So I think that this will be the last session for these two days. And so if you have some... You're not happy with that idea? No, not really. Well, maybe this will be a very long session. Well, let's see what happens. If there's a popular resistance, I'm always a soft touch. But anyway, let's have some conversations. Or observations, etc. Because that creates the sensation that what I said might be useful.

[01:02]

I wanted to make a comment about the lineage. I wanted to make a comment about the lineage. Okay. And I found it interesting that you said, on the one hand, the beliefs will be kept and not deleted, in the sense of removed, And I thought it was interesting how you said that the vows are held and not exactly destroyed. We have this German word, wir legen die Gelöbnisse ab, und das könnte man auch meinen, wir legen sie weg. And in German, the way it's in German oftentimes translated is that the vows are being put aside. In the sense that when you receive them, as if that's the time when you're also, you know, leaving them where they are, putting them down or something. Oh, the cop-out. Cop-out? You know what cop-out means?

[02:31]

Cop-out. Well, the minister who says... Well, I'm ordained, God has authorized me, and now I can forget about the whole thing because I'm ordained. That's a cop-out. Because I use environmentally friendly soap, I'm responsible. But global warming. That's a cop. That holding the precepts leads to something like a lineage. And in this way, the personal narrative becomes a wisdom narrative, something like this.

[03:41]

I experience this more and more than the physical. And when I embody that, dann erlebe ich es mehr und mehr als die Vorfahren der Lehrlinge in meinem Rücken. And I experience it more and more as the ancestors of the lineage are in my back, behind me. Körperlich stehst du in meinem Rücken, Suzuki Roshi und sein Lehrer und so weiter. that physically you are standing behind me in my diamonds. Yeah, I can't see anything. Yeah, and I can't see anything back there. And Suzuki Roshi and his team fans.

[04:42]

And Suzuki Roshi can't see anything. And Suzuki Roshi can't see anything either. In that direction, that's actually not true. This comment wasn't intended to go into this direction. My understanding so far has been as a support. And it manifested as a bodily support and not as a thought, as a support that comes through thinking about it. And a few years ago that really surprised me to perceive this as a bodily lineage and transmission lineage. Okay, and of course with other people who've taken the bloodline precepts, who've taken the precepts.

[06:04]

And who've embodied the field of precepts. which basically means don't harm all of them. You feel this Sangha body evolved through the precepts, mutually evolved through the precepts. But each person you meet You're holding the precepts, which can be understood as weaving the precepts into your daily actions and activity. And each person you meet, you treat them as if they've also taken the precepts, or secretly taken them, or wanted to take them if they knew about them.

[07:07]

And that widens the bodily field. Thank you, Gerard. You haven't said anything yet. Yes. I don't know. I'm just listening. I'm just listening too. So there. But I wanted to listen to you. Yes. Back in the corner. What is your name? Marco. Marco. Hi, Marco. I'm still dealing with the topic of the Vedas. I'm still wondering about the topic of weaving.

[08:20]

Weaving? Weaving. Weaving our mystery. Yeah. . I'm wondering how you see this. If besides the personal narrative, the stream of the personal narrative, if there's something like a deeper layer to it that opens through the gap. Is it closed now? And whether it's important to have some body-mind feeling for that.

[09:24]

Give me a hint about what you mean by a deeper layer. We are fulfilling our task We are doing something in the real world And the sense of sense of approaching some original, the essential being, or to become that original being. Okay, becoming more. Yeah. Well, I think that you're pointing to something that's real or actual. Also, I think you're pointing to something that's real or actual.

[10:28]

Yeah, but I think we have to be careful with what we really mean or what we're naming. Because if you mean something approaching fate or some inherent nature, That may be, yeah, somewhat true. But in Buddhist thinking, it's considered to be a kind of cop-out. Because once this is a generalized attitude, then you don't put so much emphasis into the embodiment of the 3,000 coherences. Weil wenn das eine Art verallgemeinerte Einstellung ist, dann betonst du so ein Konzept wie die 3000 Überlappungen oder Kohärenzen auf einmal nicht mehr so sehr.

[12:01]

And I'm not saying this is you, I'm just talking about the idea you brought up. Und ich sage nicht, dass das auf dich zutrifft, sondern einfach nur dieses Verständnis, das du da ansprichst. So we then tend to think, well, this is me, I'm this kind of person. So that's why I do such and such. Well, of course, that's partly true. But it's a detrimental way of thinking. Now, if you think of this as an innermost request, what's meant by an innermost request? A phrase Suzuki Roshi used very often. Yeah, it's interesting how words have filaments.

[13:19]

Filaments? That reach out in all directions and locate itself in a context of words. Another word says almost the same thing, but its filaments are different. There's no... Two of the... You have dictums. Dictums of Buddhism are there's no inherency and there's no permanence. Nothing is... and nothing is guided only or entirely by inherent inherency.

[14:39]

If you plant an oak in the oak, is the oak tree in the oak seed? Well, an oak tree doesn't turn into a willow, that's true. But if you plant an oak tree in New Mexico or in the high desert, it ain't going to be the same oak trees here in Germany where most of the water of the world turns into trees. But on the other hand, if you plant an oak in New Mexico or in the desert, then the resulting oak will not be the same as, for example, if you plant it here in Germany, where a large part of the world's water has turned into trees here in Germany. I mean, in Germany it's just water-filled air called forests.

[15:59]

If you don't do anything to that vacant lot, it turns into trees. They like that in New Mexico, I'll tell you. So it's not whether what is exactly true here. But what's the most useful view? For example, was there a creative moment where everything began? Zum Beispiel gab es einen Schöpfungsmoment, an dem alles begann. That's unthinkable. Das ist unvorstellbar. Was is everything always existed and just continues and continues in all dimensions?

[17:01]

That's unthinkable, but it's the better choice. Oder hat alles immer existiert und breitet sich fortwährend in allen Dimensionen weiterhin aus? Das ist auch unvorstellbar, aber es ist die bessere Wahl. So the innermost request is not who you are, but who you want to be. So the innermost request in this sense of Buddhism is sort of like it joins the precepts as a precept. If you ask yourself a simple question, what kind of person do I really wish exists on this planet? Welche Art von Mensch wünsche ich mir wirklich, dass er oder sie auf diesem Planeten existiert?

[18:05]

Welche Art von Lehrer oder welche Art von Mensch, was wünsche ich mir, wie Menschen sein sollen? Wie wünsche ich mir die Menschen? However you answer that, that's your innermost request. And once you say, I really wish that kind of person existed, I wish I'd found one in high school like that, well, then you should become that person. inner most request may have a lot of acorns in it, but it really depends where you plant it. And how you plant it and with whom you plant it. I hope what I've said at least moves in the direction of what you asked. Marco.

[19:05]

You are. Any other conversationalists here? Oh, yeah, there's a big one there. Reinhard. Ich will nicht immer der Avocados Diarios spielen, denn ich merke ja, dass die Praxis auch wird. I don't always want to be the devil's advocate, because I am noticing that practice also works. If you don't always want to be the devil advocate, why are you so often?

[20:06]

You devil you. I'm just teasing you. I have so much compassion with the ordinary daily mind. This is good. We spoke yesterday about Trump. You call that the ordinary day? No. I think that is. But I think it began with Reagan. He said... Fuck for the facts, somehow. So we spoke about Trump yesterday, but I think we could also say it started with Reagan, who said, fuck the facts, or something like that.

[21:15]

Yeah, he said, if you've seen his environmental statement, if you've seen one redwood tree, you've seen them all. Let's cut the rest of them down. So we can look at it with a sense of that that's not good. But I think there's also something good about it. Okay. I also think that you said something similar, in which you spoke of the fact that we, when we practice the practice, in the way of the Dodo Zen, of the Bawang Zen, just sitting in order to locate ourselves in the spine, You spoke about if we embody that with locating ourselves through the spine as in Soto Zen and Pharma Zen, or something?

[22:17]

I mean Pharma Zen. And we don't worry about the circumstances. He thinks that's devilish. Yeah, go ahead. Sorry to interrupt. Don't take care of the circumstances. But just locate ourselves in the location, in that location. Stabilize ourselves through the spine, yeah. Wir kümmern uns also dann nicht um die augenscheinlichen Missgefühle, die wir eventuell haben, die uns als Fakten erscheinen.

[23:24]

So then we don't worry about the obvious bad feelings that we have that may seem to us as if they were facts. Then we are ignoring, in a sense, part of what we are perceiving. And what's important for me to find out is when we speak about this locating ourselves in the spine. And we are bringing mindfulness there and we are doing that as a conscious act. And then this mystery may occur that we end up outside of consciousness.

[24:26]

And that this being outside of consciousness, that's something I really can't quite feel. For me, it seems more like it's within consciousness, but at a very hidden place. Well, it just depends how you want to define it. Of course, even in samadhi, where there's only the field of mind with no content, if we take a strong samadhi, There's a corner where you know that your usual way of looking at things. Since you're a mathematician, I knew many years ago a friend who was working on a a problem, a pure math problem.

[25:53]

He was getting his Ph.D. in that. And he had to keep getting as much information as he knew about the question, but letting some other process work on it. And that other process is, we did say, is outside of consciousness. Paul O'Leary, he spent five years trying to solve a mathematical engineering problem with a friend, and they won some prize because it took them five years to come up with it.

[27:05]

It changed the way some kind of mathematical engineering problem is solved. But five years they worked on it. And Paul O'Leary, for those of us who know him, he worked for five years with a friend on a mathematical engineering problem. It took five years, but then they finally solved it and it influenced the whole way in which problems or tasks are solved in this special area. But I agree with you that this practice isn't meant to cut you off from the feeling and connectedness with people just in the most ordinary circumstances. In fact, I think my experience increases it.

[28:06]

Anyone else? Someone else? Yes, Ellen? I would like to say two things. I would like to say two things. Number one, I'd like to reach back into my narrative history. And the second aspect, I'd like to say something about face to face. The story happened when I was 8 years old and I stood at the fence with my siblings and the fence was shaking.

[29:14]

And since it was Easter, I was dressed very nicely, particularly nicely. And at the time, washing machines and so forth weren't so commonplace. So this was really a special, special moment. That your clothes were clean was special. Und wir stehen da und wir sind Kinder und wir hören nicht auf, an diesem Zaun zu wackeln, bis der Zaun nachgibt, umfällt und dann ging es einen Hang hinab in ein Bach. And so we were children and standing there and we kept shaking the fence until it finally came down. And the landscape was such that then it went strongly downhill into a creek. And then comes the story that you just told with Einstein, who then says, what happens when I fall?

[30:35]

Then I don't feel the body. I landed down there and the first thing I asked myself then was, Ben, I felt reminded of your story about Einstein when he's falling, doesn't feel his weight. I ended up falling all the way down into the, or close to the creek or something. You must have looked a mess. But my first thought then was, where have I been all this time until I got there? This question has occupied me as a child for a very long time and it has remained in my memory. And to end the story, my mother was so angry that she put us under the cold shower, because otherwise she would have had to heat the oven first.

[31:35]

And this question has stayed with me and I've thought about it a lot throughout my childhood. And to end the story, my mother was so upset that she put us under the cold shower because she wasn't... In your clothes? Because she did not want to heat the oven for us. Okay. And the second story, face to face. Ich habe immer geglaubt, es wäre jemand da, der mir etwas gibt. About the second story, about face to face. I've always assumed that there's somebody there who will give me something. Dann bin ich aber im Rahmen meiner Doktorarbeit auf das Buch von Shinichi Isamatsu gestoßen. A critical vermon of Zen.

[32:38]

And then, but in the course of my PhD research, I encountered this book that she just mentioned. Nisamatsu. Nisamatsu. Yeah, yeah. And while I'm reading the book, I come to a point where he talks exactly about it. And at that moment, it makes me... And as I'm reading this book, I come to a place where he speaks exactly about this. And then at that moment I have this aha, this sense of plop. Ganz für mich, dass das face to face in mir stattfindet, dass ich das bin. And at that moment I knew for myself that the face to face is happening inside of me, that it is me.

[33:40]

Und deswegen, wenn ich das Sutra der Vorfahren lese... then it's not as if it's something strange, but I have the feeling that they are there. And yet, I had a dream in which I put on a robe and while I was wearing it for a short moment, it was very clear that I would take it off again. And yet I had a dream in which I was putting on a robe and as I had it put on I felt very clearly I will take it off again.

[34:51]

And even within the dream I took it off. three thousand phenomena and in this world that appears in my mind, that I create, that I see, I can form out where that is what I want. And Hisamatsu said something very beautiful, You just said about within the 3,000 phenomena, coherences, that with them appearing within mind, I can seek out what I wish for. And you said something very touching.

[35:57]

Yes, and that is the idea He imagined that there is a so-called postmodern human being who contains that he has grown up. he brought up the idea of what he called a postmodern person and someone who he said has grown, has become a grown-up. And that is something that I wish for. Okay. You look pretty grown up to me, but... Yeah, well, I mean, I worked on Tsukiroshi's book for a long time.

[37:03]

I think I proofread it after the text went to the publisher and 56 times, word by word. Ich glaube, ich habe das, nachdem der Text zum Verlag gegangen ist, habe ich das noch 56 Mal gegengelesen. And my intention was to make it as, that the reader would feel as face-to-face with Sukharshi as possible. So I tried to give a physiological, prismatic content to each word. And I think, since it's supposedly the most best-selling Buddhist book in the world, they say.

[38:15]

And it's brought a lot of people to practice. There must be this physiological content in the book. But still, even though you, reading it, feel face to face with Tsukiroshi, it's different that if Tsukiroshi suddenly appeared out of the pages and said, oh, you've understood the left side, but not the right side. So it's the interactive aspect of the filaments of presence, that constitutes a shared realization.

[39:28]

Yeah. Yeah. So that's considered a different kind of realization than also an actual realization that one can achieve through one's own practice. And you were going to say something? You were? Oh, I thought you were just before Ellen. Maybe not. Okay. Mark? Yeah. Just now, I would refer to an answer to Marco. Yeah, okay.

[40:31]

Yeah. I found that there is a lot of joy and relief in what you said about Elon Musk's request, because that might change the face of the world, and I could participate in it, even though it might just be that I enlighten the world from my own ego. So to me, it's like it's a shift of a paradigm. It's not from my own side, but from the side of the hour, which is threatening and exciting at the same time. Yeah, that's right, exactly. Nothing to do with that? Oh, yeah, Deutsch, bitte. It's not just you and me here, you know. Ja, aber fast jeder versteht es, oder? Okay. Also, ich versuch's... Also, es ist eine Paradigmenveränderung. Sie wollten, ich finde, ein Paradigmenschiff. what Reikoshi said to Marco, which is exactly the same as Breskin, to put something inside, and that it might be about, that it is not about our self-will, but about the whole thing, which represents a completely different point of view, which is on the one hand very thoughtful, but on the other hand is also quite, well, very important or demanding,

[41:49]

Responding to the request of our host, who's loaning us beautifully this house, we'll have a break now. And after the pause, we'll have, I'll just see if I can say something that might be useful. Okay, thank you very much. Thanks for translating.

[42:53]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_80.27