Good evening, everybody. For those of you who don't know me, my name is Ron Nestor. I know most of you, but not all of you. And Grace Cheerson is going to be co-teaching the class with me. And we're going to divide it up in that I'll do the first three classes and Grace will do the second three. But in the three classes that I facilitate, she will kind of handle the discussion, and in the classes that she leads, I'll handle the discussion, so we'll kind of be intersecting. Interdependent. Yeah, interdependent. So this is like introduction to Buddhism, and the difficult part of presenting this class is, number one, the awesome amount of information that one could talk about, and how do you limit it to six weeks?

[01:03]

And two, everybody has a different background of knowledge and how long they've studied and how long they've practiced, so I'm going to more or less just assume that we all know nothing, that we're just starting from zero, rather than the error on the other side. So that's how I'll do it. And feel free to, at appropriate times, interrupt and ask questions and discuss something if it doesn't make sense to you. And most of all, don't swallow anything if it doesn't If it doesn't make sense, say something. Don't just assume that you're kind of dumb or that you just don't get it, that everybody else understands it. Just if something doesn't make sense, bring it up. That's actually the most interesting times. And this sheet that we just handed out tonight is an overview of the Course.

[02:11]

It's fairly self-explanatory. So tonight what we'll do is we'll just cover basically Shakyamuni Buddha's life and the culture that he was born into in India, that time and that place. And we'll use this handout as a kind of outline for that. Partly, it'll just be historical. I'd just like to convey some facts to you, just the way things happened, or the way we think things happened. But also, his life is a teaching in itself. And some of these quotes contain the real germs of Buddhism, the real seeds of Buddhism. So we can look at it from that point, too. So, but before we start, since this is like an introductory class, it would be nice if, I think if we just went around and each person just said something about why they're here, or what you find interesting about this kind of class, or what you find interesting in the reading, or something about

[03:37]

how you came to the Brookings Zen Center, just take a minute or less, real brief, just hit one or two high points. Let's start with Ross. And your name. My name's Ross, and I enjoy the settings of classes just for the opportunity to discuss You know, we set periods of Zazen. And I guess like Ron said, there's so much information that it doesn't seem to matter how many times you take an introduction to Buddhism.

[04:56]

There's always something new and exciting, new and boring to learn. My name is Thelma, and I'm here for a couple of reasons, and one of them is that the first class that Ron was facilitating. I know you were there, for sure. It was over nine years ago, I believe. I think it was nine or ten years ago. There were several other people, but I believe he's the only one who's still currently participating that I can remember. So, you know, it was sort of like an anniversary. So it seemed, you know, really appropriate, symbolically, to commemorate.

[05:59]

And, of course, I'm fascinated with the subject. So the combination is irresistible. You can start a little cult here. What? You can start a little cult. but I know very little about Buddhism, so I'm very eager. My name is Damaris, and I guess what I'm hoping to get out of it is just to become a little more articulate, able to be more articulate and discursive about what this practice is, which is so fascinating to me, but that I feel so tongue-tied about. My name's Kelly. I just wanted to learn about Buddhism. My name's Donna, and my practice started out in the Koreans and moved into Theravada and Vipassana, and then into the Soto.

[07:03]

And I'm just interested in all aspects of Buddhism, and I'm, like the rest of you, very fascinated with the subject, so I'm looking forward to the class. I've never really been sure, actually, why I'm here. I guess that I find that every time I go over this material, it's always new in some way. I never really feel like I get it when I do it, and so here I am again. I'm Dave, and I'm initially here because No, actually, my parents got introduced to Zen Buddhism. They were in the Elder Hostel program over at the Green Gulch and asked me to go along. It was very interesting. I'm looking forward to it. I'm actually here for myself, but that is sort of the way I got introduced.

[08:09]

My name is John and I am not new to Buddhism but I always get new ideas from discussions relating to it. My name is Willa and I've been reading for a long time but I've never had the opportunity to talk to people about these things and also the idea of trying to make my own kind of skepticism about long-standing traditions and the way that they get shaped by the times and what I feel Buddhism does now, you know, on a personal level. It's going to be interesting. My name is Barbara and I'm quite new to the area. I've been reintroduced to Buddhism and I'm here to study it and to meet all of you. I'm Mike.

[09:19]

I have a real hard time reading books on Buddhism. They just seem to take a long, long time for me to get through. I do a little better when people are explaining it, especially when I don't have to go back five or six times. What the hell does that mean? That's why I'm here. My name is Lois, and I just love to come here. I keep doing it, and I enjoy being in the setting, too.

[10:21]

Sort of like what Ross was saying. Maybe adding some words to the experience, although I'm not so sure about that since I spend a lot of time with words. It's nice not having them. I think it's evoked, this coming into this room helps evoke the whole spirit of it. My name is Mary and I've been coming here for a while for Zazen, but I'm avoid taking any classes. Even though I was interested in learning more about it, but mostly because I didn't want to have to go around the room like this. So I just decided I couldn't put it off any longer. The worst is over now. My name is Kathy, and like Ross, I just enjoy being with all of you and getting a chance to speak and talk. about things. But also, I took a course in Buddhism once, 20 years ago in college, and it was taught from an academic, not practicing point of view, and it was from the point of view of no particular Buddhist tradition, from a Western academic point of view.

[11:35]

And so I would like to know more about what Berkeley Zen Center point of view is on Buddhism, because I think that there isn't one point of view. I want to know how it's thought about here. I'm Grace, and the ideas or theories of Buddhism have had a grip on me for a long time, and I hate that. I guess, like someone else said, I don't like traditions. So I keep throwing myself at it to either find the flaw or put it to some good use. I'm Ellen. This is not a narrative course. And I pick a drama to do with this person to start with. So that's why I'm here. I'm Sherry, and I came via Alan Watts in the 70s through the Sonoma Zen Center recently.

[12:38]

And I've never taken a course in Buddhism, although my mother is traditional. I thought I'd like to learn a little bit about Buddhism, too. I'm Ron, and this is the first class that I've taught. I've taken lots and lots of classes, so for me it's a chance to do, you know how when you sit in a class and you think how you'd like to do it, how you wish they would do it? Well, this is my chance to kind of do it how I'd like to do it after all these years of listening to other people talk. For me, the challenge and the interesting thing is to take the doctrine, Buddhist doctrine, and bring it to life, so that it's more than just doctrine, and actually kind of like a catalyst or sort of an inspiration for practicing.

[13:43]

That's the only reason that I can see to study it. And the only thing that's really interesting to me about it. So it's a constant challenge because If I don't work at it, it just becomes like information, and it doesn't help that much. If I work at it, and make an effort, it becomes more, and maybe a reflection of what my life is about. So, that's what I find interesting about it, and why I like it. Okay, so let's start. Well, I think it's just interesting to start with the context, the historical context of Buddhism, which is back in India, in the thousand years B.C.

[14:44]

And during this time, right before Buddha was born in this thousand year period, the civilization was really rapidly expanding and rapidly changing. It was changing from a kind of nomadic, herder-type culture into more of an agrarian-type culture. And this was all taking place on the plain, the Ganges Plain. It's a huge plain, you know, around the Ganges River, which is surrounded by mountains, the Himalayas. And also during this time, the Aryan race of people, Caucasian people, were filtering into India and mixing with the indigenous populations, which were more like, I think, Tibetan. They're not sure of the origin, or I'm not sure of the origin, but more of an oriental-type culture. So, the Aryan people were filtering in, integrating with the indigenous culture, and the culture was transforming more into a settled culture.

[15:52]

And cities were starting to form, and republics and monarchies were starting to form. So civilization was like starting to settle down and become more developed. And population was rapidly growing. So it was really, it was a very transitional and fertile kind of time in history. And in terms of the religion at that time, there was basically three different groups that were influential. The first group was the Brahmins. And the Brahmins were like the status quo. They had all the power, but a very powerful group of people. And they worshiped a god, which later became a more impersonal god, And their form of worship was basically a sacrifice system, a very extremely elaborate system of sacrifice.

[17:00]

And the idea was that if they made sacrifices in the correct way, then everything would be okay, everything would be harmonious, the crops would grow, there'd be peace and so forth. If they didn't make sacrifices in the right way, then there'd be chaos and everybody'd be miserable and death would come. So they had the population kind of in their power, and they accumulated power and held on to it very tightly. And they were rather oppressive in a lot of ways because they liked their power. But they also provided a good deal of order to the society so they were able to maintain their role. Along with the Brahmins was just the local village type religions, cults, kind of magical practices, fortune-telling, astrology, sort of smaller deities, just kind of folk religion in which, you know, a real multiplicity of how that was expressed and developed, kind of a people's religion.

[18:18]

And then the third group was a group of wandering mendicant monks called Shramanas. And the Shramanas were kind of in opposition to the Brahmins. And they lived by begging and they traveled around and they formally left home. They went through ceremonies where they would formally cut all their ties with their home life and just take off. And they were accepted in society. In some distant way, you could say that they were related to the homeless today, but in a very distant way. They were a little more intent on a philosophy, on pursuing a system of learning and philosophy. But at the same time, a lot of them just liked the lifestyle. They just didn't want to be tied down. They just liked to wander around. And they had all... And over time, the shramanas began to consolidate and get together and form groups and little sects and different systems.

[19:23]

And they were respected in society. And they began to stay together during the monsoon season and to practice together. Different groups would get together and just stay together while it was raining. So, into this situation, Buddha was born. And he was born about 620 BC in Lumbini. And it's interesting, you know, Buddha's name, you know, he has several names. So I just thought I'd just tell you what the names mean, because the names are kind of interchangeable. What we usually say is Shakyamuni Buddha. Shakya is his tribe, so it would be like, we don't really have tribes nowadays, but it would be as if the Bay Area, people who lived in the Bay Area say we're all a tribe and we settled in this area, so we were the Bayerians, and Los Angeles was the Angelenos in Los Angeles, so different tribes.

[20:44]

So it just means that he's of that tribe, the Shakya tribe, and of the Brahmin class. Well, he... I'm not sure if he was of the Brahmin class, no. His family were not Brahmins, but that was probably the system that they were raised up in. Yeah, they had to be. And Gotama, sometimes they'll talk about Gotama Buddha, and Gotama is just the name of his clan. So it would be like, maybe like your family, your extended family, the Blums. We'll call you Blum Buddha when you're enlightened. And so Gautama was his client. He's a Bavarian. Okay.

[21:47]

So Gautama would be his family or clan name. Well, it's Bavarian Muni Buddha. Bavarian Muni Buddha. Bavarian Muni Buddha. And then Siddhartha was his name, like Ron or Ross. That's just his name, Siddhartha. Hey Ron, excuse me, but do you think money means tribe? I'm not sure. I'm not sure. And Buddha, the word Buddha means awakened one. And also sometimes I talk about the Tathagata. And the Tathagata is like saying, the technical meaning is thus gone one or thus come one.

[22:55]

So it's a kind of a, a little bit like saying Roshi. A little more broader implication though. So, what does Roshi mean? Roshi is sort of like, well, technically it means like venerable old teacher. So this has a little bit more, Tathagata has more of a, more implications to it. More like Lord. Yeah, yeah. Is it important that he was or wasn't a Brahmin's son? Because I'd always heard him referred to of a Brahmin, you say he's not? No, I didn't say he wasn't. I said they weren't a practicing Brahmin family. I mean, they weren't... they were probably of that class. But my understanding is the Brahmins were actually religious leaders who actually conducted ceremonies. And his father was not a religious type leader, as far as I know.

[24:01]

But I imagine it was also a class as well, a class of people that they were associated with. And if you look at this first quote from one of the sutras about his youth, this is kind of how it comes down to us. And so we have this image of this really luxurious kind of palace that he grew up in. He was born into royalty. But it may or may not have been true. He obviously was born into a very nice situation, but not necessarily some magnificent palace. We tend to embellish it, so it might help you just to think of it in a more low-key way. We don't really know. But we do know that it was an aristocratic type situation that he was born into. And I think that the most important part about his early life was that he had everything.

[25:06]

He had all the material kinds of things that we spend so much time striving for. He had the best education. He had a good family. He married when he was about 16. He married his cousin. He had plenty of money, plenty of shelter. He had everything that he wanted. But eventually it just wasn't enough, and he realized that it was not enough. He wasn't really satisfied. So when he was 29, he left home. He just took off in the middle of the night, left his wife and child, and became a wandering monk, an ascetic. And there's a legend, you know, it's not exactly in the sutures, but there's a legend that he, what the kind of catalyst for him leaving home was that he went out on a chariot ride, and his father tried to shelter him from any kind of realization about what life was really like in the real world.

[26:19]

And on this chariot ride, he saw old age, sickness, and death, three qualities that his father tried to protect him from. in the shape of somebody who was very old and feeble, somebody who was very sick, and a corpse. And seeing these three images kind of woke him up and made him realize that he needed to do some further investigation about what life was all about. But that's maybe just a legend, just a kind of a myth. And so he began six years of an ascetic practice with a band of other ascetics. So, do you have any comments or questions so far? I heard that he also saw a monk and asked his comrade, you know, who is that or what's that?

[27:20]

And the guy said, it's someone who's left home and is, you know, discovering the nature reality But then later on, I've heard it said that when you see a monk, you gain merit or it can instill some interest in solving the question of birth and death. I don't know if it's in the sutras or where it's been written down. And every time I see these Thai monks on the street, I think of that because in this culture, we don't see Buddhists so much. So whether it's legend or not, from historical days, who knows, but certainly today it kind of warms the heart or gets one thinking. You know, I think it might be of note too, even though it may not be true, the whole notion of the prophecy, that he was either going to be a great ruler or a religious figure, a spiritual leader.

[28:33]

And so that his father, who really wanted him to be the great leader, purposely sheltered him because of the prophecy. He really made an effort, whether it's true or the story is true or not, but the idea was that he really made an effort to protect him from any kind of suffering. So that it would push him in the direction of being the leader of the clan rather than spiritual leader. So I was reading this and I just had a question about something simple. So it says, so in my father's dwelling, rice and meat was given to the slaves and workmen. So that just means that they were given rice and meat because that was a way of sheltering him too. Like if they were given something different, he would have... I'm not sure what that means. The point is that uh... where were ordinary that that his it's kind of interesting actually i thought it was really interesting how they keep that they picked this out in other words he only takes two or three

[29:42]

examples or images to show you what a luxurious life they were living. But one of them is that they were so luxurious that they could treat their slaves and work people in an even better way than most people could. So while most slaves and workers got just sour gruel, his work people got rice and meat. That's how well off Okay, so then you begin the six year period of practicing these austerities. You know, really, you know, start starvation, you know, extreme fasting, standing in cold streams and chanting, little sleep, and I imagine long periods of some meditation as well. enduring pain and so forth.

[30:46]

And he became kind of like the leader of this band. And I think he studied with various teachers in this period as well. But after six years of this, he still felt like he had developed certain kinds of powers, certain sort of psychic powers, but he didn't feel like that he had really he still felt like he was basically ego-oriented or basically sort of clinging. He had a feeling of clinging still. He didn't feel like he was really free, which is what he was after. He was after kind of liberation. So he sort of left this band of monks or ascetics and First of all, I decided maybe it would be a good idea if he had something to eat, because he was just about dead from starvation.

[31:50]

So that's when the second paragraph here, under the enlightenment section, he says, then I thought, it is not easy to gain that happy state when my body is so very lean. What if I now take solid food, rice and sour milk? And of course, the monks that were with him thought that he was just completely sold out. So they abandoned him. They didn't want to have anything to do with him anymore. So he had given up. And then it's interesting, his next thought was up at the top of the page when he says, And then I thought, now I realize that when my father, the Shakyun, was working, I was seated under the cool shade of a rose apple tree, and without sensual desires, without evil ideas, I attained an abode in the first trance of joy and pleasure arising from seclusion, and combined with reasoning and investigation. That's kind of a fancy way of saying that he actually sat down and did meditation.

[32:59]

When he was a child, they were having like a harvest festival. There's different versions of it, but they were having a harvest festival, and he just happened to sit down under a tree, away from some of the other people, and just naturally, you know, crossed his legs and began sitting. And he had this experience, this kind of experience of, well, whatever experience you have in sitting. And it was very powerful for him. And so after going through all this, the rest of his, you know, he's, at this point he's about 35 years old, You know, he's been through the whole royal life and he's been through the whole ascetic life. He remembers this experience that he had when he was a kid. So, basically he goes and he just sits down after he's had something to eat and begins to sit. And the story, the traditional stories that he sat down underneath a bow tree, underneath a tree, and you have this kind of nice image, this kind of like classic image of Buddha under the tree becoming enlightened.

[34:06]

But there's not, actually in the sutras it doesn't say that he did that. That's a later, an edition that comes from the commentaries. So it may or may not be true, but in the sutras that's not, it doesn't say that he did that. Actually this is the official version right here of what he did. And then in this third paragraph he says, I attained abode in the first trance of joy and pleasure, rising from seclusion and so forth. And in this whole paragraph is basically, what this is, is this is talking about the four jhanas, which are stages of meditation. And stressed more in Theravadan Buddhism, a more structural kind of practice, you know, with more stages, where there's stages and divisions and so forth. And I won't go into it now in detail, but I think you should just know that there are these four stages that are, in traditional Buddhism, very important and kind of a focus point in terms of meditation practice.

[35:22]

And basically what they are is, like, in the first stage, basically they're stages of leaving things behind, leaving baggage behind. So in the first stage you would leave anger, sensuous desire, laziness, restlessness, a skeptical doubt. You'd leave those all behind. That gets you into the first stage. These are called the hindrances and they're anger. You'll know these well. These are anger, sensuous desire, And you'll probably have a favorite. Laziness. Restlessness or anxiety. And skeptical doubt. And they're called jhanas? These four stages are called the jhanas. And these first ones are called the hindrances.

[36:26]

The main thing to... it's not so important that you know the details. I think the main thing is just to have a conception that there are these four stages that are really basic to Buddhist meditation in the traditional way that it's presented. Do you have any word on those pamphlets that people seem to be reading off of? I don't... They're not in the Shudra cabinet. They were. I don't think I have any after this. I think they're all gone. Why don't you just share with somebody? So in the second jhana, after leaving those first qualities behind, in the second jhana you leave thought behind. You just leave thinking behind. And in the third stage you leave enthusiasm behind. Passion for practice or enthusiasm. And in the fourth stage you leave joy behind. So you don't have anything, right? Except equanimity and concentration. So if you don't get past the first stage, you're still, like, happy?

[37:31]

Well, first stage is pretty good. But anyway, so he just sort of, like, you know, quickly moved his way up through these four stages for the jhanas. And that's what this paragraph is about. I'm not sure, but I would imagine so. Yeah, I'd imagine so. You're saying that in the time before Buddha, meditation was practiced and that these stages were already established. Yeah. So then on the next page, He begins to remember his former existences. So this like brings up the whole problem of rebirth.

[38:35]

You know, what does he mean by it? You know, it sounds kind of strange. His former existences. What is this, reincarnation or what? And again, I don't want to go deeply into it because it's just, it's a whole class in itself. But I just, so I'll just sort of give you like the bare bones outline of what he's talking about and what it relates to. Actually, you know, I think I won't. Unless you're interested later, we can go back to it. Let's just leave it for now. And we'll just say that rebirth is a part of Buddhism and we can come back to it. So he realizes his former existences and realizes that basically what he's doing is he's realizing his past karma in this section.

[39:40]

And again, karma is a whole other concept that's elaborate. But basically, what karma is, is volition, or thought action, action of your thinking, which has a result. So when you think something, it causes you to behave or act in a certain way, and that action has some kind of result. And you may be aware of some of the result, and you may not be aware of some of the result. I mean, you probably won't be aware of a lot of the result. And that result can take place in the next second, or it can take place 10,000 years later. It sets off a chain reaction like dominoes. And it just happens in unimaginably... dense and complex way, if you think about it. It's actually very logical. It's just a matter of when one thing happens, it affects something else, which affects something else, which affects something else.

[40:46]

So that's what we fundamentally mean by karma. That's the technical meaning of karma. It's a result of thinking, or the thought process, and that can also be even unconscious thought process, not necessarily conscious thought process. But some activity of your thinking creates some result somewhere down the line, and that's karma. So, he kind of acknowledges his karma. He's able to see back into his past karma and to see the implications of it. And then, he kind of comes to the meat, or the kind of key part of his enlightenment, which is the Four Noble Truths, down this last paragraph. I directed my mind to the knowledge of the destruction of the Asavas, and they are, you can see in this footnote, the Asavas are

[42:00]

sensual desire, desire for existence, and ignorance. And if you think about how much of your life is tied up with those three things, you can understand why they're so important. So he realized that he could let go of those. and he realized that basically the Asavas themselves are pain and that he realized the cause of pain, the Asavas, and realized the destruction of pain. He realized the way to undo it. and realized that it could be undone. And then Fourth Noble Truth realized that the method for doing that. And those are the Four Noble Truths, which we'll go into next time in more detail.

[43:08]

I'm just sort of brushing by them quickly now. So really the heart, you know, so if you look at it in kind of an outline form, Basically, he just decides to sit down, follow his breathing, becomes very concentrated, kind of refines himself, lets go of the various kinds of neuroses that we all have that are part of our life, and is able basically just to let go. He just completely lets go. goes through these four stages of meditation and realizes these four truths, four noble truths. It's actually very simple. The concept is very simple. And that's it.

[44:13]

and that he was so-called enlightened. And then, they don't, I didn't continue the quote here, but in the actual sutra, I believe, these various I believe it was with this version. The various gods and voices come down from the heavens and people, you know, this kind of cosmic celebration of what he just did. So, you know, this is like very impressive, but also I think it it's important that it be accessible to us too, that it's not just some kind of grand scheme that this magnificent person was able to do, but actually something that we can relate to ourselves in some way, in some form, some shape, that the elements that he went through are not different than the elements that we go through.

[45:21]

This story Though, I mean, I love hearing the story, but I always think it just sets us up for wanting to get that, to get that enlightenment. And okay, so if I sit here, even though we hear about this all the time, that it's not about obtaining or attaining or any of those things, I think that I can help or one can help too, every once in a while. I want to sit here and get enlightened. I just know it, you know? One of these days, and then it doesn't happen, and there's disappointment, and there's all these different phases we go through about it, but it's really interesting. I mean, I just... I don't know. I don't know what to say about it other than that. Hold on. Hold on. Yeah, maybe somebody wants to address what Andy said, or do you have something else to say?

[46:23]

No, I was going to relate to that. I was related to the Shasta Abbey Buddhist group. Their idea of enlightenment is just, it's another word for regular practice. There's no separation. And that's something that we tend to bring to it, part of taking the shine off the Buddha. That's their idea of it. That's what I picked up from them. Well, I think that's the same here, too. And then, you know, practice is not so much about realization, but at the same time, there's this story in it. It's like, it sounds like a kind of linear thing. Okay, you know, this happens, and you sit down, and you meditate, and these four things happen, and then you're enlightened. Well, I think it's hard not to compare it to your own experience.

[47:24]

I mean, we sit down too, but we don't hear this cosmic voice and don't walk away, you know, having left everything behind. So I think there are two elements of the story. One is that what Ron is saying, it's important to point out the accessibility of the experience to everyone. And the other is the incredible accomplishment of this one individual, which is what, I mean, it's the religion in order. named after him. So those two things to consider. To what degree do you think stories about the life of the Buddha, including, for example, this story about how he all at one time sat and progressed through, in a linear fashion, through stages of deeper and deeper concentration until he attained enlightenment. To what degree do you think that this is a very neat composite tale which has been passed down to us as a model in some ways, as an inspiration in other ways, but not really a true account of how the founder of this tradition

[48:50]

You know, I have my views. What's yours? Well, my view is that, first of all, the Buddha did not... the play-by-play on what he did was not written down as he did it or even in his lifetime. I believe, if I'm not mistaken, that the original sutras Pali were not written until after the Buddha's death. So my thought is that in some ways this is part of the religion being codified, being standardized, being, I think there were, there was consensus as to what happened and so I don't take it, personally I don't take it as gospel. I always look for the spirit of it in this.

[49:58]

It just does not sound like a historical account to me, or a true account of an internal life. And also about how it compares to my own experience. I think that when I sit down on a cushion, when we sit down on cushions, This is a struggle. This is a struggle. But I do believe that what Buddha discovered is something, is a reality, is valid. That's why I engage in this effort. It's an interesting question and a real obvious one to most of us who are here because most of us weren't born into this religion or this way of thought and we've come to it because it seems to work in some way and yet it has this kind of magical gospel quality that most of us have left behind in other religions that we've left.

[51:05]

So some of us, you know, can enjoy that part of the story and some of us can't. The question is, what difference would it make if this were the absolute truth to you? If this actually happened, how would that change your practice? If I somehow knew that this actually happened, maybe I would be a little bit more confident that the end was attainable, and a little bit less wavering in my faith. You know, I come to this practice not because I believe that any of this is so. It could be all false. Even the Buddha could not even be a historical figure. I came to this practice because the notion of sitting quietly and paying attention to just what is in front of me, to just what is, has the simplest possible notion for

[52:11]

foreseeing what is true or what is reality. That's why I practice Buddhism. Because that's the basic message that I've gotten. Yeah, and I think it's different for other people. Maybe other people have some view about whether they think it's true or what it means. I thought it was really interesting. I've answered a question I've been asking for years when Ron said that when he was describing what was happening to the population in that area, I would imagine it was pretty widespread. You know, the fact that there were these major spiritual figures that showed up within a few centuries of each other. And that, you know, explains it to me that people had reached a time when they needed a different kind of spiritual orientation than the kind of animistic or whatever was going on. And so, you know, when you were talking about how it could be apocryphal, or it could be a way to personify this different kind of spiritual need that people had, That's what makes the most sense to me. I don't know if I'm even skeptical about whether the Buddha did these things or was a person, just like I've always not needed to worry about whether Jesus did or was.

[53:27]

It's more that it's a place to rest. I was going to say that many religions began that way. You know, Christianity, the so-called Gospels were written down long after Jesus Christ died, and I think that's true in Judaism, and I suspect in other religions too, and at that time it was a very great oral tradition, and the information was passed down, but of course there were great changes over over hundreds of years or however long it was before they were written down. So I do look on it more as symbolic or metaphor. But there's a truth, but it's not the literal historical truth. And I think that's in the spiritual truth.

[54:28]

which is what people are seeking, to a large extent. One of the things that I think is the most inspiring to me, personally, is the stages of meditation. Whenever I read about his experience in the stages of meditation, I have to say, God, I have to stop thinking about my work when I'm sitting and get into these stages. And I think, for me, personally, you know, thinking about or reading about these stages is almost like, you know, a fetus in utero trying to imagine a cellular phone. I mean, it's like, it's not quite there. I'm not in that place yet. So I think if this stuff is true, then it is quite an inspiration, you know, to not daydream, not sleep and not do my recipes while I'm sitting. In that way, it's useful to me Also, just it's a little bit easier.

[55:35]

Is that in? technically for these genres you can like the hindrances, those first, you know, anger and sensuous desire and so forth, you can let those fall away during meditation and get into that first stage, but then when you're through with meditation they can come back. It still counts. You gather them up as you're fluffing your cushions. It still counts. Oh, it counts? Yeah. Is it just for meditation? I mean, is it, it's like, okay, I go through these four stages, okay, ding. And then you get up and then you have your enthusiasm and your joy again. I mean, is it just within meditation or is it? to carry, I mean I imagine it's to carry throughout your day, but I don't know if I'm so willing to give up. These are kind of technical, the way that they're usually talked about is more technical states that are actually really, are meditative states in meditation, and then what you're talking about also would happen, but not to the kind of degree of purity that is in the meditative state.

[56:43]

That's the way it's usually taught. The Theravadan tradition does get into very seem almost surreal or not applicable to our practice. And this is the old school East John's. And it is hard to grasp it. I mean, I can't. But I think that they're there. I really do believe because I've read enough consistent accounts. I don't know if any of you have read of the life after life stuff about people who physically die and their heart stops. And there's a consistent experience just like I think, comparable to this, that unless you've had it, you say, oh, it's not there, or it's hard to imagine. But I think when I read this material, I really get the sense, the solidity, that there's really something there that I haven't experienced yet. Can you say something more about the Four Noble Truths, or does that have to wait till next time?

[57:44]

Well, I would rather wait till next time to sort of talk more thoroughly about it, but if you have a question, I think we can talk about it next time, because actually his first sermon, when he began to teach, was oriented around the Four Noble Truths, and that's what we'll talk about next time. That kind of gives me phases. makes it easier when we can be with living people today.

[59:29]

Doesn't it kind of arouse questions knowing that when you think about the history of Buddhism over 2,500 years, you have a lot of falling away, falling into doubt. Buddhism, for example, almost went out of practice in India and at the same time that it started to be practiced in the Far East, in China and Japan. And then there is of course sectarian rivalry in which certain sects are not spoken well of by other sects. And although there is on the one hand this face-to-face transmission which is It's something that really does inspire a certain amount of trust. On the other hand, even if I meet someone who has received this face-to-face transmission... You have blemishes?

[60:34]

Well, how do I... It's not accessible to me. I mean, it still requires faith, and I feel... I feel that the message has changed in different traditions. That throws a monkey wrench into it. Where I am right now in the whole process of the great man theory of anything is, or great woman theory, whichever.

[61:59]

Great man. Well, yeah, the theory of history is that Buddha and Christ and Moses seem to me to be themselves bringing together at a moment in time all that's been going on. I don't tend to feel that they are the only ones. I think they speak at a particular time for more that was going on and synthesize the time or the context. It's a much more systemic thing and it just comes down. We're so limited, we tell a story, and the story is the result of multiple layers of moments of cellular experience. And it's the story like Sophie's Choice is a story, and it's only the story of a fraction of a person even.

[63:03]

And so to become enamored of that story, as if that story or that person was to be our guide, I think is to limit our experience. But we do need to do something. We need to say something. Call it a name. Call it Buddha. Call it Mark. Call it Moses or Joshua or something. And that helps. I think to become over-identified with it is to distort our experience terrifically, and to limit ourselves, and to cause that kind of feeling that you have on the cushion, or I'm not doing it right, or I missed it, or I should do it some other way, or maybe I'll go to another Zen center, or, you know, I mean, any kind of crazy thing. And I mean, I've certainly been guilty of it, you know, partly. Jason? Yeah, I think it's interesting for myself, because the reason I'm here is that is because it's a real useful tool in a real kind of crazy world that we live in, to be able to focus personally and shut off the background noise.

[64:05]

And I think that's one thing that this has provided, is it's a good place to do that, to focus on your life. And I personalize it, my experience is with Buddhism in the past, and the reason I sort of didn't get into it before is because I And I never wanted to give myself over to following that kind of life, because it was such a total dedication. And the main thing is, it's really interesting, because now maybe I'll be 39 this year, and maybe I'm old enough or whatever, but I'm here for real personal reasons, as opposed to trying to follow a path or follow a guide, as everybody said. I'm finding it's just real useful. that that's not done outside a lot. Do you think that suffering has brought you to want to do that? Oh, absolutely. Yeah, so in that way you find a sort of similar teaching.

[65:09]

Oh yeah, but it's really interesting for me because one of my first experiences, well not one of my first experiences, but one of my experiences is going to a protest at Livermore National Laboratories in and beauty and their love I was attracted to, but I never could really make it tangible and understandable on my own terms. I never thought I could do that, and even now I'm not so sure. I mean, it's something I admire, but it's interesting that the reason I'm here is much more personal and much more... Yeah, it has to do with the same kinds of things. You've mentioned your age. But it has to do with being aware that, wait a minute, I'm at 39, and I may be, you know, on the downhill. You know, but even that comes through things. But more importantly, it's survival in kind of a real crazy world. That's right.

[66:09]

It's very tough. And there's so much background noise that everybody It's not as if we wouldn't be here, but it's a chance not to be arrived. Let me kind of continue here. Just sort of a response to some of the things you said that occurs to me. You know, in Zen, in the way we practice Zen here, it's kind of along the lines of what Dave you're talking about, and we tend to downplay this side of it, which is why I think it's interesting. Because if you have the other side, the other side of just experiential practice and sitting, then you can appreciate this, and like Lois said, you don't get so sucked into identifying with it because you have your own sense of what your practice is for you. But when you have that sort of confidence, then you can look at this and you can play off of it.

[67:13]

Okay, so Buddha becomes enlightened and maybe it happened in one day or maybe it happened over 20 years. And then his first reaction was, well, he didn't know what to do about it, whether he should teach other people or whether he should just sort of keep it to himself and just be a happy guy for the rest of his life. Because he realized how incredibly difficult it would be for most people to take it on as a path. Mankind is intent, man and womankind, are intent on attachments and take delight and pleasure in them. It's hard to see the principle of causality, origination by way of cause. It's hard to see how our suffering is caused by our actions, to really deeply see that and admit to it and adjust to that.

[68:23]

But then if he tries to teach it, people don't get it. It's just going to be a drag. He doesn't want to waste his time. Then he has this little palm here, which is kind of nice. But then this Brahma Sahampati, a kind of spirit comes to him, kind of otherworldly spirit comes to him and kind of requests that he teach. It's like somebody comes to him and says, well, we really need you. But you know, it's interesting just the thought that's going through my mind is if he's worried about teach it, and it just seems like the Zen thing would be to explain it, but not worry about whether people, not need that gratification of people understanding it or not.

[69:33]

Well, if not, I think there's another view of that, which is, if all is going to play itself out, then why do I need to get in there? That's true. Yeah, but if you're truly enlightened, maybe you should just... Well, you could choose either path, and there are both paths. But he's saying more that he just thought people wouldn't accept it. And why even bother if people wouldn't accept it? Maybe you better go to help the sick or something. Is it different? Do some gardening or something or help people in other ways. I mean, if people aren't going to welcome or be interested in a teaching, why, you can't beat them over the head with it. The other thing is, you know, he was, I think it brings out his humanness, too. I think though it's a device. I think that actually they just wanted to make it. They just wanted somebody to request him to teach. It wasn't like he was arrogantly going out and just saying, well now I'm going to tell you all how it is.

[70:36]

But somebody actually requested that he do it. It's a staged device. We don't know. now introducing by popular request. So anyway, he agreed. He said he got it. I think this last line is kind of poignant. This last line says, and there are beings of little impurity that are falling away through not hearing the doctrine. I mean people who are really, you know, really good people, who are really close to being able to really get to what is, you know, reality, or to see reality, and yet they're not able to get it because nobody's teaching them the doctrine. So anyway, he decided to teach, and then he spent the next 45 years of his life teaching. And he was about, he was 35 years old then, and he died when he was 80. And his teaching, mainly he traveled. He got like a traveling seminar.

[71:36]

And he mainly taught in cities. It was mainly an urban kind of teaching. Because that's where the people were most interested in education. It's like any city, you know, the new ideas, the kind of cultural interchange happens more in the city than in the small towns. And also people could support him and, you know, he was just more developed. So he spent most of his life traveling between several of the larger cities. Paranasi was the main one. That's why it says in our meal chant, taught at Paranasi. Born at Lumbini, enlightened at Bogaya, taught at Paranasi. So that was the main city that he kept returning to, although he would travel around other places as well. And he developed a whole, we call it a Sangha, Buddhist community around him, and began to ordain people into the order.

[72:38]

And they would leave home, which means that they cut their family ties. And they lived mostly by begging, and they got their food through donations and so forth. And at first, because he felt like it would just be too difficult. Who knows what he was really thinking. What a gentleman. But it was, you know, in that culture, in that time, it was, you know, a very kind of logical thing to do. A logical thing to not allow women. Yeah, to not allow women into the order. But then he was prevailed upon by several of his disciples to do so, which he did. And so women became accepted into the sangha as well. Although there's still kind of a separation, trying to keep the monks and the nuns separate.

[73:44]

We better say the whole truth that even the highest nun was submissive to the lowest monk. it was very important that they understood that. And they had many more rules governing their behavior than the monks had. And I think you're right, that it was a consequence of the cultural time, I mean, and that, like anything else, it was like, what will people think? And, you know, we're trying to get this religion off the ground, and if we allow women in, it'll be such... an offensive thing that we'll have so much more resistance that we won't be able to gain members and people will try to stomp us out. So again, you see that so commonly. But doesn't it make you wonder if, no, if we're talking about a truth that is so profound and so universal that

[74:46]

In other words, the seeing, you know, the description of Buddha, you know, seeing his last, you know, 100,000 previous lives and understanding the law of cause and effect in its completeness and basically having this perfect knowledge in addition to relief of suffering. And then you have him basically going along with a very culture-bound principle, you know, which is the inferiority of women. And it makes you wonder, well, was he, in other words, did he have a truly universal understanding that was universal in time as well as space? Or was he just, you know, some culture-bound sexist guy, you know? And what do we do with that? It shows the tremendous impact of culture.

[75:48]

I was just reading something recently in The Occurrence about the infanticide of girl babysitting that's going on today. It's a quite serious problem in rural areas of India. And in this article, which is in an Indian magazine, The Occurrence, in some area, I don't remember the exact area, They were so concerned and upset about that, the authorities decided to inform the population that they were going to have cradles. They put cradles outside hospitals and clinics to inform people, you know, no questions asked. If you have a girl baby you don't want, just put it in the cradle. And people are doing that. And then, of course, these babies are in orphanages, but at least they're not destroyed. So that's still a situation in India today. The girl child is a problem because they have to have a dowry. These are poor rural people. And the girls who marry still goes to the husband's family, so very patriarchal.

[76:54]

And this is still the situation. So I think it brings out, you know, he was indeed a human. being to begin with, and the tremendous impact of culture and society. Sure, but how universal is the teaching then? Well, which teaching are you talking about? I think you're assuming that he made the decision based on his own prejudices rather than on a pragmatic What good would it do the world if this religion was obliterated because of these small beliefs of the local people, and how much did he want to stand up to that? That's more of a question of courage and integrity, I think, in a certain way. Ron, do you want to finish and then we'll go back to questions? Well, so it's... I mean, it's just... it raises a question.

[77:56]

I think that it's... it gives you some question. But, you know, without... I suppose a sociologist or somebody who's really deeply familiar with a culture at that time would know more, could have maybe more clear understanding. If you really knew what the culture was like at that time, it might be easier to understand it, pro and con. But I don't know if it makes it any easier to justify in terms of what the question Kathy is raising. No matter what the culture is, did he really have a universal experience? I think there's only so far you can go. Again, that's like what Lois was saying. You have to be careful how much you impute to circumstances and events. I mean, it's a good question, but I wouldn't jump to conclusions without having actually been there and seeing how it all worked and how it all went together.

[78:57]

I'll let him slide. Show some compassion, little guy. Be on universality, actually, instead of what he gets to be. So he died when he was 80 years old. The story is that he ate some tainted meat that was given to him. And, you know, he died a very dignified, kind of intentional kind of death. He died in a very small town. You know, what he had been teaching in these larger cities, he died in a very small town, kind of an out-of-the-way place. It was kind of, they considered it kind of undignified for him to be dying in such a kind of place with so low reputation. But he told them that actually, in years past, it had really been a very important city.

[80:02]

And so they shouldn't worry about it too much. But it was interesting that he dies. He was born in great splendor, or at least a very nice, elegant situation. And he dies in a very simple, mud-type village. And it chooses to do that. I mean, they want to take him someplace else. Because of course, he's not going to die just like that. They all have to get into it. But he decides to stay there and die there. So then he checks with all the monks and sees if anybody has any doubts or is sort of unsettled about practice, and they all say, oh, no, we have great faith. And then his last words are something to the effect, subject to decay are compound things. Strive with earnestness. compound things we can talk about next time, but basically it just means that everything is a composite, that we like to think of ourselves as a self.

[81:14]

And we like to think of our country as a country, and our mother as a mother, and so forth. But actually everything is just a composite of elements. And when you see everything as a composite of elements, it seems a little silly to be so attached, as we are, to the summaries of these composite elements. Since things are composed of elements, they also disintegrate. Elements disintegrate as well. So that's, it's interesting, you know, if he has one last thing to say, that's what it is. That things are compound, made of elements. And remember that. Don't forget that. And try hard. That's it. So then he does his trick about going through the jhanas again. last act of his life. He goes up through the four jhanas, and then they think that he's just about going to die or reach nirvana, and Ananda thinks that he's just gotten to nirvana, and then somebody else says, no, he's not there yet.

[82:18]

So then he goes back down through the fourth, the third, the second, the first, and then he goes back up again to the first, second, third, fourth, and then out. He really wanted to do it thoroughly, and he dies. And we say he entered nirvana, and nirvana is this kind of misunderstood, very romantic term. There's even a rock group in nirvana. I just don't understand their music, man. You're right, I don't understand their music. But they just give a benefit concert, so they must be okay. And nirvana, the word nirvana is interesting. It's ni, or ne, is a negative.

[83:22]

And vana means craving. So it's just like absence of craving. It's that simple. Just absence of craving. So it's not really a state. It's something that you can't actually logically describe. I'll use that as a kind of a cop-out. And parinirvana is the death of an individual who enters nirvana. So it's not a state, but we talk about people entering nirvana. And it's just, it's like an absence of desire, absence of craving, total absence of desire and craving. And at that point, because that craving and desire is gone, there's no more karma created. Because your thought process isn't trying to get something, create something more, there's no more karma created. And because of that, there's no more rebirth, which we'll talk about later. So that's nirvana in one sentence.

[84:27]

And after his death, we talked, a few people talked about this, but after his death, they had several councils. Everybody got together and kind of compared notes. And of course, all kinds of conflicts began to arise and people disagreed about what they had heard him say and what his intention was in saying it, so forth. And it was all oral for about 400 years. And then about the first century BC, they began to write it down. And then also during that 500 year, 400 year period, they began splitting up into different sects and different, just like with every religion, they had, people had different emphases that they believed in. And so they started dividing and they'd have conflicts and they'd argue and they, you know, the whole scene. And apparently they didn't even have Buddha images for quite a while, for the first several hundred years. And that was a later development, maybe somewhere around the time when we began setting it down in writing, setting the sutras down in writing.

[85:38]

And just briefly, the literature that came out when they began the writing is called the Tripitaka, which means three baskets. And all Buddhist writing is basically within these three divisions. The first is the Vinaya, which are precepts. The second basket are the sutras, which are supposedly Buddha's words, as was remembered by his disciples. And the third basket is the Abhidharma, which is commentary from later Buddhists on the sutras. So that's pretty well it for just Buddha's life in a very simple format. First we're at nine o'clock and we have to decide, you know, some people may need to leave.

[86:43]

Let's say limit it to five minutes. Yeah, if that's alright with people, I mean, I don't know who needs to leave right now and not. Is there anybody? No, I have to leave. Okay. No, I just have a question. Let's just take one question. Okay, the question is about, in the beginning with his austerities, or he was going through the practice, and did he reject, like, the first set of austerities? I'm just using that word, it might not be exact. and sort of take on another set of them, it kind of seems like that's what he did. Can you clarify that? In other words, he almost, he says about, he decided he was going to eat, and he couldn't attain that state, and everybody left him, and so it was as if he had rejected that part of his life, and then he went ahead and he ate, a short while later he became enlightened. What I'm getting at is, are there effective austerities and ineffective austerities?

[87:54]

I wouldn't say so. The point is that the austerities by themselves as an end in themselves didn't work. In other words, just doing It would be like if you're approached as Aza and were to just tell yourself that as long as you went into the Zen Dome and sat down and looked at the wall and had good chanting and had good posture, that would really be a great thing for you to do and beneficial and that's all you needed to do. That's the way that they were looking at the authorities. If they only stood in cold water long enough, if they only starved themselves enough, somehow that would be all that they would need to do. And it wasn't that they couldn't be helpful, but just the devotion to the practices in themselves wasn't enough. I think that's the point. They weren't going beyond just the physical manifestation of the practices. And also they were extreme.

[89:07]

They were being too extreme as well. But we didn't want to go into that. Just a quick aside, Alan Watson, in one of his talks, talks about how he wanted to be like certain teachers, because they were so smart. So he took to wearing suits and putting pens in his pockets like them. So how did you, I'm not quite sure of the connection. Well that was, the doingness of it, Oh, I see. I see. Just sort of like the outward format. The outward format, yeah. In other words, just going in and sitting in the right. Right. Okay, here's homework for the next question. Please read this. It really helps if you can read it because I'll be talking about it.

[90:06]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ