I am bound to taste the truth of that which I have just heard. Good evening, everybody. Okay. Yeah, I did. Okay. So, last time, we went over the lines that go, right in darkness there is light, but don't see it as light. Right in light there is darkness, but don't confront it as darkness. Remember that? And I rendered it as,

[01:01]

in the middle of light there is darkness, but do not meet it with the characteristics of darkness. In the middle of darkness there is light, but do not see it with the characteristics of light. And we talked about, basically, in commenting on that part, we discussed the idea of, you know, when, basically, you know, when in Rome. In other words, when you're in the midst of differentiation, knowing that differentiation is rooted in oneness, you treat it like differentiation. You don't try to see it as oneness and not totally embrace differentiation as such. And the other way around.

[02:03]

When the experience of oneness arises or is called for, you completely embrace it as oneness and unite with it. You don't try to define it or differentiate it. So, in other words, an experience of enlightenment or oneness, you don't name it and contrast it and compare it to your other experiences in your life. And when it comes time for real world positions and decisions and activities, you do it on its own terms. You don't fuzz everything over with a kind of aura of oneness. Even though you know that those individual things of this world are rooted in oneness. So you know that it's oneness, but you don't confront it as oneness. And you know that it's darkness, but you don't confront it. You know darkness is in the middle of light, but you don't confront it as darkness. And you know that light is in the middle of darkness, but you don't see it as light. Anyway, that's how I kind of interpreted those lines.

[03:08]

So, that brings us up to the next part. Next lines, which are kind of a continuation of that. Then we talked about forward and backward feet, which is the next part. Light and dark position each other, like forward and backward feet in walking. Remember that? That it's this mountain and that mountain. Remember all that? Light and dark are actually not anything. They're just positions. They're just ways that phenomena might appear to us at a particular moment. They're simply concepts, really. And then Suzuki Roshi, who said, when you were actually walking, there is no front foot or back foot. It's only when you stop to think about it that there's a front foot and a back foot. Which is to say, light and dark, these lines are telling us, light and dark are just concepts.

[04:12]

And something that appears as oneness could appear the next minute as differentiation. These are just concepts, positions, not substantial things. Then the next part, 10,000 things. Each of the 10,000 things has its particular virtue. Our job is to distinguish the appropriate use and situation. We spoke of how everything in our lives, even defilements and afflictions and problems, have a particular virtue. It's a question of figuring out and knowing what's appropriate in a given situation, appreciating everything, but knowing that at a given moment something is called for and something isn't called for. And about how trial and error, guidance from the teachings and our own process of practice, we train ourselves to figure out and have an instinct and an intuition

[05:19]

about what's appropriate at any given time. And this takes patience and energy. But when we do get the hang of it, then we have more of a sense of flowing with our lives. It's not so deliberate, like we have to figure out every minute what's appropriate in some sort of deliberate way. And that's as far as we got. Remember all that, just a little quick review. And then the next lines are... How do they go? Phenomena exist like box and cover joining. Principle accords like arrow points meeting. And Kastanahasi translates those lines as... When things are as they are, the lid fits the box.

[06:24]

Realizing essence is like arrowheads meeting in mid-air. And Master Sheng-Yen has a kind of different translation here. He says, When things are as they are, the lid fits the box. Phenomena stores, seals, covers, combines. So he doesn't translate the words box and cover literally. Those words are there. In the original text, he sort of interprets those words as box and cover stores and seals and covers and so on. So he interprets there a little bit. Principle yields to the arrow, the sword's edge, the stick. So he has a little bit of free translation there. Because it doesn't say the sword's edge or the stick at all. It says arrow points meeting in mid-air. Not mid-air, arrow points meeting. So he's being pretty free there. And then I was looking up Tessigan's commentary.

[07:27]

It's really interesting because... I mean, not his commentary. His translation of those lines is... The relative fits the absolute as a box and its lid. The absolute meets the relative like two arrow points that touch high in the air. That's very close to the way we used to do it in Berkeley. Oh yeah? Ordinary life fits the absolute as a box and its lid. The absolute works together with the relative like two arrows. Yeah. Well, it's much easier to understand that way. Because then both those lines are talking about the relationship between relative and absolute. And both images are images of things fitting together so closely that they cancel each other out. In other words, two things fitting really closely together. So that interpretation makes the whole thing much easier to think about. However, it doesn't seem like it actually says that.

[08:30]

That's the trouble. Now, I don't know if you can follow this, but I can see it's like a sort of a... If the characters go like this, it says, like it says, phenomena exist. Phenomena exist. But in Chinese, grammar is funny, so you don't know. It could be phenomena existence. The phenomena existence box and cover join. So the obvious way to read that, I mean, the way you would read it is phenomena exist like box and cover join. But I guess you could say, phenomena is differentiation. Existence is oneness. You could... That would be bending the grammar a little bit or the usual understanding of Chinese grammar. And the next one says, principle corresponds like arrow points meeting.

[09:35]

So you could read principle as, you know, unity and corresponds because two things corresponding, a differentiation. It seems like a stretch, you know. Yeah, but what I'm saying is you could read corresponds as differentiation and exists as oneness. And you see what I'm saying? There's four characters. One is phenomena, existence, principle and correspondence. And you could say that means, phenomena means differentiation, existence means unity, principle means unity, correspondence means differentiation. And that's how they could get that translation. But it sounds like a stretch. Maybe you didn't follow that, but anyway, I'm just telling you that with some stretch they could get. The relative fits the absolute as a box in its lid. The absolute meets the relative like two arrow points meeting.

[10:36]

And certainly the whole poem is about the relationship between the relative and the absolute, so that would make sense in terms of the poem. But I thought of it more in line with... And both these translations that I've read you don't do it that way. So, I try to think about it just as phenomena exist like a box in its lid, the principle or the underlying pattern matches itself like arrow points meeting. The box in its lid, of course, is like a Chinese box where the box and the lid fit so perfectly and seamlessly that you can't tell the difference. It looks like one thing. You can't tell where you would open up the box. It's made so perfectly and so subtly. So it's an image of things fitting together so perfectly that you can't differentiate them. You can't tell which is the box and which is the lid.

[11:40]

And the absolute or the underlying pattern... Remember, we talked about these Chinese philosophical terms of phenomena and principle, which are used as synonyms for differentiation and unity. But these two... But this underlying pattern somehow matches itself like arrow points meeting in the mid-air, which refers to this... We talked about this when we studied the Okyazamai, a famous story of an archer who was a great archer and was super accurate and no one could ever equal him. And then he had a disciple who wanted to surpass the master, and so he shot an arrow into the air and had a target that was going to show up the master. And the master suddenly shot an arrow into his arrow and the two arrows met in the middle of the air perfectly

[12:43]

and when they met each other they were rendered sort of mutually powerless and they just sort of fell to earth. So in the Okyazamai it actually talks about arrow points meeting in mid-air and what has this to do with skill. This is beyond skill. This is some sort of natural ability to be in tune with the universe somehow. Anyway, I think that's the same story that's referred to here. So I thought about the lines as they seem to be written. Phenomena exist like a box in its lid. Things appear to be different. As we know, our world is full of difference and difference equals trouble and things don't work the way we like and things don't quite fit, you know what I mean, ever. There's problems and difficulties and challenges and so forth and so on.

[13:43]

But appreciating the sun do kai we can see that actually things fit perfectly together. Everything that occurs is a perfect fit. Seamless. So our life becomes one seamless life and living in accord with sun do kai we don't have the kind of problems that come from seeing... In other words, if we see difference absolutely as difference and we don't see that it's rooted in oneness we see that things don't fit together. But if we understand that all differences are rooted in oneness then things fit together really well so that even though they're different, one can't see them as different. And the opposite with the next line in the underlying pattern, which seems like one thing there is opposition.

[14:47]

Even in oneness there is differentiation and opposition. It's a little bit like the previous lines, you know, right in darkness there is light. Well here, right in oneness there is a pattern of differentiation and opposition. But the opposition meets perfectly and doesn't really appear as opposition. Connecting these lines to the last set of lines when we train ourselves in this way that I spoke about last week appreciating oneness and differentiation and then working by trial and error to harmonize and find a way of meeting situations appropriately then things fit seamlessly. You imagine the life of a true Zen person

[15:51]

to be seamless and flowing. Not with problems that come from attachment and confusion but just meeting conditions, right? Meeting conditions moment after moment acting appropriately. I don't mean politely or with decorum necessarily but appropriately according to temperament in the situation. Absolute and relative are just two positions that are always present. They don't really exist. There's no such thing as absolute and relative. There's only the flow of living with things fitting together like a Chinese box. And when there is opposition as there naturally will be that opposition is like two arrow points meeting in mid-air. The opposition is met perfectly and things proceed without pushing and pulling. So, I think that these lines kind of express

[16:52]

how a person would live if one was in perfect accord with Sandokai. And I have a little note here that says opposition becomes harmony and meeting becomes separation. So, opposition becomes harmony as two arrow points meeting in mid-air. So, in our living if we were really to live in accord with Sandokai when opposition arose it would become harmony. And when meeting arose like the box and the cover joining there would be perfect meeting but at the same time there would be the understanding that it was two different things. So, each person say, in any case of meeting there would be each member of the meeting would have his own aloneness and dignity and yet there would be meeting. Something like that.

[17:53]

So, those are my thoughts on those lines. And I see them as a continuation of the past two lines which for me are about the day by day little by little practice of living in accord with Sandokai. And this is what a monastic schedule is for. It's to create a situation in which that kind of living the smoothness of that kind of living the seamlessness of that kind of living the harmony of that kind of living could actually be realized. We sort of create a situation in which one sees at every point the oneness inherent in all the differentiation of our lives. So, that brings us to the next part. When hearing the words you should understand the source.

[18:58]

Don't make up standards on your own. And here it says when it comes to words you must understand their true meaning. Don't set up arbitrary standards. When it comes to words you must understand their true meaning. Don't set up arbitrary standards. Which is pretty much the same. Don't you think? Pretty much the same. And Shengyan says he has a little different view. Received teachings must be reconciled with basic principle. Do not establish your own rules. So, it's interesting in this text and elsewhere in Chinese Buddhist philosophy and you find this too in the Koan literature words and language

[20:00]

are taken to be just special cases of differentiation. So, in other words there's not that much difference between perception and differentiation and words. Words are just a form of that. So often when you see the character for words it also means to distinguish or to designate something. Because it's so axiomatic in Buddhist thought that perception is already creating something. You know, like in our ordinary everyday way of thinking you don't really have the idea of a world of oneness. We just think of the phenomenal world. So, there's a big difference between the phenomenal world and language. Stuff and then words

[21:04]

that describe that stuff. But when you have such a big consciousness of the oneness of things the whole realm that isn't even part of everyday discourse then you see that on the one hand you have this sense of oneness nirvana, enlightenment, unity. On the other hand you have differentiation and language all in one pot. So, when it says words here it means words but it also means any kind of discrimination. So, you can translate the lines. Hearing the words you should understand the essence or the source. You could also translate it as making distinctions you should understand the essence. You should understand the place where there are no distinctions. You see that? Don't establish your own rules. That's how I translate it. Hearing words you should understand their essence. Don't establish your own rules. And actually in his commentary Suzuki Roshi says this too that it refers to words but also it can refer to any kind of

[22:04]

distinguishing or designation. Because like I say, perception is already a designation. As soon as we see anything we've already committed a linguistic act. This is understood in the Buddhist analysis of perception. It's kind of an astonishing thing when you think about it. Because we think of perception as being such a physical act. But in Buddhist psychology the act of perception already involves designation. So, I thought Master Shen Yen had a nice comment here. And I'll just read his comment. Received teaching must be reconciled with basic principle. Do not establish your own rules. He says no matter what you read, what you learn, no matter how Buddhadharma is explained all of it is expedient teaching. Which is to say useful teaching but not literal, not to be held on to as literally true. I might speak of enlightenment and practice

[23:06]

but it is separate from the fundamental principle. As long as we speak and use our minds we must remain aware that we are discriminating. The fundamental principle is non-differentiation. And so, whatever can be described is only expedient teaching. Buddhadharma exists for those who are unenlightened. The Tao exists for people who are still walking the Buddha path. Those who are fully enlightened understand that the Tao or the path is not the true path. It is a convenient teaching for those who need to be taught. In other words, in the midst of the Sandokai, really living that and really immersed in that, there's no path. There's no teaching, there's no nothing. It's all just candy for babies to help us, to bring us along and try to psych us up to do something. But there's nothing to do. We see that when we're totally immersed in it. When a bird flies across the sky, it doesn't leave a trace. There was no trace

[24:10]

before the bird arrived. I think this image of the bird, the traceless, trackless sky path of the bird was something that Dungshan brought up. And I think we somewhere, someplace, in a Dharma talk or a class, I brought up. Right? So there was no trace of that was a form of life or a dream. I sometimes... There was no trace before the bird arrived and there will be no trace after the bird departs. Still we speak of the bird's path. The Dharma spoken by Buddha and the path transmitted by the ancestors are like traces left behind by birds. If you say there is such a thing as the Buddha path, that is incorrect. However, if you say there is no such thing as the Buddha path, that would also be incorrect. Because there is a track in the sky, it's just that it's nothing. The bird did go there. There is a way the bird went, but you can't. We should not be attached to the words

[25:11]

of the Buddha. Buddha never said that he had spoken the ultimate truth. In fact, he said he spoke not a word in his 49 years of teaching. There's a sutra that says this. I never said a single word. Even though there's volumes. I never said a single word. His teachings were only expedient means. He also said that his words were medicine for a given sickness at a given time. So this is a wonderful, very simple and clear expression of Zen attitude. Or at least one of the fundamental Zen attitudes toward the scriptures and the words of the Buddha. And it's indicated by the first story of transmission. The first transmission story of Zen which we all know very well

[26:12]

of Buddha transmitting the Dharma to Makashapa is pointedly a wordless transmission. And it's why in Zen the transmission doesn't go from Buddha to Ananda. Because Ananda is the one who heard all the Buddha's teachings and memorized all the Buddha's teachings. But it's Makashapa who only understood the Buddha's meaning apart from the words. The Buddha held up a flower and Makashapa smiled. And in that begins the Zen lineage. So it's very pointedly described that way. And I really feel myself, I feel that this is not just an idea or something cool or something like that. It seems to me more like something really true. That there's an essence of the Buddha's mind. An essence of

[27:14]

not the Buddha's mind but a way of having a feel for life. That the Buddha appreciated and saw in the course of his own spiritual journey. And that he tried as much as he could to explain it and help people to experience what he experienced and indicate when he saw people being off in various ways, he would say, no, no, this way and that way and tried to explain. But basically it's this feeling or a vision almost of life that the Buddha saw that he tried to get his descendants to see as well. And that the Zen school really focuses on that feeling, on that attitude or whatever you want to call it, take on life. And that it's not in the words, it's not in the particular doctrine. It's not a

[28:14]

doctrine at all. It's a kind of a feeling for life. So Sheng Yen really indicates this, that you really have to see for yourself what's what. You can't be blinded by principles or ideologies or Buddhist ideas or anything like that. And most especially, and this is where the next line comes in, don't establish your own rules. So hearing the words you should understand their essence means understand this mind of Buddha that is transmitted from Buddha to Mahakasyapa all the way to the present. Understand that and if you can understand that then the words are great. The teachings are great, the sutras are great. It's not that the sutras are to be denigrated. The sutras are great, but if you don't understand the essence then the sutras don't mean much. So hearing the sutras, understand the real mind of Buddha and don't be confused by the sutras. And even worse than being confused by the sutras is being confused by yourself. In other words, your own self-centeredness.

[29:16]

So when it says don't establish your own rules that means don't be self-centered. Don't see things through the eye of the sutras. See it with your own eye and don't see things through the eye of your self-centeredness either because that would even be worse. So I was thinking about this today that it's very tempting and I think that we often do fall into a kind of to see the Dharma as a kind of being nice or having a certain view or acting a certain way and then we say that's the Dharma. We identify that as the Dharma. And of course it's a good idea to be good and nice to one another and kind and that's all well and good but sometimes that kind of identifying

[30:19]

a particular behavior, a particular way of doing things or a particular way of speaking or understanding as the Dharma itself can lead to great suffering because it leads to intolerance. We look at somebody and we say, well they're not. They don't look like they're doing it so they must be not as good as we are. So goodness easily leads, attaching to goodness or the teachings or something, some external appearance or even a particular understanding can lead to intolerance so we have to go beyond words and beyond received ideas and beyond discriminations of what we think the Dharma is to something deeper that we don't know what it looks like exactly. We really don't know in a given instance. Yes, yes, yes.

[31:22]

We haven't gotten to those lines yet. That's next. But yeah, that's right. And this last part of the Sandhokai really does zero in on this point. The point being that we told you all this stuff about oneness and differentiation and how one would practice and live one's life based on that. Now, at the end of the poem, we're telling you our Sakyuta Kisan is telling us bring it down to your own experience, your visceral actual experience and don't identify it with your self-centeredness, don't identify it with any doctrines, really live it. And the next lines, we're going to get to those lines in a moment if they say something similar. But I wanted to there's some great stuff from Suzuki Roshi in these last parts and I want to quote you this. Suzuki Roshi always amazes me because you never know what he's going to say. I mean, I often go back and read Zen Mind

[32:23]

Beginner's Mind and I've studied a lot of stuff about Buddhism over a long time. I mean, not that I'm an expert, but you hear all this stuff over and over again and you read the books and there's a lot of repetition in it and so forth. And then most books that I read, I will read a book and I'll say, oh, I understand where they got that teaching from, that's such and so. And I see where they got that from, that's such and so and such and so. But sometimes I read Suzuki Roshi and I think, where did he get that? I can't figure out where he could have possibly got that from. And there's a certain sort of sense of the rightness to what he's saying, but you don't know where he got it from. I think he just was yakking there based on his own deep feeling for the Dharma. I mean, there are times, of course, when he's quoting teachings and so on. But this is one of those cases where he says something that is really quite wonderful and you don't quite know what it has to do with anything, but there it is. So he was delivering the Sandokar

[33:24]

lectures at Tassajara, you know. And the Sandokar lectures are very much like this, I think I might have mentioned. Several people in Zen Center have been trying for maybe, I don't know, five to ten years to put together a book. Did I tell you this already? Yeah. So they have trouble because he wanders around and he rambles and it doesn't quite make any sense sometimes. Anyway, he says here, wherever you go, you should obey the rules of the place where you are. And the rules are important, but don't attack them. Then this is the direct quote. Rules are not the point. And he's speaking here at Tassajara where there's a lot of rules. And this is in the early days where people couldn't get used to the idea that there were rules. Nowadays we're so used to it that we to a fault. But in those days everybody was a hippie and like, what? You mean I have to get up for Zazen? You're kidding me. I can't wear my... People used to go to Zazen totally naked under their robes.

[34:25]

What? I have to wear underwear? Are you kidding? So there are rules. So rules are not the point, he says. Rules are not the point. Rules are not the point. So by observing rules you will understand what is the real teaching. See? Rules are not the point. Don't attach to rules. But by observing rules you will understand what is the real teaching. From the beginning this point is missing in all of us. Most of the people start to study Zen to know what Zen is. This is already wrong. It means they are always trying to provide some understanding or rules for themselves. Interesting. The way you study Zen you should be like a fish picking up food. They do not try to catch anything.

[35:30]

And then in the text it indicates that he's imitating this. They do not try to catch anything. They just swim around. And if something good comes along they snap it up. In other words, the way to study Zen so you see what he's saying this has to do with hearing the words you should understand their essence. Don't establish your own rules. He's saying to try to understand Zen and to get what it is is why people try to study Zen. But that's already the wrong thing because if you were to understand Zen so that understanding itself becomes a kind of a rule that you can attach to. We don't want any understanding. We're not trying to get any understanding because understanding isn't the point at all. We're already wrong

[36:32]

if we're trying to get understanding. What we should do is just swim around like a fish. The idea is the fish is swimming around with its mouth open. It's not like hunting around. And that's what they do. Whenever I go to Tassajara I always check out the scene down below the coffee tea area. Because I used to fish when I was young and seeing a big trout was one of the great thrills of life because you didn't often see them. They'd be lurking and you couldn't see them. If you could ever see a big trout you'd be like, wow. So I'm still thrilled when I see these trout down there. And they kind of hover there facing upstream and they just, whenever something comes down, they go, and if nothing comes they're just there the whole time. They're totally alert all the time. They don't take breaks. They're not studying for later on or something like that. They're always just there just like he says. So that's the way we should study Zen. If something comes along, fine. If nothing comes along, fine.

[37:33]

You're just there hovering around with your mouth open like a fish. But they also know where to hover. Yeah, they know where to hover. Well, but they find a spot that suits them. And maybe nothing comes. Then he quotes Dogen. He continues by quoting Dogen. No bird flies in the sky after knowing what is the sky and what is its limit. That's his translation of that part. I guess, wherever that is, Genjo Koan. They just fly, he says. That's how we practice Zazen. So that's a wonderful expression. We're all so focused on results and how do we do it and are we getting it or are we not getting it? Are we making progress? What's happening? We want to know what's happening. We want to see if it's right. But you can see that that whole way of approaching life is already a problem. Even if we do understand Zen, even if we do get enlightened, even if we do improve in a hundred ways,

[38:34]

still, you know, that whole approach is already going to lead to problems even though all things improve and we get smarter. So anyway, that's his comment. It's a very interesting comment, I think. On hearing the words, you should understand their essence don't establish their own rules. Well, maybe I should stop for now and see what you have to bring up. Yes? Yeah, and something else that occurred to me about that line. Could that maybe also be a comment you mentioned at some point earlier about the Northern and Southern school? And sort of like bringing that in, that maybe people were getting too attached on the moralistics of it or whatever. It's not in the words. It's not in their ideas about what it is. Yeah, I think you're really right there.

[39:35]

And Suzuki Roshi mentioned this also in his comment on those lines. And that's one of the layers of meaning in the text is that I think we mentioned it early on when he mentioned Northern and Southern schools that one of the things he was doing in the text is trying to focus on this deeper sense of what the teaching was. And say, forget these debates about Northern and Southern schools. All the aspects of Buddhism have their place. It's a matter of really seeing the essence. So I think you're right. People were very focused on Northern school and Southern school and this way of Zen and that way of Zen. There's a lot of debate at the time of Sekito Kisen who was an early one of the first of the post sixth ancestors Zen people. And there was a lot of debate about what Zen was and how you did it. So yeah, I think he is pointing to that very much so. That's one thing that is refreshing about the Buddhism

[40:36]

in the West at the moment is that it is not very sectarian. There's a lot of cooperation. Throughout the history of Asian Buddhism there was a lot of sectarian strife, despite this poem. Any other comments or questions? Yeah, Lee. So one might wonder why there are so many ceremonies and scribe practices so many rules so many what's the point of it? He says they're basically the gate towards no rules. The rules are the gate, yeah. But how does that work? Well, he says, he doesn't exactly say that it's that the rules are the gate to no rules. He says follow the rules

[41:37]

it's almost like acting appropriately. Follow the rules like he says there, I didn't read this part, but he says when you're in Tassajara you follow the rules of Tassajara. But when you go somewhere else you don't go and say they're all doing it wrong. They should do it like they do it at Tassajara. You figure out what's appropriate in that situation. You follow the rules there. And the rules even though the rules are not to be seen as absolutes because we understand that different situations have different rules through the following of the rules we find our way, we find oneness. I think it's the fish. In other words through fully engaging with our life. And I think by rules he means this rules in the widest possible sense. I mean the truth is there's always a way of doing whatever it is we're doing. I mean doing something in the way that it should be done is to be mindful, to be aware

[42:39]

in the doing of it, to be fully present in the doing of it. And then when we're fully there in the doing of our life without covering it over with ideas, whether they're Buddhist or otherwise without covering it over with ideas and with self-centeredness, but we're just giving ourselves to our life with the kind of way that a fish gives to its life or a bird gives to its life, just with that kind of sincere energy and effort which takes doing things in a certain way, in an appropriate way, then we realize the unity, the differentiation in that particular rule or way and the oneness we find through that. So it's through our living in other words, through our living. We live in a particular way, in a particular situation. There's always a particular way to be in any situation. We follow that through and we give ourselves to it wholeheartedly and in the doing of that, we find oneness. That's the idea.

[43:39]

Does that make sense? Yeah. There's a tendency I think that you're saying that we're always making rules up. We're always having judgments. Constantly having judgments and we're deluding ourselves and constantly living in our judgments and that to have rules that are like mutually agreed upon practices or something like that can remind us that we're doing that. You know what I mean? The reason, I mean this way of thinking, the reason for having all these practices are just ways of reminding ourselves that we're constantly getting attached to our understandings. So at the monastery we have loads of them. So we're constantly being reminded of our tendency to be attached to making up rules. It's an upside down kind of thing. Yeah, it is. Yeah, it is. Right, you would think

[44:41]

that a lot of people have the preconception that rules don't matter in Zen or somehow you follow the rules to go beyond the rules but there's always rules and anytime we're in the world of physical world, the world of differentiation, there's always a way of doing something. So wherever you go, you always have to figure out how to do and be in that spot. Whatever it is. And you can't preconceive of what that's going to be. You have to find the appropriate way to harmonize with it. Yeah, Andrew. I feel a lot of conflict about the whole idea of getting getting well, he's talking about how

[45:43]

and you talked also about how often we get caught up in how to do things, how to do things right. Are we on the path? That's pretty common for me. And I've had these glimmering moments of like, well, gee, what would it be like to not to actually not be attached to the results? Somebody was talking about something and said, well, maybe changing your behavior isn't the point. And it never occurred to me. It was like, well, of course that's the point. And so there's these moments of possibility that are exciting. But they're really hard to know what to do with because if we're constantly meeting the world of conditions and stuff and if it's changing, which it is, then a lot of, my energy at least, has to go into trying to

[46:45]

figure out what the appropriate behavior is. Here it's actually, in a way, simple. It's kind of anal, but at least you can estimate it. But out in the world there's nobody to ask. It's always shifting. The stakes seem so high. It's just so intense. So there's this huge desire to know when to gulp for the food and know where to position yourself in the stream. And I find that that makes it really hard to maintain this sort of fragile possibility of there being, not something other than that, but there being something behind that, something around that. So that. Well, I think that with training the whole world

[47:46]

is really a monastery. It's the same actually. Because wherever you go, there's rules. There's a schedule. There's always a schedule. You know? And there's always somebody's always doing in some way or another. I mean, really. I feel that. I feel that the world has its own. When you really when you really internalize the Zen life, and as I said earlier in discussing, last week in discussing this line about all things have their virtue. It's a matter of finding the appropriate situation and the appropriate place. That's the training. That's the day by day by day finding your balance, finding your center within the situation of the schedule and the practice. And then when that's how you live, then wherever you go, you find a similar

[48:47]

situation. It's just the arrangements are slightly different. Just like if you go from one monastery to another monastery, the rules are a little different. You've got to figure out. They do Kinyin differently. They do Zazen differently. They put on the robes. Little differences. And it takes you a couple days to sort of figure, oh, I see. They do it this way here. And you get it after a few days. And it's the same anywhere. You go somewhere else. You go to a factory. I see. They have different rules. This is how they do that. And so you kind of keep your eyes open and you stay centered and you harmonize with it. And now, a lot of the stuff you were talking about is the fear and terror and difficulty that comes up with our attachment, where we're worried about the results and we're worried about getting knocked off and all this stuff. So that's all real. I mean, I'm not saying that that's not real. We feel those things and it is difficult. But I think how I read those lines is that with an appreciation, with a training in this Sandokai, in this way of life, we can actually

[49:48]

live with a certain sense of equanimity and smoothness and appropriateness and so on. That we can actually do that. Whether we're in a monastery or not, that this is really possible. And I feel that this is so. I don't think this is a fantasy or something like that. I think it's really so. I don't say that it's easier that you can do it after one practice period or one year or two years or maybe even after five years. But if you devote yourself to your practice over time, it takes a long time, one can just live your life, right? I mean, it's not that big a thing. Just live your life without confusion and attachment and without making too big of a mess all the time. I think that's possible. But that's a good one about the fish. You remember that. What else? I have several thoughts.

[50:55]

I'm a little distracted by what you brought up. I was thinking about the rules. For me, the underlying principle and the way to observe is how everything is concepts. Well, this is my own thing, but in a way, until I stand next to you, I don't really know that I'm short. In fact, I think Ruth talked about that once where she always had this idea that she was tall, because she was the tallest person in a short family and people always thought that she was short because she was the shortest one. They're both right, though. But also, it kind of gives you this perspective you were talking about, which is how I feel about our ritual and our rules, is that if you have something to meet, then you actually can think about that line

[51:57]

in Darwin about studying the self. So, you do that by meeting. Meeting. Yeah, I think Lee had a similar point. It's very similar to what you were saying. The rules are almost like a mirror. Yeah, that's right. You see yourself quite... Because monastic rules are... It's real obvious that there are rules. With monastic rules, it's real clear. These are the rules because they're so arbitrary. But in the world at large, you could miss it that there are rules because it seems like this is just ordinary life. There's no rules here. But, of course, there's enormous rules that we're taught from little babies. You could see the similar kind of thing, and I bet Jamea could have some great stories for us. When you go to another culture, and all the rules the received rules of that culture are totally different, and you feel like... I know I felt like the biggest

[52:57]

idiot in the world when I was in Japan. Everything I did. First of all, I was this huge, ungainly creature. And I never felt huge or ungainly, but in Japan I felt like, God, it's embarrassing. Because the houses are all not built for people this big. And then everything that happens you're off balance all the time because you realize there's enormous rules here that everybody knows the rules but me. But we don't think that way because we're all acculturated. Most people live in their own cultures. So, we don't see any rules. But in a monastery it's obvious that there are rules, and so then we're faced up against ourselves, just as we are. That's why people like to travel, to some extent. Because a similar kind of thing happens when you travel. Although nowadays you don't have to worry about that because you just can go from one Hertz Renekar to the other. You know, and the club med, anywhere, even in Beijing, you can probably go to the club med and you don't have to worry about

[53:59]

that. But I think that takes the fun out of traveling. I thought at this point, it's kind of redundant, but when you were talking about phenomenons like wax and cover shining, it reminded me of the kind of looping back to the beginning about form and emptiness, where phenomena were kind of formed in a way where the arrows were like, I think of the pentacle rising, but like emptiness, where things perfectly meet to make the form what it is. So you mean, things exist because of a net of causality that causes them to appear. So all things fit together to produce one thing. Because of emptiness which creates this

[55:00]

form. Yeah, causality. It seemed like yes, I've heard that. Yeah. That's a good reading. I was interested because I thought about Catholic religion, which in certain cases, obviously every religion has its problems, but traditionally they've been somewhat degenerate as far as saying, these are the rules, don't question your faith, don't question this. That's kind of the path, just don't question it. Don't question it. They may be pulling a psychological trick on you or whatever, but since you're encouraged not to question it, you're more vulnerable to it. I was wondering how should we be when we approach these teachings, should we be doubting that this is really

[56:02]

what's right for us? How is there a safeguard in the teaching that we're not just deceiving ourselves? Uh-huh. Well, last... When was that? It was on Saturday, yeah. We had a one-day sitting and I was talking about this in the Dharma talk. Remember in the beginning I said, I quoted this sutra where the Buddha goes to a village and people in the village are very confused because they've had lots of spiritual teachers coming through and each one is giving different teachings and they don't know what to believe. And they ask the Buddha and here the Buddha shows up and he's going to give them more teachings and so they say, we don't know what to think. You know, we keep getting all these wonderful, wise men and women are coming through and they have all these great teachings and how are we supposed to know what's true?

[57:02]

And that's when the Buddha says that very famous thing where he says, don't accept something because it's a tradition. It's not a good enough reason to believe it. And don't believe it because the teacher who's telling you is impressive or you want to impress him or her or you think they're a great person. The only reason that you would believe and have faith in a teaching is because you have tested it out yourself and found it to be true in your own experience. And that is, you know, one of the cardinal most often, you know, cited sayings of the Buddha and certainly Zen is that way too. So, yeah, you need to check it out in your own experience. Now, of course, if you think about it for a minute, you realize that there are many things that you formerly thought were not so that you later came to feel were so. So you have a certain humility about your own experience and a certain kind of thoughtfulness where you recognize that your

[58:04]

first impression might not be accurate. So you're willing to stay with something for a while until you determine after some experience whether it's true or not. Because there are plenty of things that we hear and we say, I don't believe that. Forget that. But how do you know? You just heard it once and it didn't make sense and you reject it out of hand. So there's a sense in which you say, well, I'm going to take something up and practice with it and check it out and find out for myself whether I believe it or not. And that's very much the spirit of Buddhadharma. And, you know, I quoted earlier Master Shengyin who says, all the teachings are just expedient devices, right? Meaning, they're just medicine applied to a wound. So, if it heals, it's good. If it doesn't heal, then find something else. So I think that's very much the spirit. So you have to just test it out. Use your own experience to see what's true for you. Yeah, Rain.

[59:05]

I was just thinking about what Hans was talking about. I was just wondering how can we totally surrender ourselves to the forms and the rules and at the same time test them out because it seems like a huge contradiction. It's really, really hard for me. I see. Well, actually it's not because all you have to do is, you know, you make a scientific experiment, right? So then you say, well, we're going to test this experiment. It won't work unless we test 150 samples, right? Test 150 of these things and see what statistics we can come up with. So you test the first two and you say, well, I don't know. I'm going to stop now. Well, you won't get the results. You've got to test all those 150, right? And different things are going to happen. At the end of the experiment, then you can stop. Don't test anymore and see what the results are. So a training period is like that. The experiment is these weeks. You see? So you say,

[60:07]

the test of it is, yeah, you surrender to the schedule. You surrender to the experience for this amount of time and you see what happens. And, of course, you have many experiences during that time. Oh, the schedule is wonderful. Life is wonderful. Oh, I hate it. It's stupid. Why are these people doing this? Why am I doing this? How come I'm doing this? Or it's the most wonderful thing I ever... You notice, right? There's some variety, right? In terms of your relationship to it. So you observe that and that's part of what happens. But the experiment is, I'm doing this for this amount of time and then I'm going to see what I learned from it or didn't learn from it. So, listen. The day after the practice period, assuming that you're free to come and go, there's no reason for you to ever follow a Zen schedule again. You can be free, right? We'll all throw our hats in the air like when we graduate from West Point at the end of the practice period and we'll say, hey, forget it. That's the end of that. And we're all free.

[61:10]

We're liberated at the closing ceremony. And nobody ever has to sit a period of Zazen again if they don't want to. But between now and then, if you don't, then you will have blown the experiment. It'd be only like not testing a big enough sample to get the results. So, you put yourself in a box and you see what happens. You can do that even with the idea that it's not permanent or it's not... You know what I'm saying? Because it seems like even with that little bit of idea you're not surrendering to it 100%. Yeah, so surrender to it 100%. Just do the best. Yeah, just do it. And don't deny what your feelings are. In other words, if you hate it and you have real trouble with it, then deal with that. Don't pretend you don't or don't be ashamed of that. No, I mean, people do have trouble. And you have to deal with that. And you have to find out what's the source of that trouble. Is it in the schedule?

[62:12]

Or is it in my mind? Or is it both? Or neither? So, that's important. See, because you might escape from this schedule, but there are certain things that you won't escape from. You know? That's the problem. That's the... For example, your body is a schedule. Your body has a schedule, right? The schedule of your body is basically so many years of life and then decrepitude and death. That's the schedule. Well, you might not like that schedule. But that's a schedule that you can't, whether you like it or not, you're on that schedule. So, if you can sort of figure out how to understand and work with resistance to this little dinky little schedule, then the big schedule might begin to... you might begin to harmonize with that. And that's the point. That's why we have this schedule. Because it's just a way for us to understand the big schedule.

[63:14]

But everybody... You know, we have our little meeting of our little leaders. We get together. How's everything going? And when's the session? And are there enough seats in the Zendo? And this and that. And we used to endlessly have meetings about how so-and-so isn't following the schedule and so-and-so is constantly grabbing so-and-so and all this kind of stuff. But we said, well, there's nothing to say. All these people are following the schedule. They're all doing great. At least that's what they told me. I don't know. It's not true. But that's what all the leaders said. So apparently everybody in the practice period, anyway, is doing a wonderful job. Even you, Rain, are following the schedule, despite all your troubles with it. So that's amazing. I don't think that ever happened before. You probably... I shouldn't have told you that now. Because now everybody will start grabbing each other and sleeping in. Or both at the same time. So it's

[64:27]

great. Everybody is giving themselves to the schedule. Some people are happy about it and some people are not happy about it. But they're all doing it, just like a fish. Well, what else? Yes? Can we ever come to a system of rules that will last? Don't we always have to be open to testing our own rule and retesting them? No, I mean, rules are always changing, right? For sure. Even something as supposedly timeless as a monastic schedule is always changing. So then what is the rule? The rule may change tomorrow. I mean, don't... You can do whatever you want. I mean... Well, that's true. But you have a sense of... Like, for example,

[65:28]

sure, we could change the rules, but we have a sense of respect for the rules, respect for the past, tradition. So one changes the rules reluctantly. And I think that there's a certain... I mean, any way of doing things anywhere got that way somehow. Usually from people's experience. Even like if you go... Sometimes I read books about business, and they always say they have this concept of a corporate culture, you know? Every corporation has a tradition and a history, and something happened, and so they ended up doing it this way. And they have a particular personality. Now, within that, they change, but there's some respect for the past, and some respect for the intelligence of the people who created the situation. And especially, I feel that particularly in the case of religion, there's an inherent conservatism, because there's an enormous respect for the people who went before, and their wisdom.

[66:30]

So sometimes I myself get impatient with that, but I respect that that is the way it is. So if you're going to change something, you do it very carefully, and not just, oh well, we don't like this, we're going to do something different. But things are always changing. Like even in, you'd think, things like say like aboriginal cultures, you know, where people live the same way year after year after year. Well, if you study their pottery, or if you study their artifacts, you see that in fact they changed it. It always changed, little by little. The way that they made a certain kind of pot at this time was different from the way they made it even 25 years earlier, 50 years earlier, such a short amount of time. Because people, one or two people saw they could do it a little bit better, a little bit differently, based on what had gone before, and not just, wow, let's start all over again. But yes, this is the way we've always done it, and here, following along the line of how we've always done it, we can do it a little differently. And what's interesting to see now, in terms of these kind of things,

[67:33]

is that you see now, like say if you go to Hopi country, you'll see Hopi artists who are trained in Western art, who go to the Chicago Art Institute and, you know, wherever. And they come back, and they do Hopi art, based on the traditions of the ancestors with this new vision from being in the Art Institute. It's very interesting what they do. And you can see the continuity, and you can also see the difference. And that's the nature of tradition. And tradition is a very powerful thing, you know. We could all start on our own. We could all leave here tomorrow and say, we're going to do religion the way we want. And there would be something to that, you know. Because after all, Buddha was just somebody who said, well, I'm going to do it the way I see it. However, we would be losing the thousands of years, literally thousands of years, of people building this thing, day by day, month by month, year by year. And there's a real power in that. That's why the thing survives, despite the tremendous abuses that have happened, you know.

[68:35]

I mean, all institutions create abuses, right? Religion maybe is worse than other institutions, but it survives anyway, because there's an enormous power in it, and a power for transformation and goodness. So, we respect that. We make the changes little by little. So we're all creating, we're all, you know, the life that we lead together is changing what the tradition is every single day. We really are doing that. There's certain things we see we have to do, because we can't not do them in this way. So, slowly. Does that speak to what you brought up? Or did I just rattle on apart from your question? I mean, I can see what you're saying about rules in practical terms, but in the area in which we're relating to one another, I mean, the way to react, the way I should react to you today may not be the same as I should react to you tomorrow. I mean, the rules between people, just in our personal relationships, don't seem to be

[69:38]

that kind of fixed thing that we can build on progressively. They seem much more fluid. If I try to rely on rules in those situations, then that's when... Oh yes, I completely agree, yeah. I mean, the only rule, if it's a rule, and I don't think it's really a rule, is you know, non-harming, kindness, consideration. But then, yeah, just like if you go to one country, the way that you treat people or the signals that you give and so on is quite different from another country or another part of the country or something, yeah. I think what Chris is bringing up is really interesting, because there are also a lot of unspoken rules that do have to do with how you relate and that, you know, in some of which customs are not even conscious, but you know, so like if you're... and there's also a kind of Zen-centered culture that I don't know if anyone could articulate, but if you're here, you know,

[70:41]

five years later, you'll probably relate to people somewhat differently than you know, the first month. And it's maybe hard to define that, but there are certainly very complex rules of social interaction. But I mean, I mean, I know that personally, because like when I first arrived in America, if I was in a group of more than well, if I was with more than one other person, I'd just listen, because I couldn't see the joints in the conversation, I couldn't get into the conversation. But I'm thinking more on just terms of, you know, like, if we're trying to you know, when you're saying be kind, act out of harmony and act out of kindness, I mean, if we try and establish rules around that, I mean, what is the right thing to do to be kind in this situation, then what might be true one day might not be true the next day. And there's no sort of rule that says this is the right way to be kind. Yeah. It's interesting, because, you know, we have this November

[71:43]

Zen Center Board Meeting, they passed, after many, many years, a comprehensive, a sort of ethical policy statement, which makes an effort to describe, to some extent, how we would conduct ourselves in the ways that you're discussing, based on the precepts and so on. It's an interesting thing, I think, I don't know if you've read it, if the copies are around, but it's worth reading, actually, on this point. But it's, you're right, I mean, things change. The way to be kind changes in different circumstances. And it's not at all clear. Sometimes something we think is kind, later on we realize that that wasn't kind. I thought I was being kind, but actually it wasn't kind. Yeah, Lee? Well, I think in some way, if you take care of your practice, generally speaking, kindness takes care of itself. Mm-hm. You know, something you do, being kind, is something which happens. Yeah.

[72:45]

It flows out of your life. Mm-hm. Mm-hm. I wanted to ask you about agreement. I mean, like, rules, you know, there are rules, but somehow agreement is important, right? I mean, people agreeing. Mm-hm. Not making up statements on your own. In some way you can look at that and not just go off on your own. You know, like, consult other people. Mm-hm. And if the kitchen just cooked whatever it wanted to, it wouldn't work. Yeah. Yeah. And not just rules, although you can freeze it into rules, but there's some kind of reprocessing of agreement or reaching out and consulting. Yeah, it's consideration. Awareness of others and one's impact. Yeah. Yeah, and that's when you live

[73:47]

together in a situation like this, it's very obvious. I think one of the things that one learns living in a situation like this is how to be considerate of others. And I think you find when you notice in the world at large, sometimes, not all situations, but often it's the case that people don't understand the impact they're having on each other and don't understand how people influence each other. You know, and it's sensitive and considerate as you need to be in a situation like this. Linda has the last comment. This is kind of not related to the subject, but it's kind of an announcement. I read that the Pope seems to be understanding the teachings of Sambhogakaya and the fact that I don't usually read Time Magazine, but I happened to read this one article where he recognized

[74:47]

the teachings or school of thought of evolution as a valid form in the world alongside the teaching of that God exists. The way I sort of felt like the evolution could be like the world of differentiation almost. And that God has been in this oneness, attached to this oneness, and that now he's recognizing that, oh yeah, there could be this evolutionary principle of nothingness manifesting as evolutionary process in the world. That's interesting. It's nice of him. He's going to Cuba too. Castro invited him to go to Cuba and he's going to go. Well, I think this is a good place to stop. We'll pick it up from there next

[75:49]

week, which will be our last class, and we'll certainly finish the poem, I'm sure, and then if there's any review or we want to look back anywhere earlier in the poem, we'll do that. So let's chant the text. We'll use the Tanahashi version, this one here. This essence is not yet enlightened. The whole object is in each sense feel emergent. Don't merge with one another. When they merge, they embrace all things. And their lives they retain their own place.

[76:49]

Forms vary in shape, sounds vary in tone. Darkness blends higher and lower. Brightness separates clear and murky. The four great elements have their own nature just as a child's mother. Higher heats air, moves water. Westward the solid ice The eyes receive form, the ears receive sound, the nose responds to odors, the tongue to taste, the root of each function generates branches and leaves, the river and its tributaries return to the ocean, both true and false are expressed through words, right and darkness, there is darkness, don't treat it as mere darkness, right and darkness, there is brightness, don't regard it as mere brightness, brightness and darkness anticipate each other just as one foot follows the other, can't seem to solve some question, name them according to how and where they work, when things aren't as they are, who really fits the box, realize innocence is like arrowheads meeting in the air, when it comes to words, you must understand their true meaning, don't set up arbitrary standards, if you don't see the path that

[77:53]

meets your eye, how will your feet know the way, moving forward isn't a question of near or far, when you're lost, mountains and rivers block your way, please let me remind you, be steady and conceivable, your time is running fast, don't ignore it, we offer the merit of our practice, study and chanting of the Sandokai, for the enlightenment of all beings, Namo Shukriya [...]

[79:00]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ