In these morning talks, it seems like the time goes by very fast. And the most interesting part is usually the questions. So I'm going to give a very condensed background, way-seeking talk, I guess you would say. And then we can get on to the interesting part. I was raised in Missouri, and I discovered Zen through books, Alan Watts, Nipi Suzuki, and people like that, in the early 60s. I first had a formal practice experience in Chicago in 1963. There was a little center there, so I got a little taste of that.

[01:00]

And after finishing my college, which was Then when BCC was founded in early 67, I immediately picked up on that because I lived in Berkeley and went there for several times. In the late 60s, I was getting more involved in different political things that were going on.

[02:33]

And as a result of that, I discovered a group of people, mostly in Europe, who were called situationists. And I got into that very heavily and learned French, so I could read their writings. So over the next, starting around 69 or 70, up till the present, that has been the main focus of my life. And I've translated a lot of these people's writings and done some of my own things more or less along the same lines with a few divergences. Also, another interest is Kenneth Rexroth that kind of partly in that radical vein and partly overlaps with more cultural and Buddhist kind of interests.

[03:44]

So I was doing that all this time, but I just, I'm not going to talk about that anymore. Talk to me afterwards if you want to know where that is. In 1985, after not doing much thin practice over the years, I decided to start doing a regular practice, and I came here every day for about a year and a half, during the afternoon sittings and sessions and so on. And then I got a little bit OD'd, so I stopped doing that, but I've continued I do a little bit of zazen when I get up every morning at home. And then my practice here is mostly long sessions, which I've always liked a lot.

[04:48]

And then in recent years, I also went to Tassajar for a practice period back in ADA. And in recent years, I've also been So that's kind of where I'm coming from. And let's create less than five minutes. So, questions? I got into it because I was assigned it.

[05:56]

But I do like it a lot. It's one of these jobs that has a little of everything. You have to There's a sort of formal aspect and a practical aspect in figuring out. I don't know what to say. It's a lot of fun. It's a continual challenge. Well, I think they've influenced each other and many people who are familiar with both of them, and actually there aren't too many people that are, but those who are would say, well, these are very contradictory.

[07:14]

People in France say, well, what are you doing with this mystical bullshit or something? And people over here say, well, what is this? fit in. And there are a lot of differences there, but I've kind of arrived over the years of working with that at seeing them as more complementary of each other. And in kind of odd ways, as different as they are, they are sort of analogous in some ways. Like the situationists relation with other political movements is, in a sense, you could say, well, this is a political movement or political theory or perspective or something, but its approach is somewhat different, just like the approach of Zen is somewhat different than other religions.

[08:19]

You would say, is this a religion? Well, yes and no. It has a more critical In Zen, we sort of pulled the rug out from under ourselves continually. And the situationists more or less do that on the terrain of politics, I think. There's a challenge of not getting caught up in something rigid. You do something and it leads to a new set of circumstances and in that new set of circumstances maybe something different will be called for that might challenge that might be different than what you did the day before so you can't rest on you can't just say well I have arrived at the state of enlightenment and so now I can just coast along there's more a sense that whatever that enlightenment is it's a

[09:21]

So it's... Well, that is indeed too much, too much to go into adequately.

[10:36]

The situation has incorporated a lot of Marxian analysis, but also some things from anarchism. So they're more anti-authoritarian. There's an emphasis on participatory democracy of sort of grassroots, bottom-upward organization, rather than top-down. And another thing about the situationists is that they started out from a more cultural, everyday life point of view. out of things like Dadaism and Surrealism rather than out of political. So there's an element in there where their focus is on the person, on the individual, on real life, and only secondarily on massive social or political things.

[11:40]

So they end up being radical socially or politically, but the purpose always comes down to what kind of life are people living. So, during May 68, the May 68 revolt in France, which the situationists were partly responsible for triggering, you had a lot of slogans and graffiti that expressed these sort of things, such as, don't liberate me, I'll take care of that. boredom is counter-revolutionary. Things that are very different than a typical political movement would have. Revolution ceases to be the moment it is necessary to be sacrificed to it. And again, this is very different than the typical political thing says revolution or something is this great goal and so we'll all work

[12:45]

But they're bringing it back. They're saying, really, this is for the individual. And we're fighting for ourselves. We're struggling for ourselves. So in the same way, or in an analogous way, in our Zen practice, we may have very grand statements about saving everyone or doing this. But we also continually come back to whatever we are doing right here. and we don't necessarily see that as a contradiction. It's just that in some way that's kind of hard to put into words, they go together. I'm doing something right here. That's all there is. When you're serving, you're just serving that person. It's as if nothing else in the universe exists. It's just you and that other person, and then you serve them. sense.

[13:51]

But there's something where all that large stuff and the individual stuff comes together. So in that personally, when I'm involved in this larger social activities, I'm still trying to approach it somewhat like I would do in a session or something that here I'm writing a leaflet or I'm corresponding with somebody or whatever I'm doing. The context is rather different, so I have to make some adjustments there. But a lot of the same principles are going on. Just pay attention to who you're talking to, say. Where do you place your attention when you're doing either of these things?

[14:56]

I mean, I know you're free-framing each one, and it's not that polar, but where is your attention when you're serving? You say it's just there, but I'm just wondering... If it leaks out, or if you're also looking at the larger picture, I mean, if they're both happening, are they neither? Well, I think some of it, all those things that you mentioned. My number one rule of thumb in this practice, and I think it applies in a lot of other things, is one thing at a time. But that's not exactly, you can't stick to that, but it's a real good starting place, I think, that it applies to almost anything you might do, is that when you do it, just do that thing.

[16:02]

do only that thing, you know, just focus there. Then you will come into circumstances where you can't just do one thing at a time because while you're doing it you have to bear in mind other things that are going on and you do have to look ahead and so on. And so then I don't know how to define what's going on there. It's just something I think that we do in practice. I mean, actually, we're always doing lots of things at once. It's just that we're not maybe conscious of them, but out of the corner of our eye, we're noticing something, and we remember that we have to do something and all that stuff. So I think that that's kind of getting incorporated Just like when we walk we don't have to think my big toe is doing this and it's just sort of part of the big Flow that we've incorporated all these little individual things.

[17:07]

So sure when you're serving this one person You are aware of other things going on kind of peripherally but mostly you know, your focus is on what you're doing. And then in exceptional circumstances, you might have to be doing two or three things. Like as you're doing this, you still have to remember that very moment not to do this because that person has this problem or you have other things going on. But even though you've got those other things going on, then okay, then you do just three things at a time. When you say situation, you're giving a label to something that is more multiple than a thing. And I don't know how that fits with the philosophy.

[18:10]

I am a Zen student, or I am a writer, or I am a... It feels... We have to use labels, and at the same time, we have to undermine or lose labels. So the situationists, for example, an example of this is that they reject the term situationism. They say very, I mean, from the first year that they started their organization, in their first journal they have a list of definitions and they say a situationist is somebody who blah blah blah situationism a meaningless term used only by enemies of the situationists because it would imply this kind of package and so

[19:19]

Nevertheless, you can talk about situationist theory and situations persuaded. I mean, of course, there is a sort of package of experiences and perspectives, but they wanted to resist as far as possible that tendency to say, here is this trip, and you adhere to this trip, like you do for Marxism or anarchism or surrealism or existentialism or Buddhism or, you know, any number of things like that. They wanted to undermine that. So it's the same thing. And I mean, we have the same thing with Zen or Buddhism. that because it's a convenient thing that helps us, but it can also be problematic. Sure. Did you live communally during the six months or seven? I did briefly. How did that work out? Good and bad. I didn't do that very much. I just did that in a small group for a few months.

[20:23]

Do you remember that house? I think it was on Carlton or Parker during the Cambodian I don't remember that one, but I think I knew some of the same people. I do proofreading and copyediting, very part-time. And I have real cheap rent, and I don't have a family. So those are the two things that cost a lot of money.

[21:25]

So I've been able to. Self-employed? Yeah. Yeah, so I've gotten by all my adult life on being under the poverty level, the official poverty level, and I've gotten along just fine. Well, that developed because I knew the Ring of Bone people, Ring of Bone Zendo in Nevada City that Gary Snyder and other people founded back in the 70s. One of my friends was part of that, and so I had a sort of peripheral connection with them. I would visit him and go camping, and I had done a couple sessions

[22:26]

Seven Day Mountains and Rivers Sessions. And because of that connection, I got in on those in the 90s, the first one in 93 and went on that. It's very rigorous, but, you know, a real great trip. And so I came back here and talked to Mel and said, version of this. And so a couple of years later, we actually did our first one in point rays, just doing two days. And so we did those roughly every year for the next few years. And in 2000, Mel asked You know, I'm not really, ironically, I'm not that much of an outdoors person.

[23:37]

I mean, I've occasionally gone camping and I used to do some rock climbing and stuff like that. Mostly, I'm not one of these people that just go out every weekend hiking and doing stuff. So it just happened, like that's why I mentioned this, that I was in this ring of bones situation where I was just kind of along for the ride. They organized, you know, I could just go and they would tell me what I needed to do. And so that was sufficient to get me interested in that. And then I thought this is a good practice that It's sort of a different kind of sashim that gives a little variety to it, a normal sashim. And so just because of that minimal I found myself in a situation where I was heading up these things, which the ring of bone people would chuckle at because they would say, Ken, being the trail leader, how could this be?

[24:39]

He's going to get lost or he doesn't know what to do. But point raised is just my level because I was familiar with that and I've sort of learned the basic things that you need to do So it's something that I can organize and that I enjoy doing, and yet it's not, I wouldn't even know how to do some long thing out in the Sierras. You know, I would be out of my element. But in this thing, I feel really good about it. I mean, I'm enthusiastic about it. And I think it's something that practically everybody can do if they're not wheelchair bound or something. You know, it's within their capacities. And just about everybody that goes really likes it. So I'll just keep doing it. public secrets.

[25:49]

Right. And a lot of emails I've just kind of skipped over because they're really wordy and critical. But as I experienced you, you just really went there. It's not kind of that negative sentiment. You know, they're not meant to be disturbing. And I was wondering if that, in the journey campaign, it wasn't the same kind of humor. And how did you experience that? You know, I experienced it as really vigorous and just tedious and just, I would never do it. I told my dad I wouldn't do it again. You know, and afterwards, you know, you have to go out being celebratory and stuff. I wasn't sure because I'm a lifetime socialist communist. mainstream democratic process.

[26:51]

And I remember reading the whole thing about critique or summary of that. So, how did you experience the campaign, and as you, in terms of the situation afterwards? I don't remember the details of all that summary and critique. Yeah, that was very exceptional. It was an experiment. Because as I explained in that later thing, I do feel that electoral politics is really pretty flimsy in the best of situations. I'm not against it on principle. I just think it's one of the weakest things that one can do. It's kind of like signing a petition or something. It's something. But you can do things that are 100 times more impactful. And so that's usually where I direct my interest.

[27:54]

But because I knew the people involved who'd set it up, and it was right here, I mean, I thought, well, this is a convenient time to try this thing out. I've never done this door-to-door kind of thing. And the issue, you know, the particular campaign was somewhat more interesting than the average And I'm glad that I did it. I don't know that I'll do that again. But I didn't feel that there was any harm in doing it if I... Well, I hadn't thought about it in the intoxicants, but I think that is a good connection that you can get caught up.

[29:53]

And of course, sometimes it's good to get caught up. I mean, there are, like at a party, there are, megalomania may be appropriate. in certain circumstances. You can also hurt yourself by being too modest and thinking, well, we can't really do very much. Whereas, in fact, at certain points in history, people who hadn't ever thought they could do that did something that just changed all sorts of things overnight. So it's just that we have to continually make that adjustment and not get not get caught, you know, go for it and then be aware of the limits or the problems and stuff. Well, I'll just pick one example, the civil rights movement.

[31:01]

Think of the things that were done there that had nothing to do with voting. In fact, voting never would have even happened if it weren't for them. sitting in some place. Those were things that the people who did them were mostly just regular modest people. It wasn't anything big heroic, but it had an impact. It snowballed in a way that just electing somebody different would never have had. And in fact, it was things like that that pushed the people that were elected to do something in the way of passing laws and so on. So it's just an example like where the real leverage was not in the ballot box.

[32:06]

It was in the restaurants and the buses and on the streets and in people's minds and hearts. Well, a lot of different places, and one place it is, of course, is in Congress and things like that, but it's also with the soldiers. If soldiers mutiny or desert, that has a huge impact. That's one of the things that stopped the war in Vietnam, besides marches, civil disobedience, blocking you know, ports so they can't send weapons. There are all kinds of things that are in various degrees of illegality or legality that hit something direct. I mean, standing on a street with a candle, you know, it's kind of modest, but it's something that where you're getting out there, having a discussion with people is something. Maybe vandalizing something is something.

[33:09]

You know, it depends on what People have different places that they're at. And so I don't want to say, here's the tactics you do, and this is so good. But I would encourage looking into all kinds of tactics and not thinking that you just have to go through voting for somebody or having Congress do something. It may ultimately come to that, but even that can be influenced by these other things. Okay, we're over. Okay.

[33:43]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ