Good morning, everyone. Yesterday I finished talking about the precept of taking refuge in Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. And this morning I start to talk on the Threefold Pure Precept, at the bottom of page three. This is the second set of the three precepts. Let me read that section. The threefold pure precept. The precept of embracing moral cause. This is the abode of the laws and codes of all Buddhas. This is the root source of the laws and codes of all Buddhas.

[01:02]

The precept of embracing good dharmas. This is the dharma of unsurpassable true awakening. This is the way in which one should practice by oneself and the way in which one should lead others. The precept of embracing all living beings. One should transcend distinction between ordinary beings and sages and save both oneself and others. These are the threefold pure precepts. So these three are called three-fold pure precepts, or in Chinese or Japanese we call san-ju-jo-kai.

[02:11]

The Chinese characters are in the printout and handouts, so you don't need to copy these Chinese characters. San, ju, jo, kai. San is three. Ju is a collection or groups. And is pure, or purity. And is precept. So this is a threefold, or three collections of pure precept. And the first one in my translation, the precept of embracing moral cause, is translation of . gi, hai.

[03:13]

And second, the precept of embracing good dharmas is same sho and zen, bo. same as ho, zen, ho, zen, bo, kai. And the third is the precept of embracing all living beings, that is, sen, sho, shu, jo, shujo means all living beings. And so precept of embracing, the first one is ritsugi. And ritsugi literally means Vinaya. Ritsu is a precept in Vinaya, and gi is forms. Forms is like how do people do ceremonies and gatherings.

[04:26]

Those are part of the Vinaya precept. So ritsugi literally refers to the Vinaya precept. So this means even these precepts are Bodhisattva precepts or Mahayana precepts. We embrace the Vinaya precepts. That is the original meaning from one text of Mahayana Vinaya. I mean, not Vinaya, but Thera or Kaip. But another text says this, in the case of bodhisattva precept, this does not refer to the Vinaya precept, but this refers to the ten major precepts we receive. Anyway, this So depending upon the interpretation, what this Ritsugi means, refers to, is different. So I simply translate moral cause.

[05:30]

So we can put any moral cause in here if it's accord with the Mahayana teachings. So originally this precept means even though we are bodhisattva precept, we embrace and value the viraya precept. That is the reason even Mahayana monks received viraya precept. except, you know, today, you know, Japanese monks or priests, we don't receive Vinaya. Anyway, and the second one is Zen is good and Ho is Dharma, good Dharma or good actions. So this is a precept, embracing all good actions. And the third is shujo, living beings.

[06:32]

This is a precept embracing all living beings. These are the literal meaning of these threefold pure precepts. But I think this threefold pure precept is a kind of reinterpretation of the verse from the Dhammapada I introduced at the very beginning of this retreat. That is, the first one is about What was the translation? My mind doesn't really work well. The first is, fat is evil. evil or bad or twisted karma or unwholesome.

[07:35]

And the second is do what is good. And in the case of the verse from Dhammapada, the third line is, keep your mind pure. You know, this keep your mind pure is the same word with this joke. And as I said in the first lecture, in the case of the verse in the Dhammapada, to avoid unwholesome and practice wholesome is one set of teaching. And keep your mind pure is another set of teaching. This is for monks, for lay people. We should avoid unwholesome and we should do good actions.

[08:39]

If we do evil, we go to hell. If we do good things, we will be born in heaven. so within samsara depending upon our action we go up or down so we should do good things in order to go up instead of down that is one set of teaching for lay people and buddha taught the monks to keep your mind pure means being we should go beyond discrimination between good and bad. Then monks could go to enter nirvana. That is so purity in the verse in Dhammapada means go beyond good and bad. But here it said all those three. are purity, so not doing unwholesome or avoid evil and practice good things.

[09:48]

These are not based on discrimination, but these are expression of our pure heart. And so the third line is changed. This is not going beyond good and bad, but embracing all living beings. As I always said, all living beings do not stay in Nirvana. All living beings are within samsara, within this shore. So in order to embrace all living beings, we have to stay here, not going there. But staying here and doing good things to help others and avoid unwholesome, and these two, avoid unwholesome and practice wholesome, should be for the sake of all living beings.

[10:54]

That is what this purity means. So this is, I think, the interpretation of purity in the verse in the Dhammapada. So we don't do... practice good or we don't avoid evil because we want to go to hell no we want to go to heaven and we don't want to go to hell but this is the expression of a pure heart that's why we practice good and avoid unwholesome and When we receive certain precepts or accept the rules, we easily think to keep the rules is the most important thing. And this most important thing and doing good things for the people in front of us is sometimes contradicted.

[12:01]

Sometimes we use regulation or laws or precepts, some kind of taboo in certain religions as a kind of excuse not to help others. But this second precept means even sometimes we need to break the precept. We have to do good things actively. So to avoid unwholesome is not enough. Sometimes we should do good things actively. And both avoiding unwholesome action and doing good action should be for the sake of all living beings, not for the sake of this person going to nirvana, or attaining enlightenment, or becoming a teacher, or a certain kind of great person.

[13:07]

But that is the spirit of this practice. I mean, this is the fourth pure precept. Please. So is this reinterpretation of the pure mind, is this Dogen's reinterpretation? Not Dogen, but these threefold pure precepts appeared in one of the... What is the word? I forget. Yogacara texts. And this appeared also in the sutra of Yorakukyo in Japanese. What is Yorakukyo? Jewel Necklace Sutra.

[14:10]

So these three... I mean, these three are three aspects of, you know, next Dogen Zenji made comment on ten major precepts. Those three are the three aspects of each of the ten major precepts, each precepts. within the ten major precepts should be seen or understood from three perspectives. what we should avoid and what we should do, and for what we avoid and wholesome and practice good, and the answer is for the living beings. Next I'd like to introduce one Dharma discourse of Dogen,

[15:24]

That, I think, I believe, that express the point or spirit of threefold pure pursuit. What do you want? from this book, Dogen's Extensive Record. This is the translation of Ehe Korok. If you have this book and you want to check later, this appears in Volume 8, Shosan, Number 20, and it appears on page 496. Shosan is a kind of informal gathering.

[16:29]

A teacher or the abbot gives certain instruction, and students or disciples or monks ask the question to the abbot. It's called shô means small, small meeting that is different from daishan or larger meeting that is done in the Dharma hall. It's very most formal way of giving lectures. But shôsan is more informal, often takes place in abode room. And this shosan is done at the end of summer practice period. So this is kind of suitable for today. Now this is almost end of the three months summer practice period.

[17:33]

And Taigen and me made the title of this Dharma discourse, and the title is The Village Songs of Mahakasyapa and Manjushri. I'm sorry, Village Songs, plural. The Village Songs of Mahakasyapa and Manjushri. Number 20, informal meeting for the end of the summer practice period. Dogen says, for 90 days of non-action. Non-action is mu-i. Mu-i. So what we have been doing for three months or ninety days is mu'i, no action, that means we do nothing.

[18:44]

Or what we did, our practice, is good for nothing. Not for the sake of this person, but for the sake of dharma. So it has no value in a kind of a marketplace. We just practice for the sake of practice or we practice for the sake of dharma. That is what non-action or mu'i means. Usually we have some purpose or some goal or something we want, reach or get, but in our practice there is no such thing. That fight is called mu'i. So for 90 days of non-action, the whole assembly has been peaceful and calm. I hope this is true also in this assembly, peaceful and calm.

[19:47]

Nevertheless, we have been protected by the Buddha's ancestors, which is truly the fortune and happiness of the Great Assembly. So we have been practicing with peace without much difficulties, according to Dogen, because of the protection by Buddhas and ancestors, of course, including our you know, each one of us, you know, effort to practice together with people in this Sangha. So it's truly the fortune and happiness Tonight, I, or Eihei, will hold an informal meeting as usual at the end of a practice period. So at each practice period, Dogen and his assembly have this kind of meetings.

[20:55]

What we call informal meeting is an occasion to give the family instructions. Family instruction means it's not something very highly philosophical, but more intimate and concrete instructions. So this is about the teacher's own style of practice and teachings. Although there are many family instructions, now I will offer one or two. The ancestral teachers of former generations are all noble people. The teachers within the history of Buddhism from Shakyamuni Buddha in each generation They are all noble people with the mind of the way.

[22:03]

This mind of the way in Japanese is do-shin. Do is way or dao, and shin is mind or heart. Mind of the way is one of the translations of Indian or Sanskrit word bodhicitta. Chinese people translate body or awakening into this Chinese word Dao. It's kind of strange to me, but interesting. Why Dao can be awakening? Of course, this is because Daoist connotation of this word Dao. Anyway, so all teachers or ancestors had or allowed bodhicitta or way-seeking mind.

[23:05]

Without the mind of the way, the myriad practices are mere vain arrangement. Vain arrangement, maybe arrangement is not the right word. It's like a fabrication. You know, we do many different forms, how to eat, how to sleep, how to sit, how to do chanting, how to do kinking, all are those forms. And those are kind of invented, were created by Buddhas and ancestors, allow us to practice and cultivate our bodhicitta. awakening mind. And yes, if we practice all those formal practices without this mind, awakening mind, then this is really simply a vain fabrication.

[24:08]

Empty forms, no meaning. Actually, our practice has no meaning. It's mui. And yet, if we practice this good-for-nothing practice without way of mind, it's really no meaning. That is what Sarakiroshi said. Sarakiroshi said, our zazen is good for nothing. But if you don't understand our zazen is good for nothing, your practice is really good for nothing. So we understand that our practice is good for nothing. Then, I don't know, is it good or not? This is our koan. Anyway, in order to make our practice in the sangha meaningful, we need to allow bodhicitta, with seeking mind or awakening mind. That is the first thing. Therefore, monks who study and practice must first allow the body-mind or bodhicitta.

[25:16]

Allowing the body-mind is allowing the mind that saves all living beings. Maybe you don't like this one, saves, but this is dog. The word appeared in the first of the four bodhisattva vows. This do is in do, means to save. But many American people don't like this word save. But the literal meaning of this word do is cross over. means cross the river between this shore of samsara and the other shore of nirvana. So that means Bodhisattva is like a fairy person who helps people cross this river from samsara to nirvana.

[26:29]

So Dogen said to allow bodhicitta or awakening mind or way-seeking mind to allow this mind to help all beings to cross this river and enable them to enter nirvana. So way-seeking mind to seek the way does not for the sake of this person but to help others. So this is the same as the first of the four bodhisattva vows, all save or help all living beings. First, you must have the mind of the way. Next, you must become endowed with yearning for the ancient. This yearning for the ancient is boko. Maybe I don't need to write it. That means...

[27:33]

You know, now we are at the end of this three-month summer practice period. And this Dharma discourse speech was given almost 800 years ago by Dogen, the founder of Soto Zen tradition. And 800 years later, we are doing the same thing, even though the teacher is not so great like Dogen. But also Dogen Zenji quote a story about Buddha's assembly, Shakyamuni Buddha's assembly. So this three-month summer practice has been a practice carried out even from the time of Shakyamuni and for more than 2,500 years, and we are still doing And yearning the ancient means we feel happy or glad if we can do genuine practice as Dogen did, or Dogen's assembly did, or Shakyamuni and his assembly did.

[28:52]

And we try to make effort to practice. Maybe we cannot practice exactly the same way because the culture or age, everything is different. But we need to make effort to practice with the same spirit. And same spirit is this bodhicitta, practice with awakening mind. And if we can practice with the same spirit, with Shakyamuni Buddha and his assembly, or Dogen and his assembly, we feel happy. This is thus, you know, mind to yearning for the ancient. So this is a... wish to continue the tradition of this practice with the same speed. Sorry, what is the Japanese again for that yearning for the issue?

[30:01]

Bōkō. Bōkō or mōkō. Bō or mō and kō. Bō is too young and kō is ancient. Then you must think what is genuine. What is genuine is not fake, not simply forms, empty forms, but we need to the real thing. And we have many different forms, but as I said, without this bodhicitta, all those forms become fake. not genuine, not real thing. You know, even, you know, we have, you know, same, you know, temple buildings as Dogen did, like in Heiji.

[31:06]

And same, we do the same ceremonies and practices and studies. if we lack of this bodhicitta, all those practices are fake, not genuine. So to seek genuine, to seek what is genuine is most important, even though, you know, this sangha is very small and we don't have, you know, real, you know, monastery facilities yet, but that's okay. That doesn't make our practice genuine. The most essential thing, our practice, genuine or fake, is our bodhicitta, we mind. So we have to examine ourselves if our practice is genuine or not.

[32:13]

That means if we have real, true way-seeking mind, the spirit of practice, These three kinds are what should be studied by both beginners and later comers. The family instructions of Ehe are simply like this. So this is Dogen's family instruction to his students. have the genuine bodhicitta or awakening mind and value and wish to continue the tradition from Buddha and, in our case, Dogen. and make effort to keep our practice genuine with the genuine spirit of the way-seeking mind.

[33:17]

That is the very simple but most important point of our practice. Then he introduced one story. This is not a historical story, of course, this is a made-up story, probably in some China, in Zen traditions. But to me, this is very interesting. This is about, again, at the end of summer practice period, in the Sangha of Shakyamuni Buddha. And in that practice period, Mahakasyapa was the head monk. I think he was head monk. And the story is as follows. Dogen says, I can remember. So Dogen introduced the story. Once, long ago, during the time of the world-honored one, that is Shakyamuni Buddha,

[34:27]

On the day of confession, at the end of summer practice period, summer practice period is usually from 15th day of fourth month until 15th day of seventh month. So in that solar calendar, we have a practice period from middle of April until the middle of July. But this is in the lunar calendar, so the season is different. Anyway, 15th is the day of the full moon in the lunar calendar. And this is the day not only during the summer practice period, but in each month they have In Indian Sangha, they had a gathering, usually called uposatha, or in Japanese we call it husatsu.

[35:31]

And the end of the Sama practice is the day of the husatsu, or uposatha. And this is also a day of reflection. And the leader of the Sangha recites each and every precept. And if monks in the assembly thought they did something against the precept, they have to make confession or repentance. That is... that happened at the end of the summer practice period. So I think to have a precept retreat at the end of a three-month summer practice period I think is very relevant. Anyway, on that occasion, at the gathering of repentance, Manjushri,

[36:40]

Manjushri had spent the summer at three places. During the summer practice period, all monks had to stay one place at the monastery. No one can go out or travel. That is one of the regulations within Vinaya Precept. No monk can go out of the monastery. really stay and focus on study and practice. But this person called Manjushri, he was there at the beginning of the practice period, but somehow he disappeared. And at the end of the practice period, he appeared again. So he clearly broke the regulation. So Manjushri had spent the summer at three places.

[37:49]

Mahakasyapa, the leader of the monks, wanted to expel Manjushri. If they break the rule during the summer practice period, the person who breaks the regulation needs to be expelled. So Mahakasyapa, as his responsibility as the head of monks, tried to expel Manjushri. So Mahakasyapa wanted to expel Manjushri, but when he started to approach the sounding block, sounding block means in the monk's hall there is a... block with something like this, and that is like a mallet. And today, when Ino makes an announcement, this is in Japanese called tsuichin.

[38:59]

So this is Mahakasyapa's responsibility to pick up this mallet and hit the wood block and make announcement that Manjushri is expelled. When Mahakasyapa started to approach the sounding block to make the announcement, he suddenly saw hundreds of thousands of myriad, I'm sorry, myriad millions of Manjushris. Not only one, but numerous Manjushri appeared. Then Mahakasyapa tried to expel Manjushri Mahakasyapa used all of his divine powers but could not lift the sounding block.

[40:04]

He couldn't lift this mallet. That means he couldn't make announcement to expel Manjushri. Then the world-honored one finally asked Mahakasyapa, which Manjushri do you want to expel? Mahakasyapa did not respond, so he couldn't say anything. And here Dogen didn't mention, but in the original Koan story, Manjushri spent three different places. In each month, he spent different places. And first month he spent at King Prasenajit's harem. So he spent one month practice period with the mistress of the king. And in the second month, he played with children at an elementary school.

[41:16]

So he spent the second month with children. And the third month, he stayed at a . Again with women. That is what Manjushri did for three months practice period. And he returned at the end and he didn't make repentance. And Mahakasyapa wanted to expel him, but he couldn't. That's the meaning of this kind of a funny story. Of course, this is a made-up story. Manjushri was not a real person. I think this means to spend three months at certain monasteries and focus on studying Dharma and practice meditation is a really important tradition from the Buddha's time.

[42:28]

And to break that rule is clearly against the Vinaya precepts. And yet this person, Manjushri, abode sattva, you know, break the rule. And this means if all the monks stayed in a monastery, who can teach the people outside of a monastery in the world? And those people need more, those people really need dharma. So if monks stayed in a monastery, who can teach, who could teach those people? And that is a... Good idea. So this means Manjushri taught those people who were really in need.

[43:30]

If we attach ourselves to observing the Vinaya precept and stay in the monastery and apart from the people in the world, who can work for the living beings? from that point of view, to practice at a monastery can be selfish for the sake of this person's enlightenment. So one of the interpretation of this funny story is this is a criticism from Mahayana point of view to the people in so-called Hinayana. They cling to the tradition and regulation and practice for their own sake.

[44:35]

And to me, this is a really interesting point. And in this story, it seems Buddha support Manjushri. And Mahakasyapa couldn't expel Manjushri. So this story is made from the side of Mahayana point of view. And yet Dogen is going to make a comment on this story, but Dogen wants to support Mahakasyapa. Actually both. So Mahakasyapa is a kind of a symbol of embracing all moral cause or Vinaya precept. And Manjushri is a symbol of doing good for the sake of living beings.

[45:41]

And Dogen made comment on this story. Great assembly, do you want to free inquire into this occurrence? So we must be studying what this story means carefully. First, you must deeply trust that spending the summer in practice period is the one great matter in the house of Buddha ancestors. So, as Dogen says in the introduction of the Dharma discourse, we need to yearn the ancient. That means Buddhist traditions, and Buddhist tradition is to spend three months summer practice period at the monastery. So this is one great matter, very important thing. And this is also what Dogen did.

[46:51]

So Dogen, I don't think he recommended his disciples go out and teach people in the world, but I think he requested his monks to stay at a heiji for three months without going anywhere else, focus on practice. So this is important. So Bogen said, do not take it lightly. So keep the Vinaya regulation in Vinaya or Buddhist tradition is important. We cannot take it lightly. Tell me at that time, did Mahakasyapa expel Manjushri or not? In the story, it seems he didn't, he couldn't. But Dogen is asking if he really didn't expel Manjushri or not.

[48:00]

If he didn't, Maha Kasyapa couldn't expel Manjushri, Maha Kasyapa could not carry out his responsibility as a person who needs to protect the regulations. And if you say he had expelled Manjushri, why is it that he could not raise the sounding block with all of his divine powers? So he did expel or he did not. Either way, we have a problem. If you say he has not expelled Manjushri since Mahakasyapa's action was completely in accord with regulations, Vinaya regulations, his effort should not be discredited.

[49:05]

So we need to support Mahakasyapa's action to expel Manjushri. great assembly, this is to Dogen's assembly, you should know that if Mahakasyapa wanted to expel Shravakas, Pratyekabuddhas, beginners, latecomers, or even those of the stages of the ten sages and three wise ones, But those are all different kinds of Buddhist practitioners until a certain stage of bodhisattva. Dogen said, Mahakasyapa certainly could have raised the sounding block, but he couldn't raise the sounding block for Manjushri to expel him.

[50:09]

Now, if Ma Kassapa wants to expel the hundreds of thousands of milliard millions of manjushris, this is a really interesting statement, and this shows, I think, Dogen's sense of humor. He said, Mahakasyapa uses a sounding block that cannot be raised. So in order to expel Manjushri, Mahakasyapa used the sounding block which cannot be raised up. That means Mahakasyapa didn't raise the sounding block. That means he didn't make announcement. But that is the way he expelled Manjushri. Does it make sense? So he's taken support of both Manjushri and Mahakasyapa. That means Mahakasyapa's responsibility or practice as a head monk in the summer practice period and what Manjushri did, break the precept and teach the people in the world.

[51:32]

There are so many things Bodhisattva needs to do in the world. I think not only Manjushri, but Avalokiteshvara also working in the world, even while monks are practicing for three months in a monastery, which is more important. I think both are important. And how can we do both? That is the point of this story, at least from Dogen's teaching. So he said he used a sounding block which cannot be raised. That means he explained Manjushri without making the sound, without announcement. That means Manjushri is Manjushri, monks in the monasteries, what they do.

[52:38]

and allow Manjushri to do whatever Bodhisattva needs to do in the world. How can this be? How can this be? And Dogen continues, Don't you see that a thousand pound stone, I'm sorry, thousand pound stone bowl, stone bowl? cannot be used to shoot a small mouse. A huge bow cannot be used to shoot a tiny mouse. And how could a thousand-ton ship sail following the lutz of an ox guard? So big ship cannot sail in the, you know, how can I say, pool, water pool made by the ox guard.

[53:47]

That means these two are two kind of different, how can I say, not a level but a dimension. Monks continue to practice following the Buddhist traditions. This is a very concrete activity, so we have to keep this tradition. And what Manjushri did to teach all living beings, how can I say, belongs to two different dimensions. It's not, you know, Manjushri can be judged by this tradition, or this, not tradition, but regulations. So Manjushri do what Manjushri need to do. And Mahakasyapa do what Mahakasyapa need to do. So both are embraced.

[54:50]

That is what I think the spirit of three-fold pure precept, embracing moral cause and embracing good dharmas or good actions like Manjushri did. Even he broke the precept. And both are for the sake of living beings. Dogen continues, although it is like this, without intervening in a matter of such realms of comparison, Is there something more to say that goes beyond? That means we need to go beyond this kind of a separation or discrimination between keeping precept or keeping tradition and working for all living beings in our world.

[55:56]

How can we go beyond this separation? Then Dogen gave a question to his monks, and after a pause Dogen said, this is the final statement by Dogen, and he offered in a form of verse, he said, in a peaceful age, The ruler's activity is to govern without signs. The family style of old peasants seems to be most pristine. Just concerned with village songs and festival drinking, How would they know of the virtue of shun or the benevolence of Yao?

[56:58]

This poem refer to certain Chinese classic story. I think it was also a poem. That means these two people, Shun and Yao, are the Chinese emperors in the very ancient times, before history. And both kind of ideal emperors govern his country, his nation, with benevolence, not with regulations. And there is a poem that, you know, in the springtime, when, you know, it's becoming warm and the world becomes green again and they have flowers. So it's a very joyful time of the year. You know, those farmers having party in the field.

[58:03]

And they just drink wine and eat food and just enjoy their time. And the poem said those farmers even don't know their life was protected or governed. by those yang and sheng, those emperors. That means when we are in the peace and harmony, we don't even think of who maintains this peace and harmony. If the emperors want to show, I'm doing this, then those are not benevolent emperors. So that means within this peace and, you know, joyful, life. That is Nirvana, actually. Both, you know, strict regulations and beyond those regulations.

[59:10]

Regulations means, you know, man-made thing in order to make man-made effort to make this community or world peace and harmony But actually, real peace and harmony was not really made or made possible by those man-made regulations or laws or rules. But that means, that is a word, I'm sorry, my mind doesn't work. That peace and harmony is enabled by the true reality of interdependent origination, interdependent origination, that all are working together, helping each other, supporting each other, all are connected.

[60:14]

That is a real force, not a force. maybe power, force, that allow us to live in peace and harmony. But within human society, we need something man-made to keep it in order. So the man-made regulations and rules is a part of this what can I say, benevolent emperors. That is this reality of interdependent origination. If we forget about that and only see the man-made regulations and we judge people against the regulation or not, then we lose the point of our practice.

[61:21]

I think that is what Dogen meant. And I think that this is the spirit of three-fold pure precept. That means we need to value and protect the precept, kind of man-made thing. That means, man-made thing means depending upon the time or age and culture or society, those regulations can be interpreted in different ways. That's what man-made means, when I use that word. But those man-made rules or regulations or morality, moral cause are supported by this interconnectedness. Well, that is what I have to say about the threefold pure precept.

[62:24]

We only have 20 more minutes. And tomorrow is the last day of my lecture. So I'd like to finish 10 major precepts. So let me go further. When we study these 10 major precepts, I usually read two other texts on the same ten major precepts. One is the ten major precepts from the Brahmanet Sutra, or Bunmokyo, and another is Bodhidharma's comment on one mind precept.

[63:29]

And usually to talk on one precept takes one hour or more. But because my ambition to talk on all ten major precepts within this retreat, I cannot talk in details. So I just read three texts and talk on Dogen's comment. And in the past, I talked all of those 10 major precepts, comparing three texts. I'm not sure if the record of my talk lectures in the past during the precept retreat are available or not, but I hope sometimes it's available. Anyway, the first of the Ten Major Precepts is the precept of not killing.

[64:33]

And first let me read the precept from the Brahmanet Sutra, because Dogen's comment or Zen expression are capping words or capping phrases on each of these Ten Major Precepts in the Brahmanet Sutra. So the first precept from the Brahmanet Sutra is on killing. A disciple of the Buddha shall not himself kill. Encourage others to kill. Kill by expedient means. Praise killing. Rejoice at witnessing killing. Or killing through incantation or deviant mantras. I don't know how we can kill people with mantras, but it is said anyway.

[65:41]

He must not create the causes, conditions, methods, or karma of killing and shall not intentionally kill any living creature. living creatures. As a Buddha's disciple, we ought to nurture a mind of compassion and filial piety, always devising expedient means to rescue and protect all beings. If instead he fails to refrain himself and kills sentient beings without mercy, he commits a paralogical major offense. So in this first precept, the first part of this precept, not to kill any living beings, is the part not doing evil or avoid evil.

[66:56]

And the second part, we should try always to devise expedient means to rescue and protect all beings. This is the good dharma or good actions we should do. And those posts, try not to kill and also try to help living beings, should be done with a mind of compassion. And it's said filial piety, because this precept sutra is made in China, filial piety, as we discussed. On Wednesday evening during the Dharma study group, this Fidel Piety, that is a basis of Chinese morality or ethics based on family system.

[68:01]

but I'm not sure this, you know, family system works today as a foundation of morality or ethics. So, you know, this is made in the fifth century, that means, you know, about 1500 years ago in China. So as a social morality or moral code, things can be changed and we need to reinterpret in detail or concrete things. But I think not killing or protecting life is forever or forever valid. And Bodhidharma's comment on this precept is, Self-nature is wondrous and imperceptible.

[69:10]

Within the everlasting dharma, not allowing the view of extinction is called the precept of not killing. So even if we have a view that we can kill, is against this precept. Everlasting means eternal. That doesn't mean there is something permanent within this network of interdependent origination. Everything is impermanent. and changing and arising and perishing. And yet this life, so in this case, this life refer to the life, you know, wisdom life, as I think said, talked yesterday. That is Buddha's Dharmakaya. So to protect this wisdom life,

[70:16]

And being free from the view of extinction, that means the view that I can kill, I can terminate some life. And we do. That is really against the precept of not killing. And Dogen's comment on this precept is, By not killing of life, the seeds of Buddha are nurtured, and one is unable to succeed the Buddha's life of wisdom. Do not kill life. So Dogen also talks about this Buddha's life of wisdom. Buddha's e-myo, I wrote down yesterday.

[71:26]

E-myo. E is wisdom and myo is life. So as a bodhisattva, bodhisattva means a children of Buddha. That is what the seed of Buddha means. We are the seed of Buddha. And also our bodhicitta or awakening mind is the seed of Buddha that allows us to practice as Buddha's children. In order to nurture this life, we have to protect the life. So do not kill life. When we think of killing or taking life, we can see two almost opposite absolute realities. That means, maybe as I said yesterday, we cannot live without killing or without taking life from other living beings.

[72:44]

Even if we don't kill animals and eat meat, we eat vegetables. And vegetables are a form of life and we kill vegetables and that is the way we keep our life continue. So from one side it's not possible to live without killing. But from another kind of absolute truth is because of emptiness there's nothing to be killed. Now nothing is born, nothing is died, nothing is coming, nothing is gone, nothing is alive, nothing is perished. This is all changing the shapes of something, all different elements getting together and separated.

[73:45]

That's all. And I cannot say I was born, actually. In the conventional sense, I was born in the year 1948. in japan and i will die sometime in the future i don't know when so there is a birth time and this time but what is born when i was born and what is dying when i die is there something which is born there's something which is die Actually, at least according to Buddha, there's no such thing that is born and no such thing that is died. Shohaku is just a collection of five scandals. So this is one kind of absolute truth. And if we cling to that side of truth, then we can kill.

[74:52]

Even if we kill plants and animals or human beings, still we didn't kill anything. This is one extreme view, and sometimes this kind of thing is said within Zen teachings, especially in Japan. Zen was supported by so-called samurai or warrior class people, and the job of samurai is killing. That was a problem. And to, you know, when the master teach the warrior, a warrior, you know, just kill. There's no one killing, no one killed. And this is really terrible kind of a violation of the precept, I think, to, you know, protect this wisdom life. Unfortunately, yes, that is a problem.

[76:08]

And it might be same things, you know, when people do the suicide attack today. So, we need to see this wisdom life. And how can we protect this life? And of course, you know, There are many different examples, but when I was in charge of growing vegetables, when we plant the seed and it sprouts, somehow I had to think that, you know, sprouts, that was job. You know, I think, you know, I can make judgment, you can leave, you have to die.

[77:10]

That was really terrible job, but that is, in order to grow vegetables, that was my responsibility. But probably that was why Buddha profite monks to grow vegetables for me. But, you know, to, you know, how can I say, support our practice and support our life somehow, or at least someone need to do that job. And if, you know, I think, you know, I don't do that job, but, you know, farmers do, so I'm okay. Then there's something strange here. But if we see what the Buddhist monks did, because farming was prohibited in the Vinaya, they didn't do, and they just received food cooked by the lay people.

[78:24]

and those food were produced by the farmers. Of course monks didn't do killing, but the monks were supported by those people, those people's action of killing. So is this, how can I say, can we justify that kind of way of thinking? I don't kill, but let him kill. It's kind of strange to me. So this precept of not killing is really difficult koan for all of us. So I have no answer. So the precept is saying whenever possible, we try not to kill, of course. And if we do not have joy, then we see killing.

[79:26]

And whenever possible, we have to rescue life. That is our pride precept and that is our vow. But whenever we reflect our way of life, I think no one can say, I'm perfectly keeping this precept. So that's why I, not I, but Uche Mori said, when we receive this precept, we cannot say, I'm a right person. I'm perfectly, you know, keep this precept. So this precept is not a kind of a tool to judge ourselves and others whether we are a right person or wrong people. If we use this precept to judge both ourselves and others, I think that is a misuse of this precept.

[80:30]

This precept is the point we have to reflect our way of life and, how can I say, keep us humble. And so our practice of taking this precept as our vow should be always together with repentance. Otherwise, you know, we just say, just think, you know, it's not possible to live without killing, so why it's wrong? And without feeling guilty or feeling some sadness or remorse toward the living beings that support our life. And we become kind of ignorant about that.

[81:31]

And we just dream, I'm OK. And that is the problem. So I think not only the precept of killing, this is the same with all the ten major precepts. As I said before, when I received the precept, my teacher said, Then, you know, during the precept ceremony, then the teacher decides the precept, the recipient need to say, or teacher ask, do you protect or keep this precept or not? Recipient, all the recipient need to say, yes, I will. And Uchamaro said, that is a first violation of the fourth precept, not telling a lie. So we intentionally violate the precept, and we need to be aware of that.

[82:35]

Therefore, we cannot be arrogant that I'm a right person, I never tell a lie. But to be aware that I cannot live without telling a lie, is a very important awakening. Or as I said, Sakyarosi said, the more we sit, the more we see we are no good. This is awakening. So enlightenment is to see we are no good. But usually we think enlightenment makes us perfect person without seeing everything as it is. And actually things as it is, in this case of human beings, we cannot live without killing. We cannot live without telling a lie.

[83:38]

That is the reality. If we think, you know, I live without killing, then that is a fantasy. That is a dream. So these precepts are the point of awakening, actually. Well, it's 10.30. I only finished one precept. Nine are left. And tomorrow I try to talk on all nine. Or can I continue? 15 or 20 more minutes? 10 minutes? OK. The second one is not killing. This precept from the Brahmanet Sutra is as follows.

[84:42]

A disciple of the Buddha must not himself steal. or encourage others to steal. Steal by expedient means, steal by means of incantation or deviant mantras. He should not create the causes, conditions, method or karma of stealing. no variables or possessions, even those belonging to ghosts and spirits or thieves and robbers, be they as small as a needle or a blade of grass, may be stolen. As a Buddha's disciple, he ought to have a mind of mercy compassion and filial piety, always helping people earn merit and achieve happiness.

[85:50]

If instead he steals the possessions of others, he commits a paralogical offense. So this is about stealing. Stealing means some things possessed by other people. And by the action of stealing, I want to make my possession. And the reason, according to this sutra, the reason we should not steal is, as a bodhisattva, we should have vowed to offer a good thing for the people, for the living beings. and allow them to be happy. But not many people are happy when they have stolen something.

[86:54]

So this is against the bodhisattva vow. And also, one of the six parameters, actually the first one is dana parameter, offering or giving. And this stealing is opposite, taking things from other people, and those people cannot be happy. So this is really against the bodhisattva vow and bodhisattva practice of six paramitas. So that is the meaning of this precept, not stealing. And Bodhidharma's comment on this precept is, Self-nature is wondrous and imperceptible. Within the ungraspable dharma, Not allowing the thought of gaining is called the precept of not stealing.

[88:01]

That means nothing can be our possession. If we think, I can possess something and other people can possess something, and I want that person's possession to my possession, even to think that we can possess it itself against this precept, because there's no one who can possess and nothing who can be possessed. So this is from the absolute point of view. No, nothing to be possessed and no one can possess. So even to have this view, you know, I can possess and this is possessed by that person. So therefore I can transport this thing from their place to my place. That is based on illusion, elusive idea that we can possess something.

[89:05]

So even having that view is against the precept. Even if we don't actually steal, having that view, having that idea is already against this precept. You know, one of the kind of important teachings of Sawaki Roshi was... That is, gaining is delusion and losing is enlightenment or satori or realization. So his teaching is we need to intentionally lose. Losing is enlightenment and gaining is delusion. That was Sawaki Roshi's very important teaching.

[90:08]

So when we practice, we try to make effort to lose, not to gain. But someone, I don't know, who was a monk or a teacher or a layperson, but someone was a scholar, Christos Sawakiroshi, That teaching, you know, the true reality is nothing lose, nothing gain. So to say gaining is delusion, losing is enlightenment, it's still not the reality itself. So still, you know, in Saugyo teaching, still there's the idea of gaining and losing. That is delusion. That was a criticism from someone. But Uchamuro Inon criticized again to that person. That means even though as reality there's no one gain and nothing to be gained, and no one lose and nothing to be lost,

[91:25]

and that as the actual reality of our life, we always want to gain, get something, and we always want to hate, to lose, or give up something. So that's what Sawaki Roshi's teaching is based on, that reality, the actual reality of human life, not the reality of dharma. On that basis, his teaching, losing his enlightenment or satori and gaining his delusion is really valid. That was Uchiyama Roshi's kind of a counter-argue to that person. But we can continue to discuss or argue from either side endlessly. Actually, both are true. So Buddhist teaching is not kind of a, how can I say, not Buddhist teaching, but teachings by Buddhist teachers or the masters is not kind of a, how can I say, objective truth.

[92:38]

But when Sawa Kiroshi said, losing is enlightenment, gaining is delusion, he's teaching to certain particular person who has certain particular problem to help that person to be free from that problem. So if we, how can I say, objectify his teaching and think Sawa Kiroshi didn't know the absolute truth of no gaining, no losing, missed the point. Anyway, Dogen's comment on this precept is, second, not stealing. When mind and its objects are in thusness, the gate of liberation is open. This is his comment. on the precept of not stealing.

[93:41]

Do you understand? The connection, even the connection between this state comment and this precept, I think this is very important. I have to talk more than one hour. But make it short. Subject, object. In this case, this mind is subject, and kyo is object. When our mind encounters some object, something happens in our mind. And this is a very basic form of Buddha's teaching. As an object, this becomes nama-rupa.

[94:44]

Nama-rupa is an expression or a word Shakyamuni Buddha used in the Siddhanipada. And this one, this word is used also in the Twelve Links of Causation, but the meaning is different. In the case of the Buddha's teaching in Stanipata, nama-rupa refers to the object. And if we, this is my interpretation, we call nama-rupa object as nama-rupa means our object is, rupa is material. And nama means name. When we encounter some object, this object becomes nama rupa, means a combination of this matter and the name, or material and name, or the idea, or concept.

[95:50]

And this is a black marker. This is the name of this matter. So when my mind encounters this object, this object becomes nama rupa. And nama rupa is a connection of this person and this thing. That means, you know, in my mind, this is a black marker, and I need this marker to write something on the whiteboard. So this is useful and meaningful to me. So black marker, the name black marker, shows the relation between this person and this thing. And we don't really see this thing itself, but we see this thing as object with the name.

[96:51]

If we don't have name, we don't think of it. To have name means to have some definition and some value judgment. But this matter is not necessarily a black marker. This is a black marker, you know, only for a certain period of time. Before this was manufactured at the factory, this is something else. And this continues to be a black marker until the ink is dried up. and I can use for writing. After it dried up, it become junk or garbage or something else. So there's no such things called a black marker as actual thing. This is what nama rupa means. And not only this one, but each and everything we encounter as an object is nama rupa.

[98:00]

And depending upon our karma, karma means our experiences include our education, what I was taught. from my parents or family or school or the society, I have certain fixed system of value. And when I encounter certain things, almost automatically I want to get this. Automatically I think, you know, this is valuable. You know, in the modern society, the money is the, you know, for most people, money is the most valuable thing. Even though the, you know, paper money or coins are not really valuable, but money is... actually namanupa. It's not the matter, the paper is not important, or the metal is not really value.

[99:10]

But, you know, important point is human convention, that if I have certain number of money, I can exchange this with things I want. That's why money is important. but actually money is not really so important. But when we meet with some occasion I can get money, it's very difficult to reject it. or refuse, I don't want. To find motivation, to find a reason to reject, if it's not illegal. If it's illegal and I maybe have to go to jail, I have good reason to reject it. But otherwise, it's very difficult to, you know, I don't need it. As far as we are living in the modern society,

[100:14]

But that relationship with subject-object as nama-lupa, we are hooked in certain ways, and we have desires within our mind to get that thing. Or we have hatred, against certain things we don't like, or all different kinds of emotional reaction is caused by this frugged relation with certain things. And what Dogen Zenji is saying here is, when mind and object are in thusness, in thusness means being free from three-positive mind, When we are free from three poisonous minds, we are released from this fucked relation between subject and object, or the object of our desire.

[101:31]

Often these things appear, become object of my desire. But being thusness means just as it is, before this object becoming nama-rupa. To become nama-rupa means, in Uchiyama Roshi's expression, to be processed or cooked within our mind. letting go of thought, that is what we do in our zazen, we are released from this hooked relation. Then this object starts to reveal itself as it is, not nama rupa. That is what this means when mind and object are in thusness. That means that object is not object of my desire anymore.

[102:35]

We are released from this, how can I say, binding. Then the gate of liberation is open. That means its object is still there and subject is still there. but we are liberated from the three poisonous minds. And that is the time when the fire of the three poisonous minds is extinguished. So we are free from the burning house of the three worlds, the world of desire and material and non-material. then there's no reason to steal. So, Dogen's comment means when we let go of our thought, opening the hand of thought, that means we are free from this desire, then this object reveals the way, thusness, or the thing as it is.

[104:01]

Then this Uh... Subject and object or division or separation between subject and object disappeared. And subject and object working together as one reality. As Dogen says in Tenzo-kyokun, you know, tenzo and food materials or the utensils or fires or waters working together as oneness. or thusness, those things are not object of Tenzo's desire to make money or something else. So that is Dogen's comment on this project, not stealing. So if we, in our practice, if we practice in order to get something we want, the practice, even the practice or even the dharma becomes the object of our desire.

[105:18]

So when we sit, that's Dogen's meaning. When we sit, just sit. When we practice, just practice. When we eat, just eat. But often, when we eat, those foods become the object of my desire. or object to my hatred, I don't like this, I hate that, or I want this, so I eat more than my stomach needs because of desire. To fulfill my desire, we eat more than my stomach wants. That is cause of suffering. and not only the food, but we do that kind of things with everything else. That is what the expression burning house of three worlds means. And our practice is being free from that fucked relation between subject and object.

[106:26]

Then we don't see any reason to steal. I think that is my understanding of Dogen's comment on this precept. Tony, do you have something to ask? I've probably been trying to already, I mean, answer it, but if I find myself in a condition of breathing or... in that situation. I guess I'm asking, how can I... I'm aware of it, I've become aware of it, okay, now how do I approach it? Shall I approach it through negating nama rupa, or shall I approach it through trying to deal with my emotional attachment?

[107:30]

Or I guess that's what I'm asking. I think we should do whatever we need to do. Because depending upon what kind of person we are, sometimes we have to really stop it, and it might be very painful. But without this painful practice, we cannot make our stomach healthy. If we want to be released from stomach problems, we have to control our desire to eat things we like, or not to eat food we don't like. So this is one thing we need to do. And it was very difficult when I We are young, but now it's not so difficult for me because I don't have so much appetite and I don't need so much food to fill my stomach.

[108:34]

But, you know, we have a fence. At least I have another problem. So I have to deal with different ways. That doesn't make sense. Well, you give me something to work with. Yeah, thank you. Please. I think we're speaking of food. The story you told earlier about the monk that stole the rice, about that? Mm-hmm. I think so. The reason why Dogen praised that person, that monk who stole the food to feed hungry monks. So even though he violated the precept of not stealing, but he didn't steal for the sake of his own, but he stole to offer other monks, other people.

[109:55]

So within this there is a violation of precept and also, how can I say, offering things to people. Both are there. So if we really simply praise this person's action, that might be a problem. So we have to be careful to consider each situation. The difference was there was some penalty that was not... Yeah, he had to accept the result of his violation of the precepts. I'm not sure. OK. Thank you very much.

[110:44]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_91.32