We should not be caught up in words and concepts. So how can we become free from words and concepts? Our logical way of thinking is one of the most important points in Zen. It was very clear in the teaching of Umongkang. But Dougherty's kind of, not idea, but attitude toward words is completely different from that kind of, no word cannot be truth or reality itself. Of course, words and concepts are incomplete copies of reality, but like a map or atlas. And yet, a map or atlas is part of the reality. So it's really important we study how to use it. If we know, if we study how to use the map, the map is really useful kind of a tool to see, to understand the reality of the Earth.

[01:14]

If we think the map itself is reality, or the shapes in the map is a real thing, that's a mistake. Of course, that is true. But that doesn't mean we should throw all the maps away and stop using it. But we have to study how the map was produced and what distortion occurred. So if we can adjust that distortion, then we can see the reality through the mouth. So what we need when we study Dharma is to understand how the language, when we try to describe something or express something using words and concepts, what kind of distortion is made and how we can adjust it.

[02:24]

And if we know how to do it, then the word and concept is part of the reality. And all Buddhas and ancestors and Buddhist masters have tried to, even the Buddha Shakyamuni, tried to transmit, express, explain and transmit the reality through using words and letters in the form of sutras or commentaries on sutras or recorded sayings by the masters. So Dogen considers these words in the sutra or in the Zen texts as reality itself. And that is that Buddha nature manifests itself or expresses itself through words.

[03:31]

If the words are correct and if we can adjust the distortion That means if we know how to use words and language. So to say something is really important in Dogen. So reading books or studying sutras and having discussion to study each other is really important in Dogen. That is what Dōgen said in Dōtoku. Dōtoku is one of the chapters of Shōbu Genzo. Dōtoku. This dō is the same Chinese character as wēi, or path.

[04:35]

But this also means to say, or to speak. And tok is to get or attain or being capable to. So dōtoku means, how can I say, when we have certain experiences or certain understanding, we have to create the expression using words. until you can express that experience or insight, but it's not really experience, and it's not really insight. So to express something using words is really important. Another word Dōgen used in the show was Dōshū. Saying Dō and Shū.

[05:37]

What she means to get or take. So we try to offer the expression that we experience and that we see. So this move That Buddha-nature declares itself in this mood is... Buddha-nature declares itself to be mood. So this mood is Buddha-nature's work, not Joshu's work. But Buddha-nature expresses itself through Joshu's mouth. And that word was mu. And not only Buddha nature, but the dog declares itself to be.

[06:43]

So this mu is dog expresses itself as mu. And that is both must be utterance like Joshu's mu. So Joshu's word, expression, mood, is same as Buddha nature's self-expression and dog's self-expression. And so this, according to Dogen, this is really expression of reality itself. So it's not a matter of we should not cling to, or we should avoid, or we should think opposite, like woo. So does the more a bystander calls out. So anyone, or all beings, not only the nature and

[07:50]

and Doc and Josh, but all beings, when they try to express themselves, that should be a move. And such a move is a sound with a storm-melting power. I don't know what this means, whether this is true or not, but the sun has the power to melt the stone. This means before Dogen quote someone, the master of expression, a piece of rock in emptiness, kuri ben no ishi. Yeah. That's what emptiness means. Within emptiness, there's a piece of rock.

[08:53]

So it's not really simply empty space. But emptiness is a ray of the rock, that means pipe, canvas. So here, what Dogen is saying, my understanding is, Even that rock in that emptiness is melted away. That means really emptiness itself. Nothing else. So this is same as emptiness is emptiness pure. Then the monk said, all sentient beings, everyone, have dog nature. Why doesn't the dog?

[09:55]

Dogen says, what this essentially says is, or there are no sentient beings, there would be no Buddha nature. There would be no dog either. Essentially, it means what? I think he can interpret these conversations in Chinese in a very unique way, because he was not a Chinese, and Chinese language is not his own language. When you study a foreign language, you have to, you know, figure out each and every word and try to think what this is.

[11:06]

And after that, we try to understand one sentence. So first we need to think each and every word instead of interpret one sentence. I think that's why he could interpret it in this way, I think. But to Joshu is . So living beings, all have . So all living beings are all Wu, or half-blood.

[12:18]

The dog, for what reason? Five. Mu. And Dogen's interpretation is, even though the monk said all living beings are, he says are this u and this sho, and he leaves this as being. So if all living beings are all living, and that is Buddha nature, dog, four, five, mu. And Dogen is saying is all living beings are mu. That is . all living beings move, then Buddha nature should also move.

[13:26]

And kus is also move. And what does this mean? What does this move? You know, this all being, kainu, It is one strange thing. All others are new, but what is this new? According to Dogen, that is a question of the monk. What is this new? What is really there, alive, moving, arriving? eating, doing things. What is this woo? If living beings, Buddha nature, and dog are all noob, what is this woo?

[14:30]

Dog, Buddha nature, what need have they to be called noob? Then Joshu said, it is because the dog exists in current consciousness. I'm not sure about this translation. The original word is ita. Ita-u. go shiki zai. Ta is, in this case, dog. Ta is third person, it or he or she. And u as a common way of reading, u is have.

[15:35]

And go shiki is karmic consciousness. And zai is to be. So this means, and e is because. Because the dog, ta, or he, or it, have karmic consciousness. And this zai is also being. That means karmic consciousness is still there. And the good eye and dog have karmic consciousness. That's fine. Let's see. In the common way of reading, that's fine. Dog has no good nature. Dogang's way of reading this sentence is, he is because,

[16:44]

But another meaning of this Chinese character is for the Seiko. For the Seiko, ta can mean other. And so he read this as one word, ita-u, the being for the Seiko brothers. And the being for the Seiko other means for example. to live, you know, the very basic definition of path of bodhisattva is ordinary living beings are living, being moved or led by karmic consciousness, making karma. Being moved by karmic consciousness, therefore we create karma, and we create suffering.

[17:48]

But this is a definition of ordinary being, living beings. But one of the definition of bodhisattva is, so this is the way of life of ordinary beings is called gosho. God and show lives based on karma, or karmic consciousness. So the expression, God show no bond to ordinary beings who lived based on karma. That is ordinary living beings that is trans-migrating with six-gallon source and so on. But the definition of bodhisattva is a person who is living with vow. Vow?

[18:51]

That expression is gan-sho. Gan in se-gan, gan-se. Gan is vow. So living based on vow, because of vow, because of the four bodhisattva vows, especially the first one, sentient beings are numberless, we vow to free them or save them. That is first vow. And if sentient beings or living beings are numberless, There's no time we can save them all. To save them means save them all. So this vow means we don't become Buddha. We don't enter nirvana until all other beings are in nirvana. That means we vow to be the last person to enter nirvana.

[20:01]

we, you know, try to ask other people to go first. And if all living beings have this vow, it's kind of a strange thing. No one is there. You know, everyone says, please go ahead. I have a question. I was wondering, you know, if truly the compassion is coming out of heart spontaneously, Really, what does it mean to be the last person entering the Nirvana? Being the last or first doesn't make any difference. The same thing you mentioned, to be at this first step of the mountain or being on top of the mountain doesn't make any difference if you're in the practice. So, anyhow, my question should be, does it make any difference to be a Bodhisattva, to be the last person to enter or the first person to enter? So this is another idea of, you know, how we, how can I say, create the Buddha Land in this shore, not to the other shore.

[21:10]

So no one go to the other shore. All people stay here. That's what it means, first step and last step is the same place. And that is compassion. Doesn't make sense. Anyway, so Bodhisattvas vowed to stay in samsara, to work with all beings, to help all beings, and to go ahead. And if all beings live in the same attitude, then we don't need to go there. Now, if all people live with that attitude, then that is nirvana. No one is, you know, self-centered, trying to help others, serve others. So, you know, Bodhisattvas is, how can I say, transmigrate again, not again, same as ordinary living beings who have

[22:23]

karmic consciousness. Or we can say bodhisattva is a person who has karmic consciousness, therefore we don't stop transmigrating. But the purpose or the motivation is different. Not because we are ignorant and we crave things, but because we live being led by vow. we cannot stop transmigrating. And that is what this dog means, or dog's karmic nature and buddha nature means. As for bodhisattva, we have still karmic consciousness. And yet, because this dog is a bodhisattva, This dog cannot give up this karmic consciousness in order to stay in this world, to work with others.

[23:32]

That is what nitta means. Isn't this a very unique way of reading this sentence? No one can read in such a way. So nitta is bodhisattva, the being for the single brothers, is the beings of karmic consciousness. And that is Buddha, that is dog. So dog has karmic consciousness in order to continue to practice as a bodhisattva. If dog give up karmic consciousness, the dog has to give up the vow. So we keep karmic consciousness in order to continue bodhisattva practice. So, both are there. We live with karmic nature in order to work and practice as a bodhisattva.

[24:36]

So, the meaning of this word is, please. You said gansho, and thou, you said gansho. Can you translate that? Ga is Va. Sho is life or living. And you know the name of MZMC, the temple name of MZMC is Ga Sho Ji. That's what Katariyoshi meant, which means being led by Va. And that means bodhisattva. So the meaning of this word is that existence for the sake of others is in ta-u, is karmic consciousness, is the meaning of karmic consciousness. This is his way of reading the sentence. Although his existence in karmic consciousness is existence for the sake of others,

[25:48]

It is dog move. So this way of life is move. It's not because he cling to the karmic consciousness as a self or ego. To continue to practice as a bodhisattva, the dog does not give up karmic consciousness. So that fat mu means empty. It's clinging, but it's not clinging. There's no self-nature there. And that fat dog mu and brother nature mu means. So it's really different from common understanding of the koan story. So karmic consciousness never understand the dog.

[26:57]

Understand means A in original. And this A also means to encounter, to meet. So, consciousness never understands, never meets with dog, because these are one thing. The dog cannot meet the dog, and the Buddha-nature cannot meet the Buddha-nature. So there is no subject-object separation. So how could the dog encounter the Buddha-nature? Because Buddha-nature and dog are one thing. And karmic consciousness and life as a bodhisattva is one thing.

[28:04]

Karmic consciousness and being or life as a bodhisattva for the sake of others is one thing. We cannot separate into two. And this is a good point. That is bad point. So the idea, you know, the common idea about Buddha nature, how Buddha nature is something precious like gold, within that, that is, that Dogen tried to negate that idea. You know, our life has kind of a combination of two parts. One is precious, analyzed, dirt or trash. So if we want to be enlightened, we cut off this dirt part, then we become good at it. That kind of very simple calculation. A plus B equals C, so if we take B from C, it becomes A.

[29:09]

Very simple calculation, but according to Dogen, our life is not such a simple thing. We have both and we can't separate into two. These are one thing. So whether we speak of existence in karmic consciousness, existence for the sake of others, whether we are and we are both, or of dog mood or Buddha nature mood, they are always karmic consciousness. So our practice is not, you know, like a karmic consciousness, like a cancer cause of problems. So if we have surgery and take karmic consciousness out, then Only the bodhisattva part is left, but such a study is not possible, because this is one thing.

[30:16]

So from one self, this is entirely karmic consciousness, and from another thing, including karmic consciousness, this is entirely Buddha-nature. That is what Dogen said in the very beginning. Entire being is good nature. It's not a part of it. Mark, this is the end of the first section, and now he starts the second question. Mark asked Joshi, Does that dog have the Buddha nature or not? Let me read after we end this section. A monk asked Joshi, does that dog have the Buddha nature or not?

[31:27]

This question signified that the monk has skillfully gotten hold of Joshi. We thus see that making utterances and posing questions about the Buddha nature are ordinary rice eating. tea-drinking occurrences in the lives of buddhas and patriarchs. Joshu said it has, or oo. The matter of this has, or oo, is not the has, or oo employed by exhibits of the doctrinal schools. It is not the heart or, I don't think this is heart, this is being, being, who posited by the third-nastry burden scholars.

[32:28]

We must go beyond them and learn the Buddha being. Buddha being is Joshu's being. Joshu's being is the dog's being. The dog's being is Buddha-nature being. These beings are all oo. The monk said, if it already has the Buddha-nature, what's the use of it pushing into such a bag of skin? This monk's utterance asks whether Joshu's being is present being, past being, or established being, and we should have to reply that the original being in Joshu's utterance appears to refer to one being among various other beings.

[33:29]

That, in fact, it is original being, saying alone, Should original being be something that pushes into? Should it be something that does not push into? The act of pushing into this bag of skin is a cause of erroneous striving, but it is not therefore in vain. Joshu said, it's because it does it knowingly. It deliberately transgresses. As a mundane utterance, these words have long circulated in the world, but now it is Joshu's utterance. He is saying that in transgressions on purpose, in full knowledge of fatigued acts, There are probably few people who would not have doubts about this.

[34:37]

The words pushing into are difficult to understand in this context. But in fact, they are not really needed here. Not only that, if you want to know the undying man in his hemitage, You must not leave your own bag of skin. The undying one, whoever he may be, is never at any time separated from his bag of skin. To transgress knowingly is not necessarily pushing into such a bag of skin. Pushing into such a bag of skin is not necessarily knowing and deliberately transgressing. It has to be deliberately transgressing because it is knowing.

[35:43]

You should be aware that this deliberately transgressing may, as such, contain concealed within it daily activities that constitute the emancipated body of suchness. This is what is meant by pushing into. At the very time the daily activity constituting the emancipated body of suchness is concealed within it, it is concealed from you and from others as well. But although that is indeed true, do not say you are not yet free of ignorance. You leader of donkeys, you false followers. And that is not all. The eminent priest Yanchu said, you may learn all there is to know about the Buddha Dharma, but in doing so, you completely falsify the bearing of your mind.

[37:00]

Hence, even if your partial halfway study of the Buddha's Dharma has long been in error, for days or even months on end, It still cannot be anything but the dog pushing into such a rug of skin. It is a case of knowingly transgressing, but that itself is no other than being Buddha being. Do you understand? I don't think so. But I need to talk So this is the second half of this conversation.

[38:05]

A monk asked Joshi, does that dog have the Buddha nature or not? This is a very familiar question. But Dogen said, this question signifies that the monk has skillfully gotten hold of joshi, gotten hold of it to grasp, catch, same as Isan Reiyu said about the story between Ogaku and Nansen, and Ogaku caught the tiger. So here, Devin said, this monk who made this question called on Joshu. So again, this monk win, and Joshu lose.

[39:05]

It's completely opposite. I understand. We just see that making utterance and posing questions, so question and answer about what veganism is, is, as you said, ordinary rice eating, tea drinking, that is, we do every day. We eat, you know, rice, not in this country, but in Japan, three times a day. and we drink a lot of tea. So this means Buddha nature is something we should really study and practice and understand and express within our day-to-day lives.

[40:09]

It's not a philosophical topic for only the masters or Buddhist philosophers. We have to do it in our daily lives as our ordinary me and he. So nothing special. Anyway, Joshu said U this time. And none of this knock has anything to do with being. The matter of this being or U is not the U or being employed by an advocate of the doctrinal schools. It is not the U posted by the university burden scholars. This means this U used by the Joshi. His Chinese character, Wu, is one of the translations of Sanskrit word bhāva, happening being, or existence.

[41:27]

And in Buddhist Ādhyārma, the Ādhyārma masters analyze this being, in the case of Dalai Lama Kosha, into 75 beings or dharmas. And this particular school, called Sarvastivardhan, Sarvastivardhan literally means people who insist that being is real and exists. in past, present, and future, in three times. So they said being is not empty. It has fixed nature. And Phra Dogen said, Joshu's woo, or being here, is not that kind of woo. But Dogen, not Dogen, but Joshua discussed is Buddha being.

[42:42]

You must go beyond them and learn the Buddha being. Buddha being. And he said, Buddha being is Joshua's being. And Josh's being is dog's being, or u, dog's u. So in this part, Darwin talks about u, not mu. So Buddha as u, or u aspect of Buddha. There, Buddha has function, so it's not Buddha. is not a fixed entity. Buddha is impermanent, same as Buddha-nature. So Joshu-woo is Buddha-woo.

[43:45]

It's impermanent and without fixed self-nature. And Joshu-woo is dog's woo. And dog's woo is Buddha-nature's woo. So these are all u, same u. That is u, actually working, functioning and living. Such as this being is not a fixed entity, but often there's a examples such as a waterfall is used. This thing is like a waterfall. There's no, for example, Niagara Falls. There's no such thing as a waterfall. It's just a, not just a, how can I say, collection of the certain shape of the land and flow of water.

[44:50]

So Niagara Falls is just a main of this happening. It's not a fixed entity or existence. It's always changing. So we cannot say, you know, there is Nayara 4 as a fixed entity. But as a concept, Nayara 4 is always Nayara 4, forever. It doesn't change. And the real thing is always changing. The water is different. Each moment, the water that makes the fall is different. And the shape of the land is always also a little by little changed. So there's no fixed entity called Niagara Falls. So it's not there. And yet, you know, the actual Niagara Falls and the picture of the Niagara Falls are different.

[45:54]

This is really a Niagara Falls in my imagination and the actual one are different. It's really rare. And the photo or picture or my imagination is not really rare. So it's not really fiction, it's there, it's really there, and it's moving and changing and living and practicing, and yet there's no such fixed entity called narrow focus. And this woo, or butsu woo, joshi woo, buddha's woo, or dog's woo, are the same woo. It's there and it's always changing. It's actually readable and practicing. And in order to do so, this Dutta U or Joshi U or Phobos U needs to form a karmic consciousness in order to live.

[47:09]

with these five standards, we show up with these five standards and this karmic consciousness. And that is what he is saying next. The monk said, if it already has the Buddha nature, what is the use of it pushing into such a bag of skin? So somehow Buddha nature that might be formless pushed into the bag of skin and become a bog. So why Buddha nature needs to get into the skin bag? Why a bodhisattva needs to live as a karmic person called a shokapa? And this is also a problem. The last question is .

[48:15]

Oops. So the translation is already there. If it already has the Buddha nature, if the dog already has the Buddha nature, then for what reason the Buddha nature, what the dog has for is to push.

[49:23]

And new is enter, so push into. That is the meaning of pushing. Why Buddha nature needs to be pushed into the... ...skin bag of the dog? If it's Buddha nature, it has no form. It's not limited. And it has nothing to do with south or north. It's not an individual thing. Why, to the nature, needs such a skin bark as a dog in this case? And again, Dogen's way of reading this sentence is different. He said, I'm sorry. I'm thinking in Japanese. This monk's others ask whether Joshu's being, Joshu's wu, is present being, past being, or established being.

[50:33]

These present being, past being, or established beings come from this word, qi wu, already being. Already being is is the word established being. So if the dog already has good nature, he said, the good nature is ki-u, already there, already being, or established being. And he asked, is this established being, is present being or past being? Established means it's already there before this present moment. So it has some causes. So it's not simply present being at only this moment.

[51:37]

And yet it's not a past because it's present. So what is this established ki-u means? We use his question. And we would... This is the same question as whether living beings have Buddha nature from the very beginning, or Buddha nature appears only when we practice. That's what this key word means. And dogma negates both, like before. Buddha-energizing is not something we have from the very beginning. And Buddha-energizing is also not something we can get when we practice in certain way, at certain time. Then, what does it mean?

[52:41]

It's there. But is it really there? from the beginning or only this moment. And we would have to reply that the original being, the original being is also the translation of Tsu-ki-u. In Joshu's utterance, Dog has a Buddha-nature. Buddha-nature is a key word. It's already established being, and yet it's not existence from the very beginning, and it's not something we can gain at a certain time when we practice some particular thing.

[53:43]

and this translator can use this hue here as original being. I'm not sure if this translation is good or not. But original being in Joshu's utterance appears to refer to one being among various other beings, but in fact it is an original being shining alone. Shining alone means this being is only one thing, in the expression she used in the beginning of this Buddha-nature is entire being. Entire being is shining alone. That means nothing else.

[54:48]

So we cannot say it exists here, or it was there, or it will be in the future. but it is always already there. And this is a shining arrow means nothing else. This is only this moment, this moment, this moment. As Dogen said in Uchi, only this moment. And the next moment, again, this is only moment. And again, next moment, that is only moment. So this is the only thing which is shining. Should the original being, the skill, the original being be something that pushes into this original being, or already being, or established being?

[55:57]

That is buddha nature. being something that pushes into? This is a question. Or should it be something that does not push into, into this skin bark of a dog? And somehow, you know, he who, or an original being of the nature, is enter the skin bark. Later Dogen said, this enter is a problem. Because this original Buddha nature and the skin bark is one thing. It's not a matter of this, enter that. But this is one thing. And this is our practice. Buddha nature practice within this skin bark. This skin bark. So the act of pushing into, and this is pushing, the act of pushing into means this is our practice.

[57:06]

Somehow good nature pushing into this small skin bug and do something. This is practice. The act of pushing into this bug of skin is a case of erroneous striving. So whatever we do is erroneous, mistake. But it is not therefore in vain. This is very unique. So whatever we do is a mistake. But this is Dogen's, not only Dogen, but in one of the famous, in Zen, from one mistake to next mistake. That is process of our practice. So we are mistaken. And our practice is mistake. Keep making mistakes.

[58:07]

If we know that whatever we do is mistake, then we don't need to cling to, you know, we did so much, or we did such a great thing. So we can be humble, be peaceful, and just keep going. The other day you were saying that the body of a man is like a house for either the Buddha nature or social intelligence, even more. So when I'm hearing you, the time that you were saying that the Buddha nature and the bag of sin are one, so how would you compare that to the previous statement? That is the idea of the so-called semika. non-Buddhist teacher. Our self is like the owner of a house. When the house is burned, the owner gets out and buys another house.

[59:12]

That is not Buddhist idea. He had always said, we are, or Buddhism says, not like the owner of the house. So at the time of death, How would you express a corpse that doesn't breathe? That is, I think, one of the points discussed in the next section. One. Yeah, that's one. Cut into two. I want to stop. I hope I can finish tomorrow morning. If you want to move from here, you don't sit here. That's right. And let's hold the question for the end. Then we can finish. Okay.

[60:17]

Just tell me. Keep making mistakes.

[60:20]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_85.81