Today I would like to enter into a realm of experience wherein the non-substantiality of all the elements can be understood. But before going forth into this contemplation, I want to again invoke the presence of the teaching of uprightness. So, you may remember that Ajayata wanted to enlighten Vasubandhu, who was a very successful

[01:23]

ascetic, who was seeking enlightenment, never lying down, only eating one meal a day, worshiping Buddha intensely and so on. And, Ajayata Daisho said, I don't seek enlightenment, but I'm not deluded either. I don't sit for long periods, but I'm not lazy either. I don't eat only one meal a day, but I'm not a glutton either, and so on. And finally, he said that the mind that does not seek anything enters the way.

[02:31]

Uprightness is the mind that doesn't seek anything, is the attitude which doesn't seek anything, doesn't turn away from things, doesn't grab them, doesn't dwell in any experience of body-mind, it doesn't dwell in the sense objects, the sense organs, or the sense consciousnesses. It is a mind that's just like a wall, and this mind that is just like a wall, Bodhidharma says, is the way to enter the way. When people hear about this mind that's like a wall, or a mind that doesn't seek anything,

[03:48]

they tell me, it sounds so cold, so unfriendly. When people see pictures of Bodhidharma, they think he looks so unfriendly. The emperor of China thought he was unfriendly, and after he left, he found out that this was the bodhisattva of infinite compassion, and he wanted his unfriendly friend back. But it was too late, Bodhidharma was already up in his cave. What was he doing? He was sitting, still and silent. And Tian Tong, Hongzhi, the poet of the Shoyoroku, says, he sat coolly at Shaolin, and I remember

[05:12]

when I first read that I thought, the bodhisattva of infinite compassion sitting coolly, wouldn't he sit warmly? Well yes, of course he's warm, but there's a coolness there, the coolness of not seeking anything from the sitting. In silence, he completely brought up the true imperative, the clear moon of autumn turns its frosty disk, the Milky Way thin, the dipper hangs down, hangs down its handle in the night sky. As we enter into the realm of considering our relationships with others, and try to

[06:22]

see through where they stick, it will be very important that we give up everything, that we can be cold, that we can find this mind which is not even seeking non-discriminating wisdom, the mind which does not seek non-discriminating wisdom has a chance to enter it. With a mind like a wall we can enter into the study of all elements and realize their non-substantiality. We have to give up all juice in our relationships.

[07:29]

It's a lot to ask, but you get a lot for it. Complete, perfect freedom. In the echo which we have started to chant at noon service at the end, we were ending with joyful, so going joyful, people wanted to change it to ee, because it's easier to say ee, so we changed it to joyfully, so now it says something like, may we relate with all beings joyfully. The way to relate to all beings joyfully is with a mind like a wall. If you've got a mind that's trying to relate to beings joyfully, it ain't going to be joyful,

[08:47]

it's going to be sticky, gooey, and well, I won't go into what happens, you may have some idea. Ironically or surprisingly, the mind that is cool, the mind which is not trying to get anything out of this relationship, is a mind that has a joyful relationship. I said one time recently, and I've said it before, I said, you know, if I actually would enjoy, if I could have five minutes with Dogen Zenji, I would like that, just a five minute interview with Shakyamuni Buddha, maybe five seconds with Bodhidharma, or a few minutes with my old teacher Suzuki Roshi, if they just could come back and I could sit with them for a little while, I would appreciate it. How would I be when I got a chance to be with my wonderful ancestors, how would I be?

[09:56]

Would I try to get some juice out of them? Maybe, but that would not be my intention. My intention would be to meet them, with not trying to get anything out of them, just meet them, not even try to get a communication out of it. When I was young, I think I would have tried to get something out of it, but now I would sit coolly with those guys, and if I did, I think that I would use the situation well, but if I try to get anything out of it, the situation will use me, and I'll miss my chance. Dharma transmission is sometimes called menju, which literally is translated, not literally,

[11:09]

it's translated, we translated it as face-to-face transmission, but literally it means receive the face, menju, men, face, ju, get the face, that's it. So, after Vasubandhu heard about the mind which does not seek anything, he woke up. He already had considerable knowledge, but he realized undefiled knowledge when he heard that instruction, and he became a teacher of men and women, and gods and goddesses. And when his great disciple, Manohita, came to him and asked him, what is the enlightenment

[12:10]

of all Buddhas? He said, the enlightenment of all Buddhas is the fundamental nature of the mind. Manohita said, what is the fundamental nature of the mind? Vasubandhu said, it is the non-substantiality of all elements. It is the non-substantiality of the sense fields, the sense organs, and the sense consciousnesses. If you have a mind like a wall and you observe your consciousnesses working, the six consciousnesses working, if you watch them happen, which is exactly what's happening now, this is the happening of them. If you observe what's happening with a mind like a wall you will see that all the elements in this drama are working together and all of them are insubstantial. That's the proposal.

[13:13]

And this insubstantiality of all the elements of your experience is the original, is the fundamental nature of mind. It is the enlightenment of all the Buddhas. Vasubandhu said to Manohita. So the Buddha's epistemological standpoint, epistemological standpoint means, what does Buddha say our awareness is based on? Whatever you're aware of, whatever you know about now, what is it based on? It's not based on substantial entities. It's based on non-substantial entities. It's based on subjects and objects that dependently co-arise. That's what is at the base of our experience. In other words, the same thing that Vasubandhu said.

[14:23]

At the base of your experience is a mind which has insubstantiality as its quality, or as we sometimes say, emptiness. Now the first, basically the first 14 verses of Vasubandhu's treatise we've studied. And you can meditate, you have been meditating on what's been discussed in those first 14 verses, and that meditation also will be most successful with a mind that doesn't seek anything, with a mind that's not trying to understand even, with a mind which just clearly observes.

[15:29]

And the 30 verses don't even reach it. The words of the 30 verses don't even reach the mind which will understand them. The mind which will understand the words is a mind which is not reaching for the words and the words don't reach it. But, the first 30 verses have mostly been describing the arising of self and other and the problems that arise with that. And now, he shifts somewhat, and I'd like to start talking at the point where he discusses the Karka, verse number 17, and Vasubandhu says, Thus, thought involves this transformation

[16:35]

of consciousness. For that reason, what has been thought of does not exist. All is mere concept. Whatever we're thinking of, whatever we experience as our thinking, whatever we're aware of, comes through transformations of consciousness. So whatever comes in, goes through all kinds of transformations, and finally what we know is not what came in, what we know is a concept which we choose among our various concepts, or rather is chosen by a complex process of causation as the best possible guess for what's going on. And so we are aware of an object, and the object we're aware of is a concept.

[17:37]

All we're aware of is a concept. Therefore all this is mere concept. Consciousness indeed, the next Karka, the next verse, consciousness indeed possesses all seeds. Its transformation occurs in a variety of ways. It proceeds on the basis of mutual dependence as a result of which such and such thoughts are born. So this is an overview of the process. All these seeds, all these dispositions are available, these transformations are occurring,

[18:43]

and all this proceeds on the basis of mutual dependence, and thoughts are born, various thoughts are being born constantly by mutual interdependence of all these dispositions and all these potentials which are due to past thoughts. The karmic dispositions together with the two dispositions of grasping produce another resultant when the previous resultant has waned. The dispositions of grasping and grasped, of the grasping and what is grasped, these dispositions, or of the grasping and the grasper, the grasper me and the grasping, or the grasping and the grasped, these different dispositions create more effects which come into fruition

[19:52]

when the previous effects have waned and the new effects come from the past grasping. Now, in the next verse, number 20, he introduces what is called parikalpita-svabhava, the own being, the substance, which is just a fabrication. So he says, whatever thought through which an object is thought of as a substance, that indeed is a fabrication, it is not evident, there is no proof for it. So, we have a kind of thought by which we imagine that what we're aware of has substance.

[20:56]

We have this kind of thought. This is a kind of substance, this is one of the kinds of substance. This is the kind of substance which comes from us imagining that what we're aware of, one of these objects, one of these six types of objects, we imagine that they're substantial. Whatever thought through which an object is thought of as a substance is indeed a fabrication, it is not evident. In this context, the object that is thought of is not an ordinary object of consciousness or experience, but one that possesses a self-nature, a substance.

[22:01]

The ordinary things we're aware of in our experience are things that dependently co-arise. But now, among these things which dependently co-arise, we have something which has substance. This way of thinking is pure imagination. Now in Karika 21 he introduces the next kind of substantial thing, the next kind of svabhava, or own being, called paratantra-svabhava. A dependent self-nature is a thought that has arisen depending on conditions. So now we have a self-nature which is a thought which arises by conditions.

[23:05]

Since it arises by conditions it also is insubstantial, but it's insubstantial in a different way than the previous one was insubstantial. The previous one was insubstantial by being simply, totally, an imagination. And what was it an imagination of? It was an imagination of substantiality. Now this is not an imagination of a substantiality, this is imagination of some kind of thought. However, it's insubstantial because the imagination is coming into play, into being, by causes and conditions. Its arising depends on something other, but it actually is the way concepts come to play, come to awareness. It's empty but it's not mental fabrication.

[24:29]

It's a concept, but it's a concept which has dependently co-arisen. Now, if you have this paratantra, svabhava, you have this dependently co-arisen thought, you have a thought which has dependently co-arisen. The absence of the thought that we talked about before in Karaka 20, the absence of that one, the absence of the one that imagines substance, when you just have the paratantra by itself and the one that imagines substance is separate from it or absent, that absence of that imagination of substance, then this thought which is there is called the accomplished,

[25:35]

the parinispana svabhava. And this accomplished is non-discriminating wisdom. You have to be upright. So, imagine you have a relationship with somebody, I don't know who, somebody, so I have a relationship with some person, that person that I have a relationship with, there's me, the self and the object, the other. Now the dependently arising thought is the thought which arises dependent on the cause

[26:43]

of the self and the other and many other things. There's a sense of somebody over there. So, by these elements of self and other interacting and you saw how they arose also through the process of perception, so all those processes of transformation which now give rise to the sense of self and other and now there's experience of self and other, so we have this experience now. That dependently co-arisen thing is insubstantial, but it's happening, insubstantially, miraculously. You can have an experience of somebody. That's the dependent self nature. But there can also be, also having to do with how this happened, there also is the kind of thought which can imagine there's some substance to the object. The imagination of substance in the object is what's called the previous self nature.

[27:59]

And we're able to have that kind of mental fabrication because of how the process of perception develops and we get the sense of self which we then can use to project and imagine substance onto something that dependently co-arose. When we have something that dependently co-arises and then we imagine substance on top of it, that's the pure imagination on being, and that's called not being upright and that's called juicing. When the thing which is imagined as having substance is absent of that imagination of substance, or the absence of that imagination of substance, and then you just have this thing appearing, self and other appearing, but without substance imbued to it.

[29:10]

That is the accomplished and that is non-discriminating wisdom. Yes? What do you mean by substance? Imagining, imagining that something has substance by itself. If you don't also believe it, you don't really think it does have substance. So it is actually giving substance to something. That ability is there, okay, and you learned it from creating the self, from the creation of the self which happened in relationship to the process of perception which gave rise to the sense of self and other. So we know how, just as we developed a sense of self, the unexamined self then becomes

[30:13]

the template or the paradigm or the prototype for imagining selves on things or imagining independent substantial entities. The basis of imagining independent substantial entities which we can do, the basis upon which this imagination of independent entities is created is insubstantial, but insubstantiality can lead to the arising of the appearance of concepts which are not about anything but seem to be, they're just concepts, and these concepts arise by causes and conditions and that way that they are when they arise by causes and conditions is the paratantra. That is the other dependent kind of own being. Those things which arise by causes and conditions, those thoughts which arise by causes and conditions

[31:18]

and then are imagined to be substances, then are converted into the imagined self-nature. When the imagined self-nature is absent and there's just the dependently co-arisen thought, that is called parinispana and that is non-discriminating wisdom. That's why you have to be cool. You have to be able to see how things arise and then be able to see also how imaginations can be overlaid on them, and then also by looking at how the imaginations are overlaid on them you can also see that actually the imaginations are not overlaid on them and actually, I shouldn't say that actually, I want to take it back, it's not that the imagination is not overlaid on them, it's that when the imagination of substance is overlaid

[32:21]

on your experiences that's called the first one, that's the pure imagination, pure fabrication. I won't say that that doesn't happen, I'll just say when it does that's what it is. When it's separate from the other one then that's called the accomplished. In a sense it says here that the accomplished is the real, what does it say, it's the real something of events, it's the ultimate meaning of events, it's the ultimate meaning of events but it doesn't mean that the other ones don't happen. When the ultimate meaning of events happens it's called non-discriminating wisdom. However, it also says that the third, namely this accomplished, is the ultimate meaning

[33:30]

of events because it's also suchness. Suchness is that the dependently co-arisen is separate from the imagination of substance and this remains the same all the time, this suchness, but because it remains the same all the time non-discriminating wisdom also is a mere concept. Because non-discriminating wisdom is a mere concept it isn't really about anything either because what is non-discriminating wisdom? It's not like there's the dependently co-arisen and then there's something else called non-discriminating wisdom. Non-discriminating wisdom is just that what is dependently co-arising, a thought that dependently co-arises is absent of the imagination of substance.

[34:37]

There's not a third thing actually between what is miraculously apparent by causes and conditions and the absence of imagining it's a substance. There's not a third thing but it's called a third thing when things are like that. So it's just a concept too. Non-discriminating wisdom also is insubstantial. The accomplished is insubstantial. What is the accomplished about? What is non-discriminating wisdom about? It's about the karmically created. The content of it is the karmically created. It's inseparable from the karmically created. It is just the karmically created when the karmically created is absent of the imagination

[35:47]

that the karmically created is a substance. Karmically created things can happen and they do by causes and conditions and because they happen by causes and conditions they're insubstantial. That's how they happen and that's why they're insubstantial. To leave them like that and let them be that way is suchness. To leave them like that is simply non-discriminating wisdom. There also is this thing called imagination of substance. It's not banished from the scene, it's there too someplace, but it's absent in the appearance of phenomena. It's absence is non-discriminating wisdom.

[36:53]

So self and other happen in the process of awareness of anything, by the processes we've discussed of how the reflecting gives rise to a sense of self. So whenever there's awareness there's self and then there's self and other. That's part of the scene. But how can there be self and other, not how can there be, when there is self and other without then the overlay of substance to the object of the awareness? When there's not substance overlaid on the other or back onto the self, who then is the grasper, or onto the other which is then the grasped. When that is absent then the self-other relationships, just as they are, are non-discriminating wisdom. Then your cool relationships with a mind that's like a wall are what's called joyfully

[38:07]

relating with all beings. And again, you don't have to come in with a blow torch and burn away the imagination of substance. You don't have to beat down all the juice that's oozing around your relationships. Because there is this insubstantial non-existent thing called juice, called outflows all over the place. All we have to do is somehow have revealed to us the fact that this juicy, substance-glomming activity of mind is separate from the karmically created, dependently co-arisen experience.

[39:08]

And you don't have to make it that way. You don't have to clean the situation up. All you have to do is see that when you have the karmically created overlaid with a sense of substance, what you've got is delusion and misery and to somehow wait and watch and be upright until you have a chance to see what it's like when this overlay is absent and things are just appearing by causes and conditions. As long as consciousness does not terminate in mere concept, so long do these outflows

[40:15]

do these dispositions and these inclinations for the twofold graspings not cease. The twofold graspings can continue to be causes, to be part of the causation, but the dispositions can cease. And then the twofold grasping happens, can happen, but since it is dependently co-arisen it has no substance. And then that situation again, the twofold grasping is non-discriminating wisdom. And there's no more twofold grasping, not because it's been put into the category

[41:17]

of non-existence, because without that you couldn't have an experience without this twofold grasping, but because the twofold grasping is non-discriminating wisdom and non-discriminating wisdom is not the twofold grasping, the twofold grasping is the contents of non-discriminating wisdom. Non-discriminating wisdom doesn't discriminate between them, but their discrimination is part of the causation which makes them appear. And the not attributing substance to this discrimination and having that be absent is again the non-discriminating wisdom. Indeed one who, on account of one's grasping, were to place something before herself saying this is mere concept, will not stop at mereness.

[42:21]

To do that is not the mind of the wall. To stop and say this is mere concept is not I am clearly aware and no words reach it. This is mere concept reaches it in this case. This is not really stopping at mere concept. Stopping at mere concept is the mind like a wall. Stopping at mere concept means you know in self and other relationships, you know this is just a concept, but you don't then let the word this is just a concept reach you. That wouldn't be mere concept. That would be saying I'm clearly aware and no words reach me and let those words reach you. That would be again attributing substance to the state of non-discriminating wisdom. That would be taking what's appearing by dependent co-arising absent of imagination

[43:49]

of substance and taking that and putting substance on that. But, when actually what's happening by dependent co-arising is absent of the overlay of substance, it's just a mere concept too. So, you can't lay substance on non-discriminating wisdom either. Now does your question apply? Yes. When consciousness with object is not obtained, then there being no object, one is established in the state of mere concept, for there is no grasping for it.

[44:51]

It is without thought and without object. It is also the super-mundane knowledge. Through the destruction of the twofold depravities, there is a reversion of the source of such depravities. This, indeed, is the realm free from influxes, free from juice.

[46:13]

It is unthinkable, wholesome and stable. It is the serene body of release. This is called the doctrine of the great sage. The other cartoon from Far Side that I thought was relevant was one of a dog riding a bicycle, holding a cat in her mouth, balancing a vase on her head, working a hula hoop and juggling four balls on a tightrope, and then there's a whole bunch of people watching, and the

[47:33]

She tried to remain focused. This is not just for you, this is for me too, right? Still, she couldn't shake one nagging thought, colon. She was an old dog, and this was a new trick.

[48:48]

She was an old dog, and this was a new trick. Yes, I know, that's why I brought it up, it's perfect. Right now, we're all walking on a tightrope, riding a bicycle with our most delicious friend in our mouth, balancing many things while we're jiggling ourselves, that's what we're doing. And we're supposed to stay focused in such a situation.

[49:56]

And we're learning, and this is a new trick, and we also have these little demons in our ears saying, you can't learn anything like this, it's too hard. This is a new trick, don't be hard on yourself, it's going to be hard to learn this one. And so you're going to fall off the thing many times, and even when you fall, you're going to land on another one. All the material's there, moment by moment, so if you can be upright, you have a chance to witness karmically created stuff that's dependably co-arising, the attribution of substance to it. You can see that, I think, pretty well, if you stay present and cool, there's some way

[51:14]

to realize that the attribution of substance to this karmically created stuff is absent, is separate, and then there's just karmically created, dependably co-arisen experience by itself, without substance, and yet appearing. And then occasionally there's this substance that comes in and sits on it, and then it's real again, and then you've got everything causing these dispositions, and then the dispositions coming up, more karmically created and blah, [...] but in the midst of that there is a possibility of forgetting all the nagging thoughts and just witnessing what's happening as such, and then not even putting that in front of you. And if you can realize suchness without even putting suchness out there, that is supposedly

[52:23]

the supreme body of bliss. So we have finished the 30 verses, and now you can try to live with them. You got them? No? Please take care of them. Keep studying them and discussing them. Basically that's it. First time through. Congratulations. Thank you so much. Aki-san, we have an American saying, it is the saying, custom, American custom, a story.

[53:29]

The story is, you cannot teach an old dog new trick. Like, you know, if you have an old dog, a very old dog, like Zorri, you can't teach Zorri to stand up and say hello, Zorri cannot learn any new things because he's old. He can only bark, but we cannot teach him like new things, we can't teach him Zazen anymore or Kinhin, but the young dog, the young dog, young dog can learn new trick. What's the moral of the story?

[54:34]

What's the moral of the story? I'm trying to teach Aki-san a trick, English trick. Well you want to prove that old dog can't learn a new trick, go right ahead. What trick can't Zazen learn? I can't understand your Spanish. What trick can't he or can he? Can, well, for example, he learned the trick of not walking on the walkway, right, he's walking on the walkway a few weeks ago, now he's learned not to walk on the walkway. He walked on the walkway yesterday. He's learned not to let you catch him. He could learn that maybe, maybe he can learn that trick of not walking on the walkway and maybe he can learn the trick of not coming in during service, that's a trick he could

[55:41]

learn. T-R-I-C-K. Anyway, we are old dogs, you know, we are ancient dogs and so it's hard for us to learn new tricks. It's going to be hard to actually learn a new trick, but this is a trick that the Buddhas and Ancestors are trying to have learned, a trick of finding a mind which is not seeking anything and using that mind to enter into the dependent co-arising of 18 elements, mind,

[56:43]

object, and organ. Use that mind which doesn't seek anything to study them and realize their insubstantiality and thereby witness and realize the fundamental nature of mind. Simple instruction now that it's over, but very difficult to do, very difficult to give up all craving and all seeking and all gaining and just be like a wall. And even then, to then enter into the complexities and subtleties and the twistings and turnings of the mind as you actually get in there and it starts to reveal more and more of itself to you, then you have to even be more upright. New temptations will come to you which you never even saw before, which are never impossible. All kinds of meditation sicknesses will come up. It's horrendous, but that's the program.

[57:44]

Namaskar.

[58:07]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ