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

[01:24]

During this Genzo-e, we study Shobo Genzo, Shoakumakusa. SHO means all or many or various. And AK is evil or bad or unwholesome or whatever word, English word, you would like to use.

[02:25]

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

[03:40]

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

[04:48]

It said there are six Buddhas before Shakyamuni, and when we recite the names of Buddhas and ancestors in our tradition, we start Bebashi-butsu-daiyosho. That's the first of the seven Buddhas. Bebashi-butsu-daiyosho, Shiki-butsu-daiyosho, Bishagu-butsu-daiyosho, Kuroson-butsu-daiyosho, Kunagon-muni-butsu-daiyosho, and Shakyamuni-butsu-daiyosho. So, Shakyamuni-butsu was the last of the seven Buddhas. And this is not only in Zen tradition. Those names of past seven Buddhas, including Shakyamuni, appeared even in Parinikāya. Let's see. There is, in Pali, Sutra is Sutta.

[05:54]

There is a Sutta named Mahāpādāna Sutta in Dīga-Nikāya. Dīga-Nikāya is the long discourses of Buddha. The English translation of this name of Sutta is, The Great Discourse on the Lineage. And, in this Pali Nikāya, the names of seven Buddhas appear. And, of course, Vipassi Mutsu, Vipassi Buddha, is the first Buddha. And, in this story, it's kind of interesting, it describes the life and teachings of Vipassi Buddha. And that is almost exactly the same as Shakyamuni Buddha's biography.

[06:57]

And, this verse, appeared in the same sutra. In this translation, it said, not to do any evil, but cultivate the good, to purify one's mind. This the Buddha's teach. So, this verse is really old and also common in almost any Buddhist traditions. So this is really important teaching. And Dogen Zenji made his own comments on this very well-known verse. And this chapter, Shobo Genzo, Showa Kumakusa, has been considered to be one of the most difficult writings, our chapter in Shobo Genzo.

[08:07]

Dogen Zenji wrote this chapter in 1240. So Dogen Zenji was 40 years old. Probably you are familiar with Dogen Zenji's life, so I don't need to repeat his biography. But he established his own monastery, Koshoji, in 1233. And in the same year, he wrote Genjo Kōan and Makuhari Haramitsu in terms of Shōbō Genzō. And after that, until 1238, he didn't write any chapters of Shobo Genzo, because, I think, he focused on establishing his Sangha, I think.

[09:20]

So, during that period, he wrote more practical writings, such as Tenzo Kyokun and Gakudo Yojinshu. Kakudō Yōjinshi is a point to watch in practicing or studying the way. And he also wrote a manual of giving or receiving the precept. And in 1238, he wrote one chapter of Shōbō Genzō, entitled Ikka no Myōjū, that means, One Piece of Bright Pearl. So I think he felt he was ready to present a kind of philosophical teaching to his disciples. And so in 1238 he only wrote one chapter.

[10:25]

And 1239, he writes four chapters, but those four are not philosophical. One of them was called Jū-un-dō-shiki. This is not a shōbō-genzo, actually. This is a ruse of... Dōgen Zenji built a shōdō, a monk's hall, in 1236, and it seems within a few years, He had to build, what do you call it, an annex, the second building for monks. And this Jyūundōshiki is now regulation, or rules, for the monks who live in that building.

[11:38]

So it's not really a shobō genzō. And the other three is washing face. And, what is senjoro? I don't know. This is a description of how to use toilet. So these are not philosophical. And only one philosophical writing written in 1239 was Sokushinzebutsu. Sokushinzebutsu is The mind is itself Buddha. This is rather short writing. And in this year, 1240, I think he started to focus on writing Shobo Genzo. He wrote six chapters of Shobo Genzo.

[12:39]

I mean, not four, six. And those six are, I think, really important chapters. In April, he wrote Keisei Sanshoku. The date is April 20. April 20, he wrote Keisei Sanshoku. That is, Sound of Valley Stream and Colors of Mountains. I think we studied Keisei Sanshoku last year here. On August 15th, he wrote this one, Shōwaku Makusa. And October 1st, he wrote Uji, Being and Time.

[13:49]

Being, Time. And it's kind of interesting, on the same day, he wrote, same day he wrote Denne. Denne. Then, ne, that means transmission of love. This is writing about okesa. And later, this zenne is kind of rewritten and changed the title as kesakudoku. So the date of Kesakuroku is the same as the date he wrote Denmei. That means he wrote Denmei and Kesakuroku and Uji on the same day.

[14:52]

And I don't think it's possible. Maybe he has been written and kind of publicized on this day. And October 18th, he wrote San Sui Kyo. San Sui Kyo is Mountains and Water Sutra. I studied San Sui Kyo at San Francisco Zen Center. I had the first Genzo-e retreat in San Francisco. And in, I think in November, it said the day before the winter solstice, he wrote Raihai Tokuzui. Raihai Tokuzui is attaining or gaining the merit through or by making prostration.

[16:04]

Those six chapters of Shobo Genzo are, I think, really important. So I have been trying to study those chapters. And these become the kind of foundation of the later writings, I think, in Shobo Genzo. And in 1241, He wrote 10 volumes of Shobo Genzo, and 42, 16, and 43. 1243, this is the year he moved from Kyoto, from Koshoji to Echizen, to found Eheiji. In this year, he wrote 26. chapters of Shogun Genzo.

[17:09]

And 1244, 12 volumes. And 1245, he wrote only 5 volumes. And 1246, only 2. So Shobo Genzo was basically written between 38 to 46. And 40 is actually the year he really focused on writing Shobo Genzo. Probably after 1246, he worked on editing and compiling the Shobo games. Until then, he just written independent short writings, one by one. But after 1946, he wanted to make one kind of a collection entitled Shobo Genzo.

[18:23]

Before that, those were not called Shobo Genzo, I think. So, I think this Showa Komakusa is one of the very important writings of Shobo Genzo, and also to understand Bogenzen's teachings as a whole. This is about, you know, good and bad. And, going beyond good and bad. This chapter is really difficult. Dogen's comment on this verse is not really difficult.

[19:24]

This is really simple. I made a handout of the six translations of this verse. Do you have this handout? So, first, today, this morning, I would like to... Don't you have that? Okay, please. So, this morning, I'd like to talk on this first. This is a very simple path, and yet it's really difficult to really understand what this means in the entire system of Buddhist teachings.

[20:27]

What this means is really kind of complicated. In this handout, there are six translations. And the meaning is not different at all. But each translator uses a little different word for good and bad. In Chinese, the first line is AKU, MAKU, SA.

[21:34]

And second is SHU, ZEN, BU, RYO. Third is JI, JYO, GO, I. ze so bu kyo ma ku sa shu zen bu kyo The first line, shokumaksa, in my translation, is not doing.

[22:46]

Not doing. Mak is not. Sai is doing, and Sho acts as any evil. Sho makes acts as plural. And Būgyō is to do or carry out or practice. And Bū, what is Bū in English? In the robe chant, hi-bu-nyo-rai-kyo, that same bu, this bu means respectfully something like, respectfully do something. Or humbly, respectfully do something. But usually we don't translate this bu, just translate as do or practice or carry out. Everything good or all good. So this shu also makes zen as plural.

[23:51]

So this aku and zen, or evil and good, are plural. So these are not abstract nouns. These are actual activities. And ji is self. Another possible meaning is natural or of itself. And jo is to be pure or purified. And go is it. Means the self, purified self is thought or mind. And these three, this is, the show is all Buddha's teaching. Usually, we read this Chinese verse as a, how can I say, imperative.

[25:04]

That means, do not, do not do anything evil. And do, or carry out, everything good, and purify your mind. This is the teaching of all Buddhas. So, you know, this is a kind of admonition or request from all Buddhas to us, to deluded human beings. But, from, according to the Pali scholars, In Pali, this is not imperative. That's why when we read these translations, except two of them. One is the first one, and second is second from the last. One, two, three, four, fifth one.

[26:07]

Only two of them are translated as imperative, that means request, or asking, or commandment. You should not do bad, and you should do good, and you should purify your mind. This is a kind of a teaching of the Buddhas. But, according to Pali scholars, verse is not imperative. So, in other 1, 2, 3, 4 translations translate this as noun. For example, in the second translation it says, Abstention from all evil, the doing of good deeds, and the purification of the mind, is the admonition, I don't like the word admonition here, of the enlightened ones.

[27:12]

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

[28:16]

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

[29:20]

And this is also important to understand our precept. I mean, Dogen Zenji called the precept we received, the 16th precept, as the precept that has been transmitted through Buddhas and ancestors. So those precepts are That's sixteen aspects of awakening. It's not a matter of you should not do. You should not do that. The correction of should do and should not do. I mean, the Vinaya precept is a correction of should and should not. Vinaya precept, as I... talk when I give a precept.

[30:25]

You know, a precept is a kind of a correction of Buddhist mistakes. That means Buddha didn't make any precept or regulation or rules until his students or disciples made mistakes. Then someone made some mistakes, Buddha said, you should not do such a thing again. And the collection of those admonitions became a precept. The Mahayana precept, or so-called Bodhisattva precept, is a different idea. Donmo-kyo or Brahma-neksutra, Mahayana precept or Bodhisattva precept is established when Buddha was sitting under the Bodhi tree and attained Buddhahood.

[31:31]

So, this 16th Mahayana precept was established then Buddha, within Buddha's awakening, it's not a matter of Buddha's admonition to the people who made mistakes, and you should not do that again. So, these 16 aspects of Buddha's awakening, or awakening to the reality of all beings, that means 16 aspects of reality of all beings, And that has been all Buddhas and Bodhisattvas have been practicing and living. That's the difference between the very basic idea between Vinaya precept and Mahayana or Bodhisattva precept.

[32:35]

And to understand as a teaching of bodhisattva precept, I mean, to understand this verse, not to translate as an imperative, I think is important, although that is different. from the common understanding in Buddhist tradition and influenced by Chinese translation. So Dogen Zenji's interpretation of this verse is kind of unique or different from common understanding in East Asian Buddhist countries. And for Dogen Zenji, do not do any evil.

[33:49]

This do not do is really important. He used makusa in completely different meaning. Makusa is not doing. And he used this expression, not doing, as same as, you know, letting go of thought. Do nothing. Or non-doing. That is same as Mu'i. means no human activity, depending upon human desire or the idea of reaching some goal.

[34:51]

Not doing is another meaning of nirvana. So, not doing of any evil, is not a prohibition of doing evil, but this is a description of how Buddha lived. Next, I'd like to talk about teachings of good and bad, and also going beyond good and bad. I always discuss about this point when I talk about precept.

[35:56]

Because precept is something, not something to do, but it is about good and bad, about ethics, what we should do, what we should not do. And yet, as I said, not a goal, but how can I say, what Buddha taught is going beyond being free from good and bad. What's the connection or relationship between the teaching of good and bad and not do bad or evil and do good? And we should go beyond good and bad. Discrimination or relativity or dichotomy of good and bad is really important in any tradition of Buddhism. And this is kind of contradicted.

[36:59]

You know, we should do good things and we should not do bad or evil things. And this is really important teaching, of course. And yet, Buddha also taught we should go beyond the distinction or discrimination between good and bad. These two are really important teachings, but it seems contradicted. You know, in the middle of the 1980s, there were so many problems happening, not only in Zen centers, but in almost all Buddhist centers in this country. And some people, because of those things, so-called scandals, happened in the middle of the 80s.

[38:07]

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

[39:12]

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

[40:17]

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

[41:21]

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

[42:29]

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

[43:34]

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

[44:43]

And I really admire those people who didn't hide those mistakes, but recorded. and try not to repeat the same mistakes again. So, I think it's really important and interesting. But somehow, I don't like that kind of teaching. Probably because I was a Japanese. So, you know, to me, the idea of Mahayana precept, That is not a prohibition but rather aspect of awakening or reality of all beings. So it's not a kind of a order or a commandment from Buddha. And we have to be kind of a judge depending upon our activity.

[45:47]

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

[46:58]

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

[48:13]

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

[49:16]

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

[50:27]

Let him not find pleasure in his sin, S-I-N. Painful is the accumulation of wrongdoings. And 118 is, if a man does something good, let him do it again and again. Let him find joy in his good work. Joyful is the accumulation of good work. So doing good brings about joy or joyful life. So good and bad has something to do with action and its result or effect. And next one is verse 119 and 120. A man may find pleasure in evil as long as his evil has not given fruit.

[51:42]

Given fruit means the result is happened. But when the fruit of evil comes, then that man finds evil indeed. A man may find pleasure in evil, as long as his evil has not given fruit. But when the fruit of evil comes, then that man finds evil indeed. A man may find pain in doing good, as long as his good has not given fruit. But when the fruit of good comes, then that man finds good indeed. So, good and bad is within the cause and result, action and its result.

[52:55]

Next one is 1 and 122. Hold not a sin of little worth, thinking this is little to me. The falling of drops of water, will, in time, fill a water jar. Even so, the foolish man becomes full of evil, although he gathers it little by little. 122. Hold not a deed of little worth, thinking this is little to me. The falling of drops of water will, in time, fill a water jar. Even so, the wise man becomes full of good, although he gathers it little by little.

[54:00]

There are many more, but, you know, This is really important teaching of Buddha. Do not evil and do good. Otherwise our life becomes suffering. Evil deed brings about the result of suffering. So cause and result is the causality, is the basis of Buddhist ethics. You know, evil action bring about painful result, and good action bring about, that is oppositional painful. Jukka asuka. Joyful. This is a teaching.

[55:08]

Buddhas, about good and bad. That means, because evil action creates samsara, and we need to go to the hell and experience pain, so we should not do good, bad or evil thing. But good action brings about a joyful result. and we can be born in heaven. So we should practice good things. That is the teaching about good and bad. But we, in the same Dharmapada, we can find a teaching that we should go beyond good and bad. This is verse 126 of Dharmapada. said, some people are born on this earth.

[56:19]

Those who do evil are reborn in hell. The righteous go to heaven, but those who are pure reach nirvana. Do you understand? then we will be born in the hell. And if we do good things, we will be born in the heaven. But those who are pure, that is the same as in the third line of the verse, if we are pure, we reach nirvana. That means nirvana is beyond good and bad. or beyond the six realms of samsara. So, do good and be born in the heaven and not do evil and do good in order to be born in the heaven is not the goal of Buddhist practice.

[57:36]

That's not all about Buddhist teaching. But our goal is being free or liberated from that transmigration within samsara. Samsara is a world, you know, we up and down, depending upon our actions, whether we do good things, we go up to the heaven. And if we do evil things, we go down to the hell. This is the teaching of good and bad. And yet, in this verse, it says, if our mind is pure, we become free from this transmigration. And that being free from transmigration is nirvana.

[58:40]

So doing good and not doing evil is not the entire teaching of Buddha. But we should go beyond good and bad and enter nirvana. That is the Buddha's teaching. So, the first two lines of that verse Dogen's comment is about good and bad. And the third line, purify your mind, is about going beyond good and bad, that is, going to nirvana, or so-called enlightenment, being free from samsara. So, in this good and evil, dichotomy. And we should go beyond good and evil.

[59:43]

That is the way we purify our mind. Then we can be, not born, but we stop, we quit transmigration, and we enter nirvana. This is basic teaching of Buddha. And we can find same teaching in the Mahabharata. For example, verse 39. It said, But he whose mind in calm, in calm self-control, is free from the lust, l-u-s-t, lust of desires, who has risen above good and evil. Risen? Risen.

[60:45]

Who has risen above good and evil. That means go beyond good and evil. He is awake and has no fear. So if we go beyond good and evil, we have no fear. And we can awake to the reality of all beings. And verse 267 says, But he who is above good and evil, who lives in chastity and goes through life in meditation or practice, he in truth is called a bhikkhu. So, monks should be above or go beyond good and evil. And, verse 412 says, He who in this world has gone beyond good and evil, and both, who free from sorrows,

[62:06]

is free from passions and is pure. Him I call a Brahmin. Brahmin is also a religious practitioner. And verse 520, a holy man is a man. Holy man is a translation of Shuramana. That is a religious practitioner. is a man who has claimed himself, is a man who has abandoned merit and demerit. This merit and demerit is good and evil actions. Knowing this world and the other, He is dustless and has overcome birth and death. Birth and death also means samsara.

[63:09]

So, you know, in Dharmapada we find two different kinds of teachings. One is we should do good and we should not do evil. And another is we should go beyond good and evil. And we somehow... I mean, as a traditional interpretation of these two sets of teachings is, you know, the teaching of good and bad is taught to laypeople, and going beyond good and bad, and Purify One's Mind is a teaching for monks. That is a traditional understanding of these two sets of teachings.

[64:24]

As a laypeople, Buddha taught, you should not do evil, you should do good, and then you can be born in heaven. And if you do evil things, you need to be born in hell. We should do good things and we should not do evil things. And this is not a unique teaching in Buddhism. This is almost a common understanding in Indian society at that time of Buddha. If we do good things, we will be born in the heaven within samsara. And if we do bad things, we will be born in the hell. So we should do good things and not do bad things or evil things. This is really a kind of a basis of ethics or social morals in Indian society.

[65:28]

So this is not at all a unique teaching of Buddhism. But Buddha taught to his monks that they should go beyond good and bad and liberated from samsara and enter nirvana. And this was possible only by monks. So in the early Buddhism, this is really clear. You know, the lay Buddhist practice and the monks are different. The goal is different. You know, for lay people, to do good things and not do bad things, evil things, and be born in the heaven is a teaching. And for monks, they should go beyond good and bad, purify their mind.

[66:30]

Don't worry. and Nirvana is the teaching of Buddha. And these two sets of teachings was not a problem in the early Buddhism. But in Mahayana Buddhism, you know, established. These two sets of teachings are the problem. Because in Mahayana, there's no such distinction between lay practitioners and monks. They are both called bodhisattvas. That means both lay people and monks are children of Buddha. So, if the, you know, destination of two different groups are different, then that's a problem.

[67:44]

According to Mahayana teaching, both lay practitioners and monks should go to Buddhahood. That's what the sattva means. lay practitioners or monks, we are Buddha's children. So, if we practice following Buddha's teachings, we all become Buddha. So, the goal should be the same. So, only monks can enter nirvana. It's kind of a strange problem. So, in that case, how can we integrate these two sets of teachings is a very important point in Mahayana Buddhism. And another point of these two is kind of a

[68:52]

other side, another side, opposite side of the teaching of good and bad, or evil, and another side of teaching of going beyond good and evil. That means the teaching of good and evil can become a kind of, you know, moralism. You know, very clear distinction. You are good. You are bad. If you, in the case of Buddhist practitioners, if you keep the precept, you are a good Buddhist. Otherwise, you are bad, and you need to go to hell. This kind of judgment. There's no kind of revelation if we cling to good and evil. we easily become kind of judgmental to ourselves and to other people.

[69:59]

If I keep the so-called precept, then I feel I'm okay, I'm a right person, I'm a good person. And when we see someone who doesn't follow the same precept, I think, this is not a good person, this is bad. or when we meet with people who are not Buddhist and do have some different system of, you know, moral code, then we think they are bad. You know, people within this circle is good. And outside of this circle, they are all bad people. You know, this kind of discrimination and judgment you know, arise from clinging to the idea of good and bad. In each community, or each religion, or each culture, there's a certain fixed system of good and evil.

[71:05]

And if we encounter someone who has a different system, then we think we have a problem, and we think they are bad. And sometimes, in extreme situations, we feel they should be eliminated. To, you know, fight against them is a reason of life. It's a good thing. That's the way, you know, we can justify, you know, attacking others. And that is one of the, I think, main cause of fighting war. And the other side of that teaching of going beyond good and bad is... What is the word? I cannot remember this word in English. Antinomianism.

[72:08]

Do you know this word? Do you know this word? No one knows? Wow, interesting. Well, according to the English dictionary, the definition of this is One who maintains that this is an antinomian. One who maintains that Christians are freed from the moral law by virtue of grace as set forth in the Gospel. Or a believer in the doctrine that faith alone, not obedience to the moral law,

[73:10]

is necessary for salvation. That means good and bad is not necessary, but only if I have faith in God. Because the power of God is beyond good and evil. So we can be saved and be born in the paradise. So our effort to do good and our effort not to do bad is not important at all. that have faith in God's love, help us. This is in Christianity, but same idea existed in Buddhism. For example, Nagarjuna said, the teaching of emptiness, is medicine to the people who cling to forms.

[74:16]

That means good and evil, include good and evil. But if, Nagarjuna says, if someone cling to the emptiness, there's no such medicine to help this person. I mean, sickness of emptiness means there's nothing good, nothing bad. Everything is OK. If we interpret emptiness in that way, or, you know, there's no one who is killing, and nothing is killed. So there's no such thing, you know, called killing. If we... sometimes, you know, Mahāyāna precept is interpreted in that way. That is a misuse of idea or teaching of emptiness. Nothing exists. No one kills. Nothing can be killed. That is another Buddhist form of antinomianism. In Pure Land Buddhism also, at the time of Dogen, in Japan, teaching of Pure Land Buddhism became really popular.

[75:37]

One of the leaders of Pure Land Buddhism, called Shinran, said that the basic teaching of Pure Land Buddhism is that Amitabha Buddha, when he was born Sattva, he took 48 vows. And one of the 48 vows was, Unless I save all living beings, I will not become Buddha. It is the same as, you know, our Bodhisattva vow. And it said Amitabha, that Bodhisattva became Amitabha Buddha. That means this vow was already fulfilled. That's why this Bodhisattva becomes Amitābha Buddha, and Amitābha Buddha has now a pure land, Buddha's land, in the West.

[76:43]

So, his vow was already completed. Only if we have a face in his vow, and the expression of this face is Namo Amida Butsu, means, I take refuge in Amitābha Buddha. will be saved and be born in the Pure Land, not in samsara. Pure Land is nirvana. So only by the faith, through the faith in Amitabha Buddha's vow of salvation, we can be saved and be born in Pure Land. And their kind of basic idea is This world, in that age, that means 12th, 13th century in Japan, was very degenerated and lived in the last dharma.

[77:48]

Age of last dharma means no one could attain enlightenment. With teaching, practice and enlightenment, In the first 500 years of Buddhist history, people, all three, exist. They are teaching, practice, and enlightenment. And in the second 500 years, only teaching and practice exist. No one attained enlightenment. And at the final, last age, Only teaching exists. No one practices and no one attains enlightenment. That was the idea of three times. So, the idea is, it's no use to practice in order to attain enlightenment or become eternal Nirvana with our personal effort.

[78:49]

So, only possibility is we have faith in Amitābha's power of salvation. Then we can be born in Buddha's land. This world is too bad to practice anything. And it doesn't make sense. But Buddha's land, pure land, is like a practice center. It's better. And people can practice there. under the Enlightenment. That is a basic teaching of Pure Land Buddhism. And Shinran said this teaching is established for the sake of bad people. And some people kind of are

[79:52]

How can I say? Misuse or take advantage of this teaching as, you know, it's not a matter to do bad things. Because Amitabha's vow is beyond good and bad. So, when we die, we say, Namo Amitabha Tsu, we can be born in Pure Land, and we can practice there. So, whether doing evil things in this world or not, doesn't make any difference. That is a kind of a misunderstanding of Shindran's teaching. But those things can happen. And even in Zen, that kind of idea, you know, Good and evil don't matter if we really do things wholeheartedly, within samadhi. If we don't make distinction between self and others, there is no one who is killing and no one who is killed.

[81:04]

That kind of idea is possible. So, in any tradition of Buddhism, to find the middle way between moralism, the extreme clinging to good and evil, and antinomianism, that is, kind of extreme misunderstanding of teaching of going beyond good and evil. is the point. How can we find a miserable way? That means we are not humbly cling to good and evil. We are not so judgmental. And yet, we should do good. And we should avoid evil. And go beyond good and evil. And yet, even though we go beyond good and evil, we should practice good and we should avoid evil.

[82:10]

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

[83:14]

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

[84:19]

Any questions? Please. The relative ethics he taught to lay people come from his awakening of throwing away good and bad. And also the Vinaya, are those, because if he's teaching monk's Vinaya, then what is the purpose of that Vinaya? It's not to go to heaven, is it? The purpose of Vinaya? The purpose of Vinaya is going to nirvana, I think. But this is a very interesting point. To the people, to the monks, whose goal should be going to nirvana, Buddha requests to keep all those ethical codes.

[85:40]

In the case of Buddha, Buddha's teaching, going beyond should be really going beyond. But if we cling to another side of going beyond, it's not really going beyond, but going below. I think. Going below good and bad. This is a very important point. I think. And, oh, another point is inserting sutra. Oh, that is Nirvana Sutra, Pali Nirvana Sutra. Right before Buddha's death, a person whose name was Subhadra became the last disciple of Buddha. And to that person, Buddha said, I left home something like 50 years ago, or I think I was 29.

[86:55]

I left home because I... What is the word? I seek... I seek the good. And in the English translation, the good is a capital. Good. I think this means going beyond good and evil is good beyond good and evil. And that is nirvana. So these two, even in the early Buddhism, these two sides can be integrated, I think. And how is it possible is, I think, an important point.

[87:58]

Within this good, the teaching of doing good and not doing evil should be included. And that is, how can I say, nirvana. That means nirvana is not separate from samsara. This is a fact. Mahayana Buddhists taught samsara and nirvana are one. That means within nirvana, samsara is included. or within samsara, nirvana can be found. And, you know, as I often say, We take, you know, four Bodhisattva vows. And the first vow is, although sentient beings are numberless, we vow to save them.

[89:05]

This save them means save them all. That means we save means to ferry all living beings from Sansara to Nirvana. You know, there is a big river between Sansara and Nirvana, and this is called this shore and the other shore. And the word save is a translation to ferry, to get across this river. So the meaning of this first vow, sentient beings are numberless, I vow to save them, means Bodhisattva is like a person who ferries the boat between this shore and the other shore, and helps living beings within samsara go nirvana, enter nirvana.

[90:13]

And that vow means, I will not stay here in nirvana until all people, all living beings in this shore, move to this shore. That is the meaning of the first vow. Sentient beings and living beings are numberless. We vow to save them. That is Bodhisattva vow. If we are all bodhisattvas, all bodhisattvas working to ferry other people and vow, I will not enter nirvana until all others enter nirvana. That means, if all people are bodhisattvas, there's no one in nirvana. All people are working between samsara and nirvana to help each other and ask, you know, go ahead.

[91:15]

That means bodhisattva is a person who vows not to enter nirvana and working within samsara to help others. That means samsara and nirvana... That means bodhisattva is a person who, how can I say, creates nirvana within samsara. That is the basic teaching of samsara and nirvana are one. And within this practice, to help others, we can find nirvana. I think that is a very important part of Mahayana teaching. So, as a bodhisattva practice, entering nirvana is not a goal. But continue to work endlessly, continue to practice within samsara, to help others, is the goal.

[92:24]

So, and, Mahayana Buddhists think we can find nirvana within that kind of practice. And that is called, uh, mujusho mehan. Mujusho means Mu is no. Dzogchen is a place to stay or dwell. So, no dwelling. No dwelling nirvana. Because of wisdom, Bodhisattva does not stay in samsara. And yet, because of compassion, Bodhisattva never leaves samsara. So bodhisattva has no place to stay, to dwell, or freely move around anywhere.

[93:27]

That is bodhisattva vow. And that is called muju-shonhe-han, nirvana without any place to dwell. Muju-sho. Neihan. Neihan is Nirvana. And Dogen, when Dogen discussed about, you know, this verse of doing good and not doing evil and purify your mind, he tried to show us how we can, how we practice with that attitude. being free from both sides, dwelling nowhere, and practice doing good and not doing evil, and even though we do good and we don't do evil, still we are free from distinction or discrimination between good and evil.

[94:42]

How such a thing is possible? Well, is this answer to your question? So are you saying we cannot practice going beyond good and bad unless we're trying to be good and help people? Right. Yes. Please. Who was it you were referring to who left home to do the good, the capital G? Well, that reminds me of the book by Soren Kierkegaard called Purity of Heart is the Will of One Thing. Anybody familiar with that book? Anyway, he's a Christian, and he was referred to as an existentialist Christian. But anyway, so his whole book is about purity of heart is the will of one thing and how you will one thing. And the one thing that he's talking about willing is the good with a capital G.

[95:43]

And all those chapters are about things that interfere with this being one thing. For instance, if you're willing the good for the sake of reward, like heaven, then it's no longer pure because it's no longer one thing. You need to will the good for the sake of itself, not for what you get. Anyway, when you said with a capital G, that made me think of that. It's similar. Oh, that's interesting. OK, any questions? Thank you very much.

[96:21]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ