So what's this class about? Language. So this is a class about language. Foreign languages. What about language? In what way is it a class about language? Common sense. What about common sense? It's a class about developing a language of common sense. Yes? It's a class about seeking a way free language to communicate Dharma and truth.

[01:04]

It's a class about the Shoyaroku, which is a book. It's a class about transcending language. It's a class about transcending language. And why... No, why? What's the problem with language that requires one to transcend it? You can't really touch it, language. You can't really touch it, language? You can't really touch it, or I can't really touch us with language. I can only try. That's untrue.

[02:13]

Touchy with the sound. That's touching, right? There's a problem. Language points. Language points. What about pointing? Pointing is a no-no. It's an inevitable no-no, the point of the language. Language is an inevitable no-no.

[03:16]

Why is language a no-no? How is language a no-no? In the sense that language, we use language to try and express life. And it's a no-no, I guess, if we believe that cleaners stick to language for life. It's a no-no if you mistake the language for the life. But if you don't mistake the language for the life, is that language a no-no? Just inevitable. Just inevitable. So living beings, human beings express, living human beings express language, express themselves through language, and usually they confuse with their expression.

[04:18]

They forget that this is an expression of life, and therefore language becomes a kind of enchantment. People become enchanted, or they come under the spell of language. They become... Yeah, one point. Yes. Well, I think that, you know, I'm sorry to harp on dialectic things, but it's more than an expression, it's a creation as well, because language brings us as well as us makes a language. It's more than an expression, it's also a creation? Yes, it creates our world, not just expresses it, because we think within our language. Yeah. Yes. Language creates our world. As a matter of fact, the world is created by what?

[05:25]

What creates the world? Well, the world is created by action. Yeah, karma. And action has three kinds. Body, speech, and mind. But all three of those are actually language for us. Not everything is language, but action is language. So we have a story we're talking about. Excuse me. Yes. It seems like almost the universe is true, that everything except action is language.

[06:29]

Everything except language. Everything except language is action. Everything except action is language. It almost seems that action would be the only thing I'll take that. Action speaks louder words. Proceed actioning. I don't want to suggest that I disagree with either premise that karma is action, in some sense action, or that karma creates the world.

[07:37]

But it seems almost as though there's not pure identity between karma and action, almost that karma is a story of action. I'm equating them, though. Karma means action. It's a translation of karma as action. I understand that. I understand that that's true in some sense. I was trying to find the sense in which action and language meet. And it's almost that karma is the medium of action. Karma is what? Karma is the medium of action and language. Karma is the story of action. Sometimes they say that speech, that type of action which is called speech, is action, sort of, is the own being of action.

[08:53]

That among the three types of of action, action with posture, action with voice, and action with thought, is speech. That is the kind of the essence or the, or the own being of action. Speech is the type of action that's most like action. Say that. Is that what you're saying? You missed a good chance. I broke into a sweat just as soon as you said, the own being of action, right there. What? You broke into a sweat? Yes, as soon as you said, the own being of action, I was wondering who was saying such things. Vassil Bond. Our sponsor.

[10:07]

The meeting of action and language. Karma is the meeting of action and language. Yeah, well, that logic, what you said is a logical statement, but I don't know what logic that is. That's logic which says A is the meeting of A and speech. That's what you just said. That's what I mean. But with all due respect for Vasubandhu and the nature of... You don't have to bring Vasubandhu into it yet. You just said karma is the meeting of karma and speech. That's what you just said. Karma and action are exactly the same word. So action is the meaning of action in speech, that's what you're saying, right? Do you want to say that? He doesn't agree with the translation.

[11:14]

It doesn't make sense in that form. You can take your choice, you can either say karma, is the... did you say interaction? Or interface? Karma is the meeting of karma and speech. You can say that. And you can also say action is the meeting of action and speech. And you can also say action is the meeting of speech and karma. And you can also say karma is the meeting of action and speech. All those are the same statement. Okay? So, is it true? Do you mean any of those? I just mean one of them. Because if you mean one, you mean all of them. Well, I would say that those statements all bear a close resemblance, but they're not identical statements. They're very similar statements. What's the difference between them, besides the one using Sanskrit and English and some of them together? What's the difference?

[12:17]

Well, if I allow that that's the only difference, can we say that that's a difference? Yeah. There is some difference between them. They're not identical. They're very similar, but not identical. So what is the point of the difference that you're trying to bring up? Well, the point of the difference is the difference in the context of the use of words, the full meaning of the words described. It's described in the context of the discourse, its use of words. for the full range of understanding. And normally, as a matter of convention, when we consider conventionally what action is, we don't normally consider it in the same context as the consideration of a word like karma. When we discuss karma, then the context of our discussion changes. And that's true of my history of thought, although it might not have been true of Vasubandhi.

[13:21]

So what's your point? So my point is that when I talk about karma as opposed to action, when I use the word action, then I might be pointing directly to acting. And when I use the term karma, than I understand acting in the context of cause and effect. It's just a question of what I'm looking at. And if we understand acting on its own, we understand acting immediately without that which comes before and that which comes after, but just acting in the moment. then that's a little bit different from understanding acting in the realm of cause and effect. As soon as we start understanding acting in the realm of cause and effect, then we introduce the form and content of language into our consideration or into our experience.

[14:28]

And that was why I made the distinction between karma and action. The immediacy of action as opposed to the consideration of actions. So the consideration of actions is of the immediacy of acting and language. Are you proposing that action is immediate? rather than mediated by concepts? Yeah. Where'd you get that? It just came up like that. No, but is that all just an idea? Do you have some experience of that?

[15:30]

I have some experience. What experience do you have of it? Is it something you know about? It depends on which way the know about was pointed. It's something that I know about in the realm of knowing, but it isn't something that I know about in my action. But I have experienced an action that arises independently of concept. And independently of... How do you experience... How is that experienced? Action that arises independent of conception? It's experienced by the observation of action and saying... and having the question arise afterward.

[16:42]

Where did that... Could you say it again? You have an experience? I have an experience of having acted. And is that experience a conceptual experience? An experience of having acted is a conceptual experience. Pardon? The experience of having acted is a conceptual experience. Okay. So what... The action, the arising of action was not conceptual. Where did you get that from now? Where does that knowledge or that insight or whatever, where does that come from? What is it based on? It has no basis. It's just a great gift. I don't know who you give it to. I didn't ask you that. I said, what is a basis? And you said, no basis. So you have an epistemology that's not based on anything.

[17:46]

So what you're saying is that your experience is based on that. Is that your epistemology? My knowledge has a basis, but there's no apparent basis in my actions. I propose to you that action is always mediated by language, and that action only occurs in the realm of conception. It does not occur in direct experience. I propose that to you. And if you want to say that it occurs in the realm of direct experience, then I'd like to tell me how you know about direct experience, since nobody else knows about direct experience, because direct experience is not known. So what are you going to do? How do you propose to know about something that's not in the realm of knowledge?

[18:49]

There may be a difference in talking about the basis of something, knowing of it, Yeah, there is a difference between the basis of something and the knowing of it, but I'm asking you, what is the basis of what you say you know? I'm asking you, what is the basis of it? I'm asking a Christianological question, and I'd like to know what your technology is. If you don't have one, okay, but I think you do have one. So far, the one you're proposing is that your knowledge is based on nothing. Do you want to stand by what you just said? Is that your epistemology? No, I would say that knowledge is based on language. I think that would be truer.

[20:09]

But what the connection between my knowledge, between my consciousness and my action is, is not apparent. The connection between... The connection between what and what is not apparent? Between my consciousness and action. Is not apparent? It is not apparent. I would suggest to you that action is simply the appearance of consciousness, that that's what action is. That's exactly what action is, is the way a consciousness appears. And consciousness appears as though there were a story there, and that story is action. What about deep faith in cause and effect?

[21:17]

Does that necessarily appear, or is there a part of that that just doesn't appear? I think that's what Stuart's talking about. I think he's talking about... I think his so-called epistemology is his deep faith in cause and effect. He's trying to explain to you that he has this faith. I'm not speaking for Stuart, but this is what I hear him saying. That he has a deep faith in causation? In cause and effect, right. And that... And that he's trying to tell you about it. And I don't agree with his language. I think karma is action. But I think he's trying to tell you that he has faith in events having taken place that seem to have no beginning or end. They just take place. His actions just seem to take place. Leaping out of faith. I would call it something else. You'd call... You'd call... These type of feelings that I hear Stuart trying to explain to you.

[22:26]

I wouldn't use his language. I'd use a different language. What language would you use? I'd say that... when miraculous events occur in my mind, that this is something that's coming out of a deep faith, and things that are inexplicable to me. Sometimes, although I want to know... You think that what's coming out of deep faith, miraculous events are coming out of deep faith? I think things that appear to me in hindsight to have been miraculous events. Yes. How about ordinary events? Same thing. Okay. Same thing. Are you saying they come out of deep faith and cause and effect? I think so. I think ones that seem to come from the unconscious. Are they coming out of deep faith and cause and effect or are they coming out of cause and effect? Well, they're coming out of cause and effect and I don't have to know about them because of my faith and cause and effect. Do you have deep faith in cause and effect? Yes. That tells you you don't have to know about something? Tells me that if I don't understand it, it's okay.

[23:28]

That's what deep faith in cause and effect is? It's good enough for me tonight. And hopefully in a few years if we keep having this conversation, more will be revealed. How did you get deep faith in cause and effect to say it's okay? No one else was around. So what does it say now? What does deep faith and cause and effect say now? That whatever you throw at me is okay. And that I don't mind being embarrassed about the fact that there are things in my life that I can't explain to you. I'd like to tell you all my secrets, but once you told me there are secrets that only I can know. So there's a language barrier. I can't tell you these secrets. You know, I really want to.

[24:29]

Where's the barrier? What's the barrier? Don't know. You didn't tell me what the barrier was. You just said that there are secrets that... You said there's a language barrier. Why did you say that? Because I can feel that there are things that I want to tell you that I can't tell you. That I know, that when I try to use words to explain things to you over and over again, whether it be here or in Dokusan or on the lawn, and you don't understand. what I'm feeling. Just like Stuart. Just like Stuart. Exactly. That's what I feel. that he was trying to tell you he loved you in a certain way and that you wanted to hear it in a different way because I wanted to teach him something, right? But he wanted to teach you something so you ended up teaching each other something and that's fine and that's why I have deep faith in that process and maybe that's part of the cause and effect. This is an intimate practice.

[25:33]

It's sometimes so intimate. It's just not. The transmission is non-verbal. But it's still through action, I believe. It's a matter of epistemology. Even scripture. The relationship between consciousness and action that you give it doesn't explain the mechanism of the interaction between consciousness and action. It's really a description of the ontological status of action and consciousness.

[26:39]

What was that for? I don't understand. Anthology is a discussion of the nature of being, the status of being. epistemology is a discussion of the means of knowledge, the basis of knowledge. So Rhett was asking me about the epistemological mechanism, the means by which I could cognize that which was not inside language. And I feel rather stumped. I don't have an explanation for that. But I was making the point that the description of circumstances, that what was offered was not really an epistemological explanation, but an ontological statement about the status of knowledge, consciousness, and action, and it no more explained epistemology, the basis of knowledge, or the mechanism of knowledge, than did my position.

[27:43]

No, I think epistemology is more how you see the world. How you see it. Usually, how you see it as a matter is described as cosmology. Systemology is usually used to better make the basis. Stop. Language is about power, right? It seems to me that what Stuart was saying, what I heard him saying was that there was something that we experience that is beyond or outside of, or something outside of the realm of language. And what I heard Brett saying is that that's not true, that everything we experience is in the realm of language because that's what experience is. No, no, I didn't say that. That's what I heard. Yeah. Not everything that we experience is language. We have most of our experience is non-verbal and immediate.

[28:50]

But the experience that we know about is basically verbal, it's conceptual and verbal. Do we have experience we don't know about? We have most of our experience we do not know about. by ordinary objective knowledge. We don't know about most of what's happening in our direct experience. But when we talk about our experience, we have to be talking about our knowledge. No, we can talk about our experience we don't know about. Just like I just now, I'm talking about experience, I'm saying that I have experience that I don't know about, and I don't know that I have that experience. And yet, I might be certain that I have that experience and have no doubt that I have that experience, but I don't have any knowledge basis for that statement. So is that deep faith and cause and effect? It's a subset of deep faith and cause and effect. It's actually not actually faith and cause and effect.

[29:56]

Faith and cause and effect is the fact that the people are staying in the room here. Okay. Faith in cause and effect is that all this babble does not bother anybody. Or it's that part of you that's not bothered by all this babble. That's deep faith in cause and effect. If I were to leave, I don't have deep faith in cause and effect. Well, it depends on why you leave. I mean, if you left as a celebration of deep faith and cause and effect, then it would be all the more of a party for you. You can also stay. But under these circumstances, most people staying, a lot of people staying anyway, had to do with deep faith and cause and effect. To sit still, basically, is deep faith in cause and effect.

[31:05]

Same thing. Sitting still is deep faith in cause and effect. Because deep faith in cause and effect is simply to accord with cause and effect, which means you're sitting still. Okay? Okay? And you may say, well, I didn't leave the room because I didn't want to, you know, I thought I'd create a ruckus or something. Well, somebody thinks that, you know, but somebody else didn't move. And that one is deep faith and cause and effect. It's not that one has deep faith and cause and effect. That one is deep faith and cause and effect. See the difference? And there is such a one for all, you know, there is such a one. And you might say at this point, I rest my case, I rest my koan.

[32:10]

You were saying that we're not aware of most of our experiences, and I kind of feel that also... I shouldn't say we're not aware of it, because experience is awareness. It's just that you don't have objective knowledge. of most of your experience. Right. I think that I understand, but I'm not sure. Let me give you an example of what I think... Let's say, it's like we filter out most of our experience. No, that's not what I mean. That happens too. Okay, then I have to... We filter out a lot of what happens. But, for example, you take in lots of sense data directly. I mean, your body, and you're actually conscious of a lot of sensory information, which you do not ever know about consciously. But you actually, you are consciously responding and taking in lots of direct sensory data. And you're responding consciously to it.

[33:11]

But you don't, it doesn't get converted, it doesn't, it isn't known at that level. When it first comes in, it's not known. Then later it's converted into a concept and then you know it. So when you see blue or green and you know it, at that time you're not seeing blue and green, you're seeing a concept of blue and green. Seeing the word blue and green. But there is a direct experience of the sensory work of the physical world which causes that conceptual experience. And there's a lot of them that we don't ever convert to concepts. I was wondering which case we're studying tonight. Nine. Case nine? And is this conversation... I've been sometimes feeling a little... I had enough faith that I didn't want to leave, but that this conversation was a detour from nine. Like maybe we're getting to nine, but we're sort of on a scenic detour. But is in fact this a discussion of the essence of what case nine is about?

[34:12]

Thank you. You're welcome. Sounds a lot like Case 10, too. Yeah, it's a lot like Case 10. Well, let's look, if you want to recite Case 9, just so you should. Would you like to? Please listen while he recites the ninth case, and you'll understand. Okay. Just in case. Yes, please. One day at Nanquan's, the eastern and western halls, Nanquan's, the eastern and western halls were arguing over a cat. When Nanquan saw this, he took and held it up and said, if you can speak, I won't cut it. The group had no reply. Nanquan then cut the cat in two. Nanshwan also brought up the foregoing incident to Zhaozhou and asked him. Zhaozhou immediately took off his sandals, put them on his head, and left. Nanshwan said, if you'd been here, you could have saved the cat. So here we are back at that place.

[35:30]

And we've lived a week since we talked about it last time. Is there anything more about this case you'd like to discuss? Any more questions about it? I had a question, but I wasn't here last week. Yes. And this has been covered through the Senate I think that this case, the commentary was so separate often from the case. Yeah. And I had a question about that. In what way did you feel the commentary was separate from the case? Well, my only basis of comparison was the case A, where the commentary seemed to be directly related. Well, maybe you could bring up something in the commentary that you feel is not related, and then we could talk about that.

[36:38]

Do you have something in mind? Well, you can take a few minutes. What would you have done to save the cat? I never would have got in that monastery. Maybe you're in the monastery. You're in that monastery. Now I am. So what am I going to do now? Yeah, we are. I guess the sharpest difference, I thought, was in the added saying at the end. The added sayings. The added sayings are very abrupt and they're not really related at all the way the ordinary commentary is related.

[37:42]

They're not meant as expressions, I mean as explanations at all. Yeah, well, that's okay, but oftentimes the added sayings are these abrupt comments that emerge in between the lines. Okay. They often seem, they're so abrupt that unless you were there at the time, they oftentimes, you have trouble seeing where they're coming from. But they're presented in a whole. Mm-hmm. They are presented together. Right. Well, I'm not saying they aren't connected. I'm just saying that it's oftentimes hard to see the connection. And what you need to do, and sort of, I think what I recommend in order to see the connection is if you read a line and then you express something very quickly, okay, after you read the line.

[38:43]

And you do that for a while. And then you read what the guy said. You understand better. And you'll notice, perhaps, that what you say is quite surprising and apparently often unrelated by ordinary logic to what the line said. So maybe K-State was somewhat misleading if you sort of had an understanding right off of some relationship. But often it's not that way. You took what Stuart was saying and said what you're saying is like A equals A plus B. Yes. Is the logic you're placing on the logic that you're describing a certain kind of way? The basic logic here is, I would say, one possibility anyway.

[39:56]

Try this one out. The fact that A is A is the reason why A is not A. Or because, precisely because A is A, A is not A. That's one logic which could be the logic of this story. And if you accept that logic, then I would say to you, what will you do to save the cat? Using that logic. if you want to use that logic. If you don't want to use that logic, fine, and you can say, why not, and just check out of that one and present another logic that you think is applicable here. Does A represent something in the case?

[40:57]

Well, for example, the very fact that killing is killing is because killing is killing, killing is not killing. the very fact of the cat being killed is why the cat was not killed. You can also say, the fact that the cat was not killed is why the cat was killed. You can do this on various points in this story. But then, if you say so, if you want to use that logic, then I would say, What will you do now to save the cats, the various cats that are endangered in this world? What will you do? How will you act? Using that logic, not using, or using that logic, or again, if you want to use another logic, tell us the logic you're going to do and tell us what you'll do according to that logic.

[42:02]

The basic logic here again is because the fact that A is A the fact that something is itself is why the thing isn't itself. And this logic is a logic by which things are liberated from themselves by the very fact that they're themselves. It's a logic of liberation. Now how will you use that in the case of this story? How will you use that case to free yourself from yourself because you are yourself? Yes? Is that logic, form is emptiness because form is form? The very fact that form is form is why, is how form is empty. Yes, exactly the same. Form is empty, things are empty because of the way that they're themselves. So if you have a situation where you have this cat being held up and it's in danger, if you speak, now, how would you use that logic to save the cat?

[43:33]

Now, it sounds like he says all you've got to do is say anything and we'll save the cat. Just speak. All you have to do is speak and the cat will be saved. But, again, in this case, the people couldn't say a thing. Why couldn't they say a thing? Because they were stuck and they couldn't apply the logic of because of what they thought of saying, they're actually not saying what they're saying. Therefore, they can say something. That's what makes it able for you to speak. That's what makes it able for you to act because the very fact of the act you're going to make being that is why it's not that. So you don't need to be inhibited. Yes. I keep thinking of terms, relative and absolute, this logic I hear you explain is now, and throughout this case. Yes. And I'm wondering, does that plug into that logic? Relative and absolute? Yeah. We could be using language in a relative way, or using it in an absolute way, or using language to talk about language.

[44:42]

I think it would be better to postpone that consideration at the present time, if you can stand it. Can you overload the circuit here if we do that? Yes? I became interested in the commentary, the part of the commentary about the goddess, I'm not sure how it's pronounced, Geo... G-U. G-O-U. G-O-U. G-O-U. Yeah. How was that? G-U-O. G-O-U. G-O-U. G-O-U. Yeah. The sky got ripped apart by this army getting wiped out. Well, it also sounded kind of familiar to me.

[45:46]

I remember that I had to come out and replace translations of historical Chinese, you know, not historical to the mythological, a lot of them, the kings of China. And I went back and looked for it and read the poem. I thought that maybe they had some connection with Georgia. I couldn't forget. Yes, this goddess took these five colored stones, right, and smelted them, and that's what mended the sky, and that's what Jiaojiao did. He somehow took these five colored stones, smelted them, and healed the wounded sky. And what was the sky wounded by?

[46:48]

People not being able to speak. Stuart, I wish you were sitting on this side of the chair, Stuart. I wish you were sitting on this side of the chair. It's kind of funny I can't see you over there. Do you mind coming up to this seat right here? I would just like to settle this. It's such a simple koan, such a hard koan, such a famous koan. I'd like to settle it in the next 40 minutes so you all can take it home with you and live happily ever after. Okay.

[47:55]

Yes? I got the sense that last week something had been settled. And that this is sort of like more as like going on right now. I feel the same way about what was going on earlier is that I've been trying to understand what a colon class is about. I asked you about it, and I got a sort of usable explanation of what the class was about, but it doesn't really seem to be working. which is that it's to immerse ourselves in language so that we can free ourselves for when we start to understand something. But what I see happening or feel happening is that we get caught up in this language and we start, you know, just going off into outer space. And I don't see more usable knowledge being transferred to us as students through the use of this language. I think that what Bill commented on earlier was a moment when all of a sudden everything became real, and it stopped being out there in this ozone of language, and it brought it right down to the personal, right down to what went on here between us and this real living people.

[49:10]

And then Zynga went away. So part of me wants to know, how does the Cohen class work that we actually break that flying off into space with language, because more often than not, I see the language or the confusion of language winning in this class. Well, what do you think was the score, do you think? That was pretty good. Last week, I felt like we got some usable information as students. When the woman who was sitting roughly right here said that it's about doing anything.

[50:14]

It's about agreeing to act. And everything else that we've added, there's all this slicing and dicing of words or thoughts or whatever, and it doesn't seem to be getting any closer to that essence. It's there. And have any of the words tonight reached anybody anymore than what she said? Yes. I have another question. Is this the first class that you've seen that people won't often outer space with language? No. I've seen that a lot. Are you observing it, speaking up about it now? Yeah. So it's useful? Well, it's useful because it's giving me a forum to talk about language right now, which was the concept that Rev gave me about the call-on class. But I don't feel like it happens very often where we stop and agree to not get caught up in it.

[51:15]

That's my personal feeling. I feel many times that this class feels like the outside world, where all of a sudden I'm being swept up with what's going on and it's more important that I get it right or that I understand something and that I miss what's really going on, that I lose my awareness through the language. So I'm curious as to what it is that catches people, what it is that performs that transcendent act where we rise above the language. Maybe this is a unique experience I'm having here. In an earlier case, we pointed out, the commentator said, if you're clear and unattached, my words will not distract you. My baby talk will not distract you. So, at different points, at different times in this class, some people have not been distracted by the words that are happening here.

[52:19]

The reason why they're not distracted is because they're clear and not attached. As soon as you're clear and attached, the language provides an opportunity for you to be spun off again. So it's not like last week you weren't attached and then you weren't bothered, and this week, now... you can be attached again and be not bothered. As soon as you get attached again, this language class is going to bother you. So why come week after week, again and again, and do the same trick? Well, I don't know. Maybe because you can't do it every week. It's just like, I don't know what, playing baseball or bridge or something. You don't win every game. You're not on every night. But you don't just come the nights when you're on. You don't just come and hear the nights when you're not caught. Sometimes you get caught.

[53:23]

So, we could maybe present some special language here so people would be less likely to get caught. But I don't understand it that way. I think we should be just like the ordinary world. We should present just as complex and as tricky and as abstract and as stupid and as smart and as tempting language. We should play all the games that are played in the outside world and not miss any of them and see if people here can stay unattached in the midst of the swirl and whirl of language. And if you can be unattached, this won't bother you. And if it doesn't bother you now, maybe you can walk out the door into another situation where people are swirling and whirling and playing all kinds of power trips with language and not be caught. Because that's basically what being caught is about, is being caught by language. So, we have these moments of breakthrough when several of us, or all of us, for a moment, maybe out of frustration, all just let go And then somebody keeps talking and it doesn't bother any of us and we all feel great.

[54:29]

And then we all get caught up in it again and we think this is a step backwards or whatever. But the language somehow has gotten bad. The language is just baby talk. All the time the language is just baby talk. It's just babbling. And some babbling catches you, some doesn't. Okay? Now, I'm not saying you should subject yourself to such a challenge week after week after week, year after year. I'm not saying that you should do that, that you should keep putting yourself in such a situation where you might get caught again and again and be discouraged. All I'm just saying is that I intend to come and talk about these cases until we finish the book, and there will be, when we talk about these cases, various kinds of babbling going on, which will be quite troublesome to anybody who's attached to the slightest thing.

[55:34]

The only person that can sit through this class and not be scared, frustrated, distracted, or whatever, will be somebody who can stay unattached the whole class. Anybody else is going to have some problems. Right? I mean, doesn't that make sense? You don't have to agree with that, but I wouldn't want you to do that if you didn't feel. So that is the practice of the calm. That's the practice of life, too, is to be presented with something, in this case, classical stories that have some historical and, you know, some standing in the community, which you sort of have to sort of listen to and say, well, is that a joke or not? And then somehow let yourself be free of it. But you don't get free of it. There's two ways, one way to get free of it, just not come in the room. But that doesn't necessarily work because as soon as you come in the room, it might be a class like this.

[56:42]

There's other rooms that have other kind of discussions going on that also catch us. Right? So, this is actually just kind of a warm-up. Yeah? Well, it seems like what you're saying, that this is the practice of the cow and that's the practice of life, is suggesting a little bit of passivity that traditionally Buddhism is challenged by now. And I'm wondering about engaged Buddhism. I mean, if there's this sort of calm, unattached, in the middle of a swirl, when do we speak the truth in that swirl? Well, this story is about if you don't speak, the cat's going to get killed. So this is a social action koan we're studying right now. If you don't speak, if you're caught,

[57:45]

If you don't achieve it, in this case, these monks were presented with a cat being held and were told if they didn't speak, the cat would be cut, and they didn't speak. They were being told, you have to act, there's a dangerous situation, you have to do something, you have to speak. But because they were attached, they couldn't speak. So, what I'm proposing is that you... you need to achieve detachment so that when the words happen they don't paralyze you and make you passive. Because certain words will paralyze people, will hold them so they'll sit there and they'll watch somebody kill somebody. Or they'll watch, or they won't do what will stop somebody from killing somebody. Because they're stuck in words. Words are actually what are holding them shut up. And I'm saying, if you can be detached, then somebody can say something to you like, well, I'll blow your brains out if you move, and you can say, go right ahead, or whatever.

[58:55]

Or some other wisecrack you might be able to make, because you aren't caught by those words. And you can act because you're detached and those words are both not too concrete or too abstract for you. Or someone can say, move over, and you could think, well, that's not concrete or abstract enough for me. So this is the case right here where the Buddhists were passive. And because they were passive, the cat got cut. But why were they passive? They were passive because the words of the teacher paralyzed them. And why did the words of the teacher paralyze them? Because they weren't attached. They weren't detached. The possibility of this cat being cut unless they spoke, those words were what caused them to be frozen. And because they were frozen, the cat was cut. So being caught by words can cause death, can cause murder.

[60:00]

It's a very... How do you avoid it? How do you avoid it? Well, it's best to try not to avoid it. That's going to make it a little less flexible. How do you avoid avoiding it? Well, you know how you do that. You have a code, right? One, two, three. You've got to be ready, right? You've got to be ready. How do you get ready? How do you get ready? How do you get ready? Let's get it right here. Okay, ready? Okay, now go ahead. Are you good? Okay. Can we stand to be this way? Very exciting. Can we stand to be this way? Not to stay this way either. You don't get to stay this way. No, no, I can't stay this way. Okay, now are we ready? Okay. Tony. Something I've been wondering about always is, so you're standing face to face with someone and either they're going to kill you or you're going to kill them.

[61:07]

No. No what? There aren't such situations that are that limited. That's not being ready. What is it? It's a dream. I'm not going to get caught by it tonight. You know, there was a great Sunday supplement in the crowd. By the way, I'm caught in resisting your trap. I'm not going to go in that trap, but I'm just not flexible enough to go in there. Could you provide me with one that I would be willing to go into? No. Please? You're walking down the street with your new pair of expensive sneakers. Couldn't we have a current example? No, right now.

[62:09]

Couldn't you give us a right now example? Like, hold a cat up right now. Something right now. My pen through his ear. Could you come here please? And bring your pen? Get back to me? Sure. Thank you. Well, the immediacy of a situation. Yeah. Like two people staying there and the only thing they think is that they have the option of killing each other.

[63:09]

Like you and me, that's the only option we have? No. No. What other options do we have? Not killing each other. Any others? Enjoying not killing each other. Oh, yeah. One time when I was a little boy, I was playing with some other boys, and there was a girl watching us, and she kept sticking her tongue out, going, I looked at her, and she kept doing it. And then finally I just, I went over to hit her or something like that, and she got up and ran away. And I chased her for a long, pretty long ways, like a few blocks, and then I caught up with her finally in a, like a, it was like a cornfield or something, and I knocked her down and sat on her chest, and I was going to punch her, but I kissed her instead.

[64:18]

I was seven, and she was eight. But I wish I could go back. and be at that moment to see what happened to change the punch to a kiss. I think she looked up to me and kind of winked. I think she sort of gave me a kind of a little hint that that really wasn't what she had in mind. This was sort of all just a kind of a little game. Anyway, sort of something snapped and I switched from one to the other. It all worked out happily. So was there something else that you wanted to bring? Do you have some question about this? I'm not that good.

[65:25]

Verbal acts, right? Stay here, and we'll get to it later. So we have these words, this Zen teacher, this Buddhist, asked these people to do this. They couldn't speak, they were paralyzed, so he cut the cat in two. And then later, Zhao Zhou heard about this, and he did this thing. The cat was already dead, apparently, and he did this thing, which, as you know, or don't know, that wearing your sandals on your head is a sign of a symbol of mourning in China. So mourning, like if somebody dies, wearing a sandal on your head is kind of symbol of being, of grieving, of being sad that they died.

[66:30]

So that's part of what happened there. But another part of it is that he did this action, he acted, not necessarily anything other than he acted. Yes. On Sunday you were talking about the leakage of words. And I didn't understand something where you were talking about confusing mystery and the source. Does that relate to the... what we're talking about words here? Yes. How so? When you hear a word and And this mysterious thing happens that the word has, you know, has a meaning for you. Like, for example, if I go ba-ba-wa-wa, if I go wa-bi-nyan-wa-oh, that's sound, but nothing, the full mystery of language is not yet functioning until I speak words like this that seem to even, you know, when you feel like I'm expressing something and we're communicating, all that kind of mysterious things happen, okay?

[67:54]

And if you forget where that all comes from, and you actually confuse where things come from with their product, you get caught by them. But if you remember where things come from, namely that the words come from nonsense syllables, and they come from breath, and they come from the body, and they come from life, if you remember that, if you remember the source of where they come from, you don't get caught by them. Again, if you can remember what the point of this class is, through the whole class, you'll never get caught by the class. If you can remember the point of koans, that koans are just about making people released from language and be happy, if you remember where they come from, you'll never be caught by them. That's part of what Bill was saying. But people forget.

[68:57]

And they confuse where things come from with the thing, and then they attach to the thing, and then, oh, and then we've got something to work on there too, or put up problems. Does that make sense? Yes. Does it? I'll ask a second question. You asked me to ask it. It's somewhat related, which is how to work with the koans in meditation. Yeah. So how do you work with this koan in meditation is similar to, that's what I was trying to in some sense say, to settle it means in some sense not to settle it like you got the koan answered, but how are you going to settle it like planting it in your life? How can you convert this koan into something that will work for you in your daily life? In other words, be a meditation practice. That's what I would like to accomplish in now the next fifteen minutes.

[70:06]

And there's not one thing that this would be. It could be many, many things. This is related again to, there is a dangerous situation in the world right now, and if we don't act, there will be war. And that in case five, it says that accomplishing the work of great peace has no sign. There's no particular sign or signal of what you should do or what will bring peace in this world. And yet, if you don't speak, if you don't move, if you don't express yourself, probably there will be trouble. That there will be trouble if you don't act.

[71:18]

And if you act from an attached place, that still may be better than not acting at all. But if you could act as an attempt, as your attempt to bring peace to this world, as your attempt to save this cat, what would it be? How will it be for you now, in your life, starting at the end of this class or in the next 15 minutes? How will you live? as your expression of what you will do, to just speak. All that's being required of you is to speak to save this cat. What will you say? And also, can you say something that will also be the first example of what you will continue to do, what you will do again and again? So, a lot of people here, not everybody maybe can say, maybe nobody can say.

[72:29]

But just take a minute now to see if you can think of some way to bring this koan home with you. Not just a koan, but to bring your response, to bring what you would do to save the cat, what you would do. Try to think of what you would do Just to bring peace to the world. Write this tonight. Now, if anybody has come up with anything... Are you leaving?

[73:44]

Yes. Good night. Good night. Thanks for calling. You're welcome. Yes. Well, I'm heartened that you've mentioned the threatening situation in the Middle East, and I'd like to speak about that. The Fellowship of Reconciliation recommends that among the list of things we can do, we can speak to at least three people a day. Do what? To speak, to mention the Middle East, to mention what's happening, to be present to it. It's not so far away. It's right here. And not only to speak about it, but to bring that brief discussion or just mentioning it to some positives attitude. Because if speaking about it is in terms of good and the doom and the inevitability of what seems to be threatening, then we're contributing.

[74:48]

We're also mobilising to bring a sort of positive attitude that there may be a negotiated solution. It was six weeks from the initial intrusion It was six weeks until, in a public place, I overheard Americans discussing the situation, just eavesdropping. And here, too, everywhere I go, there seems to be incredible denial. So I'm part of it. You mentioned it. I want to talk about it. And I'd like to say that if we talk about it and think about it, maybe there can be a negotiable decision. Yes. No, I'm a mother of a son who might go over there, who happens to be in college, and his unit hasn't been called up. He's been reserved. And it never leaves my mind that my son made the choice to go into the Marines, and who happens to be a very, very bright boy.

[76:02]

who is majoring in molecular biology because he wants to do something about the ecology, and yet he made this decision to go into the Marines, of all things. So when it first did occur, there was not a moment of the whole day that wasn't right there with me. And most of the time, still, it's still there inside of me. And when he came home last month from his weekend reserves, he said, well, mom, it looks like I could be going in a month. And I can still feel the sweat coming up on my body when I even say it here. And Regina has a brother that's there. And we did talk about it all the time. Many people that I know were calling me and saying, well, what about John?

[77:05]

What's going to go on? And that dialogue went through. So my thoughts were like, well, boy, could he go to Canada? I mean, all the things from the 60s that came up. And mostly I had to let it be his decision on whatever action he would take. And it's real hard for me to see there's a part of this 22-year-old that wants to get out and do it, wants to get out and be a man. I mean, because that's what it means to him and how he was brought up in his peer group society, which was pretty much as middle America as you can get. The conclusion is that as the parent of the child, and I don't know that there's possibly any grief that would be harder to live with than losing a child as a parent.

[78:07]

I don't know that anything would be that. And the realization of that's right on your shoulder means that you keep it very quiet, that you read the paper, you watch the news, and you're careful that you don't want to create hysteria around saying, and there are many moments that I feel like that and I feel like that for anybody else's family member and both sides both sides there's just as many Iraqi mothers that are going through this as American mothers and maybe now the French mothers and fathers and sisters and brothers and the boys over there and the women over there not just them and So I think that the bottom line is everybody stops using so much. I mean, I've thought about this, all the different processes of what you go through when you're in this kind of a situation and it's home, and it's what we've said.

[79:11]

We have to stop using fuel and having it so that it's creating it. It's the next thing that was going to bring us up to being ecologically sensitive maybe. And that was the thought that always comes back to me as a mom. Yes. How busy were you with the hospital? When my son was 18, he was urged to register for the draft. And he decided not to. So for the next two weeks, I stood in front of our local post office. In the daytime, I dissuaded his peers from signing what. In the evening, we went to draft counseling over in Berkeley. And I supported and presented what to sign up.

[80:13]

But I think it's imperative for adults to use their elected officers and to tell them how they feel. They are people to do the work for us. They can write letters to everybody of influence and support our kids and ourselves. Any other ways of bringing this koan home? Yes? I'd like to vow to continue to try and make the effort to be aware of all my actions and the distant effects of all my actions every day, the smallest ones, which is very difficult if it's only something I can try.

[81:16]

So I vow to continue trying invite anyone else to join me in that effort. Yes? To speak up in everyday situations where a cat's being held up so that time reached that's really important. high-level power positions, you're familiar with how to act in situations in which you can act with integrity on a daily basis. How many times a day do you think you could see that opportunity? Every moment. Every moment you can? Maybe I don't catch them all, but they probably have to be every moment. You think it could be every moment, if you could be that present. I think that for me it's really noticeable that there's a cat being held up when I realise that I didn't know this a minute ago.

[82:26]

I'd like to hear some more. Yes? His calling is brought home to me when I remember in a moment, sometimes all of a sudden remembering that my own life is in danger. What would you say? When I have that moment of remembering, Would I have to be very careful? What would I say? Yeah, would I have to be very careful? That's not so much a thought more than a statement. Is there a difference? What you said then, now what will you say? What? Now what will you say? Better be more careful. Is the colon home with you now?

[83:37]

It's kind of in the yard. I'm not sure if it's home. Is it your home yard? Yeah, my home yard. Home yard or backyard? Backyard. There's room for all these koans, so don't worry. But first, let's get this one home, okay? Anybody else taking it home? Yes? Those two people? I came to this, the word generosity, to be open with my heart and open with my speech and to the moment. Let's take this story home with you. Okay. Yes? When you said, how do I save a cat? I thought, I keep getting stuck. Stuck, stuck, stuck. And each time I get stuck, That's how I'm unstuck. And so the way I save the cat... You tell him you notice you're stuck?

[84:43]

Right. The way I save the cat is by noticing. But the other part is that, in addition to that, I keep... The other way I stay unstuck, the other way I save the cat is I keep asking, is that enough? I keep asking if that's enough. To notice, is that enough? By doing that practice, do you feel this koan comes into, like, the whole koan? It's the way I understand the koan. Well, give me your understanding of the koan. Do you feel that you got the whole, you get the koan with this, with this practice? What I really want, I want to know if these practices you people are bringing up, if you feel like that brings this story home to you and you carry the story home to you and you have the story with you fully by some meditation.

[85:47]

So I've heard various meditations and I'd like to know, does that hold this whole story? Or does it hold just part of it? Because the whole story is, part of the story is not very dynamic. for example, Nanchuan just holding the cat up, or the monks just arguing, or even just killing the cat by itself. The whole story, that first part of the story, the whole thing is the whole story. And I'd like to know, is there some way you can bring that whole dynamic and intense story into your life? Yeah, I think that... And if something's left out, well, I'd like to hear about what's left out. But I want to know how you can bring that whole story and all its dynamism energy and horror and also tremendous possibility into your life. That's what I'd like to see. That's what I mean by settle the story. Settle it into your life. Take it home. Yes. What really brought it to me that brings the story home is to be more, to try to be more and more present with each moment.

[86:56]

Mm-hmm. with a lot of compassion. And I feel like the more that I'm present, the more compassion comes out of me. And the more that I can just save whatever cats come up. And what you just said, do you feel like this takes the coin with you? To me, it does. Yes? Well, the kind of facts that concern me are the things like the Middle Eastern situation. And it's not enough just to act as an individual. This is the problem. I mean, there's some situations where it's enough for you to act. But to stop this situation, many people have to act. And to get people to act, you need to persuade them. And to do this, you need knowledge. And it isn't enough just to act and to feel if you don't want yourself to go to war.

[88:00]

You have to understand sort of what's happening there. And how we react and how we don't look at the cause of the effect. We can't put ourselves in other people's... I mean, a lot of stuff... It involves using words and language skillfully. So what are you going to do? Well, so this takes me both to direct action. It also takes me to feeling the need in the Buddhist community to act. I mean, these things are created by collective consciousness. And it seems it's going to take some shifting collective consciousness, starting perhaps with an aware community to change it. I'm not going to check out. Yeah, so what are you going to do? Well, my response has become here, and to practice in this community, and exactly to talk about these things here, because I feel the only... I've tried to work in a non... practicing community, and I don't feel I can do anything.

[89:01]

So right now, coming here and talking with people here is a meditation for you that you're doing under these circumstances? Well, first it's to understand the problem. Right, you want to understand the problem better as a first step. So do you feel like that carries the full impact of this situation, of something, of a life hanging in the balance if you don't act? Do you feel like you're doing... I feel my life is in the balance. Yeah, right. And do you feel like what you're doing incorporates that or carries that burden or responds to that, or what you're saying? Well, knowing to the best of my ability. I'm asking if you feel like you're doing it. Yeah. It's not for me to judge, it's for you to judge yourself. I can do all I can do. Yeah, but do you feel like this is... I feel putting myself here is all I can do.

[90:05]

Yeah, do you feel like anything is lacking that this story brings up? No, I'm just very glad that this has taken turn. Okay, yeah. Any other offerings? Yes. I think I've lived with this for quite a while. My story is the whole world's held up. Yeah. And it's about to be slaughtered by greed. What am I going to do about it? For a period of time I've thought about this and meditated on it and writing about it. That's my way of saying something to hopefully a lot of people. It's to write, to think, to meditate, and pray. And when you do this, if you do this, will you feel this story with you? I feel it. It's not finished yet, though. The cat's not dead, but cats are dying every day. Yes?

[91:14]

Last week, As we were working on this case, what kept coming to me was correct action, correct action, correct action. And I thought about that a lot during the week. And I feel stuck right now because I think that if I were clear enough, I could see the hat being held up each moment. But I don't know that I'm able to see the hat. I think I'm too attached to whatever at any given moment to know when a cat's being held up. Right. Well, even in that monastery, the monks may not have been able to really see the cat, but they did feel, I think, that a cat was being held up. So I don't think we actually can see the cat because the cat is the whole world. But we don't have to see it to feel like there is a cat being held up. I think we feel that. And we can feel that there is a dangerous situation here. My life's in danger, your life's in danger, other people's lives are in danger.

[92:19]

But also, the truth may be in danger in a sense. Or our realization of the truth may be in danger too. So we may not be able to see all that, but yet we may feel worried. I feel... And what will you do to bring that, this, you know, big and realistic worry into your life in a positive way that will allow you to act beneficially? What will you do? For me, I go back to the question, what is the prayer of action? That's how you're going to do it. Okay? Okay. Anyway, I'd like to ask everybody to do homework, okay? And people already spoke, you can just, you have an easy time maybe. But I'd like everybody to write down in words, on paper, what practice you will do to bring this koan into your life.

[93:28]

What practice you will do, what practice you are doing to bring the... this world crisis into your daily life, as much as possible a practice that you can do constantly. You may not be able to do it constantly, but where you could conceivably do it all the time. Or a whole bunch of things that would cover the whole day, but some practice or practices that would bring this this crisis and your response to the crisis into your life as a meditation practice and as an action practice, same thing. I'd like you to write that down and I'd like you to give it to me as soon as possible. That's what I'd like to ask of all of you, and I'll try to do it too. That's not the answer to this koan, that doesn't finish this koan, but it starts to get the koan into your life And this koan seems to be directly pointing, telling us that we better say something.

[94:31]

And not just once, but every moment we better live this koan. Otherwise, cats will be killed because of our paralysis. So I'd like, would you please listen to me on my quest as such?

[94:48]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_81.29