May we unfold the meaning of that Tathagata's truth. Good morning, everyone.

[01:28]

During this genzō, we study shōbō genzō, shōaku makusa. So means all or many or various. And ak is evil or bad or unwholesome or whatever bad English word you would like to use. And mak is not. And sa is make or do.

[02:34]

So as a sentence, this is usually translated as, do not do anything evil. And of course this is the first line of a very well-known verse in any tradition of Buddhism. So this is very old teaching of Buddhism. It's appeared in Dhammapada. Dhammapada is one of the oldest scriptures in Buddhism. Even before the so-called Parinikaya was compiled,

[03:40]

That means before the original Buddhist Sangha divided into two schools, so-called Theravada and Mahasandhika. That happened about 100 years after Buddha's birth. this teaching was already there. That's why both in the Theravada tradition and Mahayana tradition share the same teaching. So in Chinese tradition, This is very well known as a very basic teaching of Buddha, not only Shakyamuni Buddha, but also the Buddhas in the past.

[04:48]

It's said there are six Buddhas before Shakyamuni. And when we recite the names of Buddhas and ancestors in our tradition, we start Vivasibhutadayosho. That's the first of the seven Buddhas. Vivasibhutadayosho, Sikibhutadayosho, Vishagubhutadayosho, Gurusumbhutadayosho, Kunagomunibhutadayosho, and Shakyamunibhutadayosho. So Shakyamuni was the last of the seven Buddhas. And this is not only in Zen tradition. Those names of past seven Buddhas, including Shakyamuni, appeared even in Parinicaya. Let's see. There is in Paris, there is a sutta named Mahapadana Sutta in Digha Nikaya.

[06:03]

Digha Nikaya is the long discourses of Buddha. The English translation of the name of Sutta is the great discourse on the lineage. And in this Pali Nikaya, the names of seven Buddhas appeared. And of course, Vipassi Buddha is the first Buddha. And in this style, kind of interesting, describe the life and teaching of Vipassi Buddha. And that is almost exactly same as Sakyamuni Buddha's biography. And this verse, appeared in the same sutra.

[07:08]

In this translation, it said, not to do any evil, but cultivate the good. to purify one's mind. This the Buddhas teach. So this verse is really old and also common in almost any Buddhist traditions. So this is really important teaching. And Dogen Zenjin, made his own comments on this very well-known verse. And this chapter, Shōbō Genzō, Shōaku Makusa, has been considered to be one of the most difficult writings, our chapter in Shōbō Genzō. Dogen Zenji wrote this chapter

[08:14]

in 1240. So Dogen Zenji was 40 years old. probably you are familiar with Dogen Zen's new life, so I don't need to, you know, talk, repeat his biography, but he established his own monastery, Koshioji, in 1233. And in the same year, he wrote Genjōkōan and Makahainihara in terms of Shōbō Genzō. And after that, until 1238, he didn't write any chapters of Shobo Genzo, because I think he focused on establishing his sangha, I think.

[09:20]

So during that period, he wrote more like a practical writing, such as Tenzo Kyokun and Gakudo Yojinshu. Dr. Do Hyojin is a point to watch in practicing or studying the Way. And he also wrote the manual of giving or exceeding the precept. And in 1238, he wrote one chapter of Shōbō Genzō entitled Ikka no Myōjū, that means One Piece of Bright Pearl. So I think he felt he's ready to present a kind of a philosophical teaching to his disciples. And so in 1238 he only writes one chapter, and 1239 he writes four chapters, but those four are not philosophical.

[10:46]

One of them was called Jyūndōshiki. This is not a shōbōgenza, actually. This is the rules of, I mean, Dogen Zenji built a sword or a monk's hall in 1236. And it seems within a few years, he had to build, what do you call it, annexes? the second building for monks. And this Jihun Doshiki is now regulation or rules for the monks who live in that building. So it's not really a Shobo Genzo. And the other three is washing face. And this is the description of how to use toilet.

[11:56]

So these are not philosophical. And only one philosophical writing written in 1239 was Sok Shin Zebut. Sok Shin Zebut is the mind is itself Buddha. This is rather short writing. And in this year, 1240, I think he started to focus on writing Shōbō Genzō. He wrote six chapters of Shōbō Genzō. I mean, not four, six. And those six are, I think, really important chapters. In April, he wrote Keisei Sanshoku. The date is April 20.

[12:58]

April 20, he wrote Keisei Sanshoku. That is the sound of a valley stream and the colors of mountains. I think we studied Keisei Sanshoku last year here. And August 15th, he wrote this one, Shoak Maksa. And October 1st, he wrote Uzi. being and time, being, time. And it's kind of interesting, on the same day, he wrote, same day he wrote denne, denne, that means transmission of rope.

[14:11]

This is a writing about a orkessa. And later, this Zen-ne is kind of rewritten and changed the title as Kesakudoku. So the date of Kesa Kuroku is same as the date he wrote Denmei. That means he wrote Denmei and Kesa Kuroku and Ujiya on the same day. And I don't think it's possible. Maybe he has been written and kind of publicized on this day. And October 18th, he wrote San Sui Kyo. San Sui Kyo is Mountains and Waters Sutra.

[15:17]

I studied San Sui Kyo at San Francisco Zen Center. I had the first Genzoe retreat in San Francisco. And I think in November, it said the day before the winter solstice, he wrote Raihai Tokuzui. Raihai Tokuzui is attaining or gaining the marrow through or by making prostration. Those six chapters of Shobo Genzo, I think it's really important. So I have been trying to study those chapters.

[16:21]

And these become the kind of a foundation of the later writings, I think, in Shobo Genzo. And in 1241, He wrote 10 volumes of Shobo Genzo. And 42, 16. And 43, 1243, this is the year he moved from Kyoto, from Koshu to Echizen, to found Eheji. In this year, he wrote 26 volumes. chapter of Shobo Gendo. And 1244, 12 volumes. And 1245, he wrote only five volumes. And 1246 only two.

[17:34]

So Shobo Genzo was basically written between 38 to 46. And 1240 is actually the year he really focused on writing Shobo Genzo. Probably after 1246, he worked on editing and compiling the Schobogen. Until then, he just written independent short writings one by one. But after 1246, he wanted to make it one kind of a collection and entitled Shobo Genzo. Before that those are not called Shobo Genzo, I think. So I think this Shoaku Maksa is one of the very important writings of Sho Bogenzo, and also to understand Bogenzen's teachings as a whole.

[18:53]

This is about, you know, good and bad, and going beyond good and bad. This chapter is really difficult. Dogen's comment on this path is not really difficult. This is really simple. I made a handout of the six translations of this verse. Do you have this handout? So first, today, this morning, I would like to... Don't you have the... Okay, please.

[19:58]

So this morning I'd like to talk on this verse. This is a very simple verse and yet really difficult to really understand what this means in the entire system of Buddhist teachings. What this means is really kind of complicated. In this handout there are six translations and the meaning is not different at all.

[21:09]

but its translator is a little different word for good and bad. In Chinese, first line is shou, aku, maku, sa. And second is shu, Then, bu-gyo. Third is ji-jo, go-i. And ze-so, bu-kyo. ma ku sa shu zen bu kyo ji jo go i ze sho bu kyo

[22:35]

The first line, shoak maksa, in my translation is not doing, not doing. Mak is not, sa is doing, and shoak is any evil. Sho makes ak as plural. And bu-gyo is to do or carry out or practice. And bu, what is bu in English? Seng-bu in the love chant, hi-bu-nyo-lai-kyo. Seng-bu, this bu means respectfully something like, respectfully do something. or humbly, respectfully do something. But usually we don't translate this グ, we just translate as do or practice or carry out, everything good or all good.

[23:47]

So this shoe also makes 善 as plural. So this 悪 and 善 or evil and good are plural. So these are not an abstract noun, it's an actual activity. And ji is self, or another possible meaning is natural, or of itself. And jo is to be pure or purified. And go is it. In the self-purified self is thought or mind. And these three, this is, the show is all Buddha's teaching.

[24:52]

Usually we read these Chinese verse as a, how can I say, imperative. That means do not do anything evil and do or carry out everything good and purify your mind. this is the teaching of all buddhas so you know this is a kind of a admonition or request from all buddhas to us to deluded human beings but uh from uh according to the paris scholars in paris this is not imperative That's why when we read these translations, except two of them, one is the first one, and second is second from the last.

[26:04]

One, two, three, four, fifth one. Only two of them are translated as imperative, that means request. We are asking our commandment, you should not do bad and you should do good and you should purify your mind. This is a kind of a teaching of the Buddha's. But according to Pali scholar, this verse is not imperative. So in other one, two, three, four translations translate this as noun. For example, in the second translation it said, abstention from all evil, the doing of good deeds, And the purification of the mind is the admonition, I don't like the word admonition here, of the enlightened ones.

[27:12]

The third one is the non-doing of any evil. The performance of that skillful. The cleansing of one's own mind. This is the teaching of the awakened. And next one is refraining from all that is detrimental. The attainment of fat is wholesome. The purification of one's mind. This is the instruction of awakened ones. Well, the last one also is imperative. Right? Maybe not be because it's true. No. I think it's important to understand this difference.

[28:16]

If this is imperative, this is a kind of an order or a request from Buddhas to us human beings. But if this is not imperative, then now this is what Buddhas have been doing, all Buddhas have been doing. So this is not asking an order from Buddhas to us, but this is how Buddhas have been practicing. And that is... I think Dogen Zen's interpretation, that's why I translate this not as imperative, but not doing of any evil, doing of all good deeds, purification of one's own mind. This is a teaching of all Buddhas. I think this is closer to Dogen Zen's comment or interpretation of this verse.

[29:20]

And this is also important to understand our precept. Dogen Zen is called the precept we receive, the 16th precept, as the precept that has been transmitted through Buddhas and ancestors. Those precepts are the 16th aspect of awakening. It's not a matter of you should not do, you should not do that. A collection of should do and should not do. I mean, the Vinaya Precept is a collection of should and should not. Vinaya Precept, as I uh talk of the night uh give a precept binary precept is a kind of a correction of buddhist mistakes that means buddha didn't make any precept or regulation or rules until their his student or disciples made mistakes

[30:42]

When someone made some mistakes, Buddha said, you should not do such a thing again. And the collection of those admonitions becomes a precept. But Mahayana precepts or so-called Bodhisattva precepts are different, different ideas. That is, in the Dhammokyo or Brahma Net Sutra, it said, Mahayana precept or Bodhisattva precept is established when Buddha was sitting under the Bodhi tree and uttering Buddhahood. So these 16 Mahayana precepts were established within Buddha's awakening.

[31:43]

It's not a matter of Buddha's admonition to the people who made mistakes and you should not do that again. So these 16 aspects of Buddha's awakening. or awakening to the reality of all beings. That means 16 aspects of the reality of all beings. And that has been all Buddhas and Bodhisattvas have been practicing and living. That's the difference between the very basic idea between Vinaya precept and Mahayana or Bodhisattva precept. And to understand as a teaching of Bodhisattva precept, I mean, to understand this verse, not to translate as imperative, I think is important, although that is different from the common understanding in Buddhist tradition.

[33:12]

influenced by Chinese translation. So Dogen Zenji's interpretation of this path is kind of unique or different from common understanding in East Asian Buddhist countries. And for Dogen Zenji, do not do any evil. This do not do is really important. She used maksa in completely different meaning. Maksa is not doing. And he used this expression, not doing, as same as, you know, letting go of thought.

[34:16]

Do nothing. Or non-doing. That is same as mu-i. means no human activity depending upon human desire or you know the idea of getting some reaching some goal not doing is another meaning of nirvana so not doing of any evil is not a profusion of doing evil, but this is a description of how Buddha lived.

[35:26]

Next I'd like to talk about teachings of good and bad, and also going beyond good and bad. I always discuss about this point when I talk about our precept, because precept is something not something to do, but is about good and bad, about ethics, what we should do, what we should not do. And yet, as I said, the, not a goal, but how can I say, what Buddha taught is going beyond, being free from good and bad. That's the connection or relationship between the teaching of good and bad and not do bad or evil and do good.

[36:38]

And we should go beyond good and bad. Discrimination or relativity or dichotomy of good and bad is very important in any tradition of Buddhism. And this is kind of contradicted. You know, we should do good things and we should not do bad or evil things. And this is really important teaching, of course. And yet Buddha also thought we should go beyond the distinction or discrimination between good and bad. These two are really important teachings, but it seems contradictory. You know, in the middle of 1980s, there were so many problems happening in not only Zen centers but in almost all Buddhist centers in this country.

[37:55]

Some people, because of those things, the so-called scandals happened in the middle of the 80s, many people left their centers and some of them came to Japan and visited me. At that time I lived in a small temple in Kyoto. One of them said, you know, those so-called scandals over abuse of sexual or power or power abuse happened because, you know, Japanese Zen teachers teach only going beyond good and bad. It was kind of a shock to me. Until then, I was not so much interested in so-called precepts But after that, I thought it's really important to understand what precept means.

[39:12]

And I mean, in Japanese Buddhism, the part of ethics or part of doing good and not doing bad is not so much emphasized in Japanese Buddhism. That is not because Japanese Buddhists are immoral. But the social ethics in Japanese society does not depend on Buddhism. But there's another kind of source or code of ethics in Japanese society. One is Confucianism, especially from the 16th or 17th century. Confucianism was the basis of Japanese ethics.

[40:19]

And much older code of ethics was In English, you know, in Japanese society, people, families live in certain villages or places for many generations. So people, all people in one village are connected and there are some hierarchies and the family is the most important unit of the community. And so within that community, there is a certain way to do things, and that is fixed. No one can change.

[41:22]

That kind of social system create certain way of behavior and to do something which is not, how can I say, disown the family, then the family or the person cannot live within that community. So it was very strict. And that kind of system existed or worked until recently. I mean probably 50 years ago. Now it's broken. So Japanese society today has a kind of a confusion. Confucianism doesn't work anymore and that kind of community communal code of morality or ethics doesn't work.

[42:29]

So Japanese society today has really a kind of a moral or ethic crisis. anyway so because there are those two so kind of very strong ethical code you know function within japanese society people didn't expect buddhism to be a source of morality so buddhist teachers could say going beyond good and bad because good and bad is already fixed So to be kind of free from or go beyond good and bad as a Buddhist revelation was more important than put emphasis on good and bad.

[43:35]

That's why in Japan, or Japanese Buddhism, the ethics or the teaching regarding good and bad was not so much emphasized. But when I heard that person said, because the teacher thought only the teaching of going good and bad, such immoral things happened, I thought it's important to study Buddhist teaching of good and bad. And I started to study Vinaya. And somehow I didn't like the idea of Vinaya. you know, in those Vinaya. It's really interesting and important. You know, those Vinayas are the collection of stories of Buddhist monks made mistakes.

[44:43]

And I really admire those people who didn't hide those mistakes but recorded and try not to repeat the same mistakes again. So I think it's really important and interesting. But somehow, I don't like that kind of teaching, probably because I'm not Japanese. so you know to me you know the idea of mahayana received that is not a profusion but as a aspect of awakening or reality of all beings so it's not a kind of a order or commandment from uh and we have to be kind of judged depending upon our activity.

[45:47]

So in my understanding, Mahayana Buddhism, Mahayana Buddhist precept is not a correction of should and should not, but rather the way we behave when we awake to the reality of all beings. that awakening is a source of the precept or morality. So this teaching of good and bad and going beyond good and bad is, I think, really important. And both appeared, I think, in any Buddhist scriptures or teachings in any traditions.

[46:58]

So we can find this in the oldest teachings like Dhammapada or Sthampada. So I'd like to introduce some teachings about good and bad and going beyond good and bad. First I introduce the teaching about good and bad, we should do good, we should not do bad, or evil, from Dhammapada. Dhammapada is a collection of verses. This one is verse 53, says, As from a large heap of flowers, as from a large heap of flowers, many garlands and leaves can be made.

[48:13]

So by a mortal in this life, there is much good work to be done. So we should do good work. and next one is Dhammapada 281 said a man should control his words and mind and should not do any harm with his body if these ways of action are pure he can make progress on the path of the wise. So in order to practice and make progress on the path of the wise person, we should do good things. And we should not do any harm.

[49:16]

Next one is verse 116. Make haste And do what is good. Keep your mind away from evil. If a man is slow in doing good, his mind finds pleasure in evil. If a man is slow in doing good, his mind finds pleasure in evil. And next one is verse 117 and 118. It said, If a man does something wrong, let him not do it again.

[50:25]

and again. Let him not find pleasure in his sin. S.I.N. Painful is the accumulation of wrongdoings. And 118 is if a man does something good, let him do it again and again. Let him find joy In heat, good work. Joyful is the accumulation of good work. So doing good brings about joy or joyful life. So good and bad have something to do with action and its result or effect. Next one is verse 119 and 120.

[51:29]

A man may find pleasure in evil as long as his evil has not given fruit. Given fruit means the result is happened. But when the fruit of evil comes, then that man finds evil indeed. A man may find pleasure in evil, as long as his evil has not given fruit. But when the fruit of evil comes, then that man finds evil indeed. And 120. A man may find pain in doing good, as long as his good has not given fruit.

[52:31]

But when the fruit of good comes, then that man finds good indeed. So, good and bad is within the cause and result, action and its result. Next one is 1 and 122. Hold not a thing of little worth, thinking this is little to me. The falling of drops of water, will in time fill a water jar. Even so, the foolish man becomes full of evil, although he gathers it little by little.

[53:35]

122, hold not a deed of little worth, thinking this is little to me. The falling of drops of water will in time fill a water jar. Even so, the wise man becomes full of good, although he gathers it little by little. There are many more. This is really important teaching of Buddha. Do not evil and do good. Otherwise our life become suffering. Evil deed bring about the result of suffering. So cause and result is the causality, is the basis of Buddhist ethics.

[54:39]

you know, evil action bring about a painful result and good action bring about a... that is the opposition of painful. Dukkha and Sukkha. Joyful. This is the teaching of Buddhads about good and bad. That means because doing evil actions creates samsara, and we need to go to the hell and experience pain, so we should not do good, bad or evil things. But good actions bring about a joyful result, and we can be born in heaven, so we should practice good things.

[55:43]

That is the teaching about good and bad. But in the same Dhammapada we can find a teaching that we should go beyond good and bad. This is verse 126 of Dhammapada. said, Some people are born on this earth. Those who do evil are reborn in hell. The righteous go to heaven, but those who are pure reach nirvana. Do you understand? If we do evil things,

[56:44]

then we will be born in the hell. And if we do good things, we will be born in the heaven. But those who are pure, that is the same as in the third line of the verse, if we are pure, we reach nirvana. That means nirvana is beyond good and bad or beyond the six realms of samsara. So do good and be born in the heaven and not do not do evil and do good in order to be born in the heaven is not the goal of Buddhist practice. That's not all about Buddhist teaching. But our goal is being free or liberated from the transmigration within samsara.

[57:52]

Sansara is a word, you know, we up and down, depending upon our actions, whether we do good things, we go up to the heaven, and if we do evil things, we go down to the hell. This is the teaching of good and bad. And yet, If our mind is pure, we become free from this transmigration, and that being free from transmigration is nirvana. So doing good and not doing evil is not the entire teaching of Buddha, but we should go beyond good and bad and enter nirvana.

[58:57]

That is the Buddhist teaching, Buddha's teaching. So the first two lines of that Vastogin's comment is about good and bad. And the third line, purify your mind, is about going beyond good and bad, that is going to nirvana, or so-called enlightenment, being free from samsara. So in this good and evil dichotomy, and we should go beyond good and evil, That is the way we purify our mind. Then we can be not born, but we stop, we quit transmigration and we enter nirvana. This is basic teaching of Buddha.

[60:11]

And we can find the same teaching in Dhammapada. For example, verse 39 said, But he whose mind in calm, in calm self-control, is free from the lust of desires, who has risen above good and evil, Reason. Who has reason about good and evil. That means go beyond good and evil. He is awake and has no fear. So if we go beyond good and evil, we have no fear and we can awake to the reality of all beings. And verse 267 says, But he who is above good and evil, who lives in chastity and goes through life in meditation or practice, he in truth is called a bhikkhu.

[61:36]

so monks should be above or go beyond good and evil. And verse 412 says, He who in this world has gone beyond good and evil, and both, who free from sorrows, is free from passions and is pure. Him I call a Brahmin. Brahmin is also a religious practitioner. And verse 520, a holy man is a man. holy man is a translation bushra mana that is a religious practitioner is a man who has claimed himself is a man who has abandoned merit and demerit this merit and demerit is good and evil actions knowing this world and the other

[62:57]

He is dustless and has overcome birth and death. Birth and death also means samsara. So, you know, in Dhammapada we find two different kinds of teaching. One is we should do good and we should not do evil. And another is we should go beyond good and evil. And we somehow And the traditional interpretation of these two sets of teachings is, you know, the teaching of good and bad is taught to lay people.

[64:02]

And going beyond good and bad and purifying one's mind is a teaching for monks. That is a traditional understanding of these two sets of teachings. As a lay people, Buddha taught you should not do evil, you should do good, and then you can be born in the heaven. And if you do evil things, you need to be born in the hell. We should do good things and we should not do evil things. And this is not a unique teaching in Buddhism. This is almost a common understanding in Indian society at that time of Buddha. If we do good things, we will be born in the heaven within samsara.

[65:10]

And if we do bad things, we will be born in the hell. So we should do good things and not do bad things or evil things. This is really a kind of a basis of ethics or social moral in Indian society. So this is not at all unique teaching of Buddhism. But Buddha taught to his monks that they should go beyond good and bad. and liberated from samsara and enter nirvana. And this was possible only by monks. So in the early Buddhism this is really clear, you know, the lay Buddhist practice and the monks are different. The goal is different.

[66:11]

You know, for lay people to do good things and not do bad things, evil things, and be born in heaven is a teaching. And for monks, they should go beyond good and bad, purify their mind, and enter nirvana is the teaching of Buddha. And this two set of teachings was not a problem in the early Buddhism. When Mahayana Buddhism established, these two sets of teachings are the problem. Because in Mahayana, there's no such distinction between day practitioners and monks.

[67:18]

They are both called bodhisattvas. That means both lay people and monks are children of Buddha. So if the destination of two different groups are different, then that's a problem. According to Mahayana teaching, both lay practitioners and monks should go to Buddhahood. That's what bodhisattva means. Whether we are lay practitioners or monks, we are Buddha's children. So if we practice following Buddha's teachings, we all become Buddha. So the goal should be the same. So only monks can enter nirvana.

[68:23]

It's kind of a strange problem. So in that case, how can we integrate these two sets of teachings is a very important point in Mahayana Buddhism. And another point of these two is kind of a other side, opposite side of the teaching of good and bad, or evil, and another side of teaching of going beyond good and evil. That means the teaching of good and evil can become a kind of, you know, moralism. In a very clear distinction, you are good, you are bad.

[69:24]

If you, in the case of Buddhist practitioners, if you keep that precept, you are a good Buddhist, otherwise you are bad and you need to go to hell. This kind of judgment. There's no kind of a liberation if we cling to good and evil. We easily become kind of judgmental to ourselves and to other people. If I keep the so-called precept, then I feel I'm okay, I'm a right person, I'm a good person. And when we see someone who doesn't follow the same precept, I think, this is not a good person, this is bad. Or when we meet with people who are not Buddhist and who have some different system of, you know, moral code, then we think they are bad.

[70:33]

You know, people within this circle is good, and outside of this circle they are all bad people. this kind of discrimination and judgement arise from clinging to the idea of good and bad. In each community or each religion or each culture, there's a certain fixed system of good and evil. And if we encounter someone who has a different system, then we think we have a problem and we think they are bad. And sometimes in the extreme situation we feel they should be eliminated. To fight against them is a reason of life. It's a good thing. That's the way we can justify attacking others.

[71:34]

And that is one of the, I think, main causes of fighting or war. And the other side of the teaching of going beyond good and bad is, what is the word, I cannot remember this word in English, antinomianism. Do you know this word? And he knows Nizam. Do you know this word? No one knows? Well, interesting. Well, according to the English dictionary, the definition of this is one who maintains that this is antinomian.

[72:48]

One who maintains that Christians are freed from the moral law. by virtue of grace as set forth in the gospel, or a believer in the doctrine that faith alone, not obedience to the moral law, is necessary for salvation. That means good and bad is not necessary, but only if I have faith in God, because the power of God is beyond good and evil. so we can be saved and be born in the paradise. So our effort to do good and our effort not to do bad is not important at all. Just have faith in God's love, help us. This is in Christianity, but same idea existed in Buddhism.

[73:55]

For example, Nagarjuna said, the teaching of emptiness is medicine to the people who cling to forms. That means good and evil, include good and evil. But if, Nagarjuna said, if someone cling According to the emptiness, there's no such medicine to help this person. I mean, the sickness of emptiness means there's nothing good, nothing bad. Everything is okay. If we interpret emptiness in that way, there's no one who is killing, and nothing is killed. So there's no such thing as killing. If we sometimes Mahayana precept is interpreted in that way, that is a misuse of idea or teaching of emptiness.

[75:05]

Nothing exists, no one kill, nothing can be killed. That is Buddhist form of antinomianism. In Pure Land Buddhism also, at the time of Dogen in Japan, teaching of Pure Land Buddhism became really popular and one of the leaders of Pure Land Buddhism called Shinran said that The basic teaching of Pure Land Buddhism is that Amitabha Buddha, when he was Bodhisattva, he took 48 vows. And one of the 48 vows was, unless I save all living beings, I will not become Buddha.

[76:17]

is the same as our Bodhisattva vow, and said Amitabha, that Bodhisattva became Amitabha Buddha. That means this vow was already fulfilled. That's why this Bodhisattva become Amitabha Buddha and Amitabha Buddha has now pure land, Buddha's land in the West. So his vow was already completed. only if we have a faith in his vow. And the expression of this faith is Namo Amidam. It means I take refuge in Amidana Buddha. We will be saved and be born in the pure land, not in samsara. Pure Land is Nirvana. So only by the faith, through the faith in Amitabha Buddha's vow of salvation, we can be saved and be born in Pure Land.

[77:26]

And their kind of basic idea is this world in that age, that means 12th, 13th century in Japan, was very degenerated. and they lived in the last dharma, age of last dharma, means no one could attain enlightenment. With teaching, practice, and enlightenment, in the first 500 years of Buddhist history, people, all three, exist, their teaching, practice, and enlightenment. And in the second 500 years, only teaching and practice exists, no one attains enlightenment. And at the final, last age, only teaching exists, no one practices, and no one attains enlightenment.

[78:33]

That was the idea of three times. So the idea, it's no use to practice in order to attain enlightenment, become Edgar Nirvana with our personal effort. So the only possibility is we have faith in Amitabha's power of salvation. Then we can be born in the dead land. This world is too bad to practice anything, and it doesn't make sense. But Buddha's land, Pure Land, is like a practice center. It's better, and people can practice there and attain enlightenment. That is the basic teaching of Pure Land Buddhism.

[79:36]

And Shindan said this teaching is established for the sake of bad people. And some people kind of misuse or take advantage of this teaching as it's not a matter to do bad things, because Amitabha's vow is beyond good and bad. So, when we die, we say, Namo Amida Butsu, we can be born in Pure Land position, Pure Land, and we can practice there. So, whether doing evil things in this world or not doesn't make any difference. That is a kind of a misunderstanding of Shindan's teachings. But that things can happen.

[80:38]

And in Zen, that kind of idea, you know, good and evil don't matter if we really do things wholeheartedly within samadhi. If we don't make distinction between self and others, there's no one who is killing and no one who is killed. That kind of idea is possible. So in any tradition of Buddhism, to find the middle way between moralism, the extreme clinging to good and evil, and antinomianism, that is kind of extreme misunderstanding of teaching of going beyond good and evil. is the point how can we find middle way that means we are not harmfully cling to good and evil we are not so judgmental and yet we should do good and we should avoid evil and go beyond good and evil and yet

[82:03]

Even though we go beyond good and evil, we should practice good and we should avoid evil. How such a thing can be possible, I think is a very important point in any sort of Buddhism. and prevalent not only in Buddhism but in any other religion or not only religion but any culture or society or human life. This is a really important point. So if we understand this point, how we can be free from either extreme, good and bad and going beyond good and bad. I think even though Dogen's comment is really difficult, but if we understand this point, that is what Dogen wants to point out. We should do good and we should not do bad, but we should not cling to that distinction or discrimination between good and bad.

[83:13]

We should be free from that. How can we live in such a way? That is a point of Dogen's discussion or liking or comment on this verse. Yes. if we clearly understand that point, I think Dogen's comment is not so difficult to understand. So this is a kind of a koan to all of us. How can we become free from judgment between good and bad. And yet, we can do good and we don't need to do or we can avoid evil.

[84:19]

Any question? Please. It seems like Buddha taught ethics that were a little different than the culture he was in. They're all just based on the culture. So I'm wondering, did his ethics, the relative ethics he taught to lay people, come from this awakening of learning beyond ethics? good and bad. And also the Vinaya are those, because if he's teaching non-Vinaya, then what is the purpose of that Vinaya? It's not to go to heaven, is it? Purpose of Vinaya? Yeah. Purpose of Vinaya is going to nirvana, I think. But this is a very interesting point. uh to the people to the monks who whose goal should be going to nirvana buddha request to keep all those ethical codes so in the case of buddha buddhist teaching going beyond should really going beyond but if we cling to another side of going beyond that's not really going beyond but going below

[85:56]

I think. Going below good and bad. This is a very important point. I think. And another point is in Sarkin Sutra, that is Nirvana Sutra, Pali Nirvana Sutra, like before Buddha's death, a person whose name was Vada became the last disciple of Buddha. And to that person, Buddha said, I left home 50 years ago, I was 29, I left home because I, what is the word, I seek the good. And in the English translation, the good is a capital, the good.

[87:23]

I think this means going beyond good and evil is good beyond good and evil. And that is nirvana. So these two, even in the early Buddhism, these two sides can be integrated, I think. And how is it possible is, I think, an important point. Within this good, the teaching of doing good and not doing evil should be included. And that is... how can I say, nirvana. That means nirvana is not separate from samsara. This is what Mahayana Buddhist taught, samsara and nirvana are one.

[88:30]

That means within samsara, nirvana, samsara is included. Or within samsara, nirvana can be found. And then, as I often say, if we take four Bodhisattva vows, and the first vow is, although sentient beings are numberless, we vow to save them. This save them means save them all. That means we faith means to ferry all living beings from Sansara to Nirvana. You know, there is a big river between Sansara and Nirvana, and this is called this shore and the other shore.

[89:36]

And the word save, in the translation to ferry, to get across, that's this river. So the meaning of this first sentence being so numberless I vow to save them means Bodhisattva is like a person who ferry the boat between this shore and other shore and help living beings within Sansara go nirvana, enter nirvana. And that vow means I will not stay here in nirvana until all people, all living beings in this shore move to this shore. That is the meaning of the first vow, living beings are numberless, we vow to save them. That is bodhisattva vow.

[90:43]

And if we are all bodhisattvas, all bodhisattvas working to ferry other people and vow, I will not enter nirvana, until all others enter nirvana. That means if all people are bodhisattvas, there's no one in nirvana. All people are working between samsara and nirvana to help each other and ask, you know, go ahead. That means bodhisattva is a person who vow not to enter nirvana and working within samsara. to help others. That means sansara and nirvana, that means both by the person who, how can I say, create nirvana within sansara. That is the basic teaching of sansara and nirvana one.

[91:47]

And within this practice to help others, we can find nirvana. I think that is a very important part of Mahayana teaching. So at the Bodhisattva practice, entering Nirvana is not a goal, but continue to work endlessly, continue to practice within samsara to help others is a goal. Mahayana Buddhists think we can find nirvana with that kind of practice. And that is called Muzhusho-mehan. Muzhusho means Mool is not.

[92:50]

Jyotishram is a place to stay or dwell. So no dwelling. No dwelling nirvana means because of wisdom Bodhisattva does not stay in samsara. And yet because of compassion Bodhisattva never leaves samsara. So Bodhisattva has no place to stay, to dwell, or really move around anywhere. That is Bodhisattva vow. And that is called Mujusyamihan, Nirvana without any place to dwell. Mujusyo. Niham. Niham is Nirvana. And Dogen, when Dogen discuss about, you know, this verse of doing good and not doing evil and purify your mind, he tried to show us how we can, how we practice with that attitude.

[94:14]

being free from both sides, doing nowhere, and practice doing good and not doing evil. And even though we do good and we don't do evil, still we are free from distinction or discrimination between good and evil. How such a thing is possible? Where is the answer to your question? So are you saying we cannot practice doing the ongoing dhamma unless we're trying to be good and help people? Right. Yes. Please. Who was it you were referring to who left home to do the good with a capital G? Well, that reminds me of The book by Soren Kierkegaard called Purely a Part is to Will One Thing.

[95:26]

Anybody familiar with that book? By the way, he's a Christian. It was referred to as an existentialist Christian. But anyway, so his whole book is about purely a part is to will one thing and how to will one thing. And one thing that he's talking about willing is the good with a capital G. And all these chapters are about things that interfere with this being one thing. For instance, if you're willing good for the sake of reward, then it's no longer a cure because it's no longer one thing. You need to build a good for the sake of itself, not for what you get. Anyway, when you sit with a capital G, you think of that. Well, that's interesting. Thank you. James, any question? OK, thank you very much.

[96:21]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_88.58