So please, if you will, tell me something about what stuck with you or what made some sense to you, etc., from yesterday. What made sense to you as a person and as a potential practitioner or as a therapist? What arose immediately when I sat down this morning was the Buddha with the koan and to see the Buddha in the door threshold. And then, of course, also the image about the electron and the wave and the particle and the two truths.

[01:25]

And that, of course, in me, something is asking how can I locate myself in between this? And then there is a perception that I can only describe with such a picture, like this game, when you try to maneuver such a ball through such a wood labyrinth to a target, but there are always grooves and holes and the ball always falls into it. And I can only describe the feeling I have with this image of a game that we have, which is you have this wooden labyrinth and a little ball in it, and you have to maneuver, navigate the little ball through the labyrinth, but it keeps falling into holes along the way. And so it is with the thinking that I can feel that And it's like that with thinking that I can feel how my thinking keeps falling into making distinctions and discriminating.

[02:57]

Yes. And how I need to make an effort in order to not fall into discrimination. And there is a feeling of being on razor's edge. And at the same time there is an incredibly clear feeling of such a direction there, or a longing for it, or a... I don't know, it's more of a feeling, a yes to this in-between, and there I want to somehow... Schauen, wie kann ich da sein? And at the same time, there's a clear feeling of an alignment with this feeling of in-betweenness or a longing for it. And just a clear sense of saying yes to that feeling that that's the place I want to go.

[04:00]

Someone else? Ja. Mich beschäftigt der rechte Augenblick. I am wondering about the right moment. I would like to use the example of language to ask my question. Yesterday you said that it has only been a few years since you found this contrast between entity and activity, so to speak, as a linguistic interpretation, which has a certain probability to have roots in the practice of thinking. You said yesterday that it was only until several years ago when you found this distinction between entity and activity as a linguistic formula that has a likelihood to take roots in the practice of a practitioner.

[05:17]

In parallel to the teaching of the Dharma, in the psychotherapy, to find formulations that can root. And in a way that you don't start from the beginning next week, so that it's not like you have to start over again next week? So that one is not just adding linguistic information. Not just so that on a horizontal plane a new concept is added.

[06:20]

so that it takes root in a vertical way and that there is a transformative power on a vertical plane. If I use language, then sometimes it is in service of the fact that a mutual field is created at first. Then it's in the service, language is in the service so that first of all a mutual field can arise. That's one way to use language. It can be done differently but right now I'm concerned with how to do it with language. But when this field is established Then it can still be the case that the right words that can take roots don't find me. Maybe because I myself have not really understood yet what it is.

[07:37]

I don't actually know what the reasons are. But I do feel when it won't succeed somehow, it won't occur. And I wonder if in such cases it's better to be silent. And I also wonder, and that's the question to you, whether you think that your previous attempts to speak about what later on became the contrast between entity and activity Whether it was helpful to try that or not. helpful to try other ways to speak about it.

[09:13]

If it was conducive to that it finally worked out in this contrast, or if the early attempts of talking about something that is not yet really graspable. Well, my... First, the actuality of my experience here, which is, I think, somewhat different than what you're asking. Of course, my motivation is to describe it as well as I can. Or to catch it. You know, in Indian dance, India-Indian dance, one of the things they try to do is to establish or create satis, S-A-T-I. And that's to create a certain state of mind, not to create understanding or meaning, but just to create a certain state of mind in people, like you might by opening your hand, a rabbit appears out of it.

[10:45]

I can't make it happen. So I'm trying to say something as well as I can and I'm trying to make a rabbit appear. But I notice that only a stuffed animal appears. But I still try. I don't have an experience of failure. I just have an experience of it's not as good as it could be. And there's no question in my mind that the repeated attempts to say something, in whatever vein it is, does lead to understanding something better or expressing it better.

[12:03]

You know, I feel I'm rather primitive. And... Und ich mache mir manchmal Notizen, bevor ich über etwas sprechen möchte. Und heutzutage sind meine Notizen häufig auf dem Computer getippt, aber früher waren sie fast immer handgeschrieben. I take an idea or a phrase and I just write it over and over again, 10, 15 times, in different word combinations, different playing with the words, and so forth. And sometimes I come to a three-word phrase, which I think works.

[13:05]

And ten phrases that don't work. But then when I get in and I start talking, I find I'm using the phrase I thought didn't work. So it's an experience of trying to get feeling and the words to kind of match. But on another level, in responding to what you said, I think it's useful to pause I really want to say hover.

[14:27]

Hover? Like a helicopter hovers? Hover over what can't be said. And you said, sometimes it's better to be silent. But if that silence is hovering over what can't be said, there's a certain power there. But many of these things are the assumption in Buddhism, from Buddhist time, Aber die Annahme im Buddhismus aus den Zeiten des Buddhas ist, dass wir nie alles von allem kennen.

[15:36]

Oder von irgendwas. Wir kennen nie alles von irgendwas, weil egal was du kennst oder weißt, du kennst es aus deiner Perspektive. And whatever you know is within the context of what your own senses and conceptual skills can notice. One of Nagarjuna's main points was you can't have a conception of reality. reality is beyond conceptuality. If I said something like, reality, actuality, the universe is round, there's no way I could say that because I... there's no possibility of an outside point and see the roundness.

[16:48]

Or as I say, if I hear a bird sing, I can only hear what my ears hear. I can't hear what a bird would hear, another bird would hear. So all perception in Buddhism is actively assumed to be only part and in the midst of a mystery. Yeah. So... Um... What is your name?

[18:01]

Yes. Judith. Judith. Oh, Judith. Judith. Ah, Judith. In English, Judith? I see. I was wanting to call you, oh, imperfect one. Guess what your shirt used to be. So, Judith, you haven't said anything. Can you tell us something in German? You haven't said anything yet. Is there anything you'd like to add? I can only say... I can only say that this language is oftentimes too complicated for me. I feel like I'm made woven more simply and the language doesn't reach into my deepest heart.

[19:19]

I don't feel like I'm intellectual enough or this intellectual. And at the same time I can take many nice aspects. From having met nice people, for example, and maybe things will follow from that, will unfold from that. Okay. I've had people that have been pressuring me for years who say to me, You know, for the first two years I didn't understand a word you said. And I say, well, why did you keep coming then? And they say, well, something like you said, well, there were some nice things along the way. Of course, I think I'm completely clear and simple, but I do know I'm a little dense.

[20:40]

And that could be a pun. I mean a joke. To say you're dense means you're stupid. Oh, okay. but it also means what I say is a little dense to take apart all at once. And Jan, can you... Say something. I would say I feel similar to what Judith said. I was afraid. And yesterday I experienced something like a school trauma. to sit in a class where I don't understand a thing and then to be asked a question.

[21:55]

But today it feels different. and what a role for me, which I'm not sure if I can make the question or want to make it a question. I don't have the perspective of a therapist but of a client. I've been in therapy for years. Maybe I would label myself a slightly advanced client. And yesterday you wrote these rooms, this imaginary space, this creation of a common space of relationship, Yesterday you spoke about these spaces, you spoke about imaginal space and creating a relational space.

[23:24]

without concepts and this idea that at least what I understood is that the therapist can put their toolkit maybe first in the imaginary space? And I thought maybe there are aspects that also the client can participate or contribute to make this a fruitful space. And I came to similar answers, that the client also had to enter non-conceptually, without concepts, and ohne Geländer, and without maybe a railing in which to hang on to.

[24:51]

Well, that's good. I like that. Das ist gut. Das gefällt mir. I assume, and those of you who are practicing therapists could tell me, I assume that I, at least if I were a therapist, I'd want the client to actively participate in creating the therapy. And not just passively receive the therapy. And as you are a slightly advanced client, this must be what you're doing. That reminds me of what I said yesterday about the relational aspect.

[25:56]

We as therapists are also dependent on this exact exchange. And I found it so beautiful, I don't know what it's called, the one in front of me. Alexander, yes. He said it so beautifully yesterday, he said, sometimes you just want to go for it, if I remember correctly. And then I got the picture of Harry Potter, of the eight or seven and three quarters, which also come into the race against an imaginary wall. Based on what you said that brought up for me again the concept I mentioned yesterday of relational psychoanalysis. And I liked how Alexander mentioned yesterday, he said that sometimes he just starts speaking.

[27:02]

just finds himself, just speaks. And that related to me to this image of Harry Potter who at this track. Track 13 and a half? Yeah, track 13 and a half or something. Where he also first runs, they also run against an imagined wall. And as they run, something opens. Yeah, we hope for the best. Yes. There are words, intellectual and understanding. I am more in the field of feelings now. Does the Buddhist practice make me more empathetic? I think the feelings in this room, in which I meditate, I am only in this intra-psychic. I am only with myself, alone. So this is related to words and understanding and intellectualism and so forth.

[28:11]

And I've been wondering, does Buddhist practice also make one more empathetic? Because when I meditate, then I am mostly focused in words on the intra-psychological space. But what about empathy? Well, I think there's no question that Zen practice, Buddhist practice, makes you feel more connected. And the degree to which that connectedness is then felt empathetically would depend on whether you're an empathetic person or not.

[29:24]

And the degree to which you developed empathy in yourself. One of the very basic practices in Buddhism are called the four unlimiteds, or Brahmavihara's divine states. And one is that you practice unlimited friendliness. And it can sometimes drive your friends a little crazy if you're too unlimitedly friendly. We have somewhere to go, and for ten minutes you were friendly at the gas station with the clerk.

[30:26]

You're going to be now ten minutes late to your unlimited friendliness. Well, you get in the longest line in the... grocery store so you can talk to people instead of the shortest line. And then the second is empathetic joy, which means to practice having joy within your enemy's success. And until you can take joy in people you feel competitive with or have harmed you, you're not really practicing empathy. And those are then the basis for developing equanimity, which is to be able to treat everything equally and understand everything as equal.

[31:53]

So you can relate to people and things without preferences. And the fourth is compassion. Where you can really feel with others. Wo du wirklich mit anderen fühlen kannst. But they're all based on the increased openness and connectivity and the power to be open without feeling endangered. Aber die alle basieren auf dieser zunehmenden Offenheit und auch der Kraft, die man braucht, um offen zu sein, ohne sich dabei gefährdet zu fühlen. What's interesting to me about psychotherapy, speaking and meeting with psychotherapists, which I do a few times a year, is that they're no different than anybody else.

[33:19]

Right. Except that they have a regular practice of relating to people. Also... That they have to deal with how to relate to people. And with some dispassion. Dispassion? Um... Distance, or... Dispassion means to... Uh... It's like non-subjective, non-subjective observing mind. Okay. I think that the most useful thing might be for you as a person and you as a therapist, if you are a therapist, is the concept of a non-subjective

[34:46]

observing mind. So maybe we can speak about that a little bit. If we want to develop that a little bit after the break. Because, you know, I think we so immediately conflate observation with the self that's doing the observation. It takes some mental gymnastics to separate that out and say, it is possible to have a non-subjective observing mind. Or we could say a non-self-referencing mode of mind. Maybe we could also say a spirit that does not refer to itself, that observes.

[36:18]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_75.37