Okay, so now I'm going to talk on Senne's understanding of koan, what koan means to him. So koan means to be public, and what to be public means according to Senrei, is to equalize unequal conditions. When there are some unfair conditions, make change and equalize. Be all people equally. That is the meaning of public, not private. As a private, you know, we can say, I won't do this or do that. or I think this is right or wrong. But as a public person, you know, we have to consider all people equally.

[01:23]

So to be a private person and to be a public person or an official person are different. And here, the core is to be a public. not to be private or individual. So public might also be any kind of authority, person with authority, leadership? I think so. So to rule over people with benevolence is to equalize unequal conditions. To rule over people, this is a kind of a Chinese idea of politics, no government, rule peoples, but if not the government, but emperor and ministers. But if emperor or ministers are not public, are not benevolent, and if they use their authority in their own personal purpose, this society becomes

[02:38]

unfair and disorder. So, to be public means to think of all people equally and do things, take care of things on that basis. That is the meaning of being public, according to Senrei. And, he said, to keep one's lot is called an, I don't know, to keep one's mouth is good English or not. But the Japanese or Chinese expression is boom. Is there boom here? Maybe not. I'll write down. Boom is a kind of very important part in Japanese society. Keeping 1-0 is a translation of shu, boom.

[03:44]

Shu means to keep or to protect. And what is boom in English? Boom literally means push. When we divide one, piece of pine into several pieces. Each portion, or each piece, is called a bun. And, you know, in Japanese, or I think Chinese, too, the society, each person has one's own bun. Portion. It's like a guest. They have... Share. Share. Not necessarily equal? No, not equal. Think of government offices. In China, emperor, ministers, high officers, middle class officers, and low class officers. And each person has to

[04:51]

position, in which, you know, one has each responsibility and... how do you call it? Station. Station. Yes. So, you know, each person has its own position. And if I do something more than my responsibility or duty. That means I violate the other people's responsibility. To know one's place. Yeah. So we have to keep our own position in order to make entire organization work well.

[06:06]

Is this the term in the Lotus Sutra about dharma position? Yeah, I think that is my understanding. So, as a public person, we have to think as an entire society or world or universe as one equal thing. So how could you use the word purview? Purview. Purview. No, that was me. I can't explain it. Which one's area of responsibility in a job? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, you know, tend to have one's own area. You know, you have to take care. But in this area, you can do more. I think this is the best way. But there is a job description for each place, too. So each portion is defined as well as... Yes, within an entire structure of organization.

[07:16]

Right. For each person and each position. And a mission and a limit. Right. So to maintain one place in the existing order of things. Yes. So, in that sense, ko and an are kind of contrary. Ko is as a whole community. And an is shu-bun. If I need shu-bun, keep one's position, it means I, my, you, are you. I cannot... do something this person has to do. You know, so we cannot... So Koan is equality and... And different... This is individuality. This is Shogun's hierarchy or individuality. It's not a hierarchy, but, you know, each one's unique.

[08:17]

Can I say unique? Okay. So within an organization, all people have to work for a certain purpose, same purpose. But each person takes care of a different part of the work in order to carry out public work. or giving a lot of means. So here, ko and an according to Sen's definition means there are two sides of one reality. So in a sense, there is nothing private because we are connected

[09:22]

with all beings. We are all public person, right? And yet, I am mine, you are you. So, but the definition, the portion that you have, the place you have, and your role, what you do, and the other, separate from the other, that comes from Where? I mean... I think it comes from the reality of interdependent origination in the case of Buddhism. So that's found from yourself. Yes. But there's also that shogun that comes from outside. Yeah, I think it comes from... That the emperor tells you to do this, the shogun says to do this, Yes, that is the meaning of Shubom in the so-called mundane world.

[10:29]

The mundane world is that. And in this world, in the private, calm world, this Shubom is the portion that you find for yourself. That is, that you just... Let me read a little more. So to keep one's hope, to keep one's caution or one's position is An. Doing anything to keep one's hope and not create confusion is most An. So Tenbo, Tenbo does Tenbo's duty, and Ino does Ino's duty. And they don't bother each other. That kind of work within the social structure is the kind of meaning of koan in a mundane way.

[11:43]

So there are two sides of, you know, I think, of one reality of this person, to be public, and to be one's own uniqueness. And in my understanding, the shoho jishiso, or the reality of all beings, According to my understanding of the Lotus Sutra, the expression, Shobo Jisso, or the reality of all beings, came out of the Lotus Sutra. And it says, according to the Kumara Jiva's translation, there are ten suchnesses. Suchness means reality. And those ten suchnesses are

[12:46]

The first four is tai, so, I forget now. But the first four is kind of a uniqueness of each being. And the next four or five, next five is a connection with other beings, like cause and second cause, a result and secondary result. I think primary cause and primary result is a connection within time. A seed becomes a fruit. And the secondary cause, like for a seed, like humidity and temperature and all other conditions is a secondary cause for bearing a fruit.

[14:00]

So this secondary cause is a connection with all other beings. And secondary result is like for a seed to bear fruits and produce seed for the next generation is primary result. But when a flower blooms, somehow the flower makes us happy. You know, the flower doesn't bloom to make us happy, but somehow there's those functions. And this is called, I think, secondary result. So, the reality of all beings means uniqueness of each and every being, and also inter-connectedness.

[15:06]

with all other beings, both in time and space. And that side is ko, and the unique side is an. So as a koan, as a compound, I think this word expresses the reality of all beings. That is my understanding. the flower, and it's a final cause because it's for the sake of the flower, because of the flower, that all this takes place beforehand. That would be a final cause, so that what comes before is determined by the result.

[16:17]

The final cause. I'm not sure. What did you mean? Pardon? Purpose. Well, for a seed to produce next generation is a purpose. I'm not sure it's the same thing or not. But anyway, what I want to say is each being has its own uniqueness. and a connection with all other beings. And that is the reality of each and every being. And each one of us is not an exception.

[17:18]

And that reality includes individuality, uniqueness of each being, and connected with all beings. In that sense, there is no such thing called individual. That is public. So, within this expression, koan, the reality of two sides is expressed. So is this similar to Sando? Sando in Sandokai? I think so. That is my understanding. Anyway... I don't really understand this sentence. But next sentence.

[18:21]

Because of this, these 75 chapters are all Genjo Koan. Manifestation of reality. though the titles and wordings are different. So this, according to Senne, in all the chapters of Shobo Genzo, Dogen is trying to express and explain this reality, including universality and individuality. And we should understand the sentences about the Dharma and interpret them as one absolute meaning. Dogen Zenji is talking only about the reality of total function. This is a translation of Dogen's, not originally Dogen's, but Dogen writes this expression, Zenki.

[19:27]

total function. That has no separation between subject and object, this and that. So the... So koan is a reality of total function, according to senne. I think Katagiri Roshi translated this Zenki as total dynamic work. So this total dynamic work, the totality, entirety of total dynamic work is called, according to Senrei. So in this first chapter, Genjo Koan, Dogen expounds the same meaning that pervades until the 75th or final chapter of Shobo Genzo, Shukke.

[20:36]

Shukke was the 75th chapter of Shobo Genzo. So he said, Dogen is really writing on only one thing, that is Koan. That is the reality of all beings. And he continues. First of all, if we understand in terms of wordly meaning, so what I said was the wordly meaning of ko and an. This expression, equalizing unequal condition and keep one's lot, It is not in accordance with the original meaning of Dogen Zenji. So, we should not understand koan in a mundane world meaning. We should see the meaning of koan as buddhadharma.

[21:38]

And that is what he is going to talk, what that means. He said, it is difficult to determine what is unequal condition in Buddhadharma. Unequal condition means uniqueness of each thing. You know, we are different. In our body, I have head and I have face, neck, torso and hands. and legs, and feet. Each part has different shape and different function. And it's difficult whether feet is more important, our head, or legs, or feet. Usually, we think our head is more important, but it's very difficult.

[22:40]

whether head is more important than feet. And fat count we use as a criterion to define equalizing inequality, whether he has a question to be equal is really a good thing or not. I mean, head is head, feet is feet, hands are hands. We don't need to make evaluation. They are just as they are. So, as Buddhadharma, we have to be careful about this. As Buddhadharma. Once we understand that to be equal and to be unequal are one. To be equal means to be public, and to be not equal means to be private. And he said, these two are one. So I think this is the same idea of Sandokai.

[23:47]

Sameness and many-ness, or diversity, are one. Excuse me. It is not possible to say that we equalize inequality. In Buddha Dharma, we cannot say to equalize inequality. If we use the expression, keep one's lot, as if there is a fixed distinction in our lot, it cannot be the Buddhadharma we are discussing now. So, what I said about the entirety, entire organization and part of that entirety as an individual person is a kind of mundane or worldly understanding.

[24:53]

But as a Buddhadharma, you know, there is no such distinction. Because everything is really connected and functions all together. Fat quorum means, should be, inequality and keeping one's lot within the total function. So this is Senne's definition of what quorum is. Inequality and keep one's lot within the total function. But it sounds like he's going back and saying what he just said isn't, is. Yes. Yes, he is. So inequality, you know? Inequality means different. Head is head, hands are hands, feet are feet. These are not equal. And he said, that is OK.

[25:55]

In Buddhadharma, not in the world. As a reality in the Buddhadharma, each thing is not equal. And he said, that is OK. That is reality. and keeping one's lot. So that means keep one's own uniqueness. And yet, he said, within the total function, this total function is being public. Interconnectedness. That means, I think, each finger has a different shape, and the sides are different. and function are different. But as a total function, this reach of my finger functions as a whole, as a total function, as one hand.

[26:58]

So it's kind of difficult to say whether this is five fingers or one hand. No, it's both. This is only one thing, one being, But we can call this five fingers, a collection of five fingers. But also, this can be called one hand. When we call this one hand, there's no separation or distinction among the fingers. Everything is really one hand. But each finger has different shape and different function. And I think that is what Senra means by saying the koan should be inequality and keeping one's lot within the total function.

[28:00]

Any questions? Mm-hmm. And does that relate to anything to your definition of what you just said about the... Uh, I think this, um, the second an means to place one's hand to something. And this can be, can mean massage, means to treat something for healing. So I think koan also means the way each one of us functions or works for the sake of all beings, I think. So this is a kind of a treatment, a practice as a treatment to heal the pain or injury of ourselves and also the society or group of people or community.

[29:09]

I think that is what Senrei is trying to say about what koa means. Any questions, please? If you have a part that's koa, you have zenki, a hand, but you don't have I think so. The total function of four fingers. but no longer, but even the Zenki is now a different Zenki?

[30:13]

Well, if we think it's different, yes. Things are changing because it's impermanent. So, you know, if I die right now and disappear from the world, this is what... Zenkis could be all different. Yeah, Zenki is always changing. The reality is impermanent. That's what I was thinking you were saying. I wasn't sure if you were saying that all five fingers were necessary. No. I don't think so. Doesn't zenki in Japanese conversation mean feeling good? Oh, that's genki. Oh, genki. Okay, then I'm going to going to the first three sentences of Genjo Kohan. I think for many people these first three sentences are the most difficult part of Genjo Kohan to understand.

[31:25]

The first sentence of Renjo Koan, I think, as you know, is, when all dharmas are the Buddha dharma, there is delusion and realization, practice, life and death, Buddhas and living beings. This is Fat Dogen, right. And Hyogo comment on this. When all dharmas are the Buddha dharma, refers to the time when we expound that all phenomenal beings, each and every phenomenal beings, are without exception the Buddha dharma. So each and everything is buddhadharma itself.

[32:38]

And I have a question about what Kyogo is saying in the next part. From delusion and realization to living beings, Dogen Zenji picks up seven kinds of dharmas in this sentence. So, he said, Dogen picks up seven dharmas out of the many dharmas. Although all dharmas should be listed, it is not possible to write all things, so the rest of all things are omitted. So he only, Dogen only picks up those seven dharmas out of, you know, a million dharmas. Although the number of the things Dogen Zenji wrote are not many, we should not say that is not enough.

[33:45]

Simply, when we penetrate the one dharma of, for example, delusion, That is the first thing Dogen picks up. Though we don't discuss many other dharmas, we are not against reality. So that means, can we really penetrate one dharma, one thing? We can penetrate all other beings, all other dharmas. This is because we should not be caught up in the dichotomy of one and many. So he said, each and everything is beyond separation or distinction of one and many. But I have a question about this commentary.

[34:52]

I think when Dogen wrote Genjo Koen as a piece, I think he wanted to say something as a message. And I think those seven are not miscellaneous or picked freely out of, you know, millions of things. But he picked those seven things because he thinks these are important. And in this entire writing, he discusses what is delusion, and what is enlightenment, and what is living beings, and what is Buddha, and what is practice, and what is life, and what is death. So those are the points Dogen is going to discuss in this entire writing. These are not examples of medial dharmas.

[36:00]

That is my understanding. So I don't really understand why he, I mean, Senrei and Kyogo, saying in this way. Please. You're saying that what he seems to be saying is that these just are meant to represent everything? Right. I think so. But I don't agree with... At this point, I don't agree with them. These are the topics Dogen wants to discuss. And after he does, he did. Let me go to the next sentence. When ten thousand dharmas are not fixed self, there is no delusion and no realization, no buddhas and no living beings, no birth and no perishing.

[37:11]

This is Dogen's sentence. And Kyogo's comment is as follows. This self is the self of all beings. This is not a person's ego. This self is not an ego, but the self of all beings. The word, there is no, no means no, and is not non-being, that is separate between beings and non-beings, wu and mu. Although Dogen said there is delusion, there is enlightenment or realization, there are Buddhas and there are living beings, but this ah, or being, or to be, doesn't mean

[38:21]

than to refer to the being which is opposite of non-being. When we say Wu and Mu, what there is and there isn't, we discuss whether this is a piece of chalk, whether this chalk is here. I used up this chalk and so this disappeared. At the time when we say the chalk doesn't exist, now it exists. And it stopped to exist. That is our usual usage of the word to be. But Senrei, or also Dogen also, I think, when they used, I mean, Dogen used the word, be, or existence, like u, or mu, Dogen said, that is not what he meant.

[39:35]

In fact, he is discussing, or these people are discussing, is not whether this choke exists now and yet, when this goes somewhere else, it doesn't exist here. In this case, we don't question whether this really exists at this moment. In Buddhism or Zen, when we discuss about Mu or Mu, or being and non-being, it's about this reality. I mean, when we say there is a choke, we don't question, you know, choke is here. But the masters or Buddhist teachers are discussing about being or non-being. What does it mean? It means how this is. Is this being or is this non-being? I mean, in this case, this is a choke.

[40:43]

Piece of choke. Does this really a being as a choke? Is there really a being or stuff or thing that is called choke or not? At this moment, all of us are watching, looking, seeing this being. Whether is this really being or not being? I mean, a choke. Choke is just a name of this being at this moment. Because I use this to write on blackboard, I call this a choke. Because I use this being to keep some water or tea, to drink, I call this is a cup.

[41:46]

But is really a cup exist or not? It's there. But is this a cup? Really a cup or not? When I drink tea from this cup, this is a cup. But I can put some water here. and put a flower in it, then this is not a cup. It's a flower vase. And then this cup fell down and broken. We don't call this a cup anymore. But it's there. But it's not a cup. It's a junk. Wow. And please. So the name only describes well, whether this being is really being. I mean, this body, this is me.

[42:52]

But, you know, now I think now this is me, shohaku. But suppose, you know, if I, you know, die right now, that means my brain doesn't function. Not only brain, but all part of my body that functions, but body is there. Is this shohaku or not? Is shohaku then, you know, what really shohaku is? This body is not shohaku. When I die, this body remains, but no one calls this shohaku. But fat is different. Fat is lost. Mind? I don't think mind is not me. Mind is just a way this body, as I taught, functions.

[43:57]

So, we are not sure whether shouhaku really exists or not, but somehow it's there. Somehow I think I'm here. And you also, I think you agree, Shouhaku is here. But, does this really exist or not as Shouhaku? What is Shouhaku? What is a cup? And what is a disk? All beings, what is this? Does this really exist or not? You wrote, you said, no eyes, no ears. It means we really have eyes and ears. Yes. So shohaku is here, but shohaku is not here. Shohaku is nowhere.

[45:01]

This is shohaku, but since shohaku is just a collection of causes and conditions, Actually, there is no such thing called shohaku. So we can say both. Shohaku is here, but shohaku is not there. Not here. This is what Senne or Dogen is discussing. We can call this genjou koan as u, either u or mu, being or non-being. Neither being nor non-being, or he, who, he, me. Neither being nor non-being means emptiness. So to be emptiness includes both being and non-being, who and me.

[46:04]

How about absolute? Relative? Absolute and relative are two ways to see this one reality, which can be a said being or non-being, or neither being nor non-being. Does that make sense? I'm not sure. So you say here, you translated Ginjo Koan as a manifestation of reality. And cause translates to this actualizing the fundamental point. And Carl, how are you translating? You haven't got to it yet. So in the first sentence, Dogen said, there are these, those seven things.

[47:14]

And in the second sentence, Dogen said, there isn't, in this case, both six things. One thing is missing, and that is practice. I think, you know, in the third sentence, he said, since Buddha way, since Buddha's way. In the first and second sentence, he said, Dharma. In the first, he said, when all dharmas, or all beings, are Buddha dharma. And in the second sentence, he said, since 10,000 dharmas. So these first two sentences are about dharma. And the third sentence, again, he said, there is. those six things. But in the case of the third sentence, he said, put away, not dharma.

[48:19]

That is the fact that Ucha-Moroshi mentioned. You know, the topic Dogen is talking in the first two sentences and the third sentence is different. In the first two sentences, Bögen discusses about Dharma, the way things are. And the third sentence, and the rest of Genjo Kohan, he's talking about Buddha way. Buddha way is practice. And in the second sentence, if there's no delusion and no enlightenment or realization, there's no practice. Practice is, in a sense, the process or path which leads us from delusion to realization.

[49:21]

But if there is no separation between delusion and realization, there is no practice needed. So, in the second sentence, there is no practice. Because everything is reality as it is, there is no distinction, no separation between delusion and enlightenment, and living beings and Buddhas. Living beings mean deluded beings, and Buddha means enlightened beings. So that's why I think Dogen didn't put practice in the second sentence. Please. Might it be a reasonable paraphrasing that the phrase, when 10,000 dharmas are not fixed self, that means when life is as it is?

[50:27]

I think both, first and second, is when things are as they are. It says 10,000 dharmas. Somewhere else, I think Dogen said 10,000 dharmas is Buddha dharmas. Because Buddha dharmas is the way all dharmas are. Both are always. Not certain time. No. That is not what I think Doge meant. Zen, I think, clearly says so.

[51:40]

Question? Yes. So, can you sum up then, what is, maybe I'm just missing something, what is the difference between when all dharmas are the Buddha dharma and when 10,000 dharmas are not fixed self? What is the essential difference between those two? I think there's no essential difference. Both are always. But when you see things in this way, they're like this, and when you see them in this way, they're like that. It's the same thing. For example, Senne says in the next, on this, comment on this second sentence, he says, we can say that when all dharmas are the buddhadharma, there is no delusion. and no realization, no Buddhas and no living beings, no birth and no perishing.

[52:49]

So, what he is saying is those two sentences are the same thing, in the positive way and negative way, not way, positive expression and negative expression. In Senne's comment on the first sentence, it said, in the first sentence, all dharmas is what is the thing that has just come. This is a famous expression from one koan. When the Huinan, the sixth ancestor, first met with a young monk, Nangaku Ejo, Nangaku visited Huinan, Huinan asked, where are you from?

[53:53]

And Huinan said, I came from a certain place. And then Shinran said, that's not what he's asking. He said this thing, what is the thing that has come? In Japanese we read, the somobutsu in morai. What thing has come? Or more directly, what thing has come? And this is not a question, according to Dogen. This is a statement to express the reality. The thing, that thing means the thing that cannot be defined, cannot be grasped, has come in this way. So this is one expression. Such things have come in this way.

[55:00]

And Nangaku didn't understand at all. So after, I think after eight years or so, after he practiced with Nangaku, Nangaku first understood what Hinan's question meant. And he visited Hinan and asked and said, now first I understood what your question meant. and Huinan asked the same question. What is the thing that has come? Then Nangaku said, that ten thousand dharmas have now. If I point out one thing, I'm off the mark. Setsuji-itsumo-tsu-sokufu-chu. That is Nangaku's expression. So, such a thing that has come is kind of a positive expression.

[56:05]

And when I say something, I'm off the mark if I negatively express the same reality. And according to Sen'e, the first sentence and the second sentence are the same. Try to express one reality using a positive expression and negative expression. And according to Senne, this is the same as Baso's saying, Baso or Madhu, the mind is itself Buddha, Sokushinzebutsu, and neither mind nor Buddha. Do you know that story? Buddha itself, mind itself is Buddha. And no mind, no Buddha. And according to Senne and Dogen, these two are two different expressions of one reality.

[57:15]

So that is basic understanding of these first two sentences of Genjo Koan. according to Senrei and Kyobo. These two are both not certain times, certain occasions, but these two are both always as the reality of all beings, or a reality of our own life. Since I don't have much time, I'd like to go to the second sentence. I mean, third sentence. Third sentence is, Since the Buddha way, by nature, goes beyond the dichotomy of abundance and deficiency.

[58:27]

Abundance and deficiency is something positive and something negative. So, this means the first sentence and the second sentence. So, I think what Dogen is saying is the Buddha way, the actual way we practice, the actual way we walk, using our legs, as our day-to-day actual life, transcends or goes beyond those two. expressions, abundance and deficiency. Actual reality in which we have to do something. Not idea or understanding of Dharma or reality. We have to do something as our practice using our body and mind.

[59:31]

That is Buddha way. And this Buddha way is beyond those two sides of reality. And he said, there is arising and perishing, delusion and realization, living beings and Buddhas. Therefore, flowers fall down because we love them, weeds grow, because we dislike them. I just wonder about the word because. Is it caused by or is it regardless of whether we like them or not? In spite of our love? In my original translation, I translated, I think, although. Very different. And in this translation, I changed it because of Senya and Kyoko's comments.

[60:41]

I see. Oh, so this would be their version? Yeah. Oh, OK. So you still stick with although? Yes. Yes. But I'm not sure which is right, which Dogen really meant. But the word is Ie domo. Ie domo means, I'm here. Or however. No, I'm sorry. In this case, Hana wa aishakuni chiri, kusa wa kiken ni oru nomi nari. Hana wa aishakuni chiri, kusa wa kiken ni oru nomi nari. It can be either. Literally. And both Semne and Kyogo's comment on this sentence is, you know, said, this paragraph has nothing special to discuss.

[61:53]

And Semne also said, So we should just understand this as it is said. Kyobo says, here Dogen Zenji again says that there is arising and perishing, delusion and realization. This there is, or being, or wu, refers to arising and perishing, delusion and realization, living beings and buddhas discussed on the ground of all dharmas are buddhadharma. So what he's saying is... what he said in the first sentence and what he's saying in the third sentence here is the same thing. This is also another point I don't agree with Kyogo.

[63:01]

Because here, in the third sentence, Dogen is talking, discussing about practice. And he said, this practice, Buddha Way, is going beyond or transcends the first two sentences. Could this be like, at first mountains are mountains, and then mountains are not mountains, and then mountains are mountains again? That is one interpretation. I think some sort of the masters interpret these three sentences in that way. But I don't think so. It's not like a step or a stage. First we understand there is delusion and enlightenment or there is mountain and rivers. Next stage we negate it. There is no such thing. And in the final stage, we go back to the simple reality.

[64:06]

That is a kind of a common understanding of these three sentences. But I don't think that is the case. Please. I'm still a little confused about Buddha way being interpreted as practice, because butsudo... Doesn't butsudo... Does butsudo exist? before practice, or... Butsu-do is practice. Butsu-do is practice. It cannot exist separate from practice, or... Yes, of course. There's no life without our actual living activity, right? Right. So Buddha Way is a concrete activity we do. Buddha Way is not kind of a Daily made, you know, high rate. But Buddha way is a way we live day by day, moment by moment.

[65:07]

Even if we're not consciously practicing? I'm not sure. We have to be careful. And we need kind of a discussion of what that means. And if we say yes, we might create some problem. If we say no, we create another problem. Please. The expression, abundance and scarcity, is very strange. I don't have any particular feeling for it. It's like words that come out of nowhere. I've never run across it in any other Dharma discussion, that expression of abundance and scarcity. Can you give me some idea of where this expression came from, what the feeling of it is? Well, the expression Dogen used is ho and ken.

[66:10]

Ho is to be rich or to be abundant, and ken is to be deficient or not enough. And those two, ho and ken, are something positive and something negative. In the case of those three pairs, you know, delusion is something negative and enlightenment is something positive, something we want. Pleasure is something we don't want. Buddha is something positive and living beings, deluded beings, are something negative. Those two sides ho and ken, and also first and second sentences. When Dogen said, there are those things, that is positive, that is ho, and there are and, as an expression, negative.

[67:15]

I think those are ho and ken, something positive, meaningful, valuable. Ken is something not meaningful, not desirable. So in Japanese language, does this flow very smoothly? Does it seem completely smooth and expected that you might use this kind of expression? Because in English, it's a little unexpected. It's almost jarring. Do you have some idea? Do you think there are some better expressions? to express this idea? I don't have any idea that better translates what Dogen Zenji said. I trust the translation. I'm just kind of surprised at Dogen Zenji's choice of language.

[68:19]

And I'm wondering whether it feels in Japanese like a completely natural thing to say. It has the effect of coming out of nowhere. Maybe because I'm too familiar with Genjo Koans. It flows well and it's very natural. Please. I want to try to follow that as a reference to the Heart Sutra, where it says all dharmas are not deficient, not complete, not defiled, not immaculate. Well, I think in the Heart Sutra it says, fūzō fūgen, fūkū fūjō, fūkū fūjō fūzō fūgen. That's the first one. Appear or disappear. Appear and disappear. Appear and disappear.

[69:36]

I'm sorry. My mind doesn't work well. But anyway, different vocabulary. I was hoping that you would say more about mountains are mountains, mountains are not mountains, mountains are mountains is a common understanding of how this might be parallel but you don't agree with it and I wanted to hear why. What is your I think, as I said, it was a kind of a stage.

[70:40]

First we study Buddhism. We say, you know, we see, we understand, we are deluded. We have a problem. We have pain, suffering. And there is something called enlightenment or nirvana. And we practice, start to practice, in order to escape from delusion and reach nirvana. I think that is a very common understanding of Buddhist practice. And yet, when we actually really practice in that way, we find There is some contradiction there. My aspiration, I think aspiration and desire are the same.

[71:42]

My desire to become free from or escape from delusion and reach Nirvana is also delusion. And in actual reality there is no such distinction or we cannot escape from our delusion. So we have to find nirvana within samsara. I think that's the second kind of a stage. So there's no distinction between samsara and nirvana or delusion and enlightenment. And we think this is a kind of a little higher understanding. And yet we need to go back to the actual day-to-day reality. So there is something called delusion and something called enlightenment.

[72:47]

And we have to practice. Is the difference between seeing them as simultaneous? So if we think those three attitudes as three stages. That is something different from what Dogen is saying. It's different from my own practice. Those three are three parts of one reality. One reality of my practice. That means in my practice of, for example, just sitting, Those three points are all included. It's not like when I was young, until a certain point, I thought, you know, there's practice and our delusion and enlightenment. And at certain times, I realized there's no such thing.

[73:52]

And I practiced in that way. But recently I found that it's not the right way to practice, so I returned to the reality. But within my practice at this moment, those three are included. This practice is a path from delusion to samsara to nirvana. And yet within this practice, this same practice, same action by this person, there are no such things called samsara or distinction between samsara and nirvana. And yet there is. That is my practice, within my practice, not within my idea or my understanding. But within the reality of this person's practice, all three points are always there.

[74:54]

Does it make sense? And that is the fact Dogen is saying in these three sentences. That is my understanding. So it's not a matter of stages. The first sentence is kind of a starting point. and the second is a little higher stage. And when you are really mature, you have to come back to the actual day-to-day ordinary reality. That's the kind of common understanding of Zen practice. But as my understanding of the entire teaching of Dogen, practice, although in teaching, is different from that kind of step-by-step practice. If I may make a comment, I really appreciate you qualifying everything you say as my understanding.

[76:03]

And going back to Stuart's comment about abundance and efficiency and its translation from Japanese, I know in Farsi When I read Persian poetry, and when I read that same poetry as translated in English, there is always an essence that gets lost. That's only you can get it from the original language. So, I appreciate what you said. When I work on translation, often I'm sad. because the important point to me is not conveyed or lost in the process of translation. But sometimes I'm really happy, you know, there's something common. So, common in Japanese language and English language.

[77:07]

But that is true. And I think that is what I can contribute as a person from Japanese culture to explain what is missing in English translation. Well, we don't have much time. We finished at 5, right? So we have 10 more minutes. I don't think we have time to discuss next sentences, so if you have questions or comments or whatever you want to say, please. Please. I always had the feeling that this work, it seems to have been deeply influenced by Nagarkana. I'm wondering if there's any Dogen was first ordained in Tendai school.

[78:30]

I think in Tendai teachings, there is some influence from Nagarjuna, like two truths. In the case of Tendai, It's a sweet truth. But of course, there's some influence from Nagarjuna to Dogen. There's no record if he studied Nagarjuna or not. But maybe he did. It's said that while he was at Mount Hiei, he led an entire dive rally all the Buddhist sutras and commentaries. Since he was very, and Dogen was a very brilliant person, I think he did. Okay? I'm interested in the south. What is the best town for women?

[79:37]

Well, Dogen Zenji's interpretation of this expression or koan, not only about this koan, but his interpretation of koan story is very unique. Sometimes he ignores grammar. And if someone else reads in that way, people think that's a mistake. But somehow, Dogen was very talented. And even by making mistakes, talented, even by making mistakes or twisted, he had the ability to express the reality deeper than the original sentence has. It's really amazing.

[81:24]

That is one of the kind of, how can I say, attractive points of Dogen's writings. He twisted original sentences and expressed much deeper things. So, you know, because we have certain concepts about certain expressions, By reading Dogen's writings, our concept is kind of destroyed and allows us, enables us to see the reality in a deeper or broader perspective. That is really amazing. And I think I have the same experience through Zazen. By, you know, practice continuously, the same thing seems a completely different way.

[82:31]

I don't know why, but that is my experience. So, Dogen's writings and my own Zazen, sometimes, in some way, are the same thing to me. or destroying my own understanding, or clinging to my own understanding. When I read Dogen's writings, the same writings, in this case, Genjo Kowa, first I read Genjo Kowa when I was 17 years old. So, more than 30 years ago. And since then, I have been reading this for many times. hundreds of times, and I think each time my understanding is a little different. Hopefully, I hope my understanding is getting deeper, but no guarantee.

[83:38]

Maybe it's just changing. And also, recently, I changed my understanding at least one part of almost completely by kind of influence from scholars, scholars' study. I think that point is about mirror and reflection or moon in the water. Traditionally, or according to Gosho, this commentary, you know... That is... Let's see... It's section 7. In seeing color with body and mind, and hearing sound with body and mind, although we perceive them intimately, it is not like reflections in a mirror or the moon in water.

[85:10]

When one side is verified, the other side is dark. I think I'm going to talk on this section tomorrow, tomorrow morning. According to this commentary, traditionally, until recently, said this is a description of enlightenment. Enlightenment. Is negative. Is separation of subject and object. And seeing the color with our entire body and mind. is enlightenment, or real, true practice. But... Seijun-san was one of the scholars. They think this is a description of delusion. It wasn't clear to me.

[86:16]

until recently. So my understanding is also changing. So don't trust me. Read and understand for your own. My talk is just one kind of interpretation. It isn't a delusion, though, that we're going to start at 9.30 tomorrow. Thank you very much. 9.30 in the morning. It's not 9 o'clock? No, 9.30 to 12. Good. Thank you very much.

[86:53]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ