We have an opportunity tonight to love our neighbor. And I imagine that we have sung the praises of perfect wisdom this fall. We have worshipped perfect wisdom. Does that make sense to you? We have acknowledged the worth of perfect wisdom. And we have praised and worshipped good friendship. And I imagine we have practiced good friendship. And perfect wisdom.

[01:01]

And we have life to continue to devote to these practices, which are, as we've talked about last week, basically sin. That's the kind of friendship that helps us become free of our ideas of our life. that help us become free of our ideas of life so there's a proposal that we will not be able to become free of our ideas of life without outside of good friendship with all beings so I've said that before, right?

[02:10]

I wondered, this is our last class, I wondered if you have any questions. Problems. We had some music going on earlier, and it stopped now for a while. But when it was going on, we had opportunity to practice friendship with that music. an opportunity to not cling to our ideas about that music, whatever they were. And we all may have some other ideas of being friends with. Yeah, maybe I'd like clarification. Yes. Want clarification before you become free of it?

[03:15]

And I've heard you answer this question before, and I either don't remember or like what you said or disappeared. So I would like to see what happens today. What were the alternatives? Is Zen a religion? I worship my leader. Is that a religion? Am I in a religious cult with my leader? I worship my leader. My leader, this one. Forget the worship?

[04:23]

Okay, can we have religion without worship? We could. We have a religion which doesn't acknowledge the worth of anything. not even devils. Would you imagine a religion that doesn't acknowledge the worth of anything, that doesn't worship? Yes? Let's hear about it. Tell us about this. This might turn out to be Zen, for all I know. Yes? Oh, I got it wrong, but I thought the word religion meant that it's faith-based, therefore maybe there's a voice of equal faith in it, maybe you can't, um, um, it's a different thing, but it's a fun fact that there's become, um, so anyway, we've So we just heard some ideas from Tish about religion.

[05:32]

Another one, another idea. When you were talking about, something you said reminded me of a statement I've heard made by some people who are in this tradition called the tradition of the teachings of the Buddha. And in that tradition they sometimes talk about there's three ways, three ways or three bases for knowledge. One is direct perception, another one is by inference, and the third one is by scripture. And in science also they have direct perception by inference. And they're not supposed to have by scripture, but they kind of do because of their, you know, their journals. Hmm? They have problems, but they can know things by these means.

[07:05]

So the tradition of the teachings of Buddha, they actually have epistemology by which they tell you how you can know things. And there's basically two ways, by direct perception and by inference. Mathematics, for example, involves both those and other sciences. But those don't particularly define religion. That's just a statement that some people who are associated with Buddhism say. Yeah? Could you say something about inference? Something about inference? Well, it's indirect knowledge. Like, for example, have you seen Sudoku? Have you seen Sudoku puzzles? Sudoku? No. Puzzle. Yeah. Well, you can have inferences about what will work there.

[08:08]

And then you can also have direct perceptions after you have the inference or even before the inference. So you can see maybe an indirect way of knowing. Before you put the numbers down, you can actually have an indirect, you can reason out where things would be. You can say, well, it's either this or this, and then there's two of this or thises, and, you know. Yeah, we... Yeah. A lot of mathematical reasoning is... So here's another thing. You can be looking for something, you're able to find it, but that's not the same as being able to prove that it can't be found. And you can prove sometimes...

[09:10]

that things cannot be found. You can't find anything, but some things you can't find, you can't prove that you couldn't find them, and sometimes you can't find it, and somebody else says, well, here it is. So somebody who can't find something might say, it can't be found, and somebody else says, here it is. Somebody else says it can't be found, and they can prove it. by, for example, pointing to places it could possibly be and prove that it has to be in one of those places and it's not in any of those places. That can be done. That's by inference. What is it? A famous theorem that I studied a little bit is called Fermat's theorem. And he proposed this theorem about 350 years ago. And he said, there's a proof of it that I have.

[10:12]

But he didn't write the proof out. And for 350 years, mathematicians tried to prove this theorem. Theorem? Theorem, yeah. The theorem was the equation x squared plus y squared equals z squared. That equation has no real integer solutions when x to the n plus y to the n equals z to the n. That equation has no integer solutions when n is greater than 2. And you can take x squared plus y squared equals z squared, and you can just plug in the square when it's 2. You can plug in 3, 4, and 5.

[11:14]

And that solves it. 25 equals 9 plus 16. Did you follow that? Sounds magical. I don't know. Sounds like magic. Huh? You don't care about me? You want me to forget the equation or you want to understand it? Okay. So, you might be somebody who thinks that it's a good idea to practice patience It's a practice, but I think I said you might be somebody who thinks it's a good idea to practice patience. It's a practice, but some people do not think it is a practice worth practicing.

[12:19]

They think when they're irritated, they're not sure it's good to practice patience. Everybody practices patience, however, some. But some people do not actually have much confidence in the practice. Some people have a lot of confidence in the practice. But nobody knows until they're very, very advanced in their understanding of reality that actually practicing patience is beneficial. So you're actually betting on it. And you bet on it tonight. You're practicing it tonight with this little lesson I was giving about different ways of knowing things. Huh? You feel like you failed it? You tried for a little while, didn't you?

[13:22]

Yeah. And the reason why you tried it is you might have thought it might be a good idea to try it. In other words, it might be beneficial. So religion, when we bet... or even have confidence in the bet that certain practices, like compassion, like patience and generosity, that they will bring freedom from suffering? No. Hmm? No. I thought you said, is it? Is it what? Yeah, I thought you said it. Yeah. What would you call it? I'd call it thoughtful assessment and behavior. thoughtful assessment behavior. Well, does Zen involve thoughtful assessment behavior? Does it teach that? Yeah, I agree, it does. But does it involve for some people believing that that might be beneficial?

[14:33]

And some people might call that a religion, that they believe in it. They don't really know But they still do practice thoughtful. They practice being careful. They practice being ethical. And they might do it just because they like to do it. But they might also think that it benefits. For example, I might like to do the so-called practices that people associate with Zen. Like I might like to sit still and quiet. When I was a little boy, one of my favorite cartoons at the movies, which also I later found a book about, was Bull. You know that one? I identified with him. What he liked to do is sit under a tree and just smell the flowers. He didn't want to go around butt heads with the other bulls.

[15:39]

And he grew up with the aid of male hormones to be this huge, powerful animal. But he still didn't want to butt heads with the other bulls. He just liked to do that. But he didn't say he believed or he thought that he would bring benefit to the world. He didn't say that. So I actually liked to live like he did. But I didn't think that this was going to liberate beings from suffering. At a certain point, I started to see people who seemed to be able to liberate people from suffering, and themselves starting. And then I found out they did these practices. But some of these practices you might like to do even if you didn't, even though you do not know that they bring benefit. But you might actually enjoy them and feel good about them.

[16:43]

But you might also think that there's a proposal that these practices which you actually feel good about when you're doing them, it's not just that you feel good about them, but it addresses the suffering of yourself and other people who are not doing them. This practice will help them. And if they practice it, they will be helped. That's where it starts to be kind of like religion. Not only are we concerned to liberate beings from suffering, but we also think that in some ways that don't help. But we don't really know that because we don't start with perfect wisdom. And when you have perfect wisdom, you know, but not anything like the way you know things now. about Zen, which is that we have a teaching, which I told you about, which is that there's these things called Buddhas.

[17:53]

But what are Buddhas? What did I tell you? Buddhas are the liberation of beings. The liberation of beings is what Buddha is. Is that religion or is that just a very inconceivable proposition? I'm not saying it is a religion, but there's a lot of people... Zen has an inconceivable... Zen teaches an inconceivable liberation. It teaches the liberation of all beings, but who are not yet understanding the teaching do not understand this inconceivable liberation. But if you understand this teaching, the proposal is understanding this teaching is the liberation of all beings.

[18:56]

And understanding the teaching occurs in liberation. Is it a religion when you're concerned with the liberation of all beings? Well, Zen's concerned with the liberation of all beings. We have these vows. Since beings are numberless, I vow to save them all. But it's not that I say that, but really I vow to join understanding which is the liberation of beings. If that's a religion, then Zen is a religion. Zen has that vow and that understanding of Buddha. Buddha's not some really cool lady that's sitting up in the clouds. all, you know, with perfect wisdom, sending down the Dharma. Buddha is sending down the Dharma, but the way the Buddha sends down the Dharma is the liberation of beings. Is every time we say Zen, is Buddhism in parentheses right afterwards? No. I think sometimes people use Zen.

[19:59]

In that movie, what is it called? Diva? French movie called Diva. Diva. They taught the art of spreading butter on a baguette. Remember that one? There's a Zen of spreading butter on a baguette. There's Zen haircut. There's Zen this, there's Zen that. So part of the confusion is the word Zen actually has a root meaning concentration. And now it means something really cool. But there's a type of Zen, which is the Zen... of liberation of beings. So that's, you might call that, that's what Buddha is. But Buddha is not, and Buddhism is not something called Buddhism. Buddhism is not something Buddhism is not some thing called Christianity.

[21:04]

Buddhism is the liberation of all Christians from Christianity and the liberation of Buddhists from Buddhism. That's what Buddhism is about. Zen has a certain family style. It's a certain style. Among the various styles of Buddhism, Zen has a particular style. So in Zen there's a big emphasis on family stories, for example. Whereas if you look at other traditions of Buddhism, there's a strong emphasis on many, many stories about the family. So part of the way we teach Zen is to tell stories about our family members and how they were friends with each other. In other traditions you don't find so many stories. Yeah. And the Tibetans tell more stories than the Theravada.

[22:08]

Well, but the Zen tells lineage stories, too. Pure land Buddhism doesn't tell so many stories, usually. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. years in the chamber, it's natural perception, examination, reality, that the sense of them, that the perception you can have defines brain. And it's just, and I get, not about pure learning, it's not about pure learning, it's not about pure learning, Well, one is Namo Amida Buddha. So if you go to China and meet Buddhists, they might say to you, instead of Namaste, they say Namo Amida Buddha.

[23:19]

So anyway, Zen is one particular family style that became the main type of institutional Buddhism in China at a certain point. So it became very influential and all that, and very popular in the West. I shouldn't say very popular. It was a form of style of Buddhism that was very appealing to the beatniks. And then it was very appealing to the first generation of people who weren't raised ethnically Buddhist who started to practice monastically in the West. Zen was originally the most. And part of the reason was that to the United States by letting non-priests enter the monastery.

[24:25]

So that's another special phenomenon we have here. So is it a religion? I would say, I don't know. So today I say, I don't know. And last time I said yes. That shows how much I know. Kim? Kim? A long time ago you were raising your hand. It's gone by? King? Why should it matter? I don't know why it's important. But then even though I don't know, even though I don't know, it might be important to somebody. turn away from the teaching. If they hear it's a religion, they might say, well, then I'm not going to practice patience.

[25:29]

It might make somebody pout for several months. If you say, it is a religion, well, then I'm out of here. So you might say that if you say yes, that it's going to undermine the person's devotion to wholesome activities, you might say whatever would encourage them to be skillful and kind. Yeah. So one Zen story is about a Zen teacher who, he asked his students questions and then usually answered them himself before they had a chance. There's a whole book full of him asking questions. So one of my favorite teachings by him is, what was the teaching of the Buddha's entire lifetime? And then his answer was an appropriate response.

[26:33]

But the literal Chinese character is three characters. It's I think it's first character is meet, second character is one, and the character for one, it's a line like that. And the third character, we have a vertical one, they have a horizontal one. And the third character is teach. So it literally means you meet each situation and then teach. You say yes, and then you say I don't know, and then you say yes. Yes? When there are two characters written, is it spoken that way as well? Is it spoken as those three words? Yeah, it's colloquial Chinese. A lot of the Zen stories are in colloquial Chinese, not literary Chinese. What is the difference? Literary Chinese is like, it follows certain rules that colloquial speech does not.

[27:34]

And literary Chinese is actually easier to read. Also sutra Chinese is easy to read for me. It's much simpler. It doesn't have all these subtle nuances of cultural associations. For example, one of our ancestors had studied with his teacher and he was going to leave. And he said, if someone asked me 100 years from now, what your teaching was, what should I say? And his teacher said, just this is it. But that's an abbreviation for a colloquial expression. And that statement is what you say in court when you're accused of a crime and you confessed, yes, I did it. You say, yeah, just this person is it. So that colloquial expression was modified, but people would recognize it, and used in that case for the teacher's main teaching.

[28:41]

And just like us, the student was kind of like, didn't understand. And then his teacher said, you have to study this thoroughly. And he left his teacher and walked a long ways. And then one day he looked in the wall what that teaching was, and he became then. He had had many enlightened experiences before that, but this was his culminating understanding based on that colloquial expression, which you won't find that in the sutras. So. I see Sean and Barry. And Elena. So Sean. You mentioned Fermat's last theorem. The growth, as you said, decided to go that they couldn't find out .

[29:49]

And it must have been very surprising for them to live in a solid hotel, because the interpretation of it was . The proof was 5,000, 20 centuries ago, whatever. 500 pages long. And so, I don't know. I hope you can start with the relationship with teaching and having students deliver the speech Also, I just want to mention that the proof that the 20th century, the late 20th century, for this theorem was not Fermat's proof because they used mathematical techniques that he had no idea about. They used all kinds of high-powered mathematical techniques. And during a good share of the 20th century, they had a computer working all the time just to see if they could find some proof. solutions for it. So he said he had a proof, but that doesn't mean that's the only proof.

[30:53]

Yeah. If you feel that this question is totally irrelevant or inappropriate at the moment, you don't have to do anything about it. Does an enlightened being experience the same way as an unenlightened being. That's your question? Yes, that's my question. So that part is relevant. And all beings experience time the same way, and nobody knows how they experience it. How you experience time is inconceivable. But the way you think about time, or the way some people think about time and the way people who understand time think about it, is different.

[32:15]

Enlightened people are free of their ideas of time. And also they might have different ideas about time. Two enlightened people might have different ideas of time, but they're both free of their ideas. Unenlightened people can also have different or same ideas of time. We could perfectly agree on our idea of time and both of us be totally hung up on it. But our ideas of time are not our experience of it. Our experience of time is our real life, and we all experience time the same way, inconceivably. But we have different karmic backgrounds, so we have different ideas about it, and we have different practice backgrounds, so we have freedom from our ideas of time. And enlightened people are free of their ideas of time. And they're also free of their ideas of space. For example, enlightened people don't think that anything takes time or that anybody takes space.

[33:17]

They think time is given. they know that because they practice not taking what is not given so there's no time that they take that's not given they just receive time enlightened beings just receive time and actually that's the we're all receiving time every Our entire life is just receiving time and receiving space in a way that we, and that's our experience, and we do not know it conceptually. You can tell me, but I just want to tell you before you tell me that what you think your experience is is not your experience. Why don't you tell me what you think your experience is? You think your time with Fred never happened.

[34:30]

Well, in reality, none of our time with anybody happens. Our actual life together is free of happening and not happening. Our real life together doesn't get put into packages called happening and not happening. Our real life is inconceivable and it doesn't fit into the packages of happening and not happening. That's the Heart Sutra. In emptiness, in reality, there's no increase or decrease. There's no birth and death. There's no happening and not happening. There's no arising and ceasing in reality. But in our minds, we have concepts. Thirty-four years. And it happened. And then it stopped happening. We have those ideas. And those ideas, if we hold to them, are more or less stressful. But actually, we are living together, right now,

[35:43]

And also our living together is not confined by the idea of now even. But we also have conscious experience and unconscious experience. It seems like now, doesn't it? But that's just a thought construction. There's no birth and death. Not in our real life, not in our real experience. There's only birth and death in our conscious experience where we make up ideas like birth and death. Our life is actually not born and does not die. It's infinite and inconsistent. But we also, part of our life, human beings, for example, and some other animals, is that our life sponsors this wonderful thing called consciousness where there seems to be me and you and time and birth and death. And we're not trying to get rid of that. Be kind to the situation where there's all this stress because we hold on to these ideas.

[36:46]

And if we practice friendship with this situation, we can stop clinging to these ideas as anything more than ideas. And then the stress is relieved. And then we open to the inconceivable love, which we already are. An enlightened person does not cling to ideas. An enlightened person does not cling to ideas you can say, but also an enlightened person is not clinging. An enlightened person is the not clinging. He is what the enlightened person is. And it's liberation. Enlightened people are liberation. But not just them, you too. Enlightened people are your liberation also. and you're invited but if you hold on to your ideas that will close the door so you have to like be kind to your ideas of how much suffering there is we have to be kind to it, we have to be friends with all of our ideas of suffering and good and bad, we have to be kind to it in order to let go when we let go the doors of liberation open

[38:08]

And is that a religion? I don't know. But tomorrow I will. Kim? If it's helpful. Buddhism is the enlightenment? Buddha, yeah. Buddha's body is the manifestation of Buddha is the enlightenment of all beings. It's the liberation of all beings. Actually, Dogen quoted another teacher who said, Buddhas manifest a body and liberate all beings. Dogen says that means Buddhas manifest a body is liberation of all beings. But another translation is Buddhas manifest a body is the awakening of all beings. So I don't know which is the best translation, but I saw two different ways of translating this.

[39:13]

Buddha's manifest body, Buddha's manifesting a body is the awakening of all beings. Buddha's manifesting a body is the liberation of all beings from suffering. So awakening and liberation are very intimate. And awakening is the intimacy of all beings, which is Buddha. The intimacy of all beings is the liberation of all beings. world. And you told us about the realms and the hungry ghosts and the titans. And I'm having trouble with that because it sounds like a sort of a belief that people who didn't know said, well, the earth was flat.

[40:19]

In other words, I don't know where these... This realm has come from who discovered it? I asked you to have been there and you said no. So who has been there and how do we know that they've been there? It just sounds like hobgoblins to me. Well, certain yogis can see these worlds. And one of those yogis was named Shakyamuni Buddha. Shakyamuni Buddha could see these worlds. But even before him, other yogis could see these worlds. When you say they've seen them, what do you mean by that? They've experienced them? Well, I guess you'd have... I'm sorry, but you'd have to ask them. But you don't have to get into that You asked, so I told you.

[41:21]

But you don't have to understand these three worlds thing, because you've got a world of all of your own. You're living in one of the worlds. Actually, the three worlds in one of the worlds has these six realms, but you're living in one of them probably, called the human realm. So you don't have to actually learn from your real work by thinking about the Hungry Ghosts and the Titans and the Devas and stuff like that. You don't have to get into that. Because you've got plenty of work to do right here. And if you do your work here, you might, as an artifact of your good work, start to understand these other realms that you're not in right now. It's a minor accomplishment. It's a distraction for you to work on it before you develop the powers by which you would know about it. Like, you know, there's certain, again, mathematical courses, they say, until you've had calculus and differential equations.

[42:24]

Because it assumes that, I assume that you already know about this stuff from what I'm talking about here. So you asked me about the three realms, and one of the realms has six parts. and one of the parts you probably live in, called the human realm. If you practice concentration and diligence and patience and ethics and generosity in that realm, you might just get into a situation where you happen to discover five other realms. But if you go looking for the realms before you develop the powers to see them, you'll be able to do the work you have to do right now. Okay? But the Buddha's accomplishment was not to see these six realms. A lot of people had accomplished that. His accomplishment was to realize the liberation of all beings by understanding their true nature. Understanding their true nature.

[43:25]

Which is his true nature. Which is our true nature. Which is our true nature, yeah. And the course in understanding our true nature is to want to understand it and also to want to in order to benefit suffering beings. And then if you want to, then there's a course. on generosity, ethics, patience, and so on. Through these practices, this is the path to understanding our true nature and liberating, entering into the liberation of all beings. But one presentation of Buddhism is that to really understand, you need to be doing this not just for yourself. You can understand quite a bit

[44:27]

without having the vow to live for the welfare of all beings, but to have the deepest and most authentic understanding of our nature, we need to be for others. Because our nature is that others are who we really are. Others are who we really are. Yeah. Who I really am is you, and Brett, and Michelle, etc. That's who I really am. I'm nothing in addition to others. But people think they are, so they suffer. I mean, they think they are, and they believe it. Because it looks like, in consciousness, it looks like something in addition to other people. But that's an illusion. There's no individuality. There's individuality, but the individuality is totally determined by others.

[45:33]

My individuality is determined by all of you, not by me. I don't determine my individuality. But I don't make my individuality. You do. And more than you, you know, you, etc., All beings make me a unique, a totally unique thing that nobody can move a slightest bit from what it is because everybody's working on it. The whole universe is not going to like, it didn't make a mistake here. But I didn't make myself. And although I didn't make myself, some people say when they say, well, if I didn't make myself, then I don't, I'm not responsible. I didn't make myself and I'm responsible. But I'm not responsible for making myself. I'm responsible for what I do now that I'm made. But you are too because you made me. But you didn't make me by yourself. You've got to share with everybody else. That's one of the ways you... One of the ways you... One of the ways you... ...perceive me.

[46:41]

But you make me in many other ways. The way you make me is, guess what? The way you make me is, guess what? Inconceivable. I don't know how everybody makes me. I can't... I don't understand that. Well, not just your... You're exhalation of carbon dioxide. You're bringing cookies to the class. You're coming to this class. Or you're not coming to this class. Everything you do supports me. That's teaching. Nothing you do doesn't support me.

[47:42]

My life is totally determined by dependency on all of you, and I'm nothing in addition to that. And your opinions of me are part of who you are, so it's part of how you support me. And your opinions of other people also contribute to me. But how that all works, I do not know. And we have stories about it, which we tell children and adults, but adults we encourage to study the stories to understand the mind of the person listening to and telling the stories I think Sophie and then Vivian And my call is that you use the problem of visible, not either an illusion, and you want to use the action.

[48:48]

And the answer, I mean, the question to me has been, to what is the meaning of all of this? And most of the people are like, why are we using it? This is not an illusion. Why do we have to explain this to the illusion that we're using the action to do that? Well, there's two kinds of meaning, basically. One kind of meaning is called conventional meaning. Another kind of meaning is called ultimate meaning. The ultimate meaning of life is that nothing in life is reached by anybody's idea of it. That's the ultimate meaning. Conventional meaning is basically just words. No, because there's also a... It's not that it's nothing.

[49:53]

We're here to become free of attaching to our illusions. Not... and illusion, you won't attach to it. If you don't attach to it, you won't suffer. I don't know. I don't know why we want to become free of suffering. Huh? There's an idea which she can tell you if you want to hear it. The ordinary manifestation of what you're asking is, I might have known this from one of his interviews, is compassion. It's the story of the artist that I found out, and he was in a cave, meditating, practicing. would come out, and they'd say, what is that? I'm not going to do this. But this thing is, and then he'd sit on that wide rock, the soft rock, and he'd ask, why are you doing that? And they said, oh, it's to see really what's in life.

[50:56]

And this guy sort of goes on and does that several times, and people make a video of that. And then about 30 years after that, he walks around and sees a dog on the road. It would hurt the maggots. It doesn't want to hurt the maggots. And in that moment, the dog manifests in the same way that I have it for the dog in my chair. It's sweet. Compassion, that's why. It's compassion that works. So we come here to learn compassion. If I'm going to always have for all these years, you know, I mean, it's like, isn't it?

[51:58]

I mean, why can't we do this? Why can't we do all this? Why, why, what, why do what? Why are we coming to this life, to this planet, and then to other planets to learn less about compassion as well? Is there any other way to learn about it? Like, really learn about it? I don't think there would be necessity for compassion if there wasn't suffering. Compassion is related to suffering. So if you want to know, if you're wondering how did we happen to get in a situation of suffering, there's a story about that, which is that when consciousness arose in living beings on this planet, for example, it arose with design flaws. Design flaws. Yeah, consciousness is... In consciousness, things appear deceptively.

[53:03]

And there's a story about why we've evolved to have deceptive appearances. there's evolutionary theories about why it's good for conscious beings to see things the way they are. So we have, we live in a, our consciousness is a place where things appear as though they weren't consciousness. Like we, I have, I have a picture of you in my mind and I think it's not my mind, I think it's outside my mind. But I don't see you that's outside my mind, I'm seeing you in my mind. So my mind is actually kind of deceptive. That's part of the reason why everybody is teaching you who you are. Because the mind appears in deceptive ways, that's part of it, and also the mind appears in is, what do you call it, not just deceptive, but really, really, really, really, really beautifully deceptive, very attractively deceptive.

[54:10]

So not only do we get a deceptive appearance of the world, but it's an almost irresistible deceptive appearance. Grasp. And when we grasp it, we suffer. And there are stories about why beings have evolved to grasp things in consciousness. It's very efficient for reproduction. So the biological situation that's given rise to consciousness has design flaws. which creates suffering, and then there's teaching. Whose design is flow? Evolution. The biological evolutionary process has found consciousness to be very useful. Things that have consciousness are on the top of the food chain. But not the enemy beings They're the only ones that need to be liberated by practice.

[55:33]

I find it to be, if you want a story, I think it's the best story around. It's only a story. Yeah, there's no end to such questions. Yeah. I'm not giving the answer to the question as the practice. The practice is to deal with that question and the answers the same way, namely don't attach to either one. And before you ask the question and before you get the answer, you have suffering. And suffering is appearing in consciousness. And if you don't grasp suffering, that's the end of suffering. And if you don't grasp colors, that's the end of suffering. So the teaching is just not to grasp what's appearing in consciousness. But how we got in this mess, there's stories about how we got in this mess, but that's not really the practice.

[56:41]

The main focus of the practice is to face the mess and practice compassion towards it. And some people actually enjoy that even before they actually understand that that's going to be helpful. But also some people feel like, I enjoy it, plus it will liberate beings if I do this practice. But I don't know exactly why we got in this situation, but there are stories about it. Vivian, and then Vivian, and then Fran. I'm going to answer the evolution, because the question I have, kind of like it, is how comfortable the notation kind was for me.

[57:44]

And I had a little friendship with it because of the music, but because of my something. But last week, it's more difficult. I'm here teaching with them. And I'm thinking the protests that are happening, and I have not stopped in that book. Our lineage of trying to show reality, that we are an illusion, and then somehow it breaks and says, oh, somebody like me could be killed in this way, and that people haven't wanted to deal with it.

[58:49]

It's not like it's happening more, it's always been more like this. But now, with the protests, destruction, there's something that they've listed. And I'm wondering, in terms of evolution, is it that our consciousness is evolving, and we're listing that thing, but as a collective, Consciousness evolving when there's protests. In our collective, we are waking to the discomfort, the suffering. I'm betting that our consciousness is always evolving, it's just a question of how is it evolving. And I'm betting that the consciousness evolves the best way when you listen.

[59:52]

And if you listen to suffering, and you listen to the cries of , you might then, yourself, ask other people to listen too. Matter of fact, you might say, did you hear that? Did you hear that suffering? [...] You might start crying yourself to help people start crying. From your listening, you might do some cries to help people, to help us all listen better. That causes evolution. That has a certain evolutionary thing. But to tell people not to listen, except you, I think that causes another is, I think, toward more suffering and less listening. So I think the great value of these protests is and that would cause effect which I am betting is better than the evolutionary effect that will follow from us not listening to each other.

[61:10]

Did I address your question? one of the benefits of this terrible situation, of these horrors, is that maybe people will be motivated to be more active in drawing attention to suffering. Just now they had all these children shot at a school in Pakistan. So people say, well this is going to help us come together and address this evil. I thought they're going to come together and address it by military opposition. I didn't feel it. He said, this is going to help us practice more compassion that I didn't hear. So these protests are, I think, more like compassion. Potentially. And then that has a certain evolutionary effect. But protests that are violent have an evolutionary effect, which I don't know how it is, but I'm betting on the non-violent protest.

[62:26]

Although I don't really know how it works. The Buddha was emphatic about non-violent demonstration. He did non-violent demonstrations. He didn't do any violent demonstrations. Brad? I had a comment and a question. So the comment was about religion. It's a long time ago, so I want to know what religion was based on. I believe that's God, or many of us. They're very outside, outside. So we have... Yeah, so somebody said that.

[63:35]

Somebody else says religion has something to do with the trends. something transcendental. But then somebody might say, well, Buddhism, the transcendental is not outside the living beings, and it's not inside either. That transcendental transcends inside and outside. So I like the teaching that transcendence comes through intimacy. and that intimacy is reality, that in fact we are intimate with each other, and most of the practices that we have are practices to help us tolerate an open relationship, which, you know, which even with, you know, your children or your parents or your spouse, intimacy is quite difficult. it kind of requires the very same practices that are being proposed as the path of enlightenment.

[64:44]

And so intimacy and wisdom and friendship are kind of in different words trying to point at the reality of our relationship. Well, I wouldn't say it doesn't matter what we call it. To say it doesn't matter, it might be slightly demeaning. I would just say that everything, no matter what you say it is, it should be given the same attention. No matter what you say, no matter what it is, it is potentially a precious mirror of reality. But if you treat anything properly, it will show the truth. And if you don't treat the truth properly, it will be obscured. So the main thing is to practice these practices of friendship with everybody and everything.

[65:50]

So to do a protest, but to do a protest realizing that what you're addressing is yourself, Somebody came to me during a retreat that we just had at Zen Center, and they were telling me about all the injustices at Zen Center. You know, you're telling me about, and somebody came to talk to this person during the retreat, and I think this person should have been talked to during the retreat about how he's going to pay for the retreat. Once the retreat started, I don't think we should bother people during the retreat. Just talk to them about before or after. I think that's better. But somebody came to talk to him about how he's going to pay for it during the retreat, turned into a trigger for him and he came and he told me he was going to leave the retreat but before he left the retreat he wanted to talk to me so then he told me about that and he told me about this other injustice that he had uncovered at Zen Center about how people and I listened to him and I said you sound like you're talking about somebody that's not you

[67:09]

And he snapped out of it. So if you're protesting against injustice, devaluing somebody's life, do you think you're talking to somebody that's not you? And if you think you're talking to somebody that's not you, this is what we call not helpful. So how can I say I oppose that and realize that what I'm talking about is myself? I oppose myself in this form. When Buddha says violence is not my way, he says that, but he understands it is herself. And that helps him be courageous about it. But I wouldn't say that that this word or that word violence or non-violence or I wouldn't say that that didn't matter I would say everything deserves and then with that compassion everything can be a precious mirror of wisdom but of course it's hard to treat everything with utmost compassion because things surprise us you know and we forget the opportunity

[68:37]

I think the Buddhist story is all my ancient twisted karma from beginningless greed, hate and delusion born through body, speech, and mind, I now, maybe just before that, that's where our stuff, I shouldn't say all of it, but I confess that I have, that my past karma has contributed to this, to this false impression. All the times that I thought that other people were not me has contributed to me now having the appearance that other people are not me. That's not the only thing that makes it. You all make me that way too. All your karma also makes me that way. But I'm not confessing your karma. I'm not confessing your delusion. But your beginningless greed, hate, and delusion also makes me.

[70:04]

So I don't... The way I am is not made just by me. It's made by all of you. But I also am responsible. So I confess my part. The way I am is created by the activity of all living beings from beginningless time. What a story. There's really no beginning. Beginning is another concept. And the design is inconceivable. The way all is creating the world and creating other people in the way other people are creating us. How that goes is inconceivable. But that's the Buddhist story about how we're made, is by inconceivable process of interdependence. That's constantly churning away expression. Creation continuously working her loom and shuttle, incorporating the patterns of spring into the ancient brocade.

[71:10]

And we're all involved in this process together. You're all making me. We're all making you. My karma, which is not me, makes me. My actions are not me. Yeah, a lot of people want to know about that. When all beings are enlightened, they would understand that nothing's happening. And they would still be happy. It's just that they would realize that everybody that they're friendly with is themselves. Everybody would know that everybody's them. Pardon? Well, the next baby that was born might actually have to go through a process. Might have to go to high school. The next baby that's born might have to go to high school, you know, and have pimples and and various hormones going through them. So they actually might have to, like, they might not be born completely enlightened.

[72:19]

And then you say, well, what makes them born enlightened? That's a little bit like these other realms. We have plenty to work on now, right? We have plenty of situations where we're challenged to look at what's happening as a teaching for us and treat it in such a way that it turns into a teaching so that it wakes us up. And we have practices which are conducive to that. We have all that to do. And then where this all would lead would be a little bit kind of a distraction. A lot of people jump to that, that there is this thing of what would it be like if everybody was in on nothing happening? But then would the whole universe not happen? Well, it's already not happening. I guess everybody would realize the truth and there would be eternal liberation, but that's already the situation.

[73:23]

Okay? Yeah? Yeah. The word intimacy, I think, carries some problems in that people consider intimacy. Other people may consider disrespect. Right. Yeah. Like I tell that story about my grandchildren putting their hands in my mouth. They didn't mean to be. I didn't feel that they were being disrespectful. But somebody might say, don't be disrespectful for your grandfather. Don't put your hand. But the grandfather doesn't feel. I just want him to wash them. That's part of what's difficult about intimacy if people do have different views about what it is. Part of intimacy is offering boundaries, and that's difficult. If you don't offer any boundaries, you're not going to be intimate because there are boundaries. And so how we offer them and how we receive them and give them is really, it's an art.

[74:25]

And if we don't do it artistically and beautifully, it can be very stressful. But the process of doing this can lead to us not attaching to the boundaries, to learn to offer them, to give protest without being attached. Because you're on both sides. Because what you're protesting against is yourself. So intimacy is hard work. Friendship is hard work. Perfect wisdom is difficult. It's called deep. Perfect wisdom is deep. Deep means difficult. Good friendship is liberating. It's a very engaging practice. But anyway, that's the practice. The other way is difficult too. Not being intimate and being mean and not practicing with people. That's difficult too. Two different difficulties. which is worse but the one one difficulty is proposing that it's liberating the other difficulty they don't say it's liberating they just say i hate those people and they're not me and i want to punish them and i'm better than them and all that stuff this way you don't you don't it's difficult but you don't

[75:39]

And if you do, you say you're sorry. I'm sorry that I said I'm better than those people. I'm better than the Taliban. I'm better than ISIS. I'm better than Republicans. I'm better than Democrats. I'm better than whatever. I'm better than straight people. I'm better than white people. But if we do, we say, that's not the way, that's not kind. I'm sorry I said that. That's not what I want to say. I want to say, I want to learn that everybody's who I am. I want to learn that. And I forgot, and I'm sorry. This is hard. And everybody's who I am, and also I... to everybody who is me. But if I really remember that teaching, I'm like... I really feel like I have a boundary to give to myself. I forgot, huh?

[76:47]

Oh, it's pogo, yeah. It's either pogo or tigger. It's a cartoon character. I think it's... It's either... Or Tigger. You think it's Pogo? Yeah. Pogo. Let's go for Pogo. Yeah, he has this beautiful poem, Call Me By My True Name. I am... who rapes the girls. I am the general who kills the people. I am the pimp. I am the prostitute. I am the businessman. That's my true name. It's a really good practice. I am all the people who are being mean to me. Call me by my true name. That's a really good practice. And I think that Thich Nhat Hanh has that wonderful teaching and Suzuki Rishi was .

[77:59]

And we can be that way, I think. And then if I bet on that, is it a religion? I don't know. But I am betting on that. I'm betting that that's true and I'm also betting that in some ultimate sense it's true as a practice. So thank you very much for your good friendship. And Betsy delivered the cookies to us. And I have two bells for you right up there. Thank you, Charlie, for doing the recording.

[78:56]

@Transcribed_v005
@Text_v005
@Score_85.95