This case about a monk asking Jo Feng what is the head and so on, as we saw last week, is modeled on a previous conversation that that Yufang's teacher had with another Zen master prior to this story. So maybe the monk's rehearsing something he's heard before, but getting a slightly different answer in the present case. So he asks, what is the head?

[01:01]

And Yufeng says, opening the eyes and not being aware of the dawn. And in a later conversation, Yufang has with another monk, maybe the same monk, at the conclusion of the conversation, he said, dawn breaking on the road, the eyes are not open.

[02:05]

So this is the head. And later in the story, Monk asks again, what about when you have a head but no tail? And Yufeng says, after all, not precious. And the commentator says that this is open in the eyes and not being aware at dawn. In the earlier story, when Jiu Feng's teacher was asked, what's the head?

[03:47]

Oh, no. I think he was asked. What about when one has a head but no tail? He said, What's the use of spitting out gold? Last week I asked everybody, you know, what's the head? Again, the commentator says that if your eye's not thoroughly clear about the head and the tail before and after, if your eye's not clear, then your mind won't be clear.

[05:00]

opening the eyes and not being aware of the dawn. have a sense of what's going on.

[06:49]

You can get to that, yeah. The story, the earlier story was, the monk says, well, first of all, Yufeng's teacher says, beginners who have not yet gotten the great matter first should know the head, and the tail will come of itself. And then the monk Sushan comes forth and says, what is the head? And... Jiu Feng's teacher, who is Shershuang, said, you should know it exists. What is the head? You should know it exists. And then Sushan says, what is the tail? And Shershuang said, exhausting the present. What is the tail?

[07:49]

Exhausting the present. What is the head? You should know it exists. But when the monk asked Jufeng, what is the head? Jufeng said, opening the eyes, but not aware of the dawn. And the monk asked the first teacher, what is the tale?

[08:55]

And he said, exhausting at present. Xu Peng said, not sitting on the eternal seat. you read just the adepts.

[10:03]

Those are, in both cases, those are beautiful out-of-contact civil liberties. And you don't read the monk or not. In other words, if you don't read what the monk says, ask, what is it? What is it? In both cases, you just read The addicts, they are somehow eternally assisted monologues, or our context soliloquies. So they have, without interjecting amongst comments, they make sense for you. Even though they don't have a context. Yeah. Opening the eyes without being aware of the dawn.

[11:11]

Exhausting the present. No, that's different. Opening the eyes without being aware of the dawn. Not sitting on the eternal seat. How does that fall? Over. Over. After all is not precious. Though full, no power. Descendants gain power. In your room it's unknown. It just reminded me, well, first it reminded me of Longblood's Rick Stippers.

[12:20]

And then I start thinking that it reminded me a lot of what we call it. It makes sense. At least hearing your response, exhausting, depressing. Really. I think the second there, it kind of made it something more graphic. I had a hard time being able to figure out how to approach it with my own life. But you're in like a lost and present. Like, I can sort of see my story about it. You know, how many times do I say what it's at, and grab something from the head instead of . And then also, if we're going to sit here, like, not trying to just grab .

[13:26]

He says, the beginners who have not yet got the great matter first should know the head and the tail kind of itself. It sounds like he's pointing at a distinction between the head and the tail. But last time when we were asked or asked a question, it seemed like they became the same question. So were many people just standing for a basic question of what is reality? So I guess I go back and forth. Are they talking about something specific, a distinction, or are they just questioning for what is reality? You're wondering if the question, what is the head, is like saying, what is reality? No, there's a distinction between saying what is the head and what is the head. Or are they both just the same question? What do you think? From this quotation I just read, it seems like they are trying to talk about two separate things, 22 truths, but I'm not sure.

[15:07]

It seems likely because they probably wouldn't just be talking about ultimate truth, would they? Might be talking about conventional truth, but then why a safe place? And it probably wouldn't be just talking about ultimate truth. Let me talk a little bit about the game. Pardon? Okay, I've been speaking about something such as the beginning. Good. What they could be talking about before and following. We're not necessarily getting into beginning and end.

[16:09]

Kale and heart are the same thing. Kale and heart are the same thing? Kale and heart are the same thing? They're two different things. At what point are you talking about principle and practice? Uh-huh. They talk about the having a child come very closely. Pardon? They talk about the having, you know, followed very closely about the situation. Uh-huh. So maybe head and tail are referring to principle and practice?

[17:18]

Uh-huh. Yeah. Why did you say principle and practice? Well, as one speaker says, the principle is so subtle it transcends sameness and difference from practice. The principle is not entirely the same as progress, and yet it can't be entirely different either. They're very close to principle practice. It seems like one of the reasons that you use head and tail as the principle of practice is that the principle of practice is more abstract.

[18:23]

And you'd like to assert carbon and opposite having their own definition and think of them as more separate, while using head and tail is less abstract. And there's also all the suggestions of the way that the head and tail relate to the reality. They're separate, but they're also connected. So there's no suggestion of both their difference and their connection. And also we might not think that the principle's a head, or that a head's a principle, or that a tail's a practice, or that a practice is a tail. But who knows what principle is, or the tail, or the practice is? Who knows? It might be a head and a tail. Your head might be the principle, for all we know. Yes. Maybe this is the head is knowledge, and the tail is experienced.

[19:30]

So what is the head, opening the eyes, not being aware as a dog. So having an appreciation, not having an appreciation, but being aware of, aware as a dog. So what is the tail? How is it with having a head and a tail? Well, after all, it's kind of so precious. You're not really experiencing it. And nowhere. How about having to tell the new head, though full, it's full experience. It may not give us, it may not be that useful. I have no idea what Thank you.

[20:37]

I asked Susan, yeah, the last shot, and her answer was great. Opening the eyes and not being aware of the dawn, seeing the universe truly is about out there. So that's ultimate reality. And then the talent, the world of activity, Is it a world of activity? Or realization, then, if that's to me first. We'll have to keep credit for it. How about when he says, what's a tale?

[21:54]

He said, not sitting on the eternal seat. What kind of practice is that? Or what kind of world of activity is not sitting on the eternal seat? Are you living in a provenance? living in impermanence? So, it's a practice of sitting on the impermanent seat, the non-eternal seat? If you're seeing the conventional reality as somehow at the stake, or most of the reality, you could call me analytically. Even if only analytically.

[22:57]

Yeah, even if only to the extent that they have different names. Even if it's that little a difference. Were you going to say the same thing? So how about having a head and no tail? So that would be ultimate truth without activity? That would be sitting on the eternal seat.

[24:06]

That would be kind of like sitting on the eternal seat. You'd be kind of stuck there because you wouldn't have the non-eternal seat tail. And that wouldn't be so precious. That word precious could also be translated as, you know, really fine or noble or cool. Well, not right here. Not right view? Yeah. You said you have a tail but no head. Or a head but no tail. Not the right view. Head but no tail is not right view? Moving straight. Well, or you could say having a head but no tail is having right view.

[25:14]

without expressing it in practice. Which is, you know, a good start, but you're not bringing it around into everything else. What about having a tail but no head? He says, though full, no power. You're busy. Pardon? You're busy. You're active. So you're full? No. You're not paying attention. Well, you might be paying attention. You might be busy paying attention. Yeah, because you're not balanced.

[26:19]

You're not in harmony. Right, but what is it that's not in harmony? It's the busyness and the activity. The wisdom and the activity. The activity doesn't have wisdom. Right. Or not enough. Not enough. Not enough principle in the activity. Unprincipled activity. Well, this is a case where there is no power, right?

[27:27]

So you want to know about what the no power is like? Pardon? Well, not too far. You just brought up power, but this line is there isn't any power. That's what this line is, okay? And your question is about the next line. but I just thought, you're jumping ahead there. Okay? And the next line is the answer. Can you wait a minute? So this line, there is power. There's activity or practice. Okay? Really? There's the tail, but there's no head, so it's unprincipled activity. So it doesn't have power.

[28:31]

It's an activity that's sort of off the ground. It's not rooted in the head. It's follow-through without a premise, etc. There are still dependents. There are still dependents. Right. There's still dependents of it. You're practicing, but there's still dependence partly because you're not depending on what you should be depending on. You don't have the principle which you should be depending on. So your activity is still in dependence. So it doesn't have power. Does that make sense? Hmm?

[29:32]

The activity is still independent. Yeah. What would it be depending on if it was activity out of touch with something? What would it be? What would it be depending on? Random... not random it would be depending on what it wasn't depending on it would be depending on what it wasn't working with whatever you don't work with you become dependent on it what's included you're not dependent anymore so principle action doesn't depend on principles is this karnic action action that you think you're doing

[30:33]

Pardon? Having a tail without a head, is that action that you think you did? Having a tail without a head, would you think you did it? You might, or you might think that the activity, you see the activity, but without seeing the principle that's running through the activity, which is We have various names for it, right? Impermanence, insubstantiality, independence. So it wouldn't be that principle involved in your activities. The activity would be What is it? Blah-di-blah signifying nothing.

[31:34]

So the activity, but because it's just activity, it would depend on something else for its power. It would be depending on what it doesn't have. It would be depending on the head. Now, what about when they're in harmony, the head and the tail? Then there's power. When your activity is in harmony with the principle, then there's power. But you don't know what's going on in the room. Okay, it's the sun and steam power, so it's just the right way the power is getting the way you're transmitted if you want self-help.

[32:51]

Yeah. Yeah. So nobody owns it, or anyway, it's just passing through. It's a nugget being passed through. That's how I see it. It's a nugget being passed through? Right. It's a teaching. Something precious that's being passed on. Well, something precious is being passed on, but you know, I think it's more what's being passed on is not the nugget. but what's valuable about the nugget. The Chinese word for principle is not the word for jade, it's the word for the lines that run through jade.

[33:52]

So in this case we're talking about not the jade, but the lines that run through jade, the principle of jade, that what runs through everything is being valued here above some jewel. So it's this thing that runs through everything. Well, it's not just that, it's also that they have a practice to go with the principle. They have both. So if they have the head without the tail, it's not precious. If they have the tail without the head, then they're full, but there's no power.

[34:58]

This is the two together. There's power, but without knowing it. So, but there's some, you know, Without principle, we rely on principle. And without principle, in relying on principle, we kind of want to know that we've got the power. We kind of want to know that we have the power which is coming to us because or in touch with the principle. But if we have the principle without the practice, I mean, if we have the practice, no, I guess, yeah.

[36:13]

Yeah. If you're not in touch with the principle, you don't have power. If you are in touch with the principle, and you're also practicing, and they're in harmony, then you have the power. There's power, but you don't know it. You don't depend on the principle, so you can know it. The principle is running through your practice, so you have the power, but you don't know it. Probably don't know. Yes? Isn't awakening to what's there? Yeah. That would be activity that was in harmony now with the principle.

[37:17]

So that would be enlightened activity. Again, can you substitute the word student? Sure. But this is a student that's in a reproductive relationship with the previous generation. By the way, I'm a grandfather. Thank you. Girl or boy? Well, I count from conception.

[38:21]

Oh. Yes from that. So there's a pregnancy in Australia. So I don't know whether it's a boy or a girl, but it's Jewish. Or maybe they're Jewish. And also Buddhist. Kathleen and then Susan. We said again, please.

[39:43]

It can't be known in the room because the human being known is already gone. But by the time I've known it, it's already transformed and become something else. With these parents, they get all of it. Am I laughing, Angie? I was coughing. But you're laughing. You were anywhere, but now I've turned out anymore. By the way, I don't know if this is true. I just heard this, that babies lap 200 times a day and most adults lap 12. So this class is a chance for you to surpass your daily quota.

[40:49]

Six, seven, eight. I know this is going to be funny, but... It doesn't have to be funny to just get the laugh. Babies don't necessarily see 200 funny things. They'll just have to laugh 200 times, whatever's there. That's nine. Ten. I, like Carol said, the last line is strange. It feels strange to me because it feels... I have this expectation that wrapping up a dualistic thing, the way the wording usually is, it's usually in the first presentation of a thing, it's both is and it isn't, and the second one isn't and it is. You know, they're usually more of a, well, like in the verse, it says, Great Ann, the stone woman's blue stops.

[41:56]

which is a not moving, and then the color of night turns towards him, which is moving, all in the same line, so it sort of cancels itself out in a way. And then the second line, the man, the wooden man's throat turns, which is moving, and the shadow of the moonlight has reached the center, which is stopping. And then in the commentary on that, it says these two are the same, these two last lines are just one line. So the commentary says to me that that last line doesn't say, which is the Senate gained power. I know it seems really dualistic, but they're two separate things. Are you coughing at me?

[43:05]

Yes? I was wondering, because a baby does something, is that necessarily good for adults to do the same thing? As long as you keep your fluids up. He doesn't keep all his fluids at me, though. You're not carrying that bottle around with you anymore? No, I...

[44:13]

There's a baby here at Green Gaunch. No, not his baby. No. At the end of the commentary on the case, the commentator says that he had been using public cases about Zhu Feng to illustrate the case of Zhu Feng. And he was doing that. This is not usually the case, that the commentator uses cases about the person in the case to comment on the case, but that's what happened here. So what's happening in the commentary is that he's using stories about the teacher in the case to comment on the stories and teachers in the case.

[45:18]

He's also using stories about the teacher's teacher to comment on this case. So these different kinds of angles on the case are coming from stories about the same people and the same lineage. And then he says, I'll leave it to Tiantung now, to bring out the remaining sense of the story. So now I'm going to move into a different way of approaching the case through this poem. Round in the compass, square in the ruler. And as you may know from the commentary, this is kind of like a comment coming from Zhuangzi, the Taoist person that they call a Taoist.

[46:26]

So you could also say, in a cup, round in a cup, What does that do for you? You want to plot the principles around? Mm-hmm. Yeah. In a crop, the principle turns around. Well, roundness, okay, within the principle.

[47:31]

It happens more than that. It's not yet. Yeah. The winner quality of the cup is usually round. Roundness is usually an issue with cup scheduling. I mean, either it's round or it's not round. That's sort of one of the main things you're looking at. Like, see that cup's not very round, or that cup's so round and nutty again. Discuss it. But it's an issue with the cup fishing. And the compasses, too, around this is an issue. But there's no other things about compasses besides around this. You can just say one thing. Well, they're cut right because they've got a cut. In China, they are. Ah. I think square probably, you know, they have this ruler maybe for like measuring rice or something.

[48:39]

You could set the ruler down to measure things. Measure square footage. Put down a square to measure a room or something, or land. I'll sell you. I'll sell you. That's the way they often sell things underneath the square of things, right? You find this beneath the square from whatever type of thing underneath, right? In both phases, there's a dimension not talking about. But even if we put in the depth, then that's what it would be.

[49:40]

So we could say spirit in a, what do you call it, in a, um, uh, spherical, in, in, uh, Here we go in the pool. Parallel pipe bed in a cracker jack box. Parallel pipe bed in a cracker jack box. So we're going to round that dip. Water is still about an acre. Yeah. And we could also add in other dimensions. We can add in time, too.

[50:44]

But the point is, anyway, whatever you add in, it's coming in that form without appearance. Something's coming in there. And it's this way in that arena. It's that way in this arena. Whatever you set, whatever dial you turn into, it would be that. And it can be that because that's the kind of principle it is. This particular principle. This head is that kind of thing. Matter of fact, this head is the kind of thing that you can call it a head. And it doesn't say, well, some people might say that, but the principle doesn't complain. Yes, I'm trying to buy it too.

[51:47]

Pardon? It's round. It's round. It's not meant to be a position. I have to assume that it's round. Say it's round. I don't think you mentioned that it's not meant to work. I'm not following what you're saying, because this isn't saying a cup's round. This is saying, in a cup it's round. We're not saying a cup is round. It's necessary that takes you away from what it is. It's a kind principle for which something else. Well, just a second now. You have something, can you define a principle of it, can you say?

[52:52]

No, this is the other way around. This is a principle. And we're talking about how it appears. We're not talking about... We're saying round in a container. In other words, it is round. Something is round in the container. In other words, it's not naturally round. It's just that in a compass, it becomes round. Or in a cup, it becomes round. To take away the cup, it's not round anymore. But when you've got a cup, it's round. You can have round without anything. You could have round without anything? Yeah, but that would be the principle of roundness, I guess, huh? Are you saying that the only round that I could have without anything would be the principle of round?

[53:56]

Otherwise, I don't know how I'd have round without anything. I don't see it. Do you see it? I don't see round without anything, but I can have a principle of round, but that's not the principle we have here. The principle of round doesn't need practice. Yes? I think what's important about this is not that it's descriptive round, but it points to the principle in that in the compass, the roundness is the basis of function, the compass. And the ruler, the squareness of the basis of function, as a ruler, this is the functional principle as it appears in the context that emerges as round, or manifests as round, and the ruler manifests as square. And that is what it is to be the context of.

[54:59]

That's what it is to be the ruler. Okay. Used. So, Matt, what they said, the inherent in cop, that when we're talking about that, the inherent in cop, that's inherent in the function of a ruler's screen. Well, when you say inherent, you've got to be careful around here. I know it's not, but I just can't address what it is that I need. How about characteristic of a cup is realness?

[55:59]

But there are square compasses, and not square compasses. There are square compasses also. But you could have a circular thing inside of a square compass. You could have a square because the function of the compass is rotating. Right, but a square can rotate. What? A square can rotate. But the rotation is... I mean, the squareness is no principle. No, but it's the... It is the round movement. There is no going around. It's the going around, but it doesn't have to be square to go around to be going to go around. You're talking about the actual compass itself. Jeez. Yes. You could have the shape of the compass going around.

[56:59]

Going around doesn't have to be around, right? But going around. It's [...] going around. But the compass could be square. As long as it's in a compass. It's right. It has to be a square in the circle. No, it could be a square. It could be a square that goes around it. Yes, you could. No, you could have a square that rotates, that goes around. And it calibrates. Like this. This could pivot like that.

[58:01]

So it would still go around, but the thing that goes around could be a square. The pendulum has to go around. The pendulum has to go around. The needle. The needle has to go out. It's not the outer format. It's the needle. It's the needle. Well, the needle could be this thing right here, this thing right here. It could go like that, right? Could be a needle going like that, right? That would be a discontinuity. Why would it be a discontinuity? No, it's Jacinta. Yes, Mark? Can I do a penny in some of your cup? Yes.

[59:02]

A penny. Okay, so... use it use it it acts used it acts left it's concealed this is a Confucian statement apparently that seems kind of straightforward use it used it acts left it's concealed Is that as simple as it seems? Now the next ones are more subtle, I think.

[60:08]

Stationary, birds resting in reeds. And again, the comment there is, I think almost, I didn't look up the characters, but it's almost the same thing that's at the beginning of case 32, which says, you know, yeah the weary fish rests in the shoals the slow bird or the dull bird dwells in the reeds but you know and uh well first it says that you know the dragons uh home is the ocean the condor or the garuda or something home is in the sky and then these big birds and this and the dragons they they do this fabulous stuff but what about the exhausted fish in the shoals and the whole bird in the reeds. And it says, is there any way to compare? So given that echo, this is kind of subtle.

[61:13]

Because here it says, it's kind of like, you know, it says, in the start of progressive practices, there are myriad roads. So in the context of progressive practices, there are myriad roads. The weary fish rests in the shoals. The slow bird dwells in the reeds. These two do not know the great ocean or the forest. People proceeding on petty ways are the same. So... It's kind of a dangerous line here. Well, you know, this business about the stationary bird resting in the reeds is referring to this. Looking at things in a progressive way, there seems to be like this, kind of like a petty approach and a great approach, you know?

[62:29]

So what's that about, the petty approach and great approach? Seems kind of X-ish, you know? Exist. Something-ist, you know what I mean? Oh, yeah. Enlightenedist, adeptist, separatist, what's the other one? Elitist. No, I'm just saying this looks kind of dangerous, this point. So what are they actually talking about? Is that what they're talking about? And then the next one, look at the next one, too. It's also kind of interesting. Going back and forth, the ram is caught in the fence. And that's referring to, it says in the commentary, that Gijing, the 34th hexagram, it's about great power.

[63:39]

Yeah, great power, great vitality. I guess it's thunder above and heaven below, and the top line is a negative line, and the interpretation is about the ram, actually it's a sheep with horns. sometimes known as a ram, who's got the head stuck in a fence and going back and forth, can't go forward and can't go backward. And it says, you know, that there's no benefit and hardship is auspicious. What's going on here? Yeah. It sounds like principle without practice. Like both of them. So what about hardship is auspicious? Is that the line here?

[64:52]

Yes? Yeah, the hardship is referring to the Uchi. Reading, I remember it. Basically, the hardship is the hardship of compliance, of the vitality being held. Yes. Because in both those pieces, So what's Tiantung trying to tell us about this case here? They're bringing the image of the birds and the birds stuck in the reeds. fishing in the shoals and rams stuck in the fence. What's he trying to tell us here?

[65:57]

Yeah. Perhaps we're trying to talk about people who either do it just the head or just the tail, not really balance the two. Yeah, but But we already knew that from before, right? I mean, what's he bringing out here? I mean, let's give him the credit first. He said he's doing something more than we have before. I mean, the commentator has already kind of told us about that, and the case has told us about that, too. Maybe he's just repeating it, and maybe this isn't a very good verse, so he's not bringing out more details, but I was looking for something new here, and So, maybe that's it. Yes? Well, if you're making a decision between head and tail there, and being stuck with that, just being stuck in duality, or by making that decision?

[67:04]

Yeah, maybe, yeah. Mm-hmm. That's good. Maybe he's pointing to being stuck in the duality of head and tail. And maybe we are stuck in the duality of head and tail. And maybe we can work with that problem we had with that duality. Yes? I would say that that would be, you know, keep me talking to different types of practices. If you're practicing sort of in hell mode, doing all this activity, you would think if your deep discipline, your hard work was auspicious, but you're more like ran out in the fence from nowhere, and if you're sort of in the head mode, you might have these sort of, you know, if you were thinking, you know, focusing more on the foot, seeing them, the stillness of reality, you know, it would be like a still bird, but you would still have these visions of the practice, and that would be your evolution of the practice.

[68:33]

Well, that's good, and that kind of connects with what she's saying, too, because you drew out, I think, a good thing about those images, but then there's also the issue that those are like two different modes, and that's kind of a problem, too. Like there's this problem of being in the printable, and being stuck in the principle with these wonderful images of ultimate reality. That's one problem. Then there's the problem of being in the practice where you're not getting anywhere because you don't have principle. Then there's the problem of these being two different things. And they're like that we really think they're different. We got problems. Which also takes us back again to those two images. So we, yeah, we have all these multiple problems. This is going to be really difficult.

[69:35]

Yes. But the cross will be over soon, don't worry. Yes. Yes. Speak. Me. No, him. You. I can speak. Both of you. So, but in station, for me, I think just staying with what's already known, staying with what you think you already know, concepts, study principles, Agree. Kind of rest in that. Agree. Or is blank, going back and forth and struggling to put action to a principle so that neither is really being alive with what is, as if the struggle or the So there's non-diligence in staying comfortable and resting.

[70:50]

Could be. Yeah, there could be. And there also could be non-diligence in fighting the defense. That's not diligence. That's just freaking out. Diligence, by the way, you know, has the root of love. Lovingly attending to it is diligence. Diligence isn't just banging your head against the wall. That's activity, but what is the principle of banging your head against the wall? It's up to the principle of hurting your head. So, Mark? Yes, she's in the sun. That's hurt. Right. Those two are easier for me than for me. Because of the burden of fish, it seems to me that they're not realizing that. But the ram's fine. Because I can see a ram doing the best thing.

[71:52]

Yeah. Right. Well, as he said, the ram might be just this activity, the tail without the head, just unprincipled activity, just impulsive activity, just trying to be, you know, powerful or something. The other two, you might be resting, you know, in understanding that really everything is insubstantial and impermanent, so just disappear, you know, just be totally cool. But to rest there is no good. We've got to practice with that wonderful principle. You've got to practice being cool. You've got to get out there and be cool. Yes, but if you try, you need to practice. If you try to be cool, you need to be cool. Well, if you're being cool, understanding the emptiness of being cool, you have a chance.

[72:57]

The ramp is easy to meet. It's actually like working with Chevron with people like this all day long. And very vicious. There are people who are just blissing out on that. There's people like that who should have around too probably. But we'll try to hide it. Alright. Uh, Liz? The birds should do something that's part of what they need. If the bird is raffling because the bird needs to be raffling while it's botanical. Right, but it doesn't just say bird, it says dull bird.

[74:12]

And it doesn't just say fish, it says weary fish. So I think it's not just a general bird or fish doing their thing. It's not the fish swimming like a bish. And a bird flying like a bird. Yeah, so it's really good stuff. This reminds me of Bill Hain, where he says, the bird flies in the air, and a man of hawthard flies the other sauce's element. Well, Mike was a bitch. So to me, put the springs up and say that they do not know the great ocean in the forks. They need to totally be themselves and remain in their element, but they're still seeking effort to realize itself. That there's a whole ocean that this bitch is not

[75:14]

It's not. We don't realize it. And it's a force. It's hard. It's not going to allow you guys. It's kind of reluctance if you're connecting to a pretty practice. There's some kind of reminder of urge here. That kind of practice, that getting out of pretty practice, you can still hear it by going with you yourself. It's something you can't need for your therapy. It's part of your element, but you still, especially if there's an effort to be applied to not get stuck and want to get some chills. There's quite a bit more in this verse. But there's just a few minutes before 9. So, I guess we can... If you want to, you can start studying K67. But we can spend a little bit more time in our next meeting.

[76:18]

finishing the verse, because we're not going to finish tonight, I don't think. But let's continue. See how much further we get. The next line is kind of interesting, too. Eating other people's food, sleeping in one's own bed. Pardon? That's what you do today? Yeah, Tuesday. So what's that got to do with the case? Oh, because you practice in Zen Zen. You don't practice at all? What? No, you really practice. Do you really practice? And is your practice eating other people's food and going to bed on Tuesdays? And going to bed at your own bed, too.

[77:22]

Right. That's your practice. Right. But what about the people? Dave, did you eat at Zen Center today? No. So what's his practice? Not so good, huh? Did you eat your own food for dinner? You had no dinner? No dinner. What? What? So anyway, this, we've got one person here. Yes? Yeah, right. Eating public food. Eating public food and sleeping in your own bed. But what's that about? Eating public food and sleeping in your own bed rather than a public bed. I don't know. What's this about? Why is this public food consumption and sleeping in your own bed?

[78:24]

What's the point here? Besides that Kara did that. So is that it? Being in the world. Huh? Being in the world. Being in the world. Interdependency karma. I've sleeping with them that... Oh, I see. Especially if there's somebody in the bed there with you. Who thinks that they can be there because of some reason, rather. It's more effort than the bad guys. That's a laugh. Someone prepared me. Someone else passed away from me.

[79:26]

Yeah, very good. Your practice is to eat public food and sleep in your own bed, right? Tuesdays. Tuesdays. What's this business about eating other people's food with a cool mouth? What's that about? Yes? I think it has to do with receiving out and being worthy of receiving out. And if a monk isn't just worthy of the practice of receiving the offering to a public offer, then then the mother can expect to be able [...] to

[80:44]

And maybe also, you know, being cool when you ask for the food, too. Not to be too clever. What did you say? Attached. Attached. Attached might lead you to be unhumble and very clever in acquiring your food. Chinese were cool. I don't know what the character is, in this case. This is also, to me it has to do with reading scriptures, eating other people's food, and whether or not, I mean, that somehow has to do with activity of the head and sort of just taking in the scriptures without really being connected to the scriptures. And doing that in a way that is unattached is hard to find. The reliance on the scriptures is often what gets one stuck and wearies one.

[81:49]

And then sleeping in your own bed is the other side of it, which is relying only on your own experience or your own, you're setting up standards on your own, maybe, and getting comfortable in the familiarity of your own interpretations, both of which are leaky. This particular case, I had a lot of trouble not pursuing the words. In this case, I kept wanting to pursue the words and get a hold of the words, more so than a lot of other cases, especially the first part. It seemed very conducive or almost seductive.

[82:52]

in encouraging one to pursue them and try to get them. You know what I mean? The way it's set up. And so I had to keep reminding myself of Gogan's expression of don't give up the practice of pursuing words and chasing after phrases and practice the backwards step. I had to keep turning myself around turning the light around while I was studying this without just closing the book. So how to continue studying was difficult without pursuing the text in the first part. The verse was not so difficult. It wasn't as hard. Yes? The text actually says it was hot. Well, in a sense, to play on what I was just saying, the commentary of this case was kind of hot.

[84:11]

It's hard for me to keep cool while I was reading the commentary. a tempting, tempting dish this week. Let me, uh, forget it, I said very soon, wasn't that such a, pardon? Uh, eating some, eating numerous food? Yes, it's, uh, it seems to me like a seamless activity that you are not doing anything, it's a clap or a guffer, there's no, there's no order. other people there in the universe. Sleeping in your own bed is distinct and visual. And you do. Well, along this line, I thought about eating other people's food is the entire universe is eating all the time. Everything that comes at you is food. And sort of being able to eat through the cold mouth and maybe sleeping in your bed is not being able to stay at home. Being able to stay with yourself while all this sort of food is coming out here. So that's it. or eating other people's food in bed.

[85:14]

There's also a little diphasana and shamatha in here too, in terms of eating is more of a diphasana activity and lying in one's bed is more shamatha. Okay, good. So the last part of the verse will finish next week, and you can start reading Case 67, which is a quote, by the way, if you want to do any research. It's a quote from the 26th chapter of the Aptamsaka Sutras. It's a chapter on the manifestation of the Tathagata. And this quote in this case is the most famous part of that chapter.

[86:22]

It's probably the most famous line from the entire sutra, is this quote here. Which chapter did you take? I think it's chapter 6 in Thomas Cleary's translation. Anyway, the chapter is called The Manifestation of the Tathagata. And this quote is the most famous part of that most famous chapter. So this next case is looking at something which is like... where the Zen teacher is pulling in a very famous scriptural passage as a case. It's kind of a little bit different quality phenomenon because usually the Zen teachers are not using the scriptures, right? We have a transmission outside the scriptures.

[87:25]

which is this interaction, this face-to-face transmission between student and teacher. Whereas now here, the Zen teacher is pulling in a very, not just a scripture passage, but a very famous one. So it's kind of an interesting non-Zen case. Like this? Could anybody look out? Yeah. I didn't write them down, but I got their imprinted. May I have every attention

[88:20]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_76.61