Before I start to talk on the water, I'd like to introduce one section from Stanipata. I think you know what Stanipata is. Stanipata is one of the oldest sutra in Buddhism recorded in Paris. And I think what Buddha said in this sutta is something to do, what Dogen is saying, the phrase I talked this morning. It's a little long, but let me just read. Maybe you understand without any explanation. It's not a difficult sutra, but I think it's very important. And Buddhist scholars think this section of Stanipata is important to see, to know the older form of Buddha's teaching of interdependent origination.

[01:22]

In the case of early Buddhism, interdependent origination is not a correct expression. Dependent origination or dependent arising is not interdependent. The idea of interdependent origination is from Nagarjuna in Mahayana Buddhism. number 11. The number is 862 to 877. The title of this sutta in English is Disputes and Contention. Disputes and Contention. And in the parenthesis it said, the causes of anger and attachment. Sir said a questioner.

[02:27]

So this is a question from someone. Whenever there are arguments and quarrels, there are tears and anguish, arrogance and pride. and grudges and insults to go with them. Can you explain how these things come about? Where do they all come from? So this person is asking, what is the cause of this human problem? Not only 2,500 years ago, but we still have the same thing. And Buddha said, the tears and anguish that follow arguments and quarrels, said the Buddha, the arrogance and pride and the grudges and insult that go with them are all the result of one thing.

[03:35]

They come from having preferences, from holding things precious and dear. Insults are born out of arguments, and grudges are inseparable from quarrels. But why, sir, this is a person who questions, but why, sir, do we have these preferences? Why do we have these preferences, these special things? Why do we have so much greed and all the aspirations and achievements that we base our lives on? Where do we get them from? I think this is a very important question for us, too. The preference is the precious things, said the Buddha, come from the impulse of desire, impulse of desire.

[04:46]

so too does the greed and so too do the aspirations and achievements that make up people's lives. So our lives came from impulse of desires. And from where, sir, comes this impulse of desire? From where do we derive our theories and opinions, our philosophy? And what about all the other things that you, the wanderer, have named, such as anger, dishonesty, and confusion? The impulse of desire arises when people think of one thing as present and another as unpleasant. That is the source of desire.

[05:49]

It is when people see that material things are subject both to becoming and disintegration, arising and perishing, that they form their theories about the world. So we create our picture of the world, our philosophy based on our like and dislike. Anger, confusion, and dishonesty arise when things are set in pairs as opposite. Two pairs, dichotomies. The person with perplexity must train himself in the path of knowledge. The recluse has declared the truth after realization. Another quick question again.

[06:54]

But why, sir, is it that we find some things present and some unpleasant? What could we do to stop that? How can we stop it? And this idea of becoming and disintegration, could you explain where that comes from? Buddha's answer. It is the action of contact. Action of contact. Contact between sense organs and their objects. Contact. It is the action of contact, of mental impression. That leads to the feelings of present and unpresent. We have present and unpresent because of the contact between sense organs and the object of sense organs.

[07:57]

Without the contact, they would not exist, of course. And as I see it, the idea of becoming and this disintegration also comes from this source, from the action of contact. Again, question. So far, sir, does this contact come from And the grasping habit, what's the reason for that, why we grasp things? Is there anything that can be done to get rid of possessiveness and anything that could be eliminated so that there would be no more contact? How we can avoid contact? a very good question, I think. And this is something about what Dogen is discussing here, I think.

[09:05]

And Dogen, not Dogen, but Buddha says, contact exists because the compound of mind and matter exists. Compound of mind and matters. Compound of, you know, our self and all other beings. And that is a fat token called the mountain. Excuse me, so is our mind and matter compounded together in the same compound, or are mind and matter separate? I'm not sure. Let me read for this. So, contact exists because the compound of mind and matter exists. The habit of grasping is based on wanting things, desire. If there were no wanting, if there's no desire, there would be no possessiveness.

[10:12]

Very logical, I think. Similarly, without the element of form of matter, there would be no contact. So if neither desire or form or object doesn't exist, there's no contact. I think it's very logical, very understandable thing. No contact. Fat pursuit leads a person to get rid of form. And how can suffering and pleasure cease to exist? That is what I want to know about. I think we want to know too. And Buddha said, there is a state, there is a state, where form ceased to exist. Buddha said, there's a state where form ceased to exist, said the Buddha.

[11:19]

What kind of state is it? And he says, I think this is the most important point. He said, it is a state. It is a state without ordinary perception. And without disordered perception. And without no perception. And without any annihilation of perception. So there's no, do you understand? Annihilation of perception. So no, without ordinary perception. And without disordered or mistaken perception. And without no perception means there is perception. So not get rid of perception. So without no perception and without any annihilation of perception.

[12:23]

It is perception, consciousness, that is the source of all the basic obstacles. So I think what Doikin is saying, perception is a source of problem, but annihilation perception is another source of problem. So how can we free from this contact between sense organs or our mind and the object of the mind? you know, about this point, you know, there are many different ideas and theories in Buddhism, from early Buddhism to Mahayana Buddhism and also in Zen. And one way or one idea is to negate the object and see only consciousness.

[13:29]

That is the teaching of Yogacara. Only consciousness, no form, no object. That is one way. Another way is get rid of mind and only form. Understand? Only form or object. So get rid of form of our mind, our thought. Yeah, that is another, I think, approach. And third is to go beyond this dichotomy of self and others or sense organs and object. I think that is the third approach. How can we go beyond this contact that is a source of all the problems, please?

[14:32]

When you say get rid of mind, in my understanding, our mind is a creation. It's not getting rid of mind. It's not create and recreate it. Not going to the front when we created. Not get rid of anything. Not to create. I'm sorry, I don't understand your point. No, it's coming to me that when you say get rid of, in my understanding, you don't know, because you get rid of something that is there. But most of our perception is not there. We create it. So it's not so much get rid of something that is there, but to stop creating, that judgment, to stop creating. Not to create, leave it as it is. You see what I mean? Hmm, maybe so. I think if you get rid of something, if you have to travel, but you only have to stop creating, maybe you know, it's different.

[15:43]

It's the same, but it's a different point of view easily, in my understanding. Could you say more? Part of the difference? in getting rid of how to create it, that when you talk about getting rid of, you have already created it and you are giving it such an entity that you say, this is it, this is me, this is mine. But when you don't create it, you stop before that, you only have not to create. So it's a different stage. Before creation and after creation. To get rid of what is already created. That is the meaning of get rid of. Jesus giving too much power to the mind is there. I believe we are creating and recreating it constantly. So it's stopping before creating it. Not just taking it as religion.

[16:45]

This is it, you know. And we need to get rid of it. But to say, can we stop creating this? I think that is what Buddha is saying. We stop creating our ego, how can I say, man-made picture of the world, our own mind, how can I say, idea based on the contact of present and unpleasant, and because of that, like and dislike. My point is when you say get rid of, it's not that you have to make an effort, and then it's something there. It's only the get rid of that I sort of, you know, or you don't like the word to get rid of, because we have to make effort. I think we have to make effort. I think.

[17:46]

I think. I'm not sure about this. I'm not sure about the meaning of the English word. Please. When you were talking, I was thinking that the effort made is actually one of letting go, and that my understanding like what you were talking about earlier, there is no one to control what's arising. But there is something about this clinging process that kind of reifies things, makes them solid, it gives them life. The effort actually is not so much getting rid of, something, and it's not, not creating something that you can't necessarily control what arises, there's this process of not clinging or letting go, you have to let it go and think it's naturally take their course, and you don't get caught up and, you know, cause a chain reaction of other things to happen. Does that make sense? I'm sorry, I'm not sure. Anyway, yes, please.

[18:53]

How can I fix? Okay, thank you. I forgot. It is perception, consciousness that is a source of all the basic obstacles.

[20:10]

And one, two, three more sections. Okay, let me read this. Another question. Sir, you have explained to us everything we have asked you about. There is one more question we'd like you to answer. For us, do you learn scholars of the world say that this is the highest purification of the individual being, or do they say that there is some other kind of goal? Buddha says, there are scholars and authorities, replied the Buddha, who say that this is the highest and the purification of the individual being. There are others who maintain that the highest purity is to be found in the complete eradication of the five components of the person.

[21:18]

That's in the five skandhas. And there is also the muni, what is muni? The wise man, muni maybe. Yeah, Muni. It's not Muni. Yeah, Muni in Shakyamuni. I was surprised. He has realized which things are dependencies, and he knows that these are only crutches and props. And when he has realized this, he has become free. He does not enter into argument, and so does not enter the round of endless becomings. What I wanted to say is, you know, these three approaches to kind of escape, not escape, avoid or go beyond the contact of self or sense organs and object or self and the world or media dharmas.

[22:47]

One is to kind of, how can I say? Let's see. Seeing without thinking. Seeing things with no mind. And another is... seeing that everything is only the mind or consciousness, consciousness only, so there's no object or myriad things. That is what the Yogacara taught. And I think third is, as I said, go beyond this dichotomy and embrace this as one thing, And I think that is what Nagarjuna tried to do.

[23:50]

He always bring up two things, two sides, dichotomies. And this one pair negate each other. And he negate both by negating both. He shows something beyond this dichotomy. I think Dogen is doing the same. Please. Could you tell us the name of the text that you're reading from again? This one? Sutta Nipata. Sutta, S-U-T-T-A. NYPATA, Nipata, Sutta, Nipata. This is very important sutra in Pali canons. No, it's separate.

[24:53]

It's part of the one, two, three, fourth Nikaya. Anyway, I'll go back to Dogen. Question? Please. Are you going to explain how this Suttanipata concept relates to what you're doing? Yeah, I think it has, what Buddha said is Suttanipata has something to do, what Dogen said about beyond or middle path between thinking and no thinking. That is, without ordinary perception, without mistaken or disordered perception, and without no perception, and without annihilation of perceptions. That is what I wanted to say, that is what we are doing nowadays. We have no ordinary perceptions.

[25:53]

by letting go. So there's no disordered perceptions. At least we don't take action based on our disordered perceptions. And we don't negate or alienate perceptions. So maybe third and fourth is the same thing. So we really just sit. Within this just sit, you know, we do what Buddha is saying. That is the state of being free from this contact and being free from like and dislike. That means preferences. So now, we go back to the water. This discussion about water, Dogen discussion about water, has also something to do with this going beyond dichotomies.

[26:59]

Paragraph, this is 17. Page 13, the first paragraph of Under the Dot said, water is neither strong nor weak, neither wet nor dry, neither moving nor still, neither cold nor hot, neither being nor non-being. Neither delusion nor enlightenment. Frozen, it harder than diamond. Who could break it? Melted, it is softer than milk. Who could break it? So Dogen is saying water is beyond these dichotomies.

[28:05]

So, what Dogen is discussing using this word water is the reality of our life beyond not only these particular dichotomies, but dichotomies of everything. So water has really no self-nature. It's changing in many ways. Sometimes it, you know, wet, of course. But sometimes it's very dry. You know, snow in Minneapolis was very dry. No wet, no wet at all. It's like a flower. Right? Yes, it is. And neither moving nor still. Sometimes move, sometimes don't move. And neither cold nor hot.

[29:09]

Water is sometimes cold, sometimes hot. Neither being nor non-being. This means form and emptiness. No self-nature. There's no such thing actually called water. And neither delusion nor enlightenment, of course. And this is not only about the water, but about ourselves. We are beyond these dichotomies. And next, this being the case, we cannot doubt the many virtues realized by water. We should study the occasion when the water of the ten directions is seen in the ten directions. This is not a study only of the time, when humans or gods see water. There is a study of water seeing water.

[30:13]

Water practices and verifies water. Hence, there is a study of water telling of water. We must bring to realization the road on which the self encounters the self. We must move back and forth along and spring off from the vital path on which the other studies and free comprehend the other. So he is saying, water is beyond these dichotomies. So also beyond the dichotomy of self and others, or self and all media dharmas, that's why water studied water.

[31:26]

and water as a metaphor for self? I think including self and object, both. Actually, he's discussing about the self which include self and others. One mind is all things, and all things is one mind. That is the self Dogen is discussing about. Please. I thought what I spoke could be everything. You could put everything in place of one. Oh, yes. So this is about the reality of all beings, all existence. Yes. That is what is said in the Lotus Sutra. So those, you know, wet or dry or soft or hard or being and non-being or being still and moving and enlightened and deluded, according to Dogen, are virtues realized by water.

[32:48]

So water has, you know, these virtues. same virtue as the mountain had. And we should study the occasion when the water of the ten directions is seen in the ten directions. That means we usually see something from my point of view, from this side. Otherwise, we cannot see. This is the source of dichotomy, source of separation between self and others. And among others, we separate something we want, something we don't want, something desirable, something not desirable, something valuable and something not valuable. And we want to get this side, and we try to push this side away. That's the way we create samsara. We try to be in that side alone.

[33:52]

And sometimes we are successful and we are happy, but more often we are not so successful, so we suffer. And we try to escape from something we don't want or we don't like or we think it's not valuable, so we try to escape. Even though we escape, they come somehow. So our life becomes chasing after something and escaping from something. And this creates samsara. Please. Is this when you could see interdependent arising at that moment? Like the ten-directional scene from the ten directions? Yeah, that is what Dogen is saying. When we see with karmic consciousness, that means this person is subject and things are object, then here is a contact and here is a preference.

[35:02]

But when 10 direction, water of 10 direction is seen in the 10 direction means not from this person's particular position, But this means, I think, there's no separation between sea, a person who is seeing, and the water which is seeing. That means water is seeing the water. Please. How is this different from ? Basically, same thing. Yeah. use the different word, but yeah, I think mountains and the waters are the same thing. Please. Not too far off the board. You know, you were talking about earlier the eye cannot see itself. Yeah, so this is a contradiction.

[36:04]

Yeah. Yes. It's just eye not seeing itself, something totally different, and this is something... Yes, yes. So I think what he's saying, when he said water is seeing water, that means, to me, that means that God saw. Means what? let go of thought, opening the hand of thought, we, of course, we see things only from my eye. And my eye cannot see my eye, so I cannot say self is seeing the self. But by letting go, you know, what I see doesn't, how can I say, doesn't form the view. It's just perception. Also like saying, wherever I look, I see myself. Right. That means the fact that we are seeing is myself. That kind of, that is what Toza meant with the word intimacy.

[37:10]

Intimacy means self and the object of the self are one thing. That means so when we let go of our view, our perception, then the self and all beings are one thing because actually from the beginning we are part of the universe, you know. only our perception or view or thinking, thought, arise from this contact or separation, and to separate things, contact, we create some view. And when we take action based on this view, then this person and all other things are separate. But when we let go, you know, actually, we are part of the world. We are part of the universe. We are just five scandals, same as all other things.

[38:14]

So we are really, actually, when we let go, we are really connected with all beings. That is what interdependent origination means. But we create separation by viewing things and forming things from this person's point of view. And please. Yeah, it's coming to me that it's not even our own view. Usually, the view that our parents, our culture, it's not usually anything between the set. In my view, it's very personal. Yeah. I think when we look at it, it's not so personal. We usually follow our parents, our culture, but it's not ours really. But I think that's our view. Our human view, our convention in human society, that is a view from not this person, but as a member of the human society.

[39:24]

Yeah. That is part of it, but that is not all we have. Buddha or Dogen doesn't necessarily speak about our personal view. you know we have some particular personal view different from other rest of people that is personal view individual view but also you know view as a human beings you know we think money is important in this society that is a view within this society that a convention that is a rule it's not a reality right So that's not my view, but the view from human point of view, human position. So that is, you know, same thing. To make the discussion simple, these are same thing.

[40:27]

Let's see if here we are. So he's saying we should, not we, but we should study the occasion when the water of the ten directions is seen in the ten directions, not from our personal or human point of view. And this is not a study only of the time when humans or God see water. So there's no separation between human point of view or God point of view and the things viewed. Therefore, he said, there is a study of water water seeing water. So here is a paradox. How water can see the water, as you said. And I think this means, maybe I said this morning, we are part of the universe, right?

[41:37]

And somehow we human beings start to think and start to view things but still we are part of the universe. So in a sense, our doing things and trying to understand things is, in a sense, the world. This universe is trying to understand the universe itself. So do you understand what I mean? That is what Dogen, I think Dogen is saying, water sees water. That means this universe sees the universe through human beings. But from human point of view, I see things. I see the universe and we separate as subject and the universe as object. But when

[42:39]

we go beyond or reality is already go beyond this dichotomy. So that means water being water, and human beings being human beings, and this entire universe being entire universe. That is a way, you know, the world see the world, water sees the water, and human beings see human beings. I think that's what he's saying. water practices and verifies water. Hence, there is a study of water, telling of water, so only water. No dichotomy between self and the water, or observer and the water as observed. That's how water practices and verifies the water.

[43:44]

And the self practices and verifies the self. And the entire world practices and verifies the world. And we must bring to realization the road on which the self encounters the self. We must move back and forth along and spring off from the vital path on which the other studies and free comprehend the other. So here he's saying there is a way we can comprehend ourselves and others can comprehend others. You know, by just sitting. You know, by letting go of any dichotomy or any thought.

[44:51]

You know, the self is just being the self. And the frog is just being a frog. And the wind is just being the wind. Water is just being the water. And this universe is just being the universe. That is the way we go beyond, go beyond even the Buddha. And this reality of going beyond is Buddha way. Do you have something to say? It's probably coming up. I know it's over, but anyway. What is the reason for transmission? That was Dogen's question, I think, when he was 15 years old, why we have to practice from teachers. And in order to understand why we have to study the teacher, he tried to find a teacher.

[45:54]

And I think this process of having a question and try to find the answer is a process of

[46:08]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_86.71