Good evening, everybody. Daniel. Lifting around. Lois. Ah, great. John, but no Jane. Mark. Matt Chesky. He's gone. Lee Riggs. Um... Ilan. Uh...

[01:04]

Jeanette. Yes. Yeah. Bob. Rain. Yeah. Somewhere I saw. Kevin. Yeah. Sookie's not coming. Nick. Right here. Seth. Suzanne. Hamilton. Yeah. There's Hamilton. Sandy. I saw Sandy. I didn't see Sandy. Caroline is not coming. Gordon's here. Catherine's here. Karen. There's Karen. Yeah, Karen. All right. Stuart. And Allison. No. Everybody else is visiting, sitting in.

[02:06]

So, um... This is our... concluding class of our six, or actually it was five, right? We missed one. And tonight we're going to, uh... just discuss two short suttas. One of them you already have, which is given in Tantra number 131, the Bhadrakaratha Sutta. It should be attached to the last one we discussed, right? At the end? Is there anybody who does not have that one? Okay. Three people? Who doesn't have that? Don't have that one. Would you, uh... take one and then... The other two guys, if you would raise your hands, he'll give you one. Oh, there's more. More than two other people. There's five other people. Six of you. I have plenty of copies, so... no problem.

[03:08]

Bhadrakaratha Sutta. And then this one, nobody has, and I'll pass it out now. This is, uh... another one we'll do tonight. You don't have the Bhadrakaratha Sutta? So they're pretty short, so I think that, uh... it's entirely possible that we can talk about these two short texts tonight. They're both, uh... they're short, but they're both extremely important texts, actually. In a certain way, you could argue that they're the most important, you know, because each one makes an absolutely fundamental point, one point only, in a way,

[04:15]

but a point that's, you know, so fundamental to the study of Buddhism and particularly to Zen Buddhism. And a lot of times we've talked about how these old suttas are not entirely... you know, we've had to do some interpretation and some reflection to figure out how to use them in terms of our Zen practice, but I think these two suttas are really and truly Zen-style suttas in the point that they make. So, uh... I'll kind of speak about the first one, the Bhadrakaratha Sutta, and then discuss and then speak about the next one and try to get them both discussed, looked at, tonight. I hope you're, uh, hanging on to these, those of you who don't have big, fat, expensive Majjhima Nikaya volume, which is well worth having. There are some books, you know, that you read

[05:16]

and then you're finished with them. There are other books that you read for ten, fifteen, twenty, thirty years, and that one, you read for a long time. I forget how much it costs. It's not too cheap, but... It's a big, thick book translated by, uh... Bhikkhu Bodhi, I guess. Anyway, the Bhadrakaratha Sutta. Now, the title is very strange. It's not obvious what the title means. Here, we have the title One... In English, One Fortunate Attachment, which seems like a strange title. Another translation of it by Bhikkhu Nanda, Nan Ananda, which is totally different, is Ideal Solitude. And, uh... Thich Nhat Hanh translates this title as The Better Way

[06:17]

to Live Alone. And you can see how they get these various translations, because the word... There's three, three words in that first word, you know. The first one is bhadda, which means good or ideal. And the second one is eka, which means one, or also can mean alone, just like in English. One can mean oneness or one, or it also can mean alone, right? Solitary. And then ratha, which means to like or to love. So, you could see where somebody could translate it as one good attachment, or one good love, or one good, you know, like that. Or you could take the one as, instead of being one, you could take it as being alone. See? And then you could say the good aloneness, or liking the good aloneness, loving the good aloneness, or loving... or the ideal way

[07:18]

to be alone. Having an affection for the ideal way to be alone. So, you know, I would say a good translation for this would be the Sutra on True Aloneness. The true meaning of aloneness, being alone. Not in the sense of loneliness, but, you know, really being alone in the sense of self-contained, truly at peace with oneself. Something like that. So, that seems... To me, I would look at it that way. Because the attachment or love as the operative word in the Sutra title doesn't make sense to me. Because, mostly, as you'll see when you look at this translation, mostly the

[08:20]

people who practiced in this old style were very suspicious of love, affection, delight, desire. They were very suspicious of it. They thought it was very dangerous. So, I don't think that, you know, it would... So, aloneness is more likely to be the operative word. Anyway. Thus have I heard On one occasion, the Blessed One was living at Sabati in Jada's Grove in Adipindika's Park. We've seen this place before. One of the favorite places where Buddha taught. It must have been very beautiful, peaceful grove. And He was there often. And there He addressed the Bhikkhus. Thus, Bhikkhus, Venerable Sir, they replied. The Blessed One said this. And I almost always say... I didn't say it before. Maybe I did it early on in the classes, but... If this were a Zen sutra, it would end there. And many of the Zen stories

[09:26]

are like that, you know, the monk and the monk says yes, and then that's pretty much the end of the story. And I think that they get that from this convention in the old suttas of the Buddha saying monks and the monks say yes. Because it's just in a certain way, you know, once the monks say yes and they're ready to hear the teaching, that's all that's necessary. The rest of the teaching is just details. Right? That you would be there and say yes. Are you here? Yes. There's consciousness and it's ready. That's all you need. And in Zen, that's about all we deal with. But anyway, this is not Zen, so they go on a little bit. So then the Buddha begins his teaching. Bhikkhus, I shall teach you the summary and exposition of the one who loves true aloneness. Listen closely to what I have to say. Yes, Venerable Sir, the Bhikkhus replied and the Blessed One began. And this is one of the suttas.

[10:27]

You see this once in a while where the Buddha spontaneously gives a poem. Let not a person revive the past or on the future build his hopes for the past has been left behind and the future has not yet been reached. Instead, with insight, let her see each presently arisen state. Let her know that and be sure of it invincibly, unshakably. Now the effort must be made so that later death may come. Who knows? No bargain with mortality can keep him and his hordes away. Meaning death. But one who dwells thus ardently, relentlessly, by day, by night, it is that one,

[11:27]

the peaceful sage has said, who has or who knows or who loves true aloneness. So I from time to time in discussing this I'll refer to this little book which is around I think which is a little book by Thich Nhat Hanh and Thich Nhat Hanh is like me thinks that these old sutras are really good things for Zen students and he's translated a number of them and feels that they're very important for all Buddhist students and this happens to be one of the ones that he's translated and his translations are very different actually from this. So I'll read you maybe I'll read you his version of this poem you can look at the one that you have in front of you just to see the differences are in a way slight but the feeling and tone is a little different. Do not pursue the past. Do not lose yourself in the future. The past no longer is.

[12:28]

The future has not yet come. Looking deeply at life as it is now looking deeply at life as it is in the very here and now the practitioner dwells in stability and freedom. We must be diligent today to wait until tomorrow is too late. Death comes unexpectedly how can we bargain with it? The sage calls a person who knows how to dwell in mindfulness night and day the one who knows the better way to live alone. That's his poem. And then so in other words this sutra is telling us that we have to focus our mind and our being and invest our whole life in this present moment of our existence. That the future is already gone so we have no use running back to the past is already gone no use running back to the past the future it never arrives

[13:29]

so no use projecting our mind into the future. So these two lines instead with insight let him see each presently arisen state. This is the secret you know of Buddhist practice this is the essence of Buddhist practice and Thich Nhat Hanh uses in his translation the word mindfulness which apparently doesn't appear exactly in this verse I think in the original but this is the essence of mindfulness is to be aware with insight means technical word insight meaning to have enough stability and accuracy and to have shed enough of projection and confusion and self clinging and so on to actually be able to see how the present arises and passes away each moment moment after moment to really understand impermanence to understand experience nakedly as it is now and to study that experience be with it and be there moment after moment after moment after moment in our lives

[14:30]

this is the practice of mindfulness to know the quality of each moment of our lives as it really is is to see the truth the four noble truths to see reality to be awakened the mind arises and passes away it arises and passes away there's no me inside of it there's no good there's no bad there's no past there's no future there's no in between there's just this [...] and it includes everything in it so that's the most important thing so don't you know chase after the past don't hope for the future just look closely and you can't really do that of course without meditation practice there's no way that you could have enough subtlety of mind to really see your experience it's very difficult to see one's actual experience and but with meditation practice and with effort over time you know one comes ever more close to this and so so to be present in this

[15:31]

profound way seeing things as they actually are that's that is the way to actually practice true aloneness true self-sufficiently true fullness of one's life and the next lines but let the person know that and if invincibly unshakably so furthermore let that experience be something that that the person be a way of life not just something that you see once and then you forget about it or something that you occasionally turn your attention to but let that be your entire basis for living let this being in the present moment with clarity be the entire basis for your living let it be absolutely unshakable no matter whether the present moment is terrible or pleasant just to you know have the courage and the insight to be with that present moment understanding there's nothing else but that amount

[16:32]

of strength you know that's that's the important thing and you must do this now the only time you can do this of course is now you can't put it off because life goes by in a flash and there's no way you can make it last any longer you know we can all take our vitamins and run our laps and all this and maybe you know we'll live a little longer but so what if we live one year longer two years longer five years ten years you know it's nothing so death comes very quickly one way or the other so don't waste time uh but if you can do this then you'll be you'll be the one who uh who really has affection for your own life you can be alone and really have affection for your life all the time then the rest of this little sutra is a little explication of what that poem means I mean I've already given you my impressions but now the Buddha has a few important points to make about what he says

[17:33]

in the poem how bhikkhus does one revive the past in other words he says don't revive meaning don't run after the past don't dwell in the past so he says how would how would you what does it mean to dwell in the past I'm telling you not to dwell in the past but what does it mean to dwell in the past so you know how to avoid that what does it mean to do it he says thinking I had such a material form in the past one finds delight in that thinking I had such feeling in the past one finds delight in that thinking I had such perception in the past one finds delight in that thinking I had such formations in the past I had such consciousness and so on and so on one finds delight in that that is how one chases after the past now let me read you Now, Han's version of that, because he makes it, I think, much more accessible to us, and I believe him. I believe that this is what is meant right here. He says, because what do we mean by pursuing the past? When someone thinks about the way his body was in the past, the way his feelings were

[18:37]

in the past, the way his perceptions were in the past, etc., etc., when he thinks about these things, and his mind is burdened by and attached to these things, which belong to the past, then the person is pursuing the past. So it mentions, those of you who are old Buddha students know these five things, forms, feelings, perceptions, mental formations, and consciousness. These are the five skandhas, the five categories of experience that make up our human experience. We, without analyzing or reflecting on our experience much, just say, oh, it's me. But it's not that it's me, that's just a rather habitual way of looking at it. If you look at your own experience more closely, you see there's different kinds of experiences, there's perceptions, there's feelings, there's all these things coming up every minute.

[19:43]

So, all our experience, when we consider our experience of the past, and the one translation says, take delight in it, and the other translation says, be burdened by and attached to it, then this is called chasing after the past. So, in other words, as you'll see in the next paragraph, it's not that we're supposed to not think about the past, or somehow wipe out all memory, or have some sort of automaton-like approach to life where we try to censor all memory and all thought of the past. This would be kind of ridiculous in a way, and ultimately quite counterproductive. The issue is, how do we understand the past, and how do we hold it? So if we glom onto the past, and attach to it, and have regret about the past, then maybe

[20:52]

this is the important thing, have regret about the past, and brood over the past, and guilt and some sort of arrestment of our ability to be present now, because we're held back by the past, this is a mistake, this is a problem. But if we understand that in the present moment, a memory of the past appears, and we can appreciate that memory, and apprehend it in the present moment, when I have a memory, it's happening to me now. And of course, as we all know, memory is not an objective thing. Memory is something that occurs in the present, in relation to present conditions. So the past is always in relation to the present, and we're constantly rewriting our past. Our memory is so selective in our idea about who we are, like history, people write history, but the history books are constantly revised, there's no objective history, there's a constant revision based upon the needs of the present, and it's that way with our own lives.

[21:52]

So if we understand that when we have experience of the past, it's a present moment experience, that just like anything else that arises in the present, it arises and passes away. We understand our experiences of the past in that way, and are not entangled by them, then we will not be running after the past. So it's the entanglement, the attachment, the confusion about the nature of the past, that's the problem. Not that we would have a thought of the past, per se. Because you see in the next line, he says, and how does one not revive the past? Thinking I had such material form in the past, one does not find delight in that, thinking I had such feeling in the past, etc. It doesn't say don't think about, it doesn't say that, it doesn't say don't think about I had material form in the past, it just says, in thinking about it, don't have attachment to it, don't glom onto it, don't let your desire and your confusion distort your relationship

[23:00]

to the past. Can't you find a light in those memories and still not be attached to the past? Yes, well that's why I pointed out Thich Nhat Hanh's translation, because we don't want to get tripped up by the word delight, which is an English word and one person's version of what the sutra really says. And certainly I think you can find delight. As I said, these guys, the people who practiced in this tradition, were suspicious of positive emotions, because they felt that it was very likely that if you had positive emotions you would have attachment. So they tended to be very conservative on that point and they tended to not want to emphasize positive emotions. But certainly it's true that one could have delight in the past without attachment. I believe that. And I think a Mahayanist would be more inclined to want to believe that and see it that way. That's why Thich Nhat Hanh avoids the whole issue by not using the word delight.

[24:03]

I actually don't know what the Pali word is, but always these words in other languages have sides and connotations that we choose an English word that is some approximation. So regardless of what the word is, it's probably not exactly delight in English. So I would not translate it that way. I would translate it as if you have attachment to, or if you brood on, or objectify the past. How do you keep from being attached to it? Well, right. And what he's saying is, focus your attention on clearly observing what arises in the present moment and let go of the mind that wants to be pulled to the past, that wants to be pulled to attachment. Train yourself, you know, little by little, to see that as being problematic and not to get caught by it.

[25:03]

Train yourself instead to see what's arising in the present. And you know, this is our Zazen, right? In Zazen, the instruction, it's a beautiful training, really. The instruction is simply, it's exactly about Zazen, because we say in Zazen, sit up straight, follow your breath. At least that's how I say it. There's different ways of presenting Zazen, even in our own little sangha here. But I like to emphasize the breath. So I always say, sit up straight, pay attention to your physical posture, and pay attention to your breath. Breathing in, you know it's breathing in, breathing out, you know it's breathing out. If and when thoughts arise, and they probably will, you know, don't hate the thought or try to knock it out of existence. Notice that you're thinking that thought, and then come back gently to the breath and the posture, without chasing the thought. So this is what the verse is talking about, is if you attach to that thought and you start

[26:04]

chasing it, and elaborating on it, and adding to it attachment, desire, regret, and so on, then you're lost. But if you notice the thought is there and you let it go, you know that that thought's there. You apprehended that thought, you let it go, and you just come back to the breath, without adding all these other things to it, then the thought comes and goes and it's not a problem. So you train yourself. In Zazen, it's a very easy situation to train yourself, and whenever that happens, you come back. Whenever it happens, you come back. In Zen, they use the image of training an ox, where at first the ox is all over the place, and then you tie a lasso around the ox and you hold on to the rope, and the ox is still going all over the place, but you hold on to the rope, not too tight, because you'll break the ox's neck, not too loose, so the ox can't go all over the place, but just with enough tightness, and eventually the ox is trained, it doesn't wander so much.

[27:07]

So little by little, you train yourself very intimately, and then you do the same thing during your daily life practice. You work in the kitchen. That's why we have all this great work that you don't even have to think about. Just, you know, you're standing there cutting, or you're washing the dishes, and you apply your mind to that task, but it doesn't require you to think that much, and so during that time, you do the same thing. You go back to your task. If you're sweeping the floor, you go back to sweeping the floor. You have these thoughts. You notice you're having the thoughts. A lot of things come up, of course, as we know, and there's nothing wrong that things would come up. In fact, they have to come up, but you don't bite, you just come back to the dishes, come back to the breath, knowing, oh yeah, that came up, good. And that way you train yourself, and then you're very alert when something comes up in the mind, well, you know, that came up in the mind, and you have a good intuition about it, and a strong feeling, you know what's going on, but you don't bite, you come back. So that's what he's saying. You see what I mean? It's actually a beautiful thing.

[28:09]

It's so simple, you would think, you know, how could that help anything? Because we always think, you know, I'm going to do something about this mind, right? I'm going to take this mind and I'm going to make it into a really good mind, a really enlightened mind, and so on and so forth, but who's making it into an enlightened mind? The same dummy that made a mess out of it in the first place, right? So how is that dummy going to make it into a better mind? He's not, or she's not, she's only going to add fuel to the fire. So this is a radical thing. You don't do anything. You don't do anything, you just pay attention to what arises in the present moment. So then the same thing, the same notion is applied to the future. How does one build up hope upon the future? Thinking in the future, things will be better. I'll have a better body, mind, mental formations, consciousness, it's all going to be better later on when I'm enlightened, or when I get the job that I want, or when I meet the right person, and so forth and so on.

[29:10]

But of course, that's actually counterproductive. How do you avoid building up hope in the future? Not finding, not being attached to those thoughts. So we have those thoughts. It's interesting that we have those thoughts, but not to pursue them. So again, this doesn't mean that one never thinks about the future or pretends there's no such thing as the future. The future is a very powerful idea. The future is not another state or like another time. It's a very powerful idea in our minds and in the minds of other people that we come into contact with. So we can't fool around and pretend there is no future. There is. There is an idea of the future that we share and that matters. So that means you make plans and you do things practically and so on, but you don't really worry about it. You don't have too much anxiety about it or hope about it. But you know that the future is totally unknown, totally beyond anyone's control. Anybody who thinks if they do certain things now, they'll be able to predict or control the future is kidding themselves. One never knows what's going to happen, and it's always unexpected, always.

[30:15]

Even if it turns out exactly as you planned, it's unexpected, because when you're sitting here planning the future, it's not what happens, even if on paper it looks like what happens. Right? You know what I'm saying? I'm going to go, after this class is over, back to my house and go to bed. But my saying that and thinking that is not the same thing as my actually doing that. My actually doing that is totally different from my sitting here thinking I'm going to do that. Right? So one never knows what's going to happen. So one knows, when you think about the future, that's what you're doing, projecting something that's inherently an idea. So you don't worry about it that much. You don't have to be anxious about it or believe in its reality any more than a reality of, in the present moment, I'm thinking about tomorrow. So I have a calendar, a big, fat one, with a big space for every day, and all these things are written in it. And if I live that long, later on I'll go here and do this or do that.

[31:18]

But who knows? So you have to plan and write those things down. But you don't really get anxious about it or believe in it too much. So that's what he's saying. Don't attach to it. Don't believe in it too much. And how, next one, number eight, and how then can you be swept away by the present? Because it's not that, you know, the past can sweep you away, the future can sweep you away, but so can the present, if you unwisely attend to the present. So how can you be, Thich Nhat Hanh translates this, and how is a person swept away by the present? Because this is not about hedonism. It sounds very hedonistic, right? The past doesn't exist, the future doesn't exist, but the present exists, so we should all eat, drink, and be merry. But no, here because an untaught, ordinary person who has no regard for noble ones and

[32:21]

is unskilled and undisciplined in their dharma, their teaching, who has no regard for true people and is unskilled and undisciplined in their dharma, regards material form as self, or as self-possessed of material form, or material form as in-self, or self as in material form. And then the same formula is repeated for feelings, perceptions, mental formations, and consciousness. So in other words, you are swept away by the present when you identify your experience as yourself and attach to it, and objectify it, reify it, hold on to it, protect it, and therefore have fear around it. That's when you're swept away by the present.

[33:22]

And that's hedonism. Hey, I'm going to have a good time, I'm going to enjoy myself now. But actually, this is an inaccurate view of the present moment, because what's really happening in the present moment is there's arising now a concatenation of physical experiences, inner feelings in relation to that physical experience, perceptions of a physical experience, a whole constellation of desires and attitudes about what arises in the present, and an awareness of all of that. Moment after moment, these constellations arise, and a relationship to a physical world and a whole bunch of inner feelings and reactions to it. That's what's going on. Nowhere in there is there possession, or me, or separation from the world. I and all things together cooperate in producing this circumstance that arises moment after

[34:26]

moment. When we see it that way, as he'll say in the next paragraph, then we're really being aware, with accuracy and truth, of the presently arisen moment. When we want to grab it, possess it, narrow it down, reify it, objectify it, and so on, then we're being swept away by the present moment. So, and number nine, how is one invincible in regard to presently arisen states? In other words, how is it that one is not swept away? Here a well-taught, noble disciple who has regard for noble ones, etc., etc., etc., does not regard material form as self. In other words, knows that this body is not the self, material form as self. No, the person knows there's a body here, but no one owns this body. This is not my possession, and this is not me, because this body is quite feeble and

[35:29]

short-lived. If I were to pin all of my hopes on this body, I'm definitely going to be disappointed. The body is just something that arises and passes away. That's what this is. He knows that, or she knows that. Or self as possessed of material form, or material form as in-self, or self as in material form. In other words, there's no self, there's just material form coming and going. Not to add anything extra to experience, some interpretation, but just that it is. When the person sees just that it is, and there's nothing else extra to it, no possession, that's how a person is invincible in regard to presently arisen states. Then number ten, the Buddha repeats the poem exactly as he said it in the beginning, and

[36:35]

he says, that's what I have to teach you for today. This is the kernel and essence of mindfulness practice, and the mindfulness sutra that we've studied so many times, and all the different techniques and ways of practicing mindfulness are really all ways of helping us to just be aware in this way of what's arising in the present moment. This is the whole secret to our practice. That's why in the end the practice kind of disappears, because the only thing there is anyway is living this way, and living in the present moment, aware accurately of what's going on, and not holding on to anything. When we live in that way, that's all there is to it basically, and all the bowing and the chanting and everything is just kind of extra stuff that we do, because it actually helps us to see that one simple truth. So that's the sutra on loving, true aloneness, and I recommend that you think about it, and

[37:39]

consider that one point, those four lines of the poem, which I think are so important. Instead, with insight, let her see each presently arisen state, let her know that, and be sure of it, invincibly and unshakably. That's the most important point. So any more questions about this one? Good. Yeah, you've got a question. Why couldn't you use your aim to be very relative to your real life? Well you could. To advance stage. Yeah, right, that would be, the only trouble with that is that, theoretically you could, in reality, we would be all likely to be swept away by it. But yeah, no, that's right, in theory, it's not the eating, drinking and being merry, it's the idea that, the idea that, the trouble with hedonism, why hedonism as a philosophy

[38:48]

or as an approach to life is not sufficient, is because the present moment that's being discussed here is very deep and inclusive. The present moment, if we really settle into this present moment with accuracy, as the Buddha speaks of it here, we understand causality and consequences. We understand that if we don't take care of ourselves now, there'll be consequences for us and others in the future. So the present moment is a sort of a nexus moment connected to all time in a sense. Hedonism takes the present moment and just understands it to be only on the surface and says, well, since there's no past and no future and no causality and no consequences, let's just have fun now. But that isn't true. In fact, there are consequences and there is causality.

[39:50]

I think hedonists get very bored, it doesn't take long to get bored with that kind of stuff. I mean, if you hang out that way for 10 or 15 years, that's not very long. I think you get bored with it. You doubt it? You think you can go on that long? You get old, yeah, that's what I mean. You party, it could be great when you're 15 or 20 or 25 or 30, but by the time you're 38 and 40 and then you're partying around and you're 42 and then you're 43 and you're partying and dancing and boy, it's hard to keep up with these young guys dancing all night long. You're not having a hard time here. Plus, it's just not that much fun anymore. Now what am I going to do? Too late now to do anything else, see? So it kind of catches up with you. So I don't think it works out, but I think somebody could, if somebody wanted to try and experiment, what the heck, it's only a life, right? Try and experiment.

[40:51]

Devote yourself for a lifetime to that and see how it works out. Let me know, like send me a card if I'm still alive. What did you mean 42, 43, it's too late? I didn't understand. Well, I mean, if you've been partying. Well, you know, you've already established such a strong pattern in that way that perhaps it's too late to do anything else in your life. Maybe not. You're right. I understand your point. You can begin practicing. You can be a hedonist for many, many years and then begin practicing if you have a real turning. But the problem is that the way one lives has momentum. So if you live a certain way for a certain amount of time, there's momentum to that. The only way that you could change is if you kind of come to the end of that and fall off. But it has momentum. So a lot of times people find themselves unable to change, you know, because they've established

[41:52]

a way of life that has so much momentum to it, they can't get out of it. I remember once, I don't know what happened to this friend of mine, but I had a friend who went to Hollywood to become a film director. And he ended up becoming a television director. And I said, you know, how could you do that? You know, that sounds like... I mean, now I wouldn't say that, but in those days, you know, I was more idealistic. And I said, well, how could you do that? You know, it's going to be... It's going to have a very superficial and, you know, horrible time of it. And he said, no, no, no, I'll be able to go there to Hollywood and it won't affect me. It won't change the way I am. I'll still be the same person. But I'll just go to Hollywood and do all this stuff because I like movies. And I said, I don't think so. I said, you know, if you do something, it changes you. And you become the person who does that thing, right? You can't just sort of do something for 10 or 15 years and then think that it doesn't affect you. That's what I meant. You know, you do something for a long enough time and it becomes who you are. It's hard to change. How did your friend name you? Well, I lost touch with him, you know.

[42:54]

He did sort of seem to me, did become submerged by that life. But I lost touch with him. It's been a long time since I've heard from him. And so I don't know what happened to him. How do you go from a he-ness to a Zen practitioner? You lock yourself up into a training temple and throw away the key. And, you know, you suffer a lot because if you have established patterns in your life of hedonism, it's not too easy to do the schedule and all that kind of stuff. It's very difficult, actually. But if you can do it and sort of keep making the effort, eventually you can train yourself. That's what I'm saying. You have all that momentum to overcome, right? It's not easy to do that. It can be done, but it's not easy. There are many stories in these old sutras of people who had a tremendous amount of momentum

[44:06]

toward confusion, violence, and so on, who saw the light and were able to turn it around. But these stories are often quite interesting because you can never escape the consequences of your actions. This was a big point for Buddha. He was convinced that there was never any way that you could erase the past, you know, and escape what you had done in the past. So in the cases of people who had done terrible things in the past, and Buddhist history is full of, especially like the most lurid cases, are the cases of people who were murderers. Some of the very famous Buddhist teachers were murderers. Not too many, but a few were murderers, supposedly, and became great sages. But in their being sages, they had to still suffer the consequences of the murders that they had committed.

[45:13]

But the consequences that they suffered were received by them in fodder for their understanding, rather than dire consequences that drove them down. There was a famous case of a guy who murdered a thousand people or so, and had a turning experience with the Buddha, and became enlightened. And he still had to suffer consequences from what he had done, but he suffered them as an enlightened person, and was able to deal with them more successfully than if he had been still in this confusion. So eventually, he exhausted those consequences. No, Agulimala was a stone to death, I don't think. You mean after he was enlightened? Yeah. Well, there's a lot of the early Zen teachers, too, were murdered, and so forth.

[46:17]

After their enlightenment. I think one of the early ancestors, third or fourth ancestor, was also murdered. Well, let's see if we can discuss this next one. Which is just as important, I think, in its own way. Making a different point, but also a very important point. Malunkyaputta, the shorter discourse to Malunkyaputta. Thus have I heard, on my occasion the Blessed One was living at Savati, in Jada's Grove in Adipindika's Park. And then, while the Venerable Malunkyaputta was alone in meditation, the following thought arose in his mind.

[47:20]

You ever have this happen when you're sitting there in meditation and all of a sudden it dawns on you, something. So, he all of a sudden, in effect, got mad at the Buddha while he was sitting there in meditation. He decided that the Buddha did not measure up. And he said to himself, These speculative views have been undeclared by the Blessed One, set aside and rejected by Him. Namely, the world is eternal and the world is not eternal. The world is finite and the world is infinite. The soul is the same as the body, and the soul is one thing and the body another. And, after death, a Buddha exists, and after death a Buddha does not exist. And, after death, a Buddha both exists and does not exist. And, after death, a Buddha neither exists nor does not exist.

[48:24]

Which about covers it, I would say. As far as whether Buddhas exist after death, that would about cover the possibilities. But, the Buddha... These views, all these things are undeclared by the Buddha. The Buddha did not say, one way or the other, about any of these propositions. The Blessed One, the Buddha, does not declare these to me, and I do not approve of that. And I don't accept it. So, you know, it's like you're sitting there in meditation, and all of a sudden you realize, it kind of dawns on you, that your teacher is full of crap, and you're not going to stand for it. So, that's what he thought about the Buddha. Right? So, you know, this is a good student. He says, I'm going to go to the Buddha, and I'm going to take this up with him. And, if he declares to me, the world is eternal or the world is not eternal, and I'm going to repeat the entire paragraph, up to the end,

[49:28]

then I will lead the holy life under him. In other words, if he tells me, if he tells me which of these things is true, and which is not true, then I'll keep up my practice. If he doesn't, I'm leaving. I'm leaving Greenville tomorrow. If the teacher doesn't, I'm returning to the low life. The lay life. This doesn't mean he's going to become a thief. They would call the life of a monk to be the higher life, and the ordinary worldly life is what he means. I'm going to return to worldly life, if the Buddha doesn't come across. Why is he telling me these things? So, anyway, this is such a human thing. We want answers. We want action. We want to figure this thing out. Get this over with. Get the truth. We want to have the answers, and how come nobody is telling us?

[50:31]

How come the Buddha is not laying it out for us? I mean, he knows, and if he doesn't know, what am I doing following him? And, if he does know, why isn't he telling me? And, why am I wasting my time here if I want to know? So, I'm going to go. I mean, that's very plucky of this person, don't you think? To go, I really think I admire him. He gets right up out of meditation. He says, I'm going right over there, right now, and find out what's going on. So, my marginal note here, which I made today, says, we want answers, and that's the problem. On the other hand, to be dumb and not think, or know anything, isn't it either. So, it's not that we should give up looking for answers. So, the way, it turns out, to be something that's somewhere in between knowing and not knowing. So, we know, but what we know is not a viewpoint, or something that we can point to.

[51:39]

It's a sort of establishment in, maybe a little bit like what we were just talking about in the other sutra. Knowing is not that we know a view, or we know this is true or that's true. Knowing means being established deeply in the present moment with accuracy and vision. Which is not the same as being stupid and running around saying, oh, I don't know, nobody knows, nothing to know. There's some sense of knowing, but it's not knowing something. It's maybe knowing as a radical sort of readiness and depth in our living. We're just there, we're ready, we see the depth of living, but we know that it's a different appearance, moment after moment. We can't say it's this or not that, not this and so on. Anyway, we'll see what the Buddha says, that's what I say, let's see what the Buddha says. So then, at least he waited till evening time, which means that we don't know what time of day it was that he was thinking that the Buddha's full of crap, but maybe it was earlier in the day, and he sat with it all day long, thought it over before he decided to go.

[52:44]

So at evening time, he got up from his seat and he went to the Buddha. Unlike the Zen guys who slapped each other in moments like this, he did his bows and went according to the way that things were done. Usually they bowed to the Buddha and they walked around him one time with their right shoulder bare, and then sat down beside the Buddha. And spoke, he said, Here, Venerable Sir, I was alone in meditation. The following thought arose in my mind. And again, this is a wonderful thing when you think about it, how these people work together. What a great thing that this guy would have this thought, and then he would feel that he was going to go right to the Buddha and share it with the Buddha. And then he would, right away, say, this is what I'm thinking, this is how I'm feeling. He didn't say, oh man, the Buddha's so great, how could I be thinking this?

[53:48]

Should I bring this up or not, and I better think about it? Or, how should I put this in such a way that he just tells him, this is what I'm thinking, this is what... And I think the Buddha expected that, and obviously was sufficiently un-intimidating in a sense. I mean, the Buddha was very great and everything, but un-intimidating enough so that a person felt like, this is what I'm thinking, I'm just going to go and tell him. So, I mean, the sutra is not about that, but when you think about the way that this goes, and there's many other times in the sutra where that happens, where you admire so much the person for being willing to say, this is how it is. And you also admire the Buddha for being willing to listen to that and not be offended or somehow inspire the disciples to be able to have that approach. In other words, feel free to speak to the Buddha that way. Anyway, so he gives the whole speech, exactly as he thought it. He says, and if you don't tell me, I'm going to abandon the training

[54:55]

and return to lay life. So if you know, Buddha, that the world is eternal, just tell me that the world is eternal. If the Blessed One knows the world is not eternal, let the Blessed One, let the Buddha, just tell me. And if you don't know that the world is eternal or the world is not eternal, then it seems to me that you ought to just say you don't know. And then I'll know that you don't know. But I don't like this business that you're not saying. Tell me, or tell me you don't know, and I'll think about it. I'll be satisfied with that. But I don't like it that you're not saying. And then he goes through all the other things that he wants to know about. These are all the sort of basic metaphysical existential questions. Is the world eternal? Is it not eternal? And so on. These are the basic questions. So the Buddha says to him, well now wait a minute here, he says,

[55:56]

did I ever tell you, come here, Malayankaputta, study with me, and I will tell you whether the world is eternal or not, and blah, blah. Did I ever tell you that I was going to tell you that? I never said that. And did you ever come to me and say, I will lead the holy life unto the Blessed One, and in return for that dedication, the Blessed One is going to tell me the world is eternal, the world is not eternal. Did you ever say that to me? Did I agree to that? And in both cases, Malayankaputta has to agree, well, no, you didn't promise me that. And I didn't say, when I came, that I required you to answer those questions for me. That's true. So then the Buddha says, that being so misguided man, who are you and what are you abandoning? Just wonderful, you know.

[56:57]

Again, the sutra could end there, and he could go away and think about that for the rest of his life. Who are you and what are you abandoning? So this is really our question too, you know. Who are you and what do you think you're doing? We think we're practicing Buddhism, but what are we really doing? And who are we really? You're looking for answers to questions. But do you know who you are and do you know what you're really doing? What's the difference whether the world is eternal or not? If you don't know who you are and what you're really doing, what is that? That you know the answer, that you can say, yes, the world is eternal, or you can say, yes, the Buddha exists after death or doesn't exist after, you know. Who are you and where are you going? Do you know? If anyone, and then the Buddha goes on, if anyone should say that I will not lead the holy life under the Blessed One until the Blessed One declares to me that the world is eternal, etc., etc., etc.,

[57:59]

that person who is waiting for me to tell him these things would wait their whole life and they would die before I ever told him anything like that. Then he gives a famous simile, one of the most famous ones in Buddhism about the guy who gets shot with an arrow. This is the original version of that simile. Suppose a person were wounded by an arrow that was thickly smeared with poison and his friends and companions, his kinsmen and relatives brought a surgeon to treat him. And the man were to say, I will not let that surgeon touch that arrow, pull it out of me until first I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble or a brahmana or a merchant or a worker. And he would say, I will not let the surgeon pull out this arrow until I know the name and clan of the man who wounded me, until I know whether the man who wounded me was tall or short

[59:01]

or middle height, until I know whether the man who wounded me was dark or brown or golden skinned, until I know whether the man who wounded me lives in a village or town or city, until I know whether the bow that wounded me was a longbow or a crossbow, until I know whether the bowstring that wounded me was fiber or reed or sinew or hemp or bark. So you find out a lot of things when you see what they made bows out of. You find out the different skin colors of different people in Buddhist time. Until I knew whether the shaft that wounded me was wild or cultivated, until I knew with what kind of feathers the shaft that wounded me was fitted, whether those of a vulture or a crow or a hawk or a peacock or a stork. So those are the kind of feathers they used. If anybody wants to make an arrow just like they made in the Buddhist time, now you know how to do it. Until I know with what kind of sinew the shaft that wounded me was bound, that they tied the point on,

[60:03]

with what kind of sinew, what did they tie the point on with? What was it made out of? Was it made out of an ox? Ox, you know, muscle sinew from an ox? Or was it muscle sinew from a buffalo? Or did they make it from a lion? Or maybe it was a monkey. Until I know what kind of arrow it was that wounded me, whether it was hoof-tipped or curved or barbed or calf-toothed or oleander. Oleander, huh? Anyway, the man would still not know this, and meanwhile he would die. Of course, by the time all this exhaustive research on the arrow was completed, the guy's long dead, right? So, you see the analogy here. So, if anyone should say to me, I will not lead the holy life under the Blessed One until the Blessed One declares to me the world is eternal, etc., etc. Still, the Buddha, I would not declare,

[61:04]

I would not say anything about those things. And in the meantime, the person is wasting their life and they're going to die. And they're not going to get satisfied. So, Madhya-kapya-putra, if there is the view the world is eternal, the holy life cannot be lived. Think of that. If there is the view the world is not eternal, the holy life cannot be lived. And then he gives all the different ones. In other words, if you have this view, one way or the other, it doesn't matter which one it is, any views that you have and you hold on to, you will not be able to live this life, which is the life that pulls the arrow out. Which is an astonishing thing, right? Why would that be? And he goes through the next number, number six, the whole thing, goes through all the different views.

[62:05]

And he says, if you have any of those views, you cannot live the holy life. So, this is the Buddha's, and it will make it clear as we read the remainder of it, but this is Buddha's radical statement that the teaching of Buddhism is not a metaphysical teaching. It's not a teaching that tells us truths about the universe. We're not looking for truths about the universe. We don't know. And furthermore, to hold on to truths about the universe and identify with those truths about the universe and commit ourselves to particular truths about the universe is a hindrance. Buddhism is not about that. It's about pulling an arrow out. Even though we don't know where the arrow was made

[63:06]

and what kind of sinew it was made out of and how tall was the man who shot it, those things, I suppose, we could think about. But it's beside the point because you'll die. So, the teaching of Buddhism is an existential teaching, not a metaphysical teaching. It's not about ascertaining truths about the universe that we can debate about. It's, in effect, agnostic in relation to any truth about the universe. So, it's not that Buddhism says there is no God or there is life after death or there isn't life after death. Any of those things are both true and not true. And to hold fast to a view of them stands in the way of the activity of practice, which is the curing of human ills, of our suffering, as he'll say in a moment. So, therefore, remember what I have left undeclared as undeclared. And remember what I have declared as declared.

[64:08]

So, it's not that I'm not saying anything. I have said something. But what I haven't said, leave it unsaid. And what I haven't said is, and then he lists all those views, I haven't said whether the world is eternal or not eternal, whether there's a God or not a God, whether life after death or not life after death, I have not spoken about that. This is not what I'm talking about. This is not what I'm concerned with. And if you are concerned, you won't be able to practice what I'm offering you. Why have I left all that stuff undeclared? Because it is not beneficial. It does not belong to the fundamentals of the holy life. It does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to nirvana. And that is why I have left it undeclared. But what have I declared? What is it that I'm saying? Because I am saying something. What is it that I'm saying? I'm saying this is suffering.

[65:09]

This is the origin of suffering. This is the end of suffering. This is the way to the end of suffering. That's what I'm talking about. And why have I talked about that and not all these metaphysical views? Because I know that that's beneficial, that that is part of the fundamental point of the holy life, that it will lead to coolant of the passions and ultimate happiness, direct knowledge, enlightenment, nirvana. And that's why I have spoken of that. Therefore, remember what I have left undeclared. If it's undeclared, forget about it. Or if you find yourself thinking about it, it's fine to think about it, but don't put your energy there. And remember what I have said. Don't put your energy there, because I'm telling you, I know from my own experience,

[66:12]

that that's what's beneficial. And that's what the Buddha said. And Mahamudra was satisfied with the Buddha's words and never again apparently had that problem. And later on, when he was old, he received more teaching from the Buddha about the nature of the senses. And he was inspired by that teaching and he went off by himself into the woods to meditate and he became enlightened. And he did finally achieve complete peace of mind in nirvana. So it has a happy ending. Anyway, I thought that was an important little sutra as well, just as important as the sutra on the loving true aloneness, because this is a fundamental thing about Buddhism. In that sense, you could say that if a religion is a belief system that has a point of view for us, answering life's fundamental questions and telling us truths that we are to believe in,

[67:16]

if that's what a religion is, then Buddhism really isn't a religion. Buddhism is more like medicine for disease. And in this, I think, the approach of Buddhism is really radically different from many other religious traditions, which start with... Obviously, human beings have a very deep need to raise and deal with metaphysical questions. This is part of what the human mind will do and must do and can't be prevented from doing. So Buddha is not saying you shouldn't think about those things or this won't arise. He's just saying, I know that if you develop a set of views about the world and believe them and defend them, you'll only project all your desire and attachment and confusion onto those views, and your very defense of your views will be a source of suffering for you. Rather than that, what you need to do

[68:18]

is allow various views to be present and just focus on the present moment of your experience and how it really is, beyond any views that you might have of it. Your actual experience of the present moment of your living in all its depth. And if you can really see that for what it is, you'll be released from your bondage. And that's the only thing that I'm concerned about. So that's very fundamental to Buddhist teaching. And also, again, in Zen teaching, over and over and over again the point is made through all the koans and all the literature that if you hold to views, and we hold to views on very subtle levels, if you hold on to views, hold on to attitudes, and don't have the spirit of just meeting the present moment with nothing in your hand, you'll suffer and your life will get caught over and over and over again. So let go, [...] and be present, be present, be present without preconceptions. That's what it's all about.

[69:19]

And that's not easy. And that's all our training in Zen is to help us learn how to do that little by little. So, that's the end of our class. Any questions about that? I shouldn't end so fast. Yeah? Actually, this is kind of the original... I took this religion class a while ago, and that was sort of the original impression I got about Buddhism was that the Buddha didn't really put out these views for people, but then as I've studied the practice more, it seems like a lot of the traditions do actually have a whole set of dogma, like Tibetan Buddhism, for instance, has, you know, all these views about reincarnation and how it works. It sort of confuses me. And also in Zen, I've encountered that as well to some extent. Well, there's two things about that

[70:21]

I can say. One is that virtually all the schools of Mahayana Buddhism hold to this notion of the non-clinging to metaphysical views, and that comes out of the emptiness teaching. In Mahayana Buddhism, this sense of the Buddha's teaching as being about suffering and not about views is manifested in the emptiness doctrine, which talks about all phenomena, including views, as being empty. Even emptiness is empty as a view. So all schools, including all the schools of Tibetan Buddhism, adhere to that. And so whatever views are being propounded, metaphysical views are being propounded, they're only being propounded on a sort of worldly level. On a deeper level, it's understood

[71:21]

that that's only a skillful means or a temporary statement. It's not actually true. That's one thing. Also, just like this monk who is practicing for some time and can't resist the need to settle metaphysical questions, it happens in Buddhism the same way, where there are Buddhists who, just like this monk, want to have these things solved, and they propose solutions. So that there are schools of Buddhism that do have metaphysical views, but then other Buddhists who say, wait a minute. So the history of Buddhist thought is a sort of dialectic between the ever-present need for human beings to come up with answers to problems, and then the other side coming up, wait a minute, let's be clear about this. And then there's debates over that,

[72:25]

and usually there's a corrective. But it happens again. So there's a whole history of the tendency in Buddhism to propound metaphysical views, and then the dialectic of another school coming up and defeating those views and coming back to zero. And I think Zen pretty much emphasizes that point very strongly. So it's true that there can be a kind of sectarianism in Zen that almost sounds like it's saying it's this way and not that way, but I don't think that that's the essence of what Zen is about. I don't know if that satisfies your question, but that's how I feel about it. I sort of feel like people are copping out to some degree. That's sort of what I feel like. Yeah, I think so too. You read the sutra like this, and that's pretty clear. And so most Buddhists,

[73:29]

even Buddhists who are not like Hinayana, and this is the Theravada canon, but even Buddhists who don't, who have the whole canon, I mean all Buddhists honor the Theravada canon, so Tibetan Buddhists read these sutras too, right? So I think these sutras kind of keep us straight. But it happens. I mean, I know it does happen. That's why you have something like Zen, which so strongly makes the point over and over again. And even a sutra like this, you see it within the sutra itself. The fact that it happened in the Buddhist Sangha. There was constantly that pressure for, give me answers, give me answers. And if you look at our own practice, you realize that our biggest problem is that we always want answers. We want solutions and answers. And what we need to do is the opposite of that. We need to just look and be present and not think that we're going to find answers.

[74:31]

Is that what Alan Watts was referring to when he spoke about the wisdom of insecurity? I think so, yeah. It's the one thing that can't be. I was thinking about this today when I was reading this sutra. I was thinking, what a wonderful thing. I have a mind kind of like this monk. And I have gone through many different views and saw that they were lacking and then go on to another view and saw that that was lacking and then another view and that was lacking. All views are attractive for a while and then are found wanting. But going beyond views, there's no view that goes beyond that. You know what I mean? It's like totally peerless. What could be beyond nothing? I was thinking that. I don't know if I'm expressing myself well. But I was just appreciating today this teaching of emptiness

[75:34]

just that things are. And we can't even say that. Just experience happens. Period. And all views are true and all views are false. So we don't have to fight with anybody. Yes? Isn't everything we say a view? Mm-hm. How do we stay away from having a fixed view if everything we say is a view unless we just don't speak? Well, we speak but we know that. You know what I mean? It's one thing to speak and believe in the views that we express and it's another thing to speak and know that all the views that we express are passing away. Of course we forget that. We forget that when we speak. But if we remember that when we speak then speaking is like singing,

[76:36]

like a bird song. Birds don't really express views when they sing. And speech is a human song. If we know that then for us it really is song. If we don't know it, it becomes a problem. Many koans on this point. And Dogen also makes this point in his famous essay called Painting of a Rice Cake. You can sometimes read that. Anything else? I wonder if you could speak to the idea of by staying in the present moment with 100% awareness one is able to somehow unchain from unwanted behavior patterns addictive behavior patterns

[77:38]

compulsive behavior patterns which seem to be so embedded almost in the nervous system. Do you think that awareness completely in the moment has the strength to overcome it? I do. I think it's the only thing. It seems to me. Just like with views. A view only goes so far and then you burn it down. You get so dissatisfied with it. But to just be present without views, without techniques without tricks is the one thing that is inexhaustible. So if you really work at being present with your experience you begin to see clearly your patterns your unhealthy, troublesome patterns and you begin to feel much more acutely the suffering that those patterns produce. And then you begin to notice that suffering

[78:41]

when you really allow yourself to feel it is unpleasant and that you really don't want it. And then you see that very clearly exactly how that works. I do this. That happens. I suffer. I don't want to suffer. I did it again. It happened again. I'm really getting at this pattern that I have a pattern here and it causes suffering and that suffering I don't like. And once you really understand that, which you will understand without trying to, just by being present because it will be right there in front of your face once you understand that, then very naturally I always use the example of a child putting its hand in a candle. If a child puts their hand in a candle believe me, they only do it once. They don't repeat that a number of times because it's very natural for us not to want pain and suffering. But mental anguish and this kind of suffering

[79:43]

that we cause ourselves, we continue to do it because we're not actually noticing or experiencing clearly enough the suffering that we're causing ourselves. But when we abide in the present moment, we get to see it and it's very unpleasant and difficult. So it's not fun sometimes to go through all this but it does wake us up to the fact that our conduct that causes suffering is conduct we really want to stop doing. And we train ourselves, in other words we get more and more subtle about it until we get to the point where we see, there it is, there it is. Even before I did anything, I could see it coming because I'm so focused on my experience and so I won't do it. And you get right down in there and you stop doing it and stop the thoughts, stop the whole pattern the whole gestalt of our minds that does that to it and you actually simply let go and let it come and let it go and the next time you let it come and go, you do it a little sooner until finally you exhaust the residual karma

[80:45]

that causes it to come and then it doesn't come anymore. That's how it works. Can you understand what I'm saying? With a lot of people suggesting that and kind of guiding them with that that for them it's too much of an intellectual thing and knowing. It doesn't have that power to penetrate almost to the cellular level where the change is made, where the turning is made. It seems like it has to be such a deeper source of power in order to unshame those kind of entrenched anger patterns. Well, my experience is otherwise. That you can keep directing them back to the present moment. However, this is a complicated thing. Maybe sometime we have to talk about it one-on-one because I'm not sure exactly what kinds of situations you're talking about but I know that there are situations in which the degree of the suffering and the degree of the lack of

[81:46]

appreciation of the suffering is so great in the case of addiction or something like that that you have to do various things before you can even start. You have to impose some more coarse sorts of techniques and things to do before a person calms down enough. Because if you tell somebody that there are people who are, because of the situation that they're in in their lives are in such a state that telling them just be present with your experience makes absolutely no sense at all. There's no way that they could appreciate that. So then you do something else. You do other ways. You have to be practical. So really you're talking about a much more subtle level of the treatment of unsettling entrenched anger patterns. Yeah, right. I'm talking about this is the most subtle aspect of it. Which is, the gross aspects of it

[82:47]

are only elaborations of that same point. But practically speaking, if someone's up here in this state working on this subtle point, it's not going to mean much. We found, for example, in the case of addiction, we found that our practice just alone is not that effective. If someone comes here who's an addict and tries to do our practice coming from using one day and here the next day, it's not going to work. We learn that. We try it. And we learn that it wouldn't work. And there's programs for people who have that scoped out and they can work with it much better. And then, this has happened many times, then people who get off of their addictions, whatever they may be, by using these other techniques to actually stop using drugs or alcohol or whatever they use and calm down to the point where they can begin spiritual practice, then

[83:47]

they get to the underlying root in their hearts that caused them to be addicted to stuff in the first place. And it's always the same underlying root for everybody. Whether you're an addict or just an ordinary human being crashing around, having trouble, like everybody does, the root of your problem is the same. So, we've been able to be, I think, fairly successful with people who have been addicted, who have gone through programs and different things and worked on their addiction and then could come and practice here and benefit greatly from it. But we've been quite unsuccessful in taking... Because we've tried. We've tried with, like, prisoners and different people and it didn't work. You know, it just didn't work out. We were not... I mean, I think it could work. There's a famous monk in Thailand who uses meditation, but I think that he has a whole structure, a whole system for working with those people, and we don't. That's not what we know about and what we do, so it hasn't worked that well for us. And we haven't decided that we're going to

[84:49]

make that a priority. Although now we're beginning to go into drug rehab centers and offer meditation practice to people who are in programs using meditation practice as a supplement to the other work they're doing. We're also going into jails now and working with prisoners who almost entirely are substance abusers. Yeah, in jails. It's a huge percentage of people in jail. 80% or 90% of people who are in jail are in substance-related issues. So we're going there and working with them. But it's an enormous thing. People are really... The social and economic conditions that operate in their lives are so horrendous that really the most of what we're accomplishing in those situations so far is we're just able... The people who go in and teach the classes are making an effort to work with themselves

[85:51]

to be able to really love the prisoners and the addicts. See them for who they are, not naive. See them for who they are and love them and be honest with them so that these people would be able to experience being treated like a human being, which they usually aren't. That there's a benefit in that. But the truth is, so far we've had very little success with meditation turning around the life of a prisoner or something like that. It does happen, but it's quite rare. These other programs, which have a more kamikaze type of strong approach are much more successful in horrendous cases. But it's interesting. It's a big challenge. But the Buddha was extremely practical in almost all the things that he taught as we read in some of our other sutras. He taught in response to actual conditions.

[86:54]

He understood the basic point and he tried to figure out on this condition or that condition what's the way that we have to approach this. And when I work with people I'm always trying to figure out what's going to work for this person. Buddha had many, many things that he taught. Many approaches, and within those approaches it doesn't have to be Buddhist approaches. Anything. I'll take anything that'll work to help a person to get in touch with themselves. So whatever we can find that will work, we use. And the Buddha also did that too. Whatever he could find, he used. Anyway, so this is the end. Thank you very much for coming to these classes. I enjoyed them a lot. I hope you have too.

[87:40]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ