I don't know if I'll enter into it. But to some extent I have to. So why don't you see if the question still exists Sunday? Anyone else? Now I'm speaking here about the craft of practice. And more like the rest of Buddhism. Then, particularly, it's been presented in the West as too much based almost entirely on enlightenment.

[01:11]

But most of Buddhism assumes a craft of practice. That's based on or rooted in enlightenment. and makes enlightenment more likely. So, anyway, what I'm speaking, emphasizing is the crafted practice. And we have to start somewhere. One of the places we have to start is the experience we already have. And so what I'm speaking about is really re-emphasizing or adjusting or rearranging the experience we already have.

[02:41]

Now the well-known controversy between nature and nurture... You mean in the sense of genetic and socializing? You don't have a term like nature or nurture? No, just a simple language. That's paternalistic, since English is just a dialect of German. Okay. Really?

[03:59]

So it's not a common topic for people. In America, it's part of the women's movement, particularly. Yeah, but do you think that women's movement is a common topic? In America, it sure is. I hope in Austria, maybe... You mean... I won't tell. Let's not get into that. Um... But if we do take, maybe just use the English words, nature or nurture, the West in general has been strongly on the side of The instinct of inborn identity. And it's part of the whole controversy about abortion, too, in the United States. That you're already a soul and a... a person, a entity, even at conception.

[05:20]

Asia, they go way in the other direction. You're really not a person until you are at least born. And then really have two parents and favorable circumstances. So the famous story of the poet Basho created the haiku type poetry. Finding an abandoned baby on a journey he was making. And simply picking it up and saying, poor child, you must not have two parents.

[06:30]

putting it back down and walking away. No, I mean, to most Westerners when they read that, they think, What kind of inhumane person can this be? It's one of the great sensibilities within Japanese culture. Sensibilities? Yeah. He's a figure of sensibility. No, he's one of the... person who most represents and has created the aesthetic and emotional world of Japan. How can you walk away from this baby? Well, for him, unless the child has a village and two parents and an extended family, it doesn't have a chance to become a person.

[08:05]

I couldn't abandon a child. But, you know, I do understand Basho's viewpoint. The emphasis is so much on nurture. The person is created through the two parents and through the society. No, I'm just, you know, this is the prologue day. We don't have to do anything, you know, except wander about. Oh, I can just talk about very soon. And, you know, I think about... Because this is an internal debate within me, nature, nurture.

[09:22]

Because Buddhism assumes, and Asian culture assumes, the self is almost entirely created by nature. Somehow Freud's idea that we're inherently aggressive or inherently warlike just doesn't occur in the same way in Asia. Freud's idea that we're inherently aggressive or inherently warlike Now, I'm not saying Freud is wrong. I mean, I'm not that boost. Yeah, so... But I'm trying to understand both points of view.

[10:35]

And what we can emphasize and understand in our practice here in the West. Can I ask a question? Why not? You can translate it. My question is, But you have the potential, you know? I mean, if you nurture something, and if you find this child, you have the potential. You can do something to develop it. And also, I mean, if you have this abortion discussion, you can discuss whether it has a soul or not, but still you have to act, and you are doing something with this potential. Either you raise it, or you don't. You have an abortion or not. So what is the Buddhist attitude towards how do you relate to a potential? Not in the sense that you don't have this discussion about soul and vanity and so on, that everything is already there, but you have a certain kind of potential and you have to relate to it.

[11:38]

So my question is, you don't have to go so far as to discuss it under the question of whether it has a soul or not, and what do I conclude then, whether it has a soul or not? Well, we're not talking about absolutes. So we don't have an absolute position and an absolute position. But we have a very strong emphasis and a framework within one emphasis and a framework within the other emphasis. We just imagine From my point of view, what you just said is the viewpoint of a Westerner.

[12:58]

And if you said that to Basho, he would agree with you. But he wouldn't act on that agreement in the same way. He would say, yes, probably a potential. But I can't get the potential. I'm not... monk poet. I have no way to bring up this child. And also in Asia, there isn't the idea of public or public space. And I, you know, I think that Things we take for granted, like there's such a thing as the public, are hard to imagine that other societies don't have it.

[14:16]

I remember when I was in Bali many years ago, I don't know, 15 years ago or so, And it looked to me like they didn't really have a concept of what public space is. My own theory is that public space was probably created by the British Empire. Yeah, and creating clubs and hotel lobbies and so forth. And I had the feeling that the Balinese wanted a tourist business, so they were trying to figure out really what a hotel is and how you have a shared public space and so forth.

[15:31]

Now, having lived in Japan for a long time, continuously and optimally, Japanese culture, traditional Japanese culture, has no idea of public space. If you, and it's probably to some extent true here, It's like the Stammtisch. The Stammtisch isn't a public table. You have to be part of the local scene to sit at the Stammtisch. Isn't that true? Well, the whole of Japanese culture is a Stammtisch. If you go in most local restaurants or bars, if you're not known, you're not welcome.

[16:49]

And if they decide to let you come in, because you seem to be that... We've heard about you, that odd foreigner who lives nearby. Well, if you sit down and you order food, we'll bring it to you. And the cook is usually also the waiter. Because the making and serving of the food is all part of what you're doing. And if you seem to be a nice person, friendly, kind of jovial, the bill at the end might be, Yeah, 3,000 yen.

[18:01]

It's not itemized. If you weren't a jovial person or somewhat friendly, the bill would have been 4,000 yen. But the third or fourth time you come back And they've developed a relationship with you. And you're having a good time. And you have the same food and even a little more and there's a friend with you. And they just hand you a piece of paper with a well done and it's now 1,500 yen. And it's because everything is based on initiation and rights, R-I-T-E-S, not R-I-G-H-T-S.

[19:05]

Well, you know my example. I give often of this when it comes up. You dress differently for different situations, but you don't dress differently because there's a public-private distinction. So if this was a very warm, sunny day in Japan, in the countryside where I used to live, we would all strip down to our underwear during the seminar. We probably won't do that here no matter how warm it gets. Because there isn't the idea that, oh, this is

[20:05]

public space. This is just, it's just a warm space, a cold space. Well, for example, that's Japanese people used to in Tokyo Airport back in the 50s, even 60s, stripped down to their underwear in the airport because it was warm. And they had little signs up saying, remember, Westerners don't understand this. Please keep your clothes on. So we take this public... Private distinction is a fact of the world, but it's not for some culture.

[21:24]

I remember my daughter Sally is now 43 or 44. At the San Francisco airport we were meeting somebody and suddenly we looked down and Sally was, I don't know, three years old and she was naked. I said, Sally, you've taken all your clothes off. Put them back on. She said, why? And I said, well, we just don't do that at the airport. We don't take our clothes off. Shh. And then she said, but doesn't everyone want to? That was a harder question to answer.

[22:25]

Well, yes, maybe, but we don't. So you have to create this identity in the consciousness which recognizes that even if everyone wants to, we don't. Okay, so back to Basho. So Basho said he does decide that he wants to do something with this baby. He's not an initiated part of any of the local villages. They've already decided to abandon this baby.

[23:27]

There's certainly a community decision. So they think he was nuts. What are you interfering for? You're not part of the... We've made this decision. And if the village had had somebody, some way to give the baby to... some couple or somebody you already had, or a cousin or something, they wouldn't. So why Basho might admit agree that there is a potential. He would simply not believe that the ingredients to awaken that potential exist.

[24:32]

Yeah, part of my own debate with this nature and nurture stuff. As I happen to be a pretty close friend of Huey Newton, who was the founder of the Black Panthers. And Just as an aside, he used to have a message on his answering machine. And it said, this is Huey Newton, more power to the people. And my friend Gerard Stern left him a message on the answering machine. Here we are becoming by in a few hours and how come more power to the people always makes me feel left out?

[26:02]

Also, ich komme hier bald vorbei, aber wie kommt es, dass diese Nachricht, mehr macht dem Volk, mir das Gefühl gibt, dass ich da irgendwie nicht Teil davon bin? Sounds good, but what it meant was it left a lot of us out. So after that, he changed his answering machine method. But what is a shared vision, a common vision that doesn't make some people feel left out? And what would be the purpose, use, etc. of such a vision? What would be the dynamic of it in our own internal structure and in our relationship to others. Okay.

[27:18]

How do we put a common vision in place in our own mind, activity, etc.? Anyway, that's not why I brought up Cord here. He was not dead. That's not the reason why I talked about Arvin Armanvui, who is now dead. Because of him, I got to know, I'd see him once a month, once a week or so, quite often. And he was an extraordinary person. And so I got to know a lot about the panthers. And a lot of the Panthers' fathers had been killed

[28:26]

and various often US government instigated battles between black groups. So the larger community in mostly Los Angeles, mostly San Francisco and Los Angeles, helped bring up kids whose fathers had been killed sometimes before the baby was born. Now this isn't scientific research. But this is an example that stayed in my mind all these years. Which is that people would often remark how such a little boy was so much like his father who he never met.

[29:40]

He would laugh the same way or have a similar sense of humor. Or have other seemingly culture culturally derived habits that looked genetic. Or would he have other characteristics that he got from the culture, but which So at least for me, this has always remained, what is it? Is self entirely created or partially created or instinctual, etc.? And then there's the brilliant work of Alan Shore. It's shown in real time how the mother and infant's brain mutually develop.

[30:49]

By a very momentary connectedness, separation, readjustment, connectedness, separation, readjustment happening like this during the first 18 months, primarily, the child's So you couldn't call this instinctual exactly. It's a kind of nurture. But it's a nurture that's physiologically embedded in the structure of the brain, the limbic system. Okay, so... So what I'm saying is the Buddhist view is based on the idea that self is almost entirely created by us.

[32:19]

Yeah, by our, you know, nurture, by our society, by our parents. And we can change it, we can develop it. even as elderly adults or middle-aged adults. Now, I'm convinced the Buddhist point of view is true, but I still want to understand it in the context of instinct, nature, etc. Okay. Now, one of the basic teachings of Buddhism is we have no inherent nature. That's just what I've just said. There's no permanent nature and there's no inherent nature.

[33:35]

Now, that's in the background of my speaking about developing a common vision. Now, this emphasis The freedom of this emphasis on nurture allowed to experiment more and assume more than we would. But you can change the structure of the mind. Change the functioning of the mind. they took it for granted more than we do now we westerners know it's true too but our emphasis is so much on nature and maybe wanting the mind to be natural

[35:07]

But natural in this sense also means something like instinctual. So we don't really carry the sense of experimentation with what the mind can be as far as yogic culture does. So, the Buddhist practitioner over the centuries of the development of Buddhism asks himself or herself what among the possibilities of mind, what should be the baseline, the reference point for the mind? So the developed decision was the reference point should be the sensorial awareness.

[36:48]

Yeah, again, think of the example of someone in... in a lot of emotional stress, and what they do, they sometimes just want to wash the dishes, or do something physical to ground themselves. So he thinks of someone who, for example, is in a great emotional stress, and he or she wants to start washing up, because he is looking for an activity, a physical activity, in which he himself So the question is, how do we ground ourselves? usually phenomena.

[37:57]

Although we think of phenomena meaning the physical world, it actually means the world of the senses. We forget that it's not the physical world, it's the world we know through our senses. Now mostly this phenomenal world, everything is okay. Look how pretty it is. When I was picked up at the train station, I mean the train station, I said, this looks like a typical Austrian day. I said, I know some people have gone to Holland for the sun. I said, of course it will be raining in Rastenberg. He said, no, I have called

[39:01]

At least he said he thinks it's going to be sunny and lasted there too. So usually things are okay. And even if they're not okay. One of these huge storms that have happened in recent years where trees are blown down and we Switzerland in the Black Forest, here too, I don't know. Even though usually nature is okay, sometimes it's not okay. Trees are being knocked down. Uh-huh. But then at least it's unarguable.

[40:20]

You can't argue with it. So it's true. So there's a quality to phenomena. But it's usually okay. And if it's not, it's unarguable or true. And if it's not, it's unarguable or true. And you can be located in it. And it's shareable. Because whatever it is, it's true and you're part of it. And it's also shareable with others. Okay, so if Buddhism is shopping around for, you know, what mind shall we... make the baseline mind. They decided culturally and philosophically and in terms of the possibilities of practice that the mind located in

[41:28]

the immediacy of phenomena felt most true. most true and most shareable because if it's shareable or you feel inseparable from this immediacy of phenomena. And it's also shareable, which is also some kind of inseparability. Then you really feel located with other people. And located in the physical fact of this world.

[42:57]

So this is the reference point mind. How do you make it your reference point? So, how do you make it to your reference point? Well, to imagine how to make it your reference point,

[44:10]

Again, you have to be able to imagine the mind as malleable or trainable. And you have to recognize the world as it actually exists, which is That is impermanent. And in fact, in its impermanence, impermanence doesn't mean it's not provisionally predictable. So the world is certainly provisionally, in most cases, rather predictable. This little platform doesn't get up and walk away while I'm sitting here.

[45:17]

It would certainly be interesting if it did. So it's provisionally predictable. So the fact that it's impermanent is not so much its unpredictability but in its uniqueness. So from the point of view of Buddhism or Dharamism.

[46:17]

Or when you really get it that it's unpredictable. Is it your experience is the shiny brightness and uniqueness of each moment. Okay. Now how do you weave into your mind, into your thinking, into your identity, some teaching? Well, the key to many aspects of Buddhism are the development of an initial mind. And if you don't develop an initial mind, and I'll have to explain more what I mean by that.

[47:29]

If you don't develop an initial mind, you can never see the world as Dharma. And to see the world as Dharma is the essence of Buddhist practice. And to see the world as dharmas means to see the world as appearance. This also takes some training. You have to kind of go against the habit of permanence. The habit of predictability. Sometimes I... Play with my beats. Sometimes I play with my little mind.

[48:36]

It's the smallest one I've ever found. And I found recently a very big one about this big. Which I got for the altar at Johanneshof. And one of the things that surprised me about Infants are now my daughter Sophia. She hadn't seen this. And I had this on the table. And I just brought in this huge one. And people said, what's that? I said, it's Buddhist weightlifting. Anyway, so she said, Papa, why do you have such a little one and such a big one? And although the other one is designed rather differently, she recognized the pattern, whether it's big or small.

[50:03]

That's always surprised me that from infants recognized A tiny drawing of an elephant and an elephant in the zoo, they both recognize it. The size doesn't make any difference. And I think this conceptual ability is more basic actually than language. And anyway, I used to watch Suzuki Roshi when he was giving lectures. And he always carried his teaching staff. But somehow I don't use unless I'm wearing rope.

[51:16]

And I used to wonder, does he carry this teaching staff because you've got to do something with his hands while he's talking? And since I've known a lot of painters in New York and San Francisco, and while you're in the studio with a painter and they are painting, they often have the radio on in the background. Well, it seems to be they sort of occupy their conscious mind so they can paint sort of outside of consciousness. to get free of what Sukhiroji called the way thinking mind limits reality.

[52:20]

So that was my theory of why I carried this stick while I was talking. But now I think it's exactly the opposite. this or beads or teachings there. Or I presume, for a Catholic, a rosary. And the fact that the beads are often used to chant the mantra. what you're actually doing is not occupying the thinking mind, you're occupying the subtle mind.

[53:30]

So while I'm talking, I'm keeping touch with an initial mind, or an underlying mind, that is not separable from all that is. Yes, something like that. So I think that's time for lunch. But what could the whole body function this way instead of the teeth? That's enough. Thank you very much.

[54:31]

I didn't get very far, but... So we will come together at 2, shall we say? Is that time enough to have lunch, too? 1.30, 12.30 to 2?

[54:46]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_72.87