talking to Lee this morning about the Lotus Sutra. And the Lotus Sutra, like lots of Mahayana sutras, starts out with saying who is in the room. Lee thinks that Ananda took attendance. Kosho. Kara. Martha. Lois. Lloyd. Jan. I want to say It starts with an A, right?

[01:08]

It's not Eleanor. It's what? Arlene. Arlene. Arlene. And Miriam. Miriam. Linda. Linda. Bill. Bill. Sister Moon. Sister Moon. Sister Pat. Sister Pat. Sister Barbara. Sister Barbara. Sister Wendy. Sister Wendy. Robin. Robin. Andy. Andy. Daryl. Daryl. Kirk. Kirk. Sonia. Sonia. Donna. Donna. Gloria. Gloria. Caroline. Caroline. Marianne. Marianne. Dacia. Dacia. Pat. I forgot. Patricia. Patricia.

[02:11]

Lee. Lee. Kathy. Kathy. Gunter. Gunter. Lynn. Lynn. Sean. Sean. And Carolyn. Carolyn. And don't tell me. It's Dr. Lesnick. Professor. Alan. Howard. Howard. He's not a doctor. But he is a lawyer. Diane. Diane.

[03:11]

Stephen. Stephen. Marissa. Marissa. And I forgot your name. What is it? Jim. Jim. And Wes. Wes. Akeem. Akeem. Michael. Michael. Sandra. Sandra. Leslie. Leslie. Joan. Joan. Reb. Do you have copies of phase 20? Oh, the middle. Oh, they're the hard ones. Fu. Jennifer. Is it Moyen? Maheen. Okay. Maheen. Maheen. Why can't I remember it? Marcy? Marcy. Melissa? Melissa.

[04:12]

Keith? Keith. Martha? Martha. Jim? Christopher. Christopher. And... Mayor, right? He made it up. Maya. Maya. Marjorie. Marjorie. Okay, well, we were studying this number, the 20th story. And I mentioned to you before that the name of the case is... Ditsong's, does it say nearness in your book? Yes. So another translation would be intimacy. Another translation would be kindness.

[05:16]

There's two characters which make up this word. The first character in Japanese is pronounced shin. Shin. Second character is pronounced Setsu, Shin Setsu. Shin Setsu means ordinary common Japanese word means kind. Shin by itself means intimate and also means parents. That's the word translated as nearness? No. Shin setsu is translated as nearness. Shin by itself means closeness, nearness, intimacy. It also means parents. It refers to the intimacy like between parents and child, between mother and child. So close, very close. And setsu means to cut. Call it cut. or sever, or chop, or clip. No.

[06:20]

No, that's a different one. So, but together, this character which means family or intimate with Setsu can mean nearness, or family with this character which means to cut can mean nearness, it can mean closeness, and it can mean kindness. And somebody mentioned a while ago that, you know, kindness comes from of the same kind. So again, the kindness is the kindness that you sort of have for yourself. That's what adding satsu means for yourself. Kindness, you said intimacy and closeness were already what Shin meant. Yes. So what is adding Setsu to yourself? No. I also mentioned you take the character, which means one, and put that Setsu with it.

[07:27]

It means one cut or one clip. It means everything. What do you get with one cut? No, you get everything. That's the idea. Or like the sound of one hand clapping, you know? Do you know what the sound of one hand clapping is? Yes. Can chia also be interpreted as penetrating? As you cut, it cuts to the inside, it's something that is, so the idea is... By itself? By itself? Well, chia means to cut. Yeah. Yi chia, or everything.

[08:31]

One kind, you said that previously. Yeah. But I also take the cut and that interpretation to mean cutting through the knot. At the same time, being most intimate, like a knife is intimate with the cut. Right there. Not two things. So intimate, not in the sense of necessarily parental intimacy or relative intimacy, not knowing meets knowing. That's a valid interpretation. Okay with me? I don't know if philologically it will hold up, though. There aren't any Chinese people in here, do we? But, you know, a Heideggerian interpretation probably is all right.

[09:37]

Is it the one, same as I vow to cut them? No. That character, you know, like, you know, delusions are inexhaustible, I vow to end them, that one, it really says delusions are inexhaustible, I vow to cut them. And the character there looks just like an axe, actually. But it means to cut. This character by itself also means to cut, but it looks a lot different. It's actually a different character. But they both mean to cut. This character has a radical in it that means sword. So this case is about intimacy in a lot of different ways.

[10:52]

Here's some words about this. Intimacy. boundaries, ethics, closeness, confidentiality, power, transference, sharing, attachment, connection, abuse, sex, vulnerability, love, harassment, control, hierarchy, trust, domination, dependency, loss, touching, commitment, taboo, bonding, healing, exploitation, eros, the shadow, rejection, distance, woundedness, symbiosis. I think all those words are relevant to this issue of intimacy. These things, I think, apply between the relationship between student and teacher and also

[12:05]

in terms of describing the function and dangers, and also they have to do with yourself. This relationship here of intimacy will also apply to the next story, Case 21, between the two brothers in the story and also the two parts of mind, or the two moons that are talked about in the next story. This story, the story of Case 20, where Di Cang asks Fa Yan, where are you going? And Fa Yan says, around on pilgrimage. And Di Cang says, what is the purpose of pilgrimage? Fa Yan says, I don't know. Di Cang says, not knowing is most intimate. This thing that's going on between them, back and forth like this, this is about all these things.

[13:17]

It's about intimacy and boundaries. It's about hierarchy and power and transference and confidentiality and sharing and attachment and connection. and abuse, and vulnerability, and love, and harassment, and control, and trust, and domination, and dependency, and loss, and touching, and commitment, and taboo, and bonding, and healing, and all that stuff's going on there in that conversation. What do you think of that? Does that make sense to you? That all that's going on? And they're talking, you know, but also this is really just a silent event here. They're talking back and forth, but really what's going on is silence. At the level of busyness, there's this chatter, but there's a silent thing going on here, too.

[14:24]

But you know, there's one word on this list that isn't there, and there's a domination and dependency, but there's not... That's something that should be on that list, I think, is assertion, self-assertion. Asserting your position. That's also going on here on both sides. Well, the... I think certainly at the end, when the monk Fa Yan says, I don't know, that's not a kind of wimpy, I don't know. He's just telling the truth about where he's at. And he's not... He's not... He's not going to lie. He's telling the truth. And the teacher, asserting his position, which happens to be recognizing his student, saying this is most intimate or this is closest.

[15:47]

I think of a mnemonic for your name. So what is it again? Maheen. Maheen. What kind of a mnemonic could I have for that? Mahim. Do you know it? Your daughter's name is Mahim? My daughter's name is Taya. If you change your name to Taya, I can just remember you have the same name. Mahim. I think she's right. What? How do you spell it? Maybe we could name this class Mahin. This is the Mahin class. Then I won't forget. What? It means moon? Moon. Oh, good. Two sister moons. Two sister moons. Also, I just ran across this quote today, which I think applies.

[17:13]

Don't look for love. Look at it. So this is a story about love. And... And when the teacher says, not knowing is nearness, that's love in the sense of he's recognizing, he's recognizing his student. He's also asserting his position. When the student says, I don't know, he's asserting his position and recognizing his teacher. And in this recognition of the other, and this asserting of your own position, in that case you're not so much looking for love, you're looking at love.

[18:24]

This is the way to look at love. not to dominate, not to submit, not to rebel, not to give up your honest opinion. And in that kind of balancing, you're not trying to get something called love. You're actually tuning in real love. but all around that is in the kind of, what do you call it, going off on one side or the other of that, then you get into all these dangers. And Fa Yun, our hero here, a few cases ago, told us about a hair's breadth difference.

[19:28]

So just a little bit of difference from looking for this thing rather than tuning it in. So, yes. I'm thinking of a lecture on Sunday when Les talked about having a comfy mind. Yes. And that's what came up from around, I don't know, sort of open and not having a purpose, even to our practice. Practicing for the dharma. Pardon? Practicing for the sake of the dharma is dogma. Yeah, practicing for the sake of practice. So these comments are, again, I'm sort of setting, I think, a stage for the next case.

[20:47]

But is there anything more on this? Do you want to spend more time on this case now, or do you want to go on to 21? 21. We still haven't really studied this verse, which is quite a challenge. But I'm ready to go to 21 if you want to, on a boat or something. Yes? I was just going to ask, when the pilgrimage, if he doesn't know why he's going, how does he know when it's over? How does he know when the pilgrimage is over? Yes. Don't you know when you can tell when the pilgrimage is over? You can tell because all sentient beings are enlightened.

[21:49]

All sentient beings are free of suffering. All sentient beings are, you know, all those wonderful things. That's how you can tell you're done with the pilgrimage. Could you say something about decides three, leads up four, and the great way of the capital goes seven across, eight up and down? Oh, there's something else I want to say, and that is about language in this class, and that is in Zen study there is...

[22:54]

One way of talking, which you might say is... I'll expose you now to a big word. Mahin. And it's hermeneutic. Ever heard that word, hermeneutic? It means, like, to interpret something, particularly to interpret a religious text. Or to explain. All right? To explain some words... And the other way you could maybe say is another kind of way of doing things is what you might call performative. And another way to talk about the same thing would be explaining and presenting. So... And Zen teachings, Zen practice and Zen teachings, I would say, are most well known and primarily became successful in the world by kind of emphasizing the performative side or the presenting side.

[24:26]

rather than the explanatory, interpretive side. The interpretive side is kind of discursive. You know what discursive means? It means like kind of going back and forth. It's not... It's intellectually going back and forth on something. And... I wouldn't say that, you know, Zen practice and Zen teachings never uses this present, this interpreted mode, but just that it's most known for and it's made it, it's been, you know, what do you call it, it gets most of its thing from this other side, okay? So now she's asking me this question about, what was it again? Okay, so case six of this collection, right?

[25:41]

The monk comes and asks, apart from the four propositions and beyond the hundred negation, please point out the meaning of coming from the West directly to me. And Matsu says, I'm tired out today and can't explain it to you. Please go ask sister. Later. Ask her if she has a referral. There are two rooms. Ask her. There are two rooms. Yeah, there's two rooms.

[26:47]

You can ask either one of them. Hey, ask him. Ask him. Sister. Can you tell me the meaning of that? I need my broom. Asked her ma. Yes. Sister Fu said there are two moons. I asked Sister Moon and she said she needs her broom. Did you ask Mahin? Mahin knows. Now, do you want more?

[27:52]

Read. It's the very first line. Well, didn't. Profound talk entering into principle or noumenon. What's an eyebrow? Profound talk entering into principle. Do you understand what profound talk entering into principle is? Do you? It's more straightforward than decides three weeks out for me. Well, it means that this three and four are... What do you say?

[29:33]

Can you think of any threes, anything that's three? Triple treasure. Triple treasure. Anything else? Four? Four noble truths, okay? How's that? Good. How about another four? Four negations. Four vows. Four, four, huh? Four what? Yeah, and four right efforts, four foundations of mindfulness. There's a bunch of threes and fours, okay? profound talk that enters into the principle is more important than these stepwise practices? What kind of profound talk enters into principle?

[30:39]

Can you think of any profound talk that enters into principle? Yeah. This is called profound talk that enters into principle. This is this thing again. These guys are actually presenting. They're not explaining. They're presenting the working of the principle. And they're proposing that this is... They're proposing this way of practicing rather than these other ways, which are good ways, but they're saying this way is actually what they're proposing. Now, again, part of the, you might even say, excuse me for saying so, the dishonesty, almost, or contradictoriness of Zen, is that we will use these three and four sometimes, because people don't want to use this kind of talk.

[31:40]

Because this kind of talk is... We don't trust it. So we have this other way. Yes? I get the feeling they give you a choice here. When it says decides three and reads out four, it's sort of like you could choose to use the three or the four or not. It's almost like a pivot. Yes, you could do that. But you could also say... Another translation is, ironically, derides three. And rend, rends, or cuts up four. So decides is kind of like, this is boss of three and four. Three and four are just some presentation of the teaching, three and four, whatever you want to say. Who's in charge of this three and four administration of these teachings? Who decides this? The principal decides. I mean, actually the light, from which these teachings are just, not just, but I mean these teachings are something that are given to people who don't understand light, straight on light.

[32:52]

So, but the decision of how to apply three and four comes from this light, comes from this numinousness, this principle. That decides everything. how we administer, whether we give somebody three or four, whether we give them the refuges, the precepts, these kinds of things. In other words, something which is not like in pieces administers piecewise or stepwise practice. This is kind of like an explanation. There was that other way that we tried before, which wasn't like an explanation. Did you see the difference between those two ways? One offers itself up more for theatrical participation. The other one is kind of like I'm telling you something.

[33:53]

Both have their advantages. One maybe makes you feel more secure, like you're learning something in this class. If you believe what I'm telling you. But that's fairly reasonable, isn't it? Yes? It's also somehow encouraging that we went back to the first sentence of phase 20 as a closure, move on to case 21. How do you feel, Sonia? You mean you're not happy with the explanation you got? Very. Yeah, that's right. That was a good explanation, wasn't it? It was a great explanation. It was better than I thought. Me too. And, by the way, in order to give this explanation, in order to give this explanation or this...

[35:08]

I went back and looked at the words. I even resorted to the original so I could get some different translations and get some different aspects on it. You see, discursive means going back and forth. So when I study texts, and particularly when I study Chinese or Japanese texts... I like to choose texts that have one, two, three translations so I can triangulate on the text, get different angles on it, and even texts where I can look up the original and look up, like I did the word nearness, to get these different angles on it so I don't come up to the word like, there it is, but kind of like walk around a little bit and get different angles on it. That's discursive, you see. It's also just like trying to understand the word and studying it, but it's kind of discursive, back and forth, back and forth, And then that leads me to be able to give an explanation or an interpretation. But before I do the discursive thinking, when she asks the question, I don't know anything.

[36:12]

I can't remember, you know, where's that part of the text? Is that from whatever? But I don't need to, because I can just say the truth. I have a headache. Would you please talk to that person over there? And when they get back, I can make a judgment. which I didn't do. Yeah, Master Ma made a judgment after the monk went around that cycle. Yes, what's your name again? Patricia. Patricia, that's what I thought. Einstein said that we had to use mathematics because people didn't understand the language of the reality. Who used mathematics? Einstein said. Uh-huh, yeah. He had to use mathematics because the deeper language was misunderstood. And that's part of what this class is about, too, is making a kind of mathematical language.

[37:16]

Mathematical in the sense that it's universal for us. So what's happening now? say something? I'm getting goosebumps. So as you know, for me, this is a case that I come back to a lot.

[38:24]

And so we can just stay here forever in this case. Shall we read the introduction? having shed illusions and enlightened light, having cut off all the ordinary, all the valiance of so many things, setting up ghosts and castings to intercede the willful for ye is a special house. It's not that there is no giving chosen to some sense of its ability, but the quality of this death is simply the sort of same breath of so many branches. Now, there's another translation which I like better. I don't know if it's right or not, but, you know, another practical translation. Although you are freed from delusion and enlightenment and have exhausted holiness and ordinariness, a particular ability is still needed to establish who is host and guest and distinguish noble and base.

[39:42]

It's not that there's no measuring of character or assigning of work. How do you understand kindred spirit of the same branch? See, this is a story on one level of two brothers. These are two brothers of the same branch. But you could also say they're adjoining branches because they made... They're adjoining each other. They're two brothers, and they had their own branch. They had their own lineage after them. But they're also on the same branch. These are brothers on the same branch. They have the same teachers. They're very close, and yet they're different. So part of what's going on in the story is looking at these two people that are very close who seem to have different understandings. That's part of what's going on.

[40:45]

Another part of what's going on is that the story is about two parts of your mind, which are very close, but are a little bit different understanding. And these two brothers, who are very close and have different understanding, are talking about this mind, which has this dynamic quality. And so, again, this story is, in a sense, you know, let's just talk about a story that's like heavy shed delusion and enlightenment, okay? Just forget about those two. And now we're tuning in, what do you call it, radio K-O-A-N, where people do things like sweep the ground, okay? Sweep the ground.

[41:45]

And then people walk up and enter into this profound talk, which has nothing to do with delusion or enlightenment. They're shit. We've exhausted ordinariness and holiness. Now we're trying to develop this ability to distinguish host and guest, to distinguish these players in this intimate drama. to understand siblings with the same breath on adjoining branches, or to understand siblings with different breath on the same branch. You see how that translation could be played back and forth. Or the same breath on the same branch.

[42:49]

OK. So, the story goes, yin-yang, which means cloud, cliff, cloudy cliff, yin-yang, cloudy cliff, was sweeping the ground, and dao-wu, dao means, you know, the path, the Buddha way, the middle way, and wu means awakening. So, dao modifies awakening, so it's the It's awakening of the Tao or awakening to the Tao, awakened way, right? So awakened way walks up to Cloud Cliff and says, too busy. And the character there for too busy is a very interesting character, which maybe next week if we have a blackboard in the room, I'll draw it for you. It's a real interesting character. It looks very busy looking. Very mercantile looking.

[43:54]

Looks like a Chinese supermarket. And Clodcliffe says, you should know there's one who isn't busy. And then Enlightened Way, I mean, Awakened Way. Sorry. It's hard to say. It's a mistake. Da Wu would be great awakening. Da Wu. It's Da Wu. Da Wu, rather. This is Da Wu. So, the way is awakening. said, if so, then there is a second moon, or there's two moons. And Claude Clift raises up his broom and says, which moon is this?

[44:59]

So that's the story, basically. And then in this text here, this Chinese text, I don't think he had a different text, but he decided to do it this way. In the text, it has two more lines. which happened after the story. So this story became the story. These guys had this conversation someplace in the courtyard, and somehow somebody found out about this conversation. They told somebody or something. And this conversation spread across China. Like I heard a good joke, I thought it was a good joke a while ago, and I told the joke a few times, and every time I told the joke, I kept expecting that people would have already heard it because I thought it was a good joke. Good jokes usually spread, so you can only tell them for a few days before people have already heard it. But even though I thought this was a good joke, it's still working.

[46:06]

Tell it. You know that joke about the Pope? Virtue. Have you all heard the joke about the Pope in the car? Yes. How many people... How many people have heard the joke about the Pope in the car? How many people have not heard the joke about the Pope in the car? So the people... Yeah, see? That's an example. I thought it was spread, but it hasn't. Okay, so the people who haven't heard the joke, I'll tell it after the other people leave. Okay? Because I don't want to bother Leslie. That's right. That's right. You remembered. That's very good. This is good. This is very good. Very good. Very good, Leslie. so that the people who've already heard it can go home.

[47:16]

It's a really, really long joke. No, it doesn't take very long. It only takes about... We can time it. It probably takes about... It depends on how I tell it, but we can do it, I think, under two minutes. What do you think? Well, that's part of it. You know, the longer you talk about it, the better it is. It's a little bit, it's a shaggy dog story, kind of. And one of the main things I find that helps is to tell you beforehand, this is a joke. It's not a real story. It's not a true story. That's, you have to understand that part. Also, these stories are jokes, too. So what happened after this story is that another famous Zen master commented on this story and he said, indeed, this is a second moon. His name was Shren Sha.

[48:19]

Shren Sha. He said that. And then Yuen Mun. Huh? He clearly didn't translate it. See, I don't know why he didn't do it that way. I can imagine, but he didn't do it that way. In the added sayings, he gives you the whole story. But in the text, it has this story, and then it says right after this, in the Chinese, it says, Shren Sha says, Indeed, this is the second moon. And then Yun Men says, says, there's no different translation for you, but in this one he says, the butler sees the maid. When the butler sees the maid, he takes care. Another translation is, I like this one better, the butler watches the maid politely.

[49:26]

What? Yes, that's right. Okay, so that's the story. Now, what do you want to do? Yeah, but also, I mean, they are dead serious, too. I mean, you know, this is... They're looking at love here. And I'm also suggesting that this conversation is really, what do you call it?

[50:43]

It's silence. It's presented silence. It's dramatic silence. Primarily what's going on here is silence. That's what I think. I think they're giving something back and forth to each other in silence, but they're talking while they're doing it. Does it matter much what they say? Does it matter? The meaning is not in the words, yet it responds to the arrival of energy. It's not in the words, but the meaning of this silence responds to when you bring your energy forward.

[51:46]

And if you bring your energy forward, then you speak in a certain way. So those particular words would come out. Exactly. Exactly. And that's what it says here too. It's not that there is no giving of job assignments of ability, giving job on assignment of ability. It's not that that's not so. In other words, if I, you know, if I look at what this is and then I bring my energy forward then you all can measure, you have no choice but to do so actually, how well I brought forth my truth. And you assign me my job on the basis of my ability to do so.

[52:51]

Do you understand? Mostly I didn't do very well. Well, you did pretty well. That's pretty good. So I see since you did so well, I'll try again. Could you say that the same thing is true when two of us have a conversation? Yes. Definitely. Whether you're looking at it or not, I'm proposing that's all we're ever looking at. And then we have relative degrees of ignorance of it. And ignorance is an action. We turn away from this love. This real relationship where we

[53:53]

can stand the relationship. Or we can stand to be honest and at the same time open our eyes to somebody else and look at that. And we have strong habits to turn away from that. But even turning away from it, we're looking at it because our action is either looking at it or looking away from it. There's nothing else going on for us. and looking away from it as sickness and looking towards it as health. And that's what's going on, I say, all day long. And that's silence. That's all that's done in silence. It's simply paying attention to it or looking away from it. And we don't understand how each other are doing it until we talk. And we can talk non-verbally, of course, with physical postures. And that's going on between all of us all the time.

[55:02]

I'm proposing that. And we measure how each other are doing. And we measure how each other are doing on that score. And we assign people jobs according to our evaluation of them. And then when we assign them a job, then that sets a whole new process in motion, which again can withstand that. And if we can, we assign each other jobs again, which intensifies it more. And then probably everybody runs away. I'm having a little difficulty with this part of the sentence that says, setting up host and guest and distinguishing noble and mean is a special house.

[56:07]

You don't have to wear meat? Yes. How about base? We're right. I understand that. What the problem here is, is I thought we weren't supposed to make, we weren't supposed to distinguish between these things, particularly. You thought that? Yeah. Who told you that? Wong Po. Wong Po told you that? Yeah. Where did he say that? In the book I just got finished reading. Why don't you go get it? Okay. Don't run. Remember, you're not feeling well. Right, and it's going to take me a while to find where he's at. Actually, he says that almost every grad. Just please go get her. Okay. Got rid of her. Okay. What? Are you getting interested in this? What? John's getting interested.

[57:19]

She actually wants to know what the text says. Are you making this up? Yes? Patricia? Excuse me. This potential turning towards and turning away that you speak of and that we do with each other, do we not also do that with ourselves? Yeah. And since there's really, from a certain point of view, I would argue, there's nobody there anyway, then what is that about on that level, in that framework? What's going on? In the framework of there's nobody there? There's nobody there. In the framework of there's nobody there, that's the basic framework. There's nobody there. And in fact, we don't believe that. We think there is somebody there. Where it's at is that you should admit that you don't believe what you just said. I don't believe it.

[58:22]

Well, you say that, but you don't really believe it. And you mostly go around thinking that there is somebody there. But when there's nobody there in awareness, then this turning away and turning towards doesn't happen, correct? When there's nobody there in awareness. Then what is that turning away and turning towards? There isn't that action. What do you mean by when there's nobody there? Well, when there's the awareness. There's no one doing the turning away and turning towards. Then there's just the oneness. And so there is no object and subject, no turning away, no turning towards. Then intimacy, which we were talking about earlier, is not a thing.

[59:23]

Right. Intimacy is not a thing. Intimacy is the nature of things. That's my point. OK. Well taken. Is that so? Is what so? in and see if the nature of things. Well, I said that. That's just talk. But in beyond talk, in the nature of things, is that not so? Beyond talk? Well, I don't care about beyond talk. But talk is cheap. Talk is cheap. And it's hard to tell the truth.

[60:26]

Anyway, all I care about is talk because that's the only problem there is. If we talk right, then we'll be released from the talk. The talk's our problem. The talk's the way we're going to get free. But the practice is different than talk. Practice is different from talk? Yeah, in my experience. So does a practice lead more to the nature of things instead of talk? You may have a practice that's different from talk, but I don't have a practice that's different from talk. My practice is entirely talk. You never have any non-talk? The meaning of practice and the function of practice, the point of practice, is not in talk. But the practice is entirely talk because the bondage is entirely in talk. What about those gaps? They're not a problem. What do you mean by gaps?

[61:31]

The gaps in the talk. The gaps in the talk are not a problem. The problem is talk. We're enchanted, we're bewitched by our talk. There is the nature of things. The nature of talk is the nature of things. I keep separating. Yes, that's talk. Talk is separating. Separating is talk. And talk liberates the separating mind. I thought it bounded. You thought it what? Bounded. It does. It binds it and releases it. Both. Both. It's really a problem. It's also a solution. Is top the same as top?

[62:34]

Well, talk is the same as discriminating thought. But that's part of what this is about. There's a kind of consciousness which isn't talking. Is that thought? It's also thought, right. But we don't know it. It's this unbusy one. So the thought that we know is the same as talk? Yes. Whatever you know, whatever you're aware of, is words, is language, is concepts. And we make these concepts together. Conception comes from a partnership. It takes two to conceive. And then, of course, because it takes two, it can take all of us. So we make language and concept together. Concepts are common property, common discourse. And fortunately or unfortunately, it's our common property that enchants us and enchains us.

[63:48]

So that's how we can also help each other be released and how Buddha could help us be released, by using our common stuff. and thereby to unleash our uniqueness and let us uniquely present our case, our koan. So these people are making unique presentations together with language in this profound talk. which also involves raising brooms and sweeping the ground. So it's also their posture, posture and postures, gestures, and speech. But when you look at someone and you see them do something, when you see someone as someone you're aware of, you've translated that person's gesture into words, into concepts. That's how you know them. If thought is separate from thought, there is a thought that's not thought.

[64:55]

How do we know it? You don't know it. And if we don't know about it, why are we claiming it's thought? Because mind actually has a conceptual... a little conceptual section and has a non-conceptualist. A non-conceptual is... it could be... it could be the tiny, tiny little blip next to the conceptual or it could be like beyond all measurement. Anyway, it's... it totally... it's totally, you know, beyond and so beyond that it's not even... it's not really separate. That's why he raises the broom and says, which moon is this? Which moon is this? Right now I say to you, which moon is this? Is this the one you know or the one you don't know? The one you don't know, you wouldn't have any way to make it other than here.

[65:59]

All day long, which moon is this? That's what he says. He said, okay, you good people, as you eat, boil tea, sow and sweep, you should recognize the one not busy. Then you will realize the union of mundane reality and enlightened reality. then naturally you won't waste any time. All day long. Which moon is this? Which moon is this? Is there a gate to that thought that is not known, like a dream might be, an unconscious or something similar? Yes. Not necessarily, but there could be. And you get that gate.

[67:07]

by worshipping what you can know. This is a book full of gates. And there's also gates that aren't in this book. But you get those gates by sitting with these gates. Just sit with these gates. Don't move from these gates. And then a whole kind of little universe of gates will roll around your knees. Or in your lap or whatever. This is what you start with, though, or whatever you want, something anyway. You start with the conceptual realm. You start with words. And this style of teaching says start with profound talk. But profound talk means just that you treat talk as though this is the talk you're going to work on. this conversation.

[68:14]

Meantime, what's really important is passing back and forth in silence. And we don't know it objectively. We intuit it We yearn for it. Yeah? You said earlier that it was scary. Is it scary? It seems to be. As you get close to it, it seems to be scary. Well, when you said that, it sort of brought up this feeling. Just recently, this person came up to me and told me that I was doing this thing to her. Yeah. And she had been thinking about it, thinking about it, until she got herself all worked up and angry at me. And, you know, that was okay. But I turned from the situation, and I was like, I mean, I said something to her about it first.

[69:26]

And I thought, you know, I don't think I can be comfortable with this person anymore. But how can I just wait with that and just continue? And that was actually my answer. I think when I get scared about participating, it's actually to say that I will participate, that I will take my part of avoiding her. That's actually my part. Does that make sense? But it's kind of scary in a way. I mean, there's this way I want to make everyone fine, or I want her to be comfortable. But that isn't really my part, because I've already been separated from that kind of interaction. To me, I don't know if anybody else is. But still, I'm willing to take my part.

[70:27]

There's a little moment of fear before I'm willing to do that. And then when willingness comes, fear comes up again and again. But it seems to deflate in some way, even though I... What deflates the fear? To say, oh, I'm willing to play this part. I'm willing to do what is required of me here. But I think that was the... I wanted to say that earlier, and there was something that you had said that was so, it was like, went right into that. I couldn't remember what it was. Well, there's all these dangers that are right around there. So...

[71:30]

But is what's being talked about that kind of willingness or something? These guys are just standing around talking. There's that sense. And if they were not willing to play their part and have that fear, then they wouldn't be able to have this conversation. You know, if they wanted something important to happen, like, you know, somebody to give them the answer to the question, then they wouldn't ever be able to come this way. But if they're willing to just participate in some way, you know, then they can... That's kind of... Well, one theory we can put forward here is that these people, these two guys... are talking to each other and they're actually looking at the same thing.

[72:31]

They're looking at love and they're willing, and they're talking about it and also they're demonstrating it at the same time. They're presenting it and discussing it in this particular case. And they're also discussing the nature of mind. They're talking about their relationship They're talking about the nature of mind, and they're also demonstrating the nature of mind. And they also are different. They almost, almost disagree. Almost disagree. Which is another thrilling and frightening aspect about it, is that we almost disagree in our... in our meeting, in our agreeing, as we get closer, in a sense, our disagreement becomes more and more poignant. And we get closer to this enmity.

[73:35]

It becomes intensified as we get closer. But a real disagreement starts to emerge. rather than some that we might have been worried about. Yeah. On the next page, there's more talk that I don't understand at all, but this is the second one about the middle paragraph, the one that the things one shot said would be just the second one. It's a little further down that paragraph. All these two are trashed, don't know if they're bad. The scholar in me has bound hand and foot. How long has he been dead? So now, will it be hermeneutic or performative?

[74:35]

You want performative? Singing and dancing. Step right up, walk right in Daddy, let your mind roll on Step right up, walk right in Daddy, let your mind roll on Everybody's talking about a new way of walking Do you want to lose your mind? Walk right in. Walk right in. Okay. Okay, walk right in. Sit right down. Walk right in.

[75:39]

Sit right down. Daddy, don't you mind rolling on? Walk right in. Sit right down. Everybody's talking about a new way of walking till you want to lose your mind. Now you want the hermeneutic. You're happy now? Yeah. Oh, great. Next. Okay, I want to give you a homework assignment among this case because... So, here's the case, right?

[76:43]

And then after the case... This guy who's collecting the stories, he chooses... The man who's collecting the stories, his name is Tien Tung, right? And he chooses to bring in two other teachers, Shren Sha and Yen Mun, and tell you what they said about this case. All right? Shrensa said, this indeed, or this is exactly the second moon. And Yunmeng says, the butler watches the maid politely, or seeing the maid, the butler takes care. Then in the verse, he brings up these guys again. He talks about Cloudy Cliff, and he says, borrowing temporarily, Cloud Cliff comprehends the gateway.

[77:48]

Realizing the function as is appropriate, enlightened way, then rests. And then he says, the snake handler on elephant bone crag The Snake Handler on Elephant Bone Crag refers to a story about Yun Men and Shren Sha and Shui Feng. That's case 22 of the Blue Cliff Record. So this is a little complicated. This is a story about busyness, okay, and one who's not busy. Now here's a very busy kind of construction that's been created here, which I'll explain to you, and then you can study the case if you want to.

[78:52]

But I'll tell you the story and see if you can learn the story. Shui Fung, which means, by the way, cloudy summit or snowy summit, Shui Fung is a teacher... Huh? X-E-U... Yeah. Shui Fung. Yeah. So, he's a teacher of Chongqing, Shrensha, and Yunmen. Okay? So, he says... Shui Fung says, he taught the assembly in this way. He said, on South Mountain, there's a turtle-nosed snake. All you people must take a good look.

[79:53]

So Shui Fung lived on a mountain called Elephant Bone Crag. So snowy mountains, his temples on Elephant Bone Crag. And in the front of his temple, temples are oriented towards the south, like Tassajara is too. There's a hill in front of Tassajara, on the south side of Tassajara. In his temple too, Elephant Bone Crag, there was a hill in front of there and they called it South Hill or South Mountain. So he addresses the assembly and he says to his monks, on South Mountain there's a turtle nose snake. You people must take a good look. Now a turtle nose snake is one of these real old snakes. And these snakes are venomous. And these snakes have eaten all Buddhas and Zen pioneers. They've already done that.

[80:57]

After you're eaten by this snake, you then become such a snake. And you can eat others and digest them, and they come out as snakes too. Okay? So the person who's constructing this case tells a story about these two monks, and then he brings in these other two monks commenting on this story, Shrensha and Yunmun. And then, in the verse he writes, he refers to a story about these two guys and their teacher, and one of their Dharma brothers. And the story is that the teacher says, you people, that there is on South Mountain a turtle-nosed snake. You people should take a good look. Okay? And then, Chongqing, Dharma brother of Shrensha and Yunmen, says, in the hall today, there certainly are people who are losing their bodies and their lives.

[82:13]

Then later, a monk related this story to Shrensha, Dharma brother of Chongqing, and a commenter on this case, the one who said, this indeed is the second moon. Shrensha says, what did he say? He said, only Chongqing could talk like this. In other words, He can talk like this. Only he can talk like this. However, nevertheless, I'm not like that. And the monk said, well, how about you, teacher? And Shrensha says, why use South Mountain? At that time, Yun Men was hanging around. and he threw his staff in the ground, and in front of the teacher, Shui Fung, making a gesture of fright, as though it were a snake.

[83:30]

Okay, did you understand that? I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't understand it. Okay, so the scene is, the teacher says to all the monks, you people should know, there's a turtle-nosed snake on South Mountain out there, you people should have a good look. And then his senior disciple says, you know, in this hall today, there are certainly people who are losing their bodies and their lives to the snake. Okay. Aren't they telling him he's the snake? Yes. All of them said that in their own way. Yes. The snake is not across the way. Exactly, and that's what Shrensha says. Shrensha says, my elder brother can say that.

[84:32]

He can say, all the people here, there are people here, some people, who are certainly losing their lives. My elder brother can talk like that, but only he can talk like that. I did not like that. And the monk says, well, how are you, teacher? So Shrensha is someplace else with his own students, and he hears about this story about his elder brother and his teacher. And he says, that's okay. My elder brother can talk like that. Only he can talk like that. I'm not like that. What about you, teacher? Why use South Mountain? That's what you're saying. Why use South Mountain? Why use Shre Phong? And then Yunmen, Cloudy Gate, the great Yunmen, he throws down his staff and goes, as though it were this turtlenose snake. And now, Tien Tung says, the snake handler of Elephant Bone Crag. The snake handler of Elephant Bone Crag is Yunmen, the younger of these three disciples, and the

[85:40]

you know, the most famous of the three. Thousands of years later, he's the most famous. He was the youngest. He threw down his staff. It's kind of like Michael. He threw down his staff. He's the snake handler of elephant bone crag. And then the doings of childhood seem shameful when you're old. So the verse sounds like it's criticizing this monk for throwing down his staff as though that were the snake. But as you'll notice if you read the commentary, Wan San does not agree. So it's a simple story, and now I'm exposing you to this complication here. So can you remember the story? If you can't, you can read it in the Blue Cliff record, Case 22. But I think it'd be better if you just learned it right now.

[86:45]

Do you know it now? Anybody who doesn't know it, it'd probably be good to say so, and then you can learn it right now. You don't know it? OK, what do you know? What's the beginning of the story? You know Shui Fung? Xue Feng, you know him? You know what he said to his monks? He said, there is a turtle-nosed snake on South Mountain. All you people should have a good look. Can you say that? There's a turtle-nosed snake on South Mountain. All you people should have a good look. Who said that? Xue Feng. Where did he live? Near South Mountain. What was the name of the mountain he lived on? Elephant bone crag. Elephant bone crag.

[87:46]

Right. It says there, elephant bone crag. The handler, the snake handler of elephant bone crag. You know who that was? Huh? I know some of the other names. Ian Mann. Ian Mann. Ian Mann was his disciple who was the snake handler, right? You know what Ian Mann did? Right, that's yin-men. He threw it on his staff and went, ah, as though it were a snake, okay? And you know what Chongqing said to Xue Feng? No, Tiantong said that. That's in the Book of Serenity. So in the initial thing, the teacher says, you people, on South Mountain there's a snake who eats all the Buddhism ancestors and makes them into Buddhism ancestors. All right? You people should go have a good look.

[88:48]

And then Chongqing says, right here in this room there certainly is somebody or somebodies who are losing their bodies and lives. That's that story, okay? And later, Shrensha, a monk, and Yunmen are together in another little setting, and Shrensha says, that's okay for Elder Chongqing to say, but I'm not like that. The monk says, how about you, teacher? And he says, why you, South Mountain? And then Yuen Min throws down his staff and goes . And then Tien Tung is talking about that event. And apparently, he's talking about Yuen Min, who is the snake handler of elephant bone crag. And what you do as a youngster, aren't you ashamed of now?

[89:51]

This thing, OK? So, anyway, there it is. So you need to get familiar with this, I think, in order to understand what's going on in this case. Yeah? Who says, why be concerned with South Mountain? Shrensha. The teacher says, on South Mountain there's a snake. You know, looking out of the Dharma Hall, and there's a hill, and Brother Dharma Hall says, over on that hill, there's a snake. You guys should have a look. then his head student says, there's people in this hall who have already been losing their bodies and their lives, okay? Who said that? Chongqing. That's that story. And later, another disciple says, why use South Mountain? He says, okay, that my elder talks like that, but only he can talk like that. I'm not like that. I have to do something different.

[90:52]

And what I have to say is, why you self-know? That's what Martha said, too. Okay? And then Yin-Man throws his staff down, and he gets criticized for it, apparently, in his verse. So there it is. That's the kind of information you need to do this background work, if you want to do it. If you don't do it, then it's going to be hard to understand what's going on in the verse and so on. Case 22 of the Blue Cliff record, if you want to read it again. But we can go over it in class again if you don't want to read it. What I'm doing tonight is just setting the table for a feast. OK? It may take two or three weeks to set the table for this feast. Maybe not. Maybe just two. I'll try to do it in two weeks. And then we can eat on the third week.

[91:53]

Or at least start eating. But it takes some time to set the table for this case. We can... We can... What do you call it? We can do a... What do they call it? A three-piece setting. We could have done a three-piece setting just on the case, but I was actually going to try to set a full setting of the full case with the commentary before we eat. So this class is kind of setting it up. So don't be discouraged if you don't understand it yet. We're just getting geared up. This is equipping ourselves to deal with this case. Is our assignment to understand case formative? Case formative. In the Blue Cliff record? To understand it? Is that our assignment? No. Actually, I wouldn't advise you to try to understand that case and read all the commentary and everything. Just learn that case. Just learn Case 22. Case 22 just happens, for some reason, to be one of the most complicated cases in the Blue Cliff record. So don't try to get into the whole case.

[92:57]

Just learn the story. I think if you learn the story, that may be enough to follow what's going on in this case. I've had trouble with this. I've been using this story, but I've had trouble with this verse for a long time. So I'm taking you into that trouble land, into that briar patch, so to speak, of this verse. Because for a long time I couldn't figure why did he bring these people up in the first place in his verse? Why bring these other monks into this story? We had this nice simple story between these two people. Why is other people being brought in? That's part of what is going on here. It's complicated by this rather complicated story. And then these two people are also brought in and mixed in at the bottom of this case. So the people who want to hear the story can stay a little bit. The people who don't can go.

[93:58]

The joke. The joke. Oh, sorry. Yeah, let's hear it. Well, it pretty much, he's telling us in his book pretty much not to make the least distinction. But the place that I found where, I mean, where I can actually show you that he's saying this stuff is, do you want to read it? Just show me where it is. Where is it? First, learn how to be entirely unreceptive to sensations arising from the external forms and thereby purge your bodies of receptivity to externals. Second, learn not to pay attention to any distinctions between this and that arising from your sensations

[95:01]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_84.44