I want to talk a little bit first about translation. You know, these ancient texts like this one from Well, this is a Ming Dynasty text. No, Song Dynasty text, which is after somewhere 10th or 11th century. But the original text, you know, is 9th century, maybe. And this ancient Chinese, which is pre-Chaucer in comparison, I mean, Chaucer is hard enough for, you know, people to translate into English, I mean, present day American.

[01:05]

And Tong Dynasty Chinese, you know, is especially colloquial terms. Like we have colloquial terms that maybe 500 years from now will be translated. And there are all kinds of interpretations about what our terms mean. So they often mean the opposite of what the literal meaning is. And the meaning changes through time, words and phrases. So these texts. can either be very carefully translated or not so carefully translated and nuanced. I think nuance is really an important term.

[02:09]

I've been co-translating for many, many years and I think it's a very good way to translate because a native translator or someone who is translating, who is Japanese or Chinese, translating from their language into English may be really good, but there are things that they don't understand about our way of understanding things. So it's always nice when there's a co-translation because then, like, I can intuit things and put them into our own words that the primary translator would never dream of to complete the understanding. So certainly with this text, it's translated many times by different people.

[03:20]

Every translation is different. No matter who translates, every translation is different. There's some translations of Dogen. When you read them, one translation, you look for it in another one and you can't find it because they're translated so differently according to the understanding of the translator. So it's important with sutras. Sutras are kind of an outline, present these these understandings. as a kind of outline. And when we read the sutra, the translation of the sutra, it looks like the real thing. And you can't change it. The only way you can change the literal way the sutra is expressing itself in that way is through a commentary.

[04:22]

That's why in Asia people don't read sutras so much, they read commentaries. Because commentary conveys some understanding of the sutra which is pointing to the moon. So to be able to I'm just a scholar and a practitioner. Translating together is a good combination because the scholar can bring out certain aspects of the text, which are fairly literal. And a practitioner can nuance that understanding through practice. So it's very good combination. So. Commentary is very important and different people have different commentary, different way of commentary, commenting and so it's useful to study all those different ways of commenting because they bring out different aspects.

[05:31]

This particular sutra has sort of like the Mahayana expressed in the Hinayana way, so to speak. In most Mahayana sutras, they're very lofty ideas and a lot of imagery and Indian way of writing is very flowery and intellectual. And in this sutra, The Sixth Ancestor takes all these lofty ideas, lofty understandings, and presents them in a very simple way that says, these are about you. If you read Mahayana sutras, it's like looking up in the clouds, as if there's some distance between you and the characters in the sutra.

[06:44]

But successes are... this sutra brings all of that stuff down to earth. It says, like, the Trikaya is you. These are the three bodies of you. Not some lofty ideas in the sky. So... and the Pali sutras are about very practical aspects, mostly of how you practice. The Mahayana sutras are more about lofty concepts. So, he brings those lofty concepts down to the practicality of our own life. That's what, to me, that's what's so engaging about this sutra. So today, I want to talk about this chapter called Samadhi and Prajna.

[07:49]

Samadhi, you know, has various meanings. There's a sutra which lists hundreds of Samadhis and they all have names. That's significant, you know, but if you know how to understand that, there's samadhi of washing the dishes, samadhi of sweeping the floor, samadhi of talking on the telephone. This is our new samadhi sutra. And also, the sutras can often give us some idea of special states of mind. And the Samadhis are like some special states of mind, if you take them literally.

[08:58]

But they're not to be taken literally. They're pointing at something. Because as we know, Samadhi of Zen is no special state of mind. Samadhi of Zazen is no special state of mind. But we still have the idea of creating some special state of mind called good or happy or enlightened. So the patriarch, on another occasion, preached to the assembly as follows. Learned audience, in my, it says system here, but I don't like that word.

[10:10]

I don't think it's a good word. understanding, Samadhi and Prajna are fundamental. But do not be under the wrong impression that these two are independent of each other, for they are inseparably united and not two entities. Samadhi is the quintessence of Prajna, while Prajna is the activity of Samadhi. So, we talked a little bit about what that is, but not yet. At the very moment that we attain Prajna, Samadhi is there with, and vice versa. If you understand the principle, you understand the equilibrium of Samadhi and Prajna. A disciple should not think that there is a distinction between samadhi begets prajna and prajna begets samadhi.

[11:13]

To hold such an opinion would imply that there are two characteristics in the dharma. One is samadhi and the other is prajna. Now, if you look back in history, there's the terms Samadhi and Vipassana. Vipassana and Samadhi. Samadhi is the quintessence of Vipassana, so to speak. Vipassana are just two aspects of the same thing. And these terms kind of come from... Samadhi and Prajna kind of are related to Samatha and Vipassana. In the history of Buddhism, Samatha and Vipassana have often been thought of in separate ways.

[12:21]

There are people who practice Samadhi and there are people who practice Vipassana. Vipassana is like understanding. and Samatha is quiet as peacefulness, peaceful mind. So, these are often like the practitioners of Samadhi who are always sitting dozen, the practitioners of Vipassana who are investigating mentally investigating. But these are not two practices. They're one practice. When there's one, there's the other. And one is the basis for the other. And for the Mahayana, there's Samadhi and Prajna.

[13:30]

Prajna is not the same as Samatha. I mean it's Vipassana, but it's the Mahayana equivalent. Samadhi is more... I mean... Prajna is intuitive understanding. It's not knowledge. Whereas Vipassana is more knowledge, prajna. So, prajna is our intuitive understanding before thinking. And samadhi is, I like to think of samadhi as the intersection between heaven and earth. In other words,

[14:33]

Samadhi, I think, we can look at it this way. If you think about dharmakaya, sambhogakaya and nirmanakaya, I don't want to confuse us, but dharmakaya is our essence of mind, which has no boundary and no special characteristics. This is why when we sit in zazen, we say, no special state of mind. We're sitting in realization of dharmakaya. Nirmanakaya is our transformation body. Everything changes. Our body, mind, which is continually changing. That's the earth's body. Sambhogakaya is our wisdom body.

[15:37]

So when our dharmakaya and nirmanakaya meet, that's sambhogakaya, and that's samadhi. So we're actually sitting in samadhi, because in zazen, heaven and earth meet and disappear as separate entities. So, Sambhogakaya is the expression of Prajna as consciousness. So, when we say, like when Suzuki Roshi says, That's through the Sambhogakaya. So the Sambhogakaya, when we sit in Zazen, Sambhogakaya is facing emptiness.

[16:47]

And when we get off the cushion and go out in the world, Sambhogakaya is facing form. Not that they're two different things. the transformation activity in the world. So, this Sambhogakaya is our Samadhi, our oneness with the universal mind, which has no special characteristics. So when you step out the door, we expect something, but if you don't have any expectation, you just meet things as they are. So Samadhi is open mind, open mind which is big mind, being expressed.

[17:52]

And you are the Sambhogakaya Buddha. So we say you are Buddha. you have the potential to express, to allow dharmakaya to be expressed in your nirmanakaya body, mind, world. So, that's called inner peace. Calming. Harmonious activity. So a disciple should not think that there is a distinction between samadhi begets prajna and prajna begets samadhi. Samadhi is the ground from which prajna arises. So it says, for one whose tongue is ready with good words but whose heart is impure, samadhi and prajna are useless because they do not balance each other.

[18:59]

On the other hand, when you're good in, I don't know this language, good in mind as well as in words, and when our outward appearance and our inner feelings harmonize with each other, then it is a case of equilibrium of samadhi and prajna. In other words, you shouldn't just talk about it all the time. Your actions and your understanding should balance each other. In other words, put your body-mind where your mouth is. What do you say? Argument is unnecessary for enlightened disciples. To argue whether prajna or samadhi comes first will put one in the same position as those who are under delusion. This is Dogen's practice and enlightenment are one. When Dogen talks about practice is enlightenment, enlightenment is practice, he's saying the same thing. Argument implies a desire to win, strengthens egotism, and ties us in the belief in the idea of a self, of being a living being and a person.

[20:09]

Argument brings up ego, because we have a desire to win, and then self arises, and strengthens egotism, and ties us to the belief of a self, of being a living being and a person. So a learned audience, to what are Samadhi and Pragya analogous? So he gives us an analogy. They are analogous to a lamp and its light. With the lamp there is light and without it, it would be dark. The lamp is the quintessence of the light and the light is the expression of the lamp. So in name they are two things but in substance they are one and the same. It is the same with samadhi and prajna. So samadhi is like the basis. So when we sit, we sit in samadhi and then prajna arises. But they're not two different things.

[21:15]

And prajna is what leads us to sit in samadhi. certain enlightenment and gradual practice is what is actually what we do. Can you go back a second to what you were saying about argument? Yeah. Now, I'm going to make another argument. Actually, it's interesting, something that, as we're sitting here, I'm thinking about a conversation that I had with Ken Nair several years ago. I can imagine that one. And, you know, I'm also thinking about what you were saying yesterday about studying the Hasidic past.

[22:19]

So argument is another form of discourse for bringing forth understanding. I mean, I'm not arguing that side, but I'm just saying, you know, there are various modes for bringing forth understanding. And this, a kind of justificational one, which is what they do in, say, the Connecticut tradition, It's also what they do in the Pacific with the Jewish tradition. Some of it is culturally, and it's not what they do, I don't think, in the Confucian tradition, where you're supposed to just respect your elders and not, you know, argue with them. Where are we? Well, we let Prajna arise so that

[23:21]

When we have a discourse, this is Nagarjuna, the person trips up themselves without you trying to trip them. In other words, he presents his argument in such a way that the person that... I don't say argument, but discourse in such a way that the person that he's discoursing with discovers themselves what's right and wrong. Argument means, in this case, means sticking to your idea and trying to prove something and trying to be right. So this argument is a lower form of discovery. Although nothing is fixed, so an argument can also be be beneficial.

[24:25]

But this is not a law, it's an attitude. If you have the attitude, if you stick to the attitude of argument, nobody will want to talk to you. You just drive people away. Even if you're righteous, the argument often brings up righteousness. So the attitude is, instead of arguing, to help the person find, in other words, instead of beating your kid, how do you get them to mind? It's more difficult because you have to go deeper than argument from what I hear you saying is like beating, you know, who's going to win? No, that's not what I was saying. You're responding to what I was asking. I'm not valuing argument.

[25:29]

I'm just above something else. I'm just talking about not shutting down discourse. Basically, I'm talking about exchange of ideas to explore. Well, that's a different meaning of word argument, I guess. But I think that's what you see in the Hasidic tales, right? No. No. I see in the Hasidic tales how to reduce ego. how to get rid of it, what the appropriate place for ego is. That's what I see in the Hasidic tales.

[26:32]

That to me was so wonderful. And bringing heaven down to earth. So, Tibetans argue points of doctrine. But in Zen, we don't argue points of doctrine because we're not attached to doctrine. Doctrine is not our thing. So that's a kind of exercise. And it's understood that it's an exercise. And it's good for the mind. And so, yes, certain kinds of argument I think are valuable and have a place. But to have the attitude of argument. Can work.

[27:35]

But I don't think it should be a mode. I think maybe what you're saying is that it's the attitude that's more important than the forms, perhaps. One of my lessons of political involvement was that I learned a lot more talking to people I didn't agree with than I did when I talked to people I did agree with. So, you know, that openness, whether you're arguing luciferously or quietly or whatever, Yeah, I guess I think of argument as confrontation in some way to win. But anyway, I appreciate your what you're bringing up. Debate might be a little more neutral. Under some circumstances, it might be.

[28:42]

Yeah. I'm happy to let it go. I don't want to argue with you. In the example about the lamp and the light, are we to assume that the lamp is only a lamp when it's producing light? Well, there's something that's called a lamp when it's not lit. But it's not really a lamp until it's until it's lit. Just like Dogen talks about when you step into a boat. It's called a boat, but it's not really a boat until we pull the sail, take hold of the tiller and shove off. Does the lamp have a dimmer switch?

[29:49]

We hope not. Well, no, our emotions have a dimmer switch, should have a dimmer switch. But. OK, Nancy, it would be fun to just have a day where we call things something else, like the boat would be a wobbly shoe. It's going to be the whole day that way. Just call it something by different names. Yeah, I mean, it could be. I mean, if it's not a boat, it could be a shoe on water, which would be rather unsafe, but... Well, I have shoes that are waterproof. This is called the big ship of Dharma.

[30:49]

Some people call it Zendo. What is it before it's a boat? It's a potential. It has potency, but it hasn't been released to its true nature. It's a vehicle, but it hasn't been completed. Just like someone who goes to college and they've completed all their studies, but they haven't been launched out into the world yet.

[31:55]

It's the same with the piano too, that it's not a piano. It's potentially a piano. But when it's played, then you and the piano and the music are one. And then the piano is the piano. And you are you. And the music is the music. And that all makes for one one act. In terms of the quintessence and activity, sometimes it's translated as a substance and function. Sometimes there's translations. Right. Yeah. In our practice. We use them. And sometimes I like to think about that as as the function of our practice is hidden and the substance of our practices. So then also contestants in activity.

[33:02]

Well. The key name is the vehicle, just like sitting is the vehicle. And the vehicle is the seat, or the container, which allows for samadhi, which is the backward step that creates the light, or that turns the light inward. and then Prajna arises. So, it's the same with Kinhin. Kinhin is the vehicle, the container, and the Samadhi of Kinhin. And then we're totally walking, just walking, and then Prajna arises.

[34:10]

I say arises, but it's there. But substance and function, it's like samadhi, you could say, is the substance, substance, and then samadhi is the function. Prajna is the function, the activity of samadhi. Somewhere in the back, in the words you're talking about, so we leave here, oh, so we're sitting in Zanzan, and then we exit the building and go and meet things. Meet circumstances, yeah. So what I've been, I have like a painting right here, you know, and I was wondering, I was going to ask you about that, I heard that we hold memories.

[35:21]

Oh yes. Yeah, and so I was attempting to meet the whatever is there. I can't really see exactly what it is, you know. Are you able to actually, like, release it somehow? Or, like, I wanted to meet this and release it. Okay, well, that's an interesting question. We hold stuff in our body in various places, like anger. Anger we hold up in our, usually, in our upper back. So, you know, this is where we hold it, you know, and frustration and resentments and so forth. I don't know what you, I can't say what's held here, but when we can't, we need to hold on to something. You know, in this world, this unstable world, we need to hold on to something. So when we have something that we can't, that we take in and can't release, it has to be held somewhere.

[36:23]

So we displace it in various parts of our body, and we hold it in our stomach. If you ever go around and adjust posture, some people's posture is like an iron bar. You just cannot move that person. And they're holding a lot of tenseness in their body. So how do you open yourself so that you're free of tenseness? Whether it's here or here or whatever. And this is, in Zazen, this is what we're doing. It's like letting go of all that stuff. Basically letting go. So that we're just returning to our natural state. free of acquired stuff. That's what we're doing. Nothing else. And then, that allows the Dharmakaya to flow freely through us.

[37:26]

So, when we're sitting, we should think about, well, you know, you can take, put your mind there and think, open up, [...] and same with your back or whatever, you know, and especially with your legs, open up, because when we find some difficulty, we want to, our natural tendency is to push away, or to enclose, and then we limit ourself. So, you have to go counterintuitively, and let the let the difficulty be there without attaching to it. And you can actually release a lot of tenseness in your body. And hopefully, you know, no matter what's going on, you can just be loose. It's all about being loose. Even though you have strict posture, it's all loose. There's no tenseness in your body.

[38:32]

That's what you should be practicing with. How do I let go of this tenseness? Even though I have perfect, you know, really strict posture, what do I need? What can I let go of that I don't need? So you keep going over your body and letting go of all that. I think in yoga, idea that you do have some connection there and then okay with that same thing that you've made more intense okay now let that out so it's kind of a way of well kind of like location maybe yes locating something if you need to yeah that's not what I would say but I could might try that I was just thinking in terms of looking at these identity of objects or the

[39:48]

that we give them, this piece of wood that's shaped in a hole or whatever, can be different things depending upon what's going on. So it might be that this thing that's called a boat sometimes because we want to ride on water is a shelter. Or it might be wood to keep us warm. So these things don't have a fixed identity. Right, that's right. We fix their identity. We have it in our mind as a mind object, but it could be many things. And children, when they play, do that. And they make, you know, forts out of chairs and things like that because it's not a fixed object. That's right. Yeah. I used to, when I was a little kid, I used to put boxes together. And that was my boat, you know. We played fisherman. You just make it anything you want. That's actually the freedom of prajna.

[40:50]

You can make anything into anything else. Nothing has a fixed identity. Although we do fix our identities. We do it. That's why we say it's a construction of our mind. I don't know. Oh my goodness. It's good not to get too far.

[41:25]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ