. Counting the breath is a later innovation. But basically, those kind of Samadhis are somewhat, they're classed in nine, they're basically classed in nine classes, and they produce 17 heavens, and that's pretty much set. And in some sense, those Samadhis are also kind of universal in the sense that they're transcultural and transreligious. The only thing that's cultural about them is maybe in terms of talking about being reborn in these heavens as a result of these practices. The Samadhi number three are the Samadhis of the individual vehicle. Those are the Samadhis where now the Dhyana is applied to the Four Noble Truths.

[25:51]

The Samadhi is applied to the Four Noble Truths. It's applied to meditations on selflessness. And I hope at least one session before we stop to look at that type of meditation. of number three, the meditations of the individual vehicle, the meditations of individual liberation from self-clinging to the idea of the self of a person. And the Samadhis of number three are those concentration states that are for people who have been thinking about the teachings about selflessness of the person. So the Buddha gives these teachings verbally of how the person doesn't have an independent self and goes through various exercises. where you can think in terms of, like, is the person identical to the body?

[26:54]

I mean, is the self identical to the body? Is the self different than the body? Is the self different than and the same as? Is the self neither different nor the same as? Various possibilities of the relationship between the body and the self. Then you can do the difference between the body and the other skandhas, I mean, between the self and the other skandhas. Is the self the same as feelings or different? It's both the same and different and so on. So these kinds of meditations which you can find in some Mahayana texts, in some Mahayana meditation texts in China you can still find those, but in some of them they wanted to get rid of these practices, put them aside so that they could emphasize the Mahayana so people could see. But the point of these samadhi number threes is basically to realize the selflessness of the person. Pudgala nairatmiya.

[27:56]

And in early Buddhism that was sufficient, that realization is sufficient for entry into nirvana. that sets you free from self-cleaning and then you work out that freedom from self-cleaning, then you bring that together with all your habits over some period of application and your habits all get washed away, all the habits that you built under the auspices of self-cleaning get washed away, so you have like a pure person who understands selflessness and all their behaviors look like that. They look selfless and they can prove they're selfless because in fact their minds have been purified, their habits have been purified of that clinging idea. And this is the arhat, which is a fabulous attainment and on evening service every other night we pay homage to these amazing spiritual beings And the women whose names we chant in the morning, these women achieved this state.

[29:00]

Okay, that's circle number three. But in circle number four, we're talking about realizing, we're talking about Samadhis which are for people who have been studying, hearing about teachings of non-duality, the teachings of emptiness, and they understand them. And now they want to enter into one-pointed concentration with these teachings so that these teachings actually start taking over their body and become them. So the Arhats, some of them might have been able to go into a train station. Some of them might have been able to go various places. The Buddha could go pretty much any place. But some of the Arhats also might be able to go to different places. But they had rules which prevented them from certain range of beneficence. And... The bodhisattvas have no ... they can go any place. That's what I said at the beginning when you were making all that noise, is that it reminded me of the Mahayana because bodhisattvas aren't afraid of people who are expressing themselves, but monastics kind of have to stay away from people like that sometimes.

[30:13]

Bodhisattvas understand that people have to express themselves in order to come out and learn about what's going on. So they're happy when people are being themselves because then they can see who they are and give them what they need. So they're not afraid to go into hectic situations once they have some realization of non-duality. Yes, Tim? selflessness from emptiness and non-duality. And so I don't really understand that distinction well enough. Well, the next level of selflessness, which the fourth circle's about, is a realization of the selflessness of all dharmas. Oh, and the third one is just selflessness of the individual. Selflessness of the person. Of people or...? Well, of a person, like a body that has a face and stuff. So Buddhism doesn't deny the conventional existence of a person like me or you.

[31:18]

We just say that this person isn't independent of all other persons and is not actually like a self to that person. If you look at that person, you will not find a self of the person, but you will find in that person probably the idea that they do have a self, that is an independent existence of other beings, and that makes them separate from other beings. But the person is still sitting there, but at least that person is free of the idea that that person is separate from others. So then how does non-duality go beyond that? Nonduality is that you understand that all other people are also not separate from each other, which you weren't clinging to before anyway, unless they were your other people. And you understand that all the elements that you used to verify the non-self of the person, all the elements that you looked at of your experience to see if you could find a self among the elements,

[32:21]

you find out that the elements themselves also don't have inherent existence. And also, for example, nirvana and samsara are also elements, and you find out that they also have no self. Therefore, they're not dual. Whereas in the earlier stage, you could be free of the self of the person and still think that nirvana and samsara were different. They are different, but you could think that they're separate and prefer one over the other. But in Mahayana, we don't prefer nirvana over samsara. Nirvana is a tool to help beings in samsara. That kind of non-duality, Shakyamuni taught also, though. He did. He did. And some of his disciples understood it, probably. But the situation got to be a case that people needed either to bring it out more or amplify it because they felt like it was getting lost. Buddha's example himself was, I think, the Mahayana.

[33:22]

That's what the Mahayana people feel. And they feel it not just to be in alignment with the tradition, but because they really do appreciate his teaching. And that's why I drew the circle this way, is that the Mahayana includes the Theravada teachings, you see. But part of the confusion is, and even as I'm teaching here, part of the confusion is, somebody says, do you recommend following your breath. I said, well, I don't really recommend it, because I'm recommending Mahayana Samadhi now. So, the practice of following your breath is included in this Mahayana circle, but I want to first of all make sure we understand the Mahayana Samadhis. Once you understand the Mahayana Samadhis, then you can understand how to practice all the other Samadhis which aren't necessarily Mahayana, you can practice them in the Mahayana spirit. Or rather, they are practiced in the Mahayana spirit. Once you understand non-duality, then if you practice following your breath, once you understand Mahayana Samadhi, breath is meditated on without it being dualistic.

[34:35]

and it's exactly a Mahayana meditation then because it's non-dual even though you're doing this exercise. It still can be calming to follow your breath, it's okay, and it can be calming to take ibuprofen. But how does a bodhisattva take ibuprofen or follow the breath in a non-dual way? Because it's okay to take ibuprofen or follow your breath, but if you don't realize non-duality pretty soon, you're going to be sorry, because you missed the chance. So we jump over these other practices in some sense, and before it's too late, teach non-duality, and before it's too late, get people to enter samadhi of non-duality, and then they can practice all other meditations in a way that doesn't have outflows. you know, that doesn't basically throw them back to a lower level of practice than the practice which is directed towards Buddhahood. But it's tricky because we don't want to put down reasonable practices, wholesome practices like

[35:40]

following your breathing. It's perfectly wholesome and some of you find it quite helpful, but some of you find it very disturbing because you practice it dualistically, and some of you practice it dualistically but don't find it disturbing. But whether you find it disturbing or not, I still would like everybody to learn how to practice all practices in the non-dual mode, how to enter the non-dual way of practicing all wholesome dharmas. That's the Mahayana objective and that's why in some Mahayana texts you find them not mentioning the Theravada meditations because people have an association of practicing those from a dualistic perspective or even putting down the Theravada practices. Like in some Zen texts, like Dogen will say sometimes, following the breath is a Hinayana practice. It's only Hinayana if your attitude is one of duality. I shouldn't even say it's only Hinayana if that's right, because Hinayana isn't duality. It's only Hinayana if you practice it not from the point of view of not realizing the non-duality.

[36:49]

So Hinayana isn't dualistic. All dharmas are non-dual. Hinayana is non-dual. But if you practice certain kinds of meditations on selflessness, but still with some duality, then they're Hinayana, okay? If you practice selflessness, if you're not even practicing selflessness, they're not even Hinayana, then they're just yoga practices. Okay, and what? And Helena? Would you say that there are dharmas that arhats do not think are empty? Or... or do not consider empty? It's possible. I don't know if we have proof of this of an arhat who thought nirvana was separate from samsara. There might have been an arhat like that who realized nirvana and who even purified her whole body and mind and was a totally gracious and benevolent being, but they still had the idea that samsara, the world of misery, was dual with the world of bliss and happiness and nirvana.

[38:05]

I don't have an affidavit to that effect by some arhat, but they may have thought that. And they also might have thought, and this is even more important, this is the implication of that duality that's important, they might have thought that the beings for whom they feel great love and compassion, they're always meditating on loving kindness and compassion, right? And they're good at it now, and they're selfless about it. They don't even think, I'm doing it anymore, okay? And they act like that too. Some people don't think that way anymore, but they have old habits like that. These people don't even act like that. And they really do love people, but they still think that people are other than them. And because they think people are other than them, there's still an outflow, and their energy is still not flowing as freely as it does for the Bodhisattva, who's working for the welfare of others, but at some point realizes that the others that she's working for are not separate.

[39:09]

Then there's no outflow, and then things start really flowing. And then they're not afraid for people to express themselves. As a matter of fact, they welcome it as a way to play. They come into samsara to play. Bodhisattvas come into the world of misery to play. And it's possible that some people who successfully got to nirvana did not want to go back to play, and they just stay in nirvana, and from nirvana they try to be nice to people who are in samsara. and they try as much as possible to help them, but they do not let go of nirvana for them. And the Bodhisattvas do not, they actually do go to, it's like Monopoly, they actually do go to nirvana, but they only visit. They go to nirvana and then come out of nirvana and go back to samsara. The Arhat sort of stays in nirvana. They think that's the goal. And they attain it, they have attained it.

[40:13]

And from that lofty position they help other beings. And they say, hey, come on, come on to Nirvana, you can do it. You may have to be reborn, but anyway, you can eventually do it. Make a donation and next life you can come to Nirvana. And they really, they mean that with total love. But it's not really completely total, because they haven't done this amazing thing. which makes the love total, and that is to give up the idea that these miserable people are other, are separate. That's the key difference. And that's through the Diamond Sutra makes that point so strongly. I'm devoted to these beings, but there are no beings I'm devoted to out there. And in order to really save other beings, which is the Bodhisattva's thing, The Mahayana, the Bodhisattva wants to save the others, not get herself to nirvana. I want to get nirvana to help other people. It's this great skillful thing I'm going to get.

[41:15]

I'm going to get nirvana and then I can go up to people and say, want a little nirvana? Of course he says, yes sir, I do. Where do I get it? Come on over here. Where's the nirvana? Well, later. Just like I heard one guy say, he was visiting, he's the person who teaches Zen and Theravada, and he was in a Vipassana group, and he said, do they have concentration practice in Zen? And he says, yeah, they have it, but you can't, they've got it, but you can't keep it. So the key thing about non-duality is it makes it, it ends outflows, so you can save beings. So I think arhats do want to save beings, but part of the Mahayana is if you really want to save beings, you have to understand that they're not separate. Of course, you can save them some, you can help them some without still have that whole bad idea of separateness.

[42:18]

But the idea is that non-duality purifies your compassion. Did you have a problem with that, Julie? Okay, thanks for expressing yourself. Eleanor? I understand you to say that you can pass over the first three wings to practice the Samadhi of the fourth? Not really, but you can pass over studying the first three and hear about the fourth, and actually what actually happens is that So I want to jump over to some extent the early ones so you hear about the fourth because you haven't heard enough about the fourth to be totally won over. Once you hear the fourth, then you actually do need to use everything inside to help you actually enter into the fourth. Plus there's a few exercises that are primarily concerned for entering the fourth. And these meditation techniques up here on number four are not heard of in three, two, or one.

[43:19]

But still three, two, and one will help you enter four. But I'm just saying that if you look at Zen texts and some other Mahayana Buddhist, Chinese Mahayana texts, you won't hear anything about one, two, and three, you won't hear anything about the nine levels of dhyana. You won't hear about shamatha and vipassana, stopping and contemplating. You won't hear about counting the breath. Almost any Zen text, except modern ones, and if you go to Zen centers now, they teach you to count your breath and stuff in introductory instruction, but the traditional texts they didn't mention this, they wanted people to hear about this, and then once they're convinced that this is what they want to do, once they're on the Bodhisattva path, then they learn everything. Okay? Elizabeth? What do you mean by outflow? Outflow is like, if you, well the simple one is that if you have an idea,

[44:24]

And then you grasp it. That grasping puts a kind of charge on it. So like if I think you're, I don't know what, if I think you're helpful, and then I grasp that, and then Alex says that you're unhelpful, then I turn to Alex, holding onto my view that you're helpful, and I tell Alex a thing or two. Because I've got the truth, which is the truth, And his thing is the false, and then I tell him, there's a charge there, and in that charge, a lot of energy flows out of me into Alex, and he kind of goes, and then, I don't know how he meditates with that, but I just lost some energy around my fixation of my view. Now also, If you have, another way that outflow occurs is that if you are separate from me, and I give you my love or my attention or my time, then I feel like I lost something.

[45:27]

And maybe you think you've gained something, and you say thank you, and I say you're welcome, and I'm tired and, you know, Another way that all flows happen is like when you open a door or you sit in a chair, if you assume that the chair is separate from you and that you know what the chair is and have a fixed idea about the chair, it drains you a little bit to have that relationship with the chair. After a while you get tired sitting in chairs, because every time you're sitting basically on your assumptions Rather than, rather than, okay, here we are now, I kind of, I'm trying to stand here on the ground, now I'm going to try to sit on this chair, which I don't know what's going to happen now. It's kind of like, well, if you excuse the expression, an adventure of experimentation. Because, you know, I got an idea there's a chair back there, but I'm not fixed on the fact that it's going to hold me. And you don't get tired sitting on chairs like that. So, outflows drain your energy, they either drain you and deplete you,

[46:33]

because your energy is flowing in these ruts, or they inflate you, or you go back and forth, and it tires you out. And this energetic component to incomplete circulation of thought, incomplete circulation of understanding, dualistic thinking makes these compartments where there's these energy exchanges, gain and loss and stuff like that. I don't mean to be opposed to these practices. I just want to emphasize, practice these practices non-dualistically, which means practice these practices with no gaining idea. Don't try to seek anything. Just practice the practice for the practice. learn how to practice the practice for the practice with no expectation, with no gaining idea, then it's like a non-dual attitude towards the practice. And that's an example of a type of practice which goes with the fourth circle.

[47:35]

And you can practice that non-dual, non-gaining, non-seeking way with practices which are not in the outer circle, strictly speaking. but practices which have been practiced by people who do have a gaining idea towards the practice. Okay? Who is next over there? Yes? I'd like some language around not reifying the Bodhisattva path as better. It's easy for us to fall into the arhat path or the perfection of that capacity as zen sickness, which is quiescent practice. Anyway, I would like to hear some language around how not to reify this path, the bodhisattva vow, as better than

[48:47]

The Buddha's realization is of non-duality. That realization does not make Buddha better than sentient beings. So if Buddha is not better than sentient beings, Buddha is also not better than Bodhisattvas, and Buddha is not better than Arhats. That's Buddha's understanding. But there is that the Buddha understands that. and Mahayana is heading towards an understanding of non-duality, of things not being bitter. So, not only does a bodhisattva not find ordinary non-practitioners as disgusting, a bodhisattva does not find arhats disgusting. A bodhisattva often will find an arhat knows a lot more than they do about a lot of things, and they will go to an arhat with respect and they will hope for the Arhat to be a Buddha too.

[50:03]

And they will somehow not slip into the duality of better and worse. The Arhat may not be into better and worse either, but some might be. Like I said, they might be into nirvanas better than samsara. Bodhisattvas, they don't think that the Mahayana is better than the Theravada. They don't think Buddhas are better than sentient beings. They don't think Nirvana is better than samsara. Therefore, they can do this heroic stride. They can stride through the world of Buddhas, Bodhisattvas, Arhats, and ordinary sentient beings. They can stride and not get distracted from what is helpful. and they don't get into better except as a mistake, which they confess then. So Bodhisattvas do a lot of confessing. I thought this was better than that. I confess it. In other words, I lost faith for a moment in non-duality. I thought this was better. So Mahayana is not better than anything else.

[51:11]

It's not better. It's the teaching of not better. Like, what's his name? Somebody says, all the religions are the same, especially Buddhism. And Suzuki Rishi says, Buddhism is not one of those religions like Islam, Judaism, Christianity. Mahayana being the teaching and practice of non-duality, it has this transcendent quality of transcending sameness and difference, better and worse, so there might be some tendency for somebody to say, boy, that's really the greatest, and then they named it the greatest. It was kind of a sales pitch, right? And it's a skillful means which you can question whether you're forgiven for saying, hey, we're going to practice the universal, the great vehicle.

[52:23]

So the Chinese, at least in China, will be number one. It's messianic. And so we can talk about that, we can have a session on that one. Yes? and I'm drinking something, and maybe somebody spiked my drink. Yes. So I became intoxicated. Yes. But I didn't plan to become intoxicated. Yes. And then I realized that I'm intoxicated and that in that state I can't help other beings. Yes. Maybe I can't even help myself. You realize that you... I mean, you're awake enough to realize you're intoxicated and that you can't help other beings? That's what it seems to me, that in this state... Well, you're somewhat awake then. You're awake enough to realize you're intoxicated. Yeah. Okay? And then this thought comes up, you know, in this state I can't be helpful to other beings. Yes. While I'm intoxicated.

[53:25]

Yes, that thought arises. So, so... Or if you're intoxicated, actually, that thought might arise, you might, Boy, now I can really help people! Finally, finally I can be nice to that creep! I'm in a weird state and I can't help people until I come out of this state, like in a couple of hours or something. Yeah, that's kind of dualistic, that attitude. that, okay, I'm intoxicated, and until I come out of this intoxication, I'm not going to help people, rather than, I'm intoxicated, but somehow I noticed that I would like to help people right now. Well, yeah, what if the bodhisattva notices that, but then notices that their body kind of doesn't respond to, you know, properly, so that, you know, they fall over and knock somebody over, you know, and they get hurt?

[54:29]

So they notice that their brain isn't functioning well because there's this intoxication. Yes. Would the Bodhisattva say, you know, it would be better if I wasn't intoxicated? I could be, you know, would they notice it better or worse? The highly developed Bodhisattva does not get into that. The highly developed Bodhisattva says, I'm intoxicated. And, you know, and they, that's it. That's it. They just confess. And they really don't have anything to confess if they got intoxicated. You know, somebody else, they might confess, I drank that drink without testing beforehand what it was and now I'm intoxicated. So maybe I wasn't careful about what I drank. But I'm not going to wait until I'm sober to be kind. I'm going to be kind in the middle of my intoxication. That's why I say I want to practice what I can practice if I have Alzheimer's. A practice that doesn't depend on my intelligence. But if I have intelligence, to use my intelligence to be devoted to a practice that doesn't go away when my brain stops functioning the way it does now.

[55:35]

And it can stop functioning because of neural damage, because of drying up in old age, or because of intoxication. But I want to enter a practice that isn't me doing it by my power. I want to enter the practice of coming through this inconceivable process of enlightenment. I want to give myself to that realm and I want to become more and more familiar with that realm, and in that realm I still might be able to tell that I was poisoned or intoxicated when it happens, but it's kind of like that realm is virtually untouched, the compassion and love and inconceivable mutual assistance that's happening in that realm is untouched by intoxication. In that realm, I'm not wanting to get intoxicated, but it can happen. Poisons can come into me. I can go into a realm that has poison in it because the enlightenment is drawing me and pulling me into that realm. And then I go in there and I get poisoned.

[56:37]

And I say, yep, I'm poisoned. They said I would get poisoned, and now I'm poisoned. And the Samadhi's working very nicely here too. And I'm not gonna last much longer because of this poison, but the Samadhi is fabulous. It's just wonderful how all things are helping me be here so that this help can come through me and back to these beings. It's wonderful. That's the Samadhi of the fourth type. And it's just, you know, inconceivable. And that's another thing about these... The third circle is conceivable liberation. The fourth circle is inconceivable liberation. The third circle is psychological liberation. The fourth circle is metaphysical liberation. Was it Sala? I don't know. I can't keep track of... Did you have your hand raised? Sala and Max? Who else? Who else had their hands raised before? Raise your hands now. and Sarah, and Joe, and Bob, okay?

[57:46]

Sala? To go back to previous lectures, what does liberation from signs have to do with what you're talking about now? Just let me say quickly. Liberation from signs is part of the teaching of the Sambhinirmocana Sutra in particular. The Sambhinirmocana Sutra is like the base text which teaches about removing signs. And the purpose of removing signs is to remove the duality between the yogi and the teachings that they've understood. So, removing signs is part of the way the yogi becomes intimate with the teachings they've understood from a dualistic perspective. And a practice of that? The practice of removing the signs?

[58:47]

Yes. Yeah, and that practice is, well, how would I say? I'm, without getting into talking about the removal of signs, which is rather technical, but I hope someday to do with you, and it's in chapter seven of the Samadhi Nirmachana Sutra, that teaching, when we got to that, when I was studying that sutra with the priest, when we got to that teaching, I felt that I had to go back again to the earlier part of the book to be able to practice that teaching. They weren't, it seems like we weren't fluent enough with the earlier teachings because you need to use the earlier teachings to understand how the signs are removed, how the signs are eliminated. But understanding how signs work, how our mind works, helps us understand how our mind works to understand things and how our mind uses duality to understand things, and how signs are part of the process of understanding, but then how signs separate us from things.

[59:54]

Understanding all this is part of what it takes to eliminate the signs, and we need to go back and understand more how that happens in order to remove the signs. But I'm trying, without even getting into that, to give you meditations which actually will remove signs, but I'm not talking about it yet. I'm kind of being indirect. But removing signs, like I'll say this much, is that signs are the way that we get, that we grasp and extract meaning from concepts. but also then signs create separation. So what we want to do is we want to get meaning from concepts, and then after we get the meaning, we want to remove the sign, so now we're intimate with the meaning we got, without that separation of the signs. But we seem to need to go through this process to get meaning of various teachings.

[61:01]

But then to be intimate with them, we must remove the means by which we got them. Okay, and that was Rosie, and I don't know who's next, Max? delivered dharma lectures and also personal instruction to people. Yes. So I don't know, that was just something that came to mind, that practitioners have been able to practice with any, you know, any state of mind, being in any state of mind and able to also practice that way. Right, but I hope this doesn't sound like criticism, but Trungpa was very well educated in his early years, and had a lot of understanding of Buddhism in his early years, and you can get, yeah, so it's the same thing, you can get intoxicated

[62:13]

and still be able to deliver some of that realization. However, this is different from intoxication where somebody else puts the stuff in your thing without you knowing. He knew that what he was drinking was intoxicating. That's the difference. Okay? And that, although he could still do a great deal, still, there's some question about whether he did as much as he might have been able to if he wasn't doing that. So it still might interfere, but that's enough maybe. When you talk about practicing so that when you get Alzheimer's the practice will continue, sometimes it makes me jump to the nurses taking care of you, that maybe the non-dual function of all-inclusive reality is that at some point you're actually out of the... Whatever it is that you have to offer is no longer available.

[63:38]

to the universe, but it's available in the form of others offering that to you. Yeah, I think that's close, but that's a really good example because you have this person there and then the nurses are helping that person and you say what you have available is no longer offered, but another way to put it is what you used to offer is no longer given. Like if you gave Dharma talks, you can't give Dharma talks anymore. But the actual samadhi, the actual practice that was going on while you were giving dharma talks was not the dharma talks. The actual dharma was how, the actual dharma is not what I'm saying, the actual dharma is how all of you are creating me and how the way you're all creating me and helping me. Now that thing that's helping me through all you is now coming back to you. from me. That's the actual, that's the Samadhi. Not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is just, I don't know what I'm saying.

[64:42]

But it's just an opportunity, like a rock's an opportunity, or a flower's an opportunity, or a pebble's an opportunity, for everything to help that pebble help everything. So the nurses is a good example because you have this old, I don't know what, this old Alzheimer's patient who is a Buddhist priest, and you see the nurses helping him, and as you watch how the nurses are helping him, you see how that help is coming back to the nurses. And if you see that, you see the samadhi that this particular priest was devoted to. So, it isn't that he is able to do the samadhi, but that where his concern was all along is still untouched. So it doesn't matter that he can't think anymore, or he can't talk anymore, or that he talks and thinks in strange, unusual ways compared to the way he used to.

[65:45]

The Samadhi goes on, and the way to see it is actually how nice everybody is to him. And to see how people being nice to him is how the Samadhi is helping everybody, not just the people who are helping him. But you get to watch how people are helping him, so you get to see the Samadhi by watching how people are helping him. So like Emma mentioned to me this other, after the last class, that I went to visit Mumon Yamaduroshi, a great Zen master, you know, when he had whatever you call, you know, being very old, you know, so they bring him out and with all his robes on and sat him in a chair, you know, I would have felt better just going to meet him and having him lying in bed, you know, but they actually propped him up with all his robes in a fancy chair and he's looking, you know, just drooling, you know, and his students going up, �Roshi, this American Zen student is here to visit you. Remember him? You visited him in Totsahara, blah, [...] blah.

[66:46]

And then, you know, you just sit there and look at them and you think, well, what is Buddhism again? Is Buddhism like smart Zen master who can do really great calligraphy and whack people and give Dharma discourses that are like, you know, that's Buddhism? Or is Buddhism that we all just jump into the way we're all helping each other? You know? What is it again? Because what it used to be isn't here anymore. And then these very nicely dressed Japanese ladies come in and look at him and cry. You know? Are they crying because what was there before is not there? What are they crying for? Are they crying because the love is still the same? What are they crying about? I didn't ask them. So we're talking about a practice in the outer circle that's always going on. We're in the middle of it right now. and the question is how we can more and more be happy about it and more and more be not afraid that when we get our head knocked off the Samadhi is going to be scratched in the slightest bit.

[68:02]

So can we enjoy a practice now right now while we still have all our intelligence that won't be undermine it all once we lose all our intelligence? Can we enter into that stream of dharma samadhi, of nondual samadhi now and enjoy it now and forever? That's part of what I like about what I understand the Buddha way to be rather than in some ways the very powerful arhat way very powerful arhat way, and less powerful yogi way. Great yogis are number two. These are very powerful yogis that can get into these concentration states. But their practices end when their power stops. But this inconceivable samadhi, well, it's not a samadhi of better, like, oops, it would be better if I didn't have Alzheimer's.

[69:07]

It'd be better if I didn't have a broken leg. It'd be better if I could sit in full lotus. Well, I'm trying to sit, again, cross-legged, but if I never get there, that's not worse. That's not better. It's just the way the universe is creating the situation and helping that situation. Let's see, Sarah, and now I see two new hands. Sarah? I was, I've spent some time being confused about why I thought this was just around Zen center and now I think it's been like historically through China that you come in to practice and you get pretty advanced teachings right from the beginning. Or people will say things to you like, you know, you'll be like, I can't handle this. I'm like, oh, it's good for your practice, you know, and it's kind of in this way that is actually, you know, very Mahayana, but there's a way that Concentration practices that calm you down enough so that when you hear about the fourth level thing There isn't the danger of getting so excited and being so dualistic that you actually you can't help but try to make it yours and grasp rather than well if you if you're upset and And somebody says that's good for your practice.

[70:30]

That's a good thing for you to like meditate on the non duality of your upset and and you're calm, and you hear that instruction, and you can understand it, but somehow you're still upset and you resist that teaching, it's possible that you can get some instruction of this type. So somebody might say to you, like I'm saying to you, try to relax with being upset. Try to not seek not being upset. Try to accept that being upset is really what's given to you. Try not to steal now. Now that you're upset, try not to steal and get something that's not given. So we try as much as possible to help people calm down and perhaps as little as possible get them into seeking something. Because later when we have to antidote that seeking, we're encouraging them again to do this seeking thing. We're reiterating the dualistic patterns. But if the person really, really is refusing to listen to non-dual teaching, then we say, OK, well, why don't you take an ibuprofen?

[71:39]

Why don't you count your breath? If you can find something that will calm you down, why don't you do it in order to get that? So if people just refuse to practice a non-gaining practice, we say, okay, practice a gaining practice. Do something to get something then. And then after you get it, now when you listen to the teaching of non-duality, you say, yeah, I feel better, I'll listen to it now. So that's fine. And then maybe the next time you get upset, first you say, do you want to do it the non-dual way or the dual way? And they say, I'll do another dual. So we do, you know, and little by little, pretty soon you say, today I'll try a non-dual. I'll deal with this upset without seeking that it would go away. I'll deal with this upset in the sense of, thank you very much, I have no complaint whatsoever. I'll deal with it that way. Rather than trying to make it go away, I'll just emphasize, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you.

[72:45]

Not for it, exactly, but as a non-dual way of being with it. So if, again, you don't wanna be clinging to the non-dual approach. So part of the non-dual approach is being willing to use dual approaches. But being willing to use dual approaches, that allows you to use non-dual approaches too. And since dual approaches seem to be used plenty, They seem to be offered a lot. I personally feel like, well, we could offer a few non-dual. They're kind of unusual. Let's get a little non-dual out in the space. Let's get a little bit more emphasis on non-gaining. That seems to be an unusual thing. Let's give a little bit more into giving up control. Since control is such a big deal, everybody wants it, how about talking about giving it up? Okay? So I see now Grace, and so I think, and Danny, I think Joe was next.

[73:52]

I think you mostly addressed it. It was a question about when one comes to practice with seeking or gaining mind, how to slough that off when you're engaged in counting your breath, you know, in gaining practice. Yeah, right, I did answer it. What was the answer? Yeah, for example, by giving up, trying to gain anything from your gaining practice. But gaining practice is a perfectly good opportunity to realize non-duality, by basically not trying to gain anything from your gaining practice. Just say, here I am, I'm just kind of like very greedy gaining, I'm a greedy gaining guy.

[74:56]

who's practicing this yoga practice where I'm gonna get a lot of stuff now, so I'm happy. And I understand that this is totally, totally dualistic, and I accept that and I confess it, and I'm gonna play this one all the way. And if you do, you'll reach non-duality. The full expression, the total expression of dualistic mode is non-duality. Because once you totally express it, there's no grasping or seeking. And then it becomes non-dual. So I'm not sure who's next, but maybe Bob was next. I had a question about gathas, and I was wondering how they would fit in with that, because it seems like a gatha practice. You could take something, you know, that was kind of an individual thing, and then it could be expanded to include lots of people, everyone.

[76:03]

So, like, when I do X, may all beings experience ABC. Is that, how would that fit in with those levels? Is that like a... If you did it dualistically in order to change, or in order to realize concentration, for example, it would fall under number two. Right? Does that make sense? That could be a concentration practice. You can use Gatas as concentration practices. How could you use them, say, for a non-dualistic practice? Well, even a practice where you hope for benefit for others but still think they're other, it's still dualistic practice. But it's a wholesome practice, of course, to wish the benefit of others and the safety and health of others. It's very wholesome. very wholesome, but still dualistic if you think that they're other, that they're separate from you.

[77:05]

And you can achieve concentration and enter into a Samadhi of wishing welfare to others. It's a Samadhi of a Maitri Samadhi. You can enter into full trance through wishing well others, but it can still be dualistic. I mean, it could still be dualistic. So you ask me, how could it be non-dualistic? Well, if you understand non-duality, when you say, may all beings be happy, you understand that all beings are non-dual. And you're not seeking anything by that chant. You're doing that chant. That chant emerges from your realization of non-duality. It doesn't emerge from trying to get something. It's just you're a guy who goes around wishing people well. And then you stop wishing people well, and then you're a guy who's like saying, hi. but it's coming from an expression of your samadhi and non-duality. And you're not trying to get anything for it, and you don't think it's better than some other state, and you don't think other people are better than you, or you're better than other people, and you don't think other people are separate from you.

[78:14]

You understand that, and you act like that. And acting like that, you can still go around chanting gathas. Yes. You said, I think, that great yogis, their practice stops when their power stops? If they're practicing dualistically, they're practicing, you know, my, I'm doing the practice, and then when they stop doing the practice, then the practice is over, except for the results, when the results fulfill themselves. So, my question is, if ultimately, the nature of everything is non-dual, then even if they were practicing dualistic consciousness, wouldn't on some level the practice non-stop? Everything's non-dual. All phenomena are non-dual, including the phenomena of somebody trying to get something for themselves. It's still non-dual, ultimately.

[79:18]

Ultimately, all dharmas are non-dual. And if you practice dualistically, that may make it, at least while you're practicing dualistically, if you don't understand non-duality in your whole body, then that dualistic practice to some sense distracts you from non-duality. But it's still the way things are. And why does the practice stop when there are powers? If that's the way things are, then how is it that their practice stops when there are powers? How is it that dualistic practice stops when dualistic practice stops? That's what I'm talking about. When dualistic practice stops, the practice stops, and then there's results of dualistic practice. Dualistic practice is karma, and it has karmic effects. And the effects stop when the conditions for the effect stop. That's all I'm saying. But you also said that if you practice dualistically,

[80:21]

Right, but we didn't, her example is not somebody who's reached non-duality, somebody who's still operating on the level of, I'm doing the practice, and I'm doing the practice to get something, okay? That can be wholesome, and it has karmic effects, because it is karma, because it's based on the idea of, self and other, and even, I won't get into that, but, so I'm just saying that that has its results, and it depends on the illusion. It's an illusory thing, it doesn't really exist, but it appears to exist for a while. It's an impermanent thing. This thing arises, lasts for a while, and ceases. But the practice is always going on. The samadhi doesn't arise and cease. The samadhi is talking about the way we're actually always working together. That itself is permanent.

[81:29]

Even in the case of yogis. Even in the case of yogis. Yogis are no less part of this samadhi than non-dual, yogis of non-duality, and people who don't even practice yogi, we're all working together. That's always going on. We're always helping each other. That's what the Buddha realizes, and that's what Buddha wants us to see. Would you say that the yogi would be operating, or his practice would If the yogi confessed that, then, what are you asking, if he confessed? Then would he be operating in a non-Buddhistic practice? He would always be in this samadhi together with everybody else.

[82:30]

We're all in Buddha's samadhi. We're all in Buddha's samadhi. The kind of samadhi that Buddha has is we're all in it all the time. Buddha never, like, kicks us out. And if you understood that, you also would realize you don't kick anybody out. Okay? Now, but if some of the people in your samadhi are trying to get something, and some of the people in that samadhi who are trying to get something confess that they're trying to get something, when they confess it, they still might be then in the next moment want to get something. But when they confess it, they melt away the root of that transgression. By the power of that confession, they start melting the root of gaining idea. but they haven't melted it yet necessarily, but they have done something which will melt that root of duality, and melt the root of the belief in duality, of the grasping of duality, of the working for, being of an employee of duality. So in actuality we are employees of non-duality, but apparently a lot of the time we're employees of duality.

[83:39]

we confess our employment in duality, which means we confess our lack of faith in non-duality. The more we confess our employment in duality, the more we melt away our habituation and attachment to duality. But one confession doesn't necessarily free us from that deep habit. I just wanted to mention a case of Alzheimer, which confirms what you're saying, is William de Kooning, very well-known abstract expressionist painter, continued to do a large body of work when he had Alzheimer's. And there was a show at the Museum of Modern Art about two years ago, and the work was, you know, an extension of his whole body of work, which was some of the best work he had ever done, was when he had Alzheimer's. it was more pure and there was a lot being written on the fact that his vision or his pain and salati, as some people might see it, just continued going in spite of the fact that he couldn't do anything else.

[84:44]

Yeah, that's a good example that the art of Mahayana meditation, and I would say maybe other kinds too, can go on. when certain facilities which make it possible to go to the bank and cash the checks for your artwork are no longer there. Because when you move from the mind of going to the bank and cashing checks and answering telephones, when you move from that mind into the realm of art, you gave up that stuff. So when you lose that stuff, if somebody can get you into the art room and give you the brush, it still happens. Because you weren't using some of your regular stuff anyway. So some people can continue religious practice when they can't do anything else. They can't enjoy it in certain ways that they used to, but the practice goes on. So it's 10.30 and lots of questions still on the floor.

[85:46]

So I'm sorry, but I think we should stop because I think people get kind of So part of what I'm doing is giving you practices some practices actually that are hopefully in accord with this level of samadhi, even though you haven't gone through all the earlier ones, even though you haven't practiced to such an extent of becoming really deeply mentally stabilized and also analyzing and understanding selflessness and giving you practices which are even beyond that realization. But I hope to come back and do this other work later. So maybe next time or next time we can look at this kind of meditation a little bit more.

[86:53]

Well, number three, the type of meditation which is concerned with realizing the selflessness of the person, which is a kind of meditation which does give access to personal liberation, give you freedom from the habits of self-cleaning, which is a huge, wonderful change in our orientation, but there still can be some duality. And some of the practices which promote that, I have not been telling you yet, but I think eventually you'll be ready to hear these things either being disgusted by them as something you don't want to do, so I hope he doesn't assign that, or like, oh boy, I can really like get that and then I would be a great... So the practices that I, the actual practices that I'm giving, which I sort of mean to be attending to the fourth circle, are practices of bringing great compassion and, you know, to everything that happens.

[88:19]

And, you know, to come, to meet everything, giving up, grasping and seeking in every meeting. This is a practice which is given hopefully in the spirit of non-duality. So I'll keep talking about these as actual things that you can easily work with, not actually easily, but that are easy to remember and to practice while I'm trying to show you also how this works in the big picture of all the different types of samadhi.

[88:59]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ