I vow to taste the truth of the Tathagata's words. Do you want to come closer to me? Yes. Good evening. Good evening. Let's see. I think I know almost everything. I want to do chapter 7, The Goddess. And... We kind of sort of started on this last week. We read a little bit of it. And I kind of sort of would have a feeling of wanting to actually go through it tonight. And also I'd like to have discussion and to talk about how this as Dharma relates to us in our lives and our practice and all of that. But something that happens is sometimes we get into discussion, like we might get into so much discussion about the first sentence that we wouldn't go any further.

[01:09]

Like, thereupon Manjushri, the crown prince, addressed the Licchavi Himalakirti, the Himalakirti from Licchavi clan and said, good sir, how should a Bodhisattva regard all living beings? So we could probably just talk about that sentence all night, we could. So do you all know what a bodhisattva is? The new people... I don't want to fill in too much, but if the new people... How about this? We're going to go through this chapter, and I may comment on some things, and if you have questions about what something means, or what's being said, let's talk about that, but then maybe we can try and get through the whole thing and then discuss the whole thing too. Does that work? Can we do that? Can we try that? So I'm going to kind of be guided by the Thurman version. Some of you have the Watson version, too, and there's some interesting differences, and we can point those out.

[02:10]

And I want to do some readings like we did last time when we get into the dialogues between Vimalakirti and the venerable monk Sariputra, I mean, between the goddess and Sariputra. But let's just start from the beginning a little bit and just go over some of this and kind of the first run through and kind of present it. So the Himalakirti's reply to how a bodhisattva should regard all living beings. Stuart, why don't you read, why don't you read just, oh, I don't know, a third of that or so. A third of that paragraph? Yeah, just sort of half of it, a little bit of it. Vimalakirti replied, Manjushree, a bodhisattva should regard all living beings as a wise man regards the reflection of the moon in water, or as a magician, or as magicians regard men created by magic.

[03:12]

He should regard them as being like a face in a mirror, like the water of a mirage, like the sound of an echo, like a mass of clouds in the sky, like the previous moment of a ball of foam, like the appearance and disappearance of a bubble of water, like the core of a plantain tree, like the flash of lightning, like the fifth great element, like the seventh sense medium, like the appearance of matter in an immaterial realm, like a sprout from a rotten seed, like a tortoise hair coat, like the fun of games for one who wishes to die, like the egoistic views of the stream-winner, like a third rebirth of a once-returner. Good. So you get the idea. This is what the Malakirti is suggesting to Buddha the Bodhisattva, the great Bodhisattva Manjushri, that Bodhisattvas should regard all living beings as illusory in some way.

[04:17]

Questioner 2 Yes. Well, he's not talking just about the material realm. These are qualities of... So these are all things that would be very familiar to his audience. He's talking to an audience of accomplished monk-like practitioners, practitioners on the arhat path to self-purification. So these are kind of conventional qualities, the third rebirth of a once-returner. So, hi, come on in. The point is that they're all illusory. That's all. There are different qualities of things. And it's interesting, Watson's list is fairly different.

[05:35]

But it's got things like, you know, the perception of color in one, the Vimalakirti, I mean, the Therman, it continues. Some of these are material, some of them are not. The instincts of passion in a Buddha, the perception of color in one blind from birth, the inhalation and exhalation of an ascetic absorbed in the meditation of cessation. Like the track, so this is a, that's a quality that's familiar to meditators in this practice who would know that that's not, that that wouldn't exist. Like the track of a bird in the sky, like the erection of a eunuch, like the pregnancy of a barren woman, like the unproduced passions of an emanated incarnation of the Tathagata, like dream vision seen after waking. So all of these are like dreams, like illusions, impossibilities, a tortoise hair, tortoise fur coat. So a lot of these are conventional expressions for impossible things.

[06:40]

So that's the point. Well, ultimate liberation is, by definition, there's no more rebirths. So that's talking about the liberation of a Buddha. So again, I think rather than getting into the particulars of this, I mean, some of these are colorful and interesting examples, but the point is, these are a range of impossibilities, of illusory qualities, of dream-like things. OK? So the point is that all living beings are phantoms. So that's how one regards them. But then the next question, which I think is after Vimalakirti says, precisely thus, Manjushri, does a bodhisattva who realizes ultimate selflessness consider all beings?

[07:51]

So the bodhisattva who realizes ultimate selflessness realizes selflessness of herself, but also of everything. So all beings, all of us in a sense, and the table and the teapot and the microphone and the lights, everything is essentially selfless, ultimately selfless, ultimately like a face in a mirror, like the core of a plantain tree, like the disappearance of a bubble of water and so forth. It's in all beings rather than all objects, I think. All beings, all beings sometimes means all sentient beings. The table wouldn't be enough. But it also sometimes means all existence, all existent entities, all beings, singular, all events, all. So that also would pertain to those. Maybe that's not as relevant to us as actually fellow creatures in a sense.

[08:53]

Does that like when they, do they use the word dharma to mean all? Yeah, in this case, probably beings is a shujo, which means living, created things, or living beings, it's sometimes translated as, or sentient beings, it's sometimes translated as. But if Martha is like a burst bubble or a piece of foam of water, certainly the table would be too, right? I don't know. Maybe some tables last longer than some of us. This table may be here after all of us, but at any rate, it's made of wood and will fall apart eventually, too. So the point is, the point isn't So much what is the nature of reality, although that's certainly part of it, but how do we see each other? How do we regard living? So the question is how to regard living beings. So in that sense, yes, Martin, you're right.

[09:57]

What's relevant to us is that all living beings are like this, actually. And that's how the Malakirti's recommending we regard them. But then the next question becomes all the more poignant or relevant to us in a sense. Manjushree asks, Noble Sir, if a bodhisattva considers all living beings in such a way, how does he generate great love toward them?" So how do you love someone who's just like a bubble about to burst or has just burst? How to love beings who we recognize are ephemeral, dreamlike? This is really the question. And we talked about this word, this word that Thurman translates as love here. It's maitri, maitri. Mahamaitri. Mahamaitri, great maitri. So it's the same root as loving kindness. But I like Thurman's use of the word love there. I think Watson says compassion or pity.

[11:00]

And I think that. Actually, I don't need to translate this. It can be translated as compassion, but it also... Meta is Pali. Maitri, I think, is the Sanskrit of meta. I'm not sure, but I think that's the case. Is meta Pali or Sanskrit? Does anyone know? Yeah, I think Maitri is the Sanskrit version of meta. Karuna is compassion, so we're dealing with English words and Sanskrit words. The point is that this word, Mahamaitri, in the Sanskrit original, I don't know how it was translated into Chinese exactly. it implies loving kindness, but I think to just translate it as love is maybe more relevant to us. You know, a lot of times when I've talked to people about Buddhism, particularly new students or people who haven't practiced before just hearing about Buddhism, they ask, well, what does Buddhism have to say about love?

[12:06]

Well, here it is. And I think that this is, that Thurman's translation is actually quite apt. But technically what's being spoken of here is loving kindness, which of course is, intimately interwoven with compassion. So it would be okay to translate this as compassion, I think, and Burton Watson does so. But great love is actually quite a good translation, I think. There's a pretty interesting footnote in the pyramid that says, in an effort to maintain distinctions between Buddhism and Christianity, translators have used all sorts of euphemisms for this basic term. Granted, it is not the everyday love that leads to light. It is still the altruistic love that is the finding So I kind of think it's maybe most interesting to just take that translation at face value and see what is the sutra saying about love in all the possible meanings of it.

[13:07]

Although technically we can remember that it's talking about this kind of, what's the Greek agape? This kind of love of all being. as opposed to simply erotic love or affection to one other person. But I think we can see all the meanings of love is included in here. It's asking how do you love beings who are empty, who are illusions, who are like tortoise hair coats. So this sutra is of course grounded in teaching of emptiness, which the first six chapters have been talking about. So the project of studying the sutra is about how to see emptiness teaching and the inconceivable aspect, and this is getting into that. But it also is about how do we actually practice with that? So Vimalakirti replies to this wonderful question. And it says to Manjushri, when a Bodhisattva considers all living beings in this way, he thinks, just as I have realized the Dharma, so I should teach it to living beings.

[14:15]

So thereby he or she generates the love that is truly a refuge for all living beings. So in as much as a Bodhisattva has realized the teaching, and to whatever extent the Bodhisattva has realized the teaching, to share it with living beings is the way a bodhisattva considers living beings. So I think we can read this as to the extent that you have been moved by practice in your own spiritual dedication, the point of being a bodhisattva is to share that. So that's in some way a response to Martin's question about, well, do we have a teacher or not a teacher? Is somebody enlightened or not? And of course, in the earlier chapter, the question about liberation and bondage talked about liberation as being applying one's awareness of Dharma skillfully, liberatively, effectively.

[15:20]

So how do we actually generate love? Thereby she generates the love that is truly a refuge for all living beings. The love that is peaceful because free of grasping. The love that is not feverish because free of passions. The love that accords with reality because it is equanimous in all three times. The love that is without conflict because free of the violence of the passions. The love that is non-dual because it is involved neither with the external nor with the internal. So it's not to love illusory beings without being stuck in a view of them as external or as internal. The love that is imperturbable because totally ultimate. Thereby she generates the love that is firm, it's high resolve, unbreakable, like a diamond, the love that is pure, purified in its intrinsic nature, the love that is even, its aspirations being equal, the saint's love that has eliminated its enemy, so a saint that is probably an arhat in this case, does not see these illusory beings as enemies.

[16:43]

It's possible for us to see some beings as enemies. We can all imagine someone we think of in our own life or in the world as the enemy, you know, in some way somebody's doing bad, but to eliminate that view of that person as part of this love that the Amala Kirti is suggesting. The enemy might be weeping, might be clinging. The enemy is not the enemy of other, but... It could be that too. In the footnote it says, the folk etymology of Arhat is Aranam Hamter, killer of enemies, and the enemies being passions and ignorance. Right. So the ultimate enemy is the ignorance and passions that separate us from others. So to eliminate those enemies. I was just going to say that. Thank you. He goes so far as to say, this translation says,

[17:46]

What it doesn't say is how he generates it, it just says that Bodhisattva generates this, and then tells you what kind of love Bodhisattva generates, but it doesn't tell you how to generate it. Right. He does. When Bodhisattva considers all living beings in the way that he's described... How does he generate the great love? He considers beings in such a way he thinks to himself, he meditates on, just as I have realized the Dharma, so should I teach it to living beings. And in that way, generates the great love. So to actually be concerned for all living beings, to actually just to be committed to sharing whatever Dharma has arisen in your heart with all living beings, even though they're empty. And so in a way we can see all of these as hows also. This is what happens. But just to hear this, these are modes of it.

[18:56]

So it's the Bodhisattva's love that continuously develops living beings. The Tathagata's love that understands reality. The Buddha's love that causes living beings to awaken from their sleep. Spontaneous love, fully enlightened spontaneously. so forth, the love that is enlightenment, because it is unity of experience. So all of these, in a way, you can see these as what that love is, but also they're kind of, you know, these are the manners in which, in a sense, these are how, if you hear that this is what the Bodhisattva's love does, is like, then to consider each of these. You know, you might take any one of these or any bunch of these, to consider them as an expression of bodhisattva love. And what does that mean? And actually, anything you read in a sutra is a meditation instruction. So each of these could be considered a meditation instruction on love, or all of them together. The love that is great compassion because it infuses the Mahayana with radiance.

[20:07]

So it's a radiant love. The love that is never exhausted because it acknowledges voidness and selflessness. So that's interesting. To inexhaustible love because it considers the emptiness and selflessness of that love. The love that is giving because it bestows the gift of dharma free of the tight fist of a bad teacher. That's an interesting translation. I think Watson's is a little different. But to share, I think Watson's is something like sharing open-handedly and sharing. easily, but to give of the dharma freely. What does he say, Kenneth? I treat someone with compassion that hides nothing, proceeding with the purity of an upright mind. Okay. So the love that is morality because it improves immoral living beings, the love that is tolerance because it protects both self and others, so to tolerate both self and others, to tolerate the imagined distinction between self and others, which is real in a sense, but also as illusory, as foam and bubble, and to tolerate that difference.

[21:16]

The love that is effort because it takes responsibility for all living beings. That's worth considering. The effort of love is to take responsibility for all living beings. That's what the Bodhisattva's love is. The love that is contemplation because it causes attainment at the proper time. And in the note Thurman says, or at an opportune time, so to attain some understanding or some expression of that in an appropriate, timely way. The love that is liberative technique because it shows the way everywhere. The love that is without formality because it is pure in motivation. the love that is without deviation because it acts from decisive motivation. So a lot of this has to do with purifying intention, right? To see other beings and to see the way in which one's own intention to love is expressing or not expressing. So, in a sense, these are gradual practices. This is a description of how bodhisattvas love, but also to take on any one of these is to work in yourself to see how we all

[22:28]

may be able to love this way at times and probably are not able to love this way in lots of times. But again, these are meditation instructions, practice instructions. The love that is high resolve because without passions, that is without deceit because non-artificial, that is happiness because it introduces living beings to the happiness of Buddha. Such Manjushri is the great love of a Bodhisattva. this is the paramitas, so there's an equation of the great love with the paramitas. Yeah, there are various teachings in, yeah, giving morality, tolerance, effort, right. So there are various systems of practice that are embedded in a lot of these kinds of lists in this one too. Then Manjushree asks, what is the great compassion of a Bodhisattva? So this is a little, the first one is the great, is Maha, Maitri, I think this is Maha Karuna.

[23:36]

So in a sense, there's a distinction here between love and compassion. Of course, they're totally related. And Vimalakirti says, it is the giving of all accumulated roots of virtue to all living beings. So at the end of every chant we do in the Zenda, there's a dedication, may our intention equally penetrate every being or various other dedications to extend our practice to all beings. This is the great compassion here. Whatever roots of virtue we accumulate to give them, to relinquish them, to intend them, to wish that they be shared by all living beings is the kind of loving attitude and compassion of the Bodhisattva. And what is the great joy of the Bodhisattva? To be joyful and without regret in giving. So, what is the equanimity? To benefit both self and others. To watch one resort when terrified by fear of life.

[24:40]

At that point, the Bodhisattva takes refuge in the magnanimity of the Buddha. then where does the bodhisattva take her stand? She should stand in equanimity toward all living beings. So that's actually pretty... To stand in equanimity toward all living beings, if we think about that as a real practice, is challenging. What should... So, the Malakirti goes on to say, to live for the liberation of all living beings, to liberate them from their passions, to apply himself appropriately, to apply himself to productionlessness and to destructionlessness, is appropriately applying himself. And then there's this interesting part, Manjushri says, what is it, so the Malakirti's talking about productionlessness and destructionlessness, to see that nothing arises and that nothing is destroyed ultimately.

[25:53]

And Manjushri asks, what is that? What is not produced and what is not destroyed? The Malakirti says, evil is not produced and good is not destroyed. And then Manjushri asks, what is the root of good and evil? And Thurman says materiality, I think we might translate that as materialism, or acquisitiveness of the material, is the root of both good and evil. Watson translates it as the body. I don't think that's what's referred to here. I may be wrong, but I don't think so. Manjushri asks, what is the root of that? So Manjushri is always asking, what is that? What's the essence of each of these qualities? How does one do this? Manjushri is constantly questioning and asking, what is the point of this? And Vimalakirti says, desire is the root. What is the root of desire and attachment? Unreal construction, false concepts, fabricated construction is the root of desire, and the root of that is false concepts or upside down thinking.

[26:57]

And Manjushri says that, what is the root of the false concept? And Vimalakirti says baselessness. I like Watson's translation for that, groundless assumptions. So the root of false concepts, the root of our upside down thinking, the root of our misperception or misconception is groundless or baseless assumptions. What's the root of that? When something is groundless, how can it have any root? Therefore, all things stand on this groundlessness. So this is another exercise in taking back our desires, attachments, and so forth, and our practice back to emptiness. Yeah, he cuts through in a certain way.

[28:00]

Yeah, he can be snide. I think that's true. But he's doing that to Manjushri for Manjushri's benefit. Well, if you see it as snide, it's snide. I don't know. How many think he's been molecured to use snide? Well, we have at least a few people who perceive the snide. How many think Vimalakirti is not snide? How many think Vimalakirti is both snide and not snide? How many think Vimalakirti is neither snide nor not snide? Okay. He has the appropriate response. I have a strong attachment to any thought. So are you attached to non-snideness though? No, I'm attached to not having an opinion.

[29:00]

On the matter of snideness there is no dharma that arises in your thought stream, is that...? Okay, thereupon. So, but I think the important thing about, this is one of their, these kind of, you know, in a sense, heady, it's not conceptual, and maybe, I don't know if it's intellectual or not, but it certainly is, it seems abstract, some of it anyway. This discussion about how, but it's all a discussion about how arises the great compassion of the Bodhisattva. So this whole discussion is about this basic question, How does the bodhisattva generate great love toward these illusory beings, which are us? There's one thing that I want to say here, just because I like it. Kevin wants to say something. I want to say something. I'd like to make a mantra. Okay. Manjushri says, what is the root of false and empty distinctions? Vimalakirti says, topsy-turvy thinking is the root.

[30:05]

Topsy-turvy what? Topsy-turvy thinking. There's a translation. Yeah, that's literally, the Chinese is literally upside-down views or topsy-turvy thinking, and Thurman translates it as false concept. But yeah, I think that's a very clear and kind of colorful way of describing what happens when we start thinking in certain ways, which is how we think most of the time. Doreen? Would you put that extension? No, I would not at all. In fact, if it's bothering people next time, I'll extinguish it immediately, yes. So what's the difference between that and unreal construction? Unreal, well, let's see what, I think looking at Watson is actually helpful in this passage. Watson says false and empty distinctions. to construct, to make distinctions, to construct falsely, false distinctions is one thing, and then from that comes, or that comes from upside-down view, unreal view.

[31:22]

So it's a distinction, so that in itself is a kind of distinction in terms of the process involved mentally, that there's this basic upside-down view of the way things are, and then based on that one makes false distinctions. So, after this discussion about the nature of generating great love and compassion, a certain goddess who lived in that house, having heard this teaching of the Dharma of the great heroic Bodhisattvas, and being delighted, pleased, and overjoyed, manifested herself in a material body. We're entering a world here, we've been in this world since we entered Jamal Kirti's room, where there are all these beings floating around, some of them in non-material bodies, and this is a goddess who can choose to manifest in a material body. So that's the way the spirit world works, you know, there are spirits around in the fields and in the trees, and some of them sound like birds, and sometimes they manifest physically, and sometimes we see some of these manifestations, and in this case,

[32:31]

this goddess appears and she showers the great spiritual heroes, the Bodhisattvas and the great disciples with heavenly flowers. So we kind of went over this section, I think, last time. So I'll just do a quick recap. The flowers fell and they kind of just glanced off the bodies of the Bodhisattvas, but the great disciples, like Sariputra, the flowers stuck to them. And then some of them, like Shariputra, tried to shake the flowers off of them, and the flowers wouldn't come off. Sad. Then the goddess said to the venerable Shariputra... We had a reading last time, and this is one of those wonderful passages, and I just think it's... I'd like to... Since... So who... Let's see. Martha, can you read the goddess, please? And Kevin, why don't you be Shariputra? So are you reading from the... I've got it.

[33:37]

You've got Thurman? I have... Oh, you have Thurman. Okay, good. Starting where? Um, starting... Do not say that. Reverend Shariputra, why do you shake these flowers? Oh, Reverend Shariputra, why do you shake these flowers? Goddess, these flowers are not proper for religious persons. And we are trying, and so we are trying to shake them off. Do not say that, Reverend Shariputra. Why? These flowers are proper indeed. Why? Such flowers have neither constructual thought nor discrimination. But the elder Shariputra has both constructual thought and discrimination. Is this right, all in quotes here? Yes, that's you. Reverend Shariputra, in propriety for one who has renounced the world for the discipline of the rightly taught Dharma, consists of constructual thought and discrimination, yet the elders are full of such thoughts. One who is without such thoughts is always proper. Reverend Shariputra, see how these flowers do not stick to the bodies of these great spiritual heroes, the Bodhisattvas.

[34:44]

This is because they have eliminated constructual thoughts and discriminations. For example, evil spirits have power over fearful men, but cannot disturb the fearless. Likewise, those intimidated by fear of the world are in the power of forms, sounds, smells, tastes, and textures, which do not disturb those who are free from fear of the passions inherent in the constructive world. Thus, these flowers stick to the bodies of those who have not eliminated their instincts for the passions, and do not stick to the bodies of those who have eliminated their instincts. Therefore, the flowers do not stick to the bodies of these bodhisattvas who have abandoned all instincts." Good, let's pause there. So we did talk about this last time, but I think there's a lot of, I think there's some, there are a lot of ways to think about this, and it's, you know, we have ideas about what's proper and improper. So part of what this chapter is about, and the Sutra is about, is how we approach practice.

[35:47]

So, Vimalakirti is obviously criticizing the Arhat path, Why is it that the Arhats can't shake off the flowers, and how does that relate to our practice? And I kind of want to pause here, because this is such a wonderful example of something. Yes? Well, they're attached to this view that flowers are bad, that any ornamentation is bad. They're guilty of this groundless assumption. Right. Okay. Well, it's more than that. They've taken vows not to adorn themselves. Part of the vow of monks is not to wear adornment, not to get involved in flowers and songs, perfumes. Right. It's improper. For religious persons is how Dharman translates this, but I think it's kind of monk practice.

[36:50]

So there's a formal practice that Shariputra and these arhats you know, that they have actually foresworn, as you said, ornamentation, decoration. There's a vimalakirti saying being attached to that very notion is why the flowers are sticking, not because of the vial itself. Right. So there's a notion of purity here. There's a notion of how to practice that the arhats are involved in, the chariputra and these other disciples are involved in, and it does not include having flowers strewn all over their heads. This is not their practice, you know. So I don't know, has anybody, have any of you ever gone into the Zendo and Green Gulch and seen somebody wearing bright red? Yeah, sat next to people wearing bright red. Was it shocking? I actually wore bright red a few times. I've worn white in Zendo. I actually had a lecturer last fall, a Tibetan

[37:52]

in a red shop. It was really exciting. But here in this window, it's one of us. I'm just wondering what, you know, how, you know, I mean I like black myself, you know. I kind of like wearing black robes. It's very simple and elegant to kind of all wear black. Some people think it's depressing. Not always, but if I am depressed, black does not help. If people were wearing red, would that cure your depression? But if everybody wore red in there every day, would that cure your depression? Anyway, I see what you're saying. Yes, so the Rajneeshis only wear red. They might be shocked if somebody walked in wearing black. Anyway, we do have ideas of what is practice and what is not practice. Or it's possible. Excuse me, I don't mean to impute that. I have ideas like that. Some of you may occasionally have had ideas of what is practice and what is not practice.

[38:57]

This is what Vimalakirti is talking about here, that we have ideas of what is proper and what is not proper. This doesn't mean that you have to wear red into the zendo. You can wear black into the zendo. But if you think that wearing black in the zendo is better than wearing red in the zendo, it's a little bit funny. And somebody might pour red paint on you someday, and you might be upset. And you don't need to get upset if somebody pours red paint on you, actually. It's also appropriateness. I mean, often we have dancing in the zendo after a sashimi, or there's music. We didn't used to in the old days. There's music. Oh, once that goes on. People in the city. We've had... We had square dancing in the Sendo one year. Was anybody else there? And we've had... I remember one Sashin that somebody brought in a piano... Rev had somebody bring in a piano and play some songs to end the Sashin. So, I think we are willing to play with our forms.

[39:59]

I remember one time at Tassajara, Brother David came to visit. And he happened to arrive Do you know, Anna, who Brother David is? He's a Benedictine monk who lives in Big Sur and is an old Zen student, but he's also this Catholic monk, but he calls himself a Zenedictine. He's an old Zen student, but he's this Catholic monk, and he arrived, and it happened to be that the day he arrived was Halloween, or Halloween Eve. And it just happened to be that he arrived in the late afternoon, just in time to go to evening service, and it just happened to be that Various people had planned to wear unusual costumes into the zendo for that evening service. And it happened that the doshi, who was the shuso, the head monk for that practice period. Does anybody know Robert Lytle? Does anybody remember Robert? Anyway, he was the shuso then. And he was kind of, you know, have you seen the movie Frankenstein?

[41:00]

He was kind of, you can imagine Robert actually, quite easily. He had various makeup. Does anybody know Brian Fikes was the G.E.C.O. and he was dressed up as Igor and he'd pump under his robe. And other people had sheets over them. And Brother David was there for evening service. And I think Robert was a little embarrassed when he walked in and saw that Brother David was there. But we went through evening service. And Brother David was giving a class that evening and he said, this proves to me that you really respect these religious forms, because you can play with them. So, there are occasions when it's okay to wear flowers, even if you're a monk. Could it also be a pertinent hair tag, and that was a woman who was showering them with these flowers? Sure, it's shocking. If it was the Buddha doing this, then it would be fine. If it was the Buddha showering himself. Yeah, yeah, this is even more improper.

[42:02]

A woman. Yes, okay. I wonder if they still wouldn't question it, even if the Buddha did do it. Well, there are all these sutras, you know, and we might even see this in this sutra, where a Buddha says something or shines some light and suddenly there are clouds that appear and it rains, not just flowers, but parasols and jewels and... And Hershey's Kisses. And Hershey's Kisses, and yes, all kinds of adornments. So Buddhas do these things. They kind of generate these clouds that rain all kinds of wonderful things. So this is about impropriety and what is proper for religious practice. So just to the point where the goddess says, therefore the flowers do not stick to the bodies of these bodhisattvas because they've abandoned all instincts. They've abandoned all... The bodhisattvas, unlike the arhats, have

[43:04]

are not instinctually passionate, okay? He doesn't say that they have eliminated all passions. In fact, they have compassion, which is passion together with these illusory beings. But they've eliminated their instincts for the passions. In other words, they're not reacting instinctually, unconsciously. to avoid or attract themselves or involve themselves with passions. So therefore, the bodhisattvas can be very happy to have flowers rain on them and they fall off right away. And after this discourse, the venerable Shariputra says, goddess, how long have you been in this house? He changes the question. Let's just, I want to keep reading this. Let's see, let's get another goddess in Shariputra. Tori, would you be the goddess? Sure. Matt, would you be Shariputra? Goddess, how long have you been in this house? I have been here as long as the elder has been in liberation.

[44:10]

Then, have you been in this house for quite some time? Has the elder been in liberation for quite some time? At that, the elder, Shariputra, fell silent. Elder, you are the foremost of the wise. Why do you not speak? Now, when it is your turn, you do not answer the question. Since liberation is inexpressible, Goddess, I do not know what to say. All the syllables pronounced by the elder have the nature of liberation. Why? Liberation is neither internal nor external, nor can it be apprehended apart from them. Likewise, syllables are neither internal nor external, nor can they be apprehended anywhere else. Therefore, Reverend Shariputra, do not point to liberation by abandoning speech. Why? The holy liberation is the equality of all things. Goddess, is not liberation the freedom from desire, hatred, and folly? Liberation is freedom from desire, hatred, and folly.

[45:14]

That is the teaching for the excessively proud. But those free of pride are taught that the very nature of desire, hatred, and folly in itself is liberation. Excellent. Excellent, Goddess. What have you attained? What have you realized that you have such eloquence? Okay, thank you. So, again, he changes the subject. Yeah, so this, those free of pride, I like Burton Watson's translation there, arrogance. I think that's, this excessive pride is kind of arrogance. So this is, again, another wonderful, important teaching here about language. So, Shariputra kind of hesitates. He has false modesty. He's not going to. Or he doesn't know how to express his liberation. And he is this liberated arhat. I mean, he is liberated in the sense of having purified himself. But he cops out, as someone said, that he says his liberation isn't expressible.

[46:15]

So this is, the previous section was talking about our ideas about propriety. This has to do with our ideas about speech. This is also about propriety in a way. the goddess affirms that language itself is the nature of liberation. Syllables are neither internal nor external, nor can they be apprehended anywhere. Language itself also can be used for liberation. It doesn't develop so much in this passage, but I think this passage is kind of a background for the whole idea of Koan practice. that to use living words rather than dead words, to use liberative words rather than words that see these words as illusory, but then how does one use these words to point to that? Shari Putra says that, that isn't liberation freedom from desire, greed and delusions from anger,

[47:26]

desire and folly. So this is pretty conventional, traditional Buddhism, right? To get free of greed, hate, and delusion is liberation. Isn't this something you may have heard somewhere? Isn't this some idea we have of what enlightenment would be, to be free of greed, hate, and delusion? Well, the goddess says that that is only a teaching for for arrogant, excessively proud people. So some of us at times are that way, and maybe we need to hear that and try and get rid of our greed, hate, and delusion. But actually, the very nature of greed, hate, and delusion is itself liberation. That's what the goddess is saying. So this is pretty radical, challenging stuff, actually. I think this just means that the very nature of desire, hatred, and falling itself is just empty. There's no self there. I don't think it's saying, it's not saying, she's not saying it's empty, she's saying it's liberation, which is not the same as empty.

[48:30]

No? No. Realization of emptiness. Anyhow, I don't understand and I didn't believe this. Before I say anything, does anybody else want to say something about this? I think what's missing here is liberating others. I mean, just if you yourself are free from delusion, there's still a piece missing for a true bodhisattva. That's part of it, right. So not to shy away from. greed, hate and delusion, in the same way that one might shy away from flowers or various other things that one thought would be improper. That's not what I meant. That's not what I meant. I was really saying, in addition to those things that you want to be free from, you also want to help others get free from those things. Right, right. So like Vimalakirti takes on an illness, so he takes on greed, hate and delusion.

[49:33]

But I think this, yes, yes to both of you, and also to the other idea that I was adding to what you were saying, that one does not shy away from greed, hate, and delusion any more than from so-called improprieties. Tori? Yeah, I was just going to continue what you were saying. Please. There it is. Okay, good. So to study greed, hate and delusion, to experience it, to witness it, to observe it, to see how it works, is something that is, that might be at least liberating. But also, like, what you were saying, what's your name? Karen. Karen. Wouldn't it liberate other beings if you were free of greed, hate and delusion?

[50:41]

Can that be actually part of liberating other beings, is being free? It might be. But I think what the Goddess is saying is something more than anyone said yet. But I... Not including everything that's been said, but... She says, literally, those free of pride are taught that the very nature of desire, hatred and folly is itself liberation. What do you think, son? This is such a pond in Chapter 8. Oh, something ahead. Where did you free us from our curtsy as the voice of all the way to the qualities of the Buddha. His responses from the voice of the long way. It follows the way to the team. So experiencing desire, hatred and folly would be the way. But I think, yes, yes, but also the very nature of desire, hatred, and folly is a self-liberation.

[51:45]

Reminds me of an old Zen story. Zhao Zhou asked his teacher, what is the way? And the teacher said, ordinary mind is the way. Or a monk asked, Matsu, what is Buddha? And he said, mind is Buddha. So Buddha is not something somewhere outside of greed, hate, and delusion. Liberation is the very nature of desire or greed, of hatred or aversion, of folly or confusion, is liberation. So... It's also saying there's no place to stop, nowhere to rest. Right. No rest for the wicked, right? So the very nature of the way things are. So greed, hate, and delusion also are like bubbles about to burst.

[52:46]

But that's also the world we live in, right? Us illusory beings. That's what I meant by no self. Excuse me? That's what I meant by no self. I'm just wondering about that. That's why I want to know. I don't understand. What is it that you're saying is no self? I think that's a different discussion, but I'm not sure what you mean by no self, and we'd have to talk about that a while. Okay, dependent co-arising. Well, what is the dependent co-arising of greed, hate and delusion? Or how do we study karma? Or Dogen says, to study the way is to study the self. So we live in this world of greed, hate, and delusion. We live in the midst of flowers and bird singing, and we have attractions and aversions.

[53:52]

Right in that is liberation, or that itself is liberation. But I think the point that you're making, Karen, is very important to this. that this is, in the liberation of the goddess and the dharmalakirti you're talking about, this is turned towards, again, the whole context of this conversation is how does the bodhisattva generate great love toward these illusory beings? This is the topic for all of this. So how is our desire or anger or confusion in itself How does it liberate beings? And how do we study it to liberate beings? And how do we express it to liberate beings? So the arhats are trying to run away from greed, hate, and delusion. The arhats have cleansed themselves of their personal greed, hate, and delusion. Now for some beings that might be helpful to see somebody like that, who is actually like a saint or pure, I don't know.

[55:01]

Any of you ever seen any saints? Maybe that's how the Dalai Lama works. The Dalai Lama's pretty impressive. His own is the Dalai Lama. Does anybody here ever meet Issan? I think he's maybe the closest that I personally have known to a saint, but he certainly was not free of greed, hate, and delusion. Issan Dorsey, who founded the Hartford Street Synod. I think of saints, I think of people who've seen Lit Hard, Very controlled. OK, so that's the image that we get of Shariputra. But I'm taking saints at face value. I mean, really, there are people who have purified themselves of greed, hate, and delusion. And the mature Mahayana says that those two are doing bodhisattva practice because they're encouraging to some people. There was once a Japanese Rinzai Zen teacher who was visiting Green Gulch many, many years ago.

[56:04]

And I remember sitting in the tan, listening to a lecture, I don't know who was lecturing, whether it was Weber, Baker, Rocher, I don't remember who it was, but I could see this Japanese teacher down, you know, from where I was sitting, also sitting on the ton, and he was just sitting there. I mean, there was not a single muscle that was holding onto anything in his body. He was upright and just sitting there. And it was just, it was just, the tandem was just very clear. So I don't know if that's being a saint, but he certainly, there was nothing that he was holding onto. You could just see it in the way he sat there. So seeing such beings may be encouraging, but that's not necessarily what is liberating for everyone. Most of us are enmeshed in greed, hate, and delusion, or at least I am. I don't know about any of you, but not Martin. But how do we see somebody practicing liberation with greed, hate, and delusion?

[57:08]

right in the midst of desire, anger, confusion. So liberation is not apart from that. So that's, in any way, this is part of what's, I think, you know, this is what I feel from what the goddess is saying here. So is it just to be still with it? Say that again? Just to be still with it? Uh-huh. Uh-huh. So, to be in the midst of greed, hate and delusion and to not have any greed or hatred or delusion about it. Right. So, trying to get rid of anger is more anger. Right. Trying to grasp objects of desire or greed is just greed. But how to be in the midst of that without trying to do anything about it. And once you do that too, then you have compassion for other people who are going through all So yeah, we're all confused, greedy, raging beasts.

[58:10]

Except for Martin. Except for Martin. So, but is liberation like, does that mean that liberation is somewhere over there where only Martin can live, or is liberation to have something to do with us too? That's liberation, actually. What? I'm kind of scared of this liberation. Right, we are. We are. We think it's easier to purify ourselves of all greed, hate, and delusion than to actually deal with the liberation of bodhisattvas. Right. This is why Shariputra keeps running away from this goddess. You don't really want to wake up. Scary. Imagine seeing that everything is just beautifully liberated just the way it is. I mean, gosh, it's scary, yeah. Can we sign up for program B? Yeah, hey, let's get rid of all my desires and all my, you know, anger and just sit there like a Zen robot. Okay, anyway, so let's move along.

[59:14]

Let's see what else happens here, because there's more to come. So let's see, let's get a new Shariputrin. This would be a good Sesame Street. Let's get a Sesame Street. Sonya, would you be the goddess next? Do you have the Thurman version? I'm really interested in how you pull that off. Well, who is it that says free to be you and me? Why would that be correct? So is Miss Piggy the goddess, and who is? Yes. Big bird. Big Bird or Shariputra? Okay. Okay, would you read from here, the Goddess? Bob, do you have a thermon this time? Would you be Shariputra, please? Reading from Shariputra starts with Excellent, Excellent Goddess. Excellent, Excellent Goddess, pray, what have you attained? What have you realized that you have such Therefore, I have such eloquence.

[60:19]

Whoever thinks, I have attained, I have realized, is overly proud in the discipline of the well-taught Dharma. Goddess, do you belong to the disciple vehicle, to the solitary vehicle, or to the great vehicle? I belong to the disciple vehicle when I teach it to those who need it. I belong to the solitary vehicle when I teach the twelve links of dependent origination to those who need them. And since I never abandoned the great compassion, I belong to the great vehicle, as all need that teaching to attain ultimate liberation. Okay, let's just skip the next paragraph, just because I want to get to more of the juicy stuff. Can you skip down to Reverend Shariputra? I've been in this house. Reverend Shariputra, I have been in this house for twelve years and I've heard no discourses concerning the disciples and solitary sages. but have heard only those concerning the great love, the great compassion, and the inconceivable qualities of the Buddha. Great. So this is the world that this goddess lives in and that Jamalakirti lives in.

[61:22]

All that happens here is great love, great compassion, and inconceivability. There's none of this other teaching which which the goddess says she will teach to those who need it. She does teach these lesser teachings of purification and so forth. But what happens in Vimalakirti's house, where the goddess has been hanging out for 12 years, is this great love, great compassion, and inconceivable qualities. And just in the interest of moving ahead, I'm going to skip the eight strange and wonderful things. But there are these eight wonderful strange things that happen in this house of the Malakirti, and you can read about them. There's a light of golden hue which shines constantly. There's the fact that whoever enters the house no longer is troubled by passions. Can you imagine? The third strange and wonderful thing is that it's never forsaken by these gods and deities. This house is never empty of sounds of the dharma.

[62:24]

One always hears the rhythms, songs, and music of the deities and men, and the sound of the infinite dharma of Buddha. There are these treasures there. Anyway, there's all this wonderful stuff that happens in this house. Can you guys pick it up? Page 61. Just before that, Sonia, if you can... Reverend Shariputra, these eight strange and wonderful things are seen in this house. Who then, seeing such inconceivable things, would believe in teaching the disciples? Goddess, what prevents you from transforming yourself out of your female state? The Watson translation is even more direct. What prevents you from changing out of your female body? Although I have sought my female state for these 12 years, I have not yet found it. Rev. Shariputra, the physician to incarnate a woman by magic, would you ask her what prevents you from transforming yourself out of your female state?

[63:30]

No, such a woman would not really exist, so what would there be to transform? Well, so, Rev. Shariputra, all things do not really exist. Now, would you think what prevents one whose nature is that of a magical incarnation from transforming herself out of her female state? Thereupon, the goddess employed her magical power to cause the elder Shariputra to appear in her form and to cause herself to appear in his form. Then the goddess, transforming into Shariputra, said to Shariputra, transformed into a goddess. Reverend Shariputra. What prevents you from transforming yourself out of your human state?" And Shariputra transformed into the goddess, replied, I no longer appear in the form of a male. My body has changed into the body of a woman. I do not know what to transform. If the elder could attain, no, if the elder could again change out of the female state, then all women could also change out of their female states.

[64:47]

All women appear in the form of women in just the same way as the elder appears in the form of a woman. While they are not women in reality, they appear in the form of a woman. With this in mind, the Buddha said, in all things there is neither male nor female. Then the goddess released her magical power and each returned to their ordinary form. She then said, Reverend Shariputra, what have you done with your Kriyayoga mind? Oh, I need to make it. I've been practicing it. Shariputra? I neither made it, nor did I change it. Just so. All things are neither made nor changed, and that they are not made and not changed. That's the teaching of the Buddha. Goddess, where will you be born when you transmigrate after death?

[65:49]

Again, he changes the subject. There's a lot to talk about there, but let's just run through to the end, because we're almost there, and then we'll go back over the whole thing. Where will you be born where all the magical incarnations of the Tathagatas are born? Did you want to change? But the emanated incarnations of the Tathagata do not transmigrate, nor are they born. All things and living beings are just the same. They do not transmigrate, nor are they born. Goddess, how soon will you attain the perfect enlightenment of Buddhahood? At such time as you, Elder, become endowed once more with the qualities of an ordinary individual, then will I attain the perfect enlightenment of Buddhahood. Goddess, it is impossible that I should become endowed once more with the qualities of an ordinary individual. So this is a technical point, that an arhat, by definition, has fully, really, has completely, like, gotten rid of all desires and anger. I mean, it's just like, they can't happen anymore, okay? I mean, it's like a technical, this is just true, okay?

[66:50]

Just so, Ravindra Sariputra, it is impossible that I should attain the perfect enlightenment of Buddhahood. Why? Because perfect enlightenment stands upon the impossible. Because it is impossible, no one attains the perfect enlightenment of Buddhahood. But the Tathagata has declared, the Tathagatas, who are as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, have attained perfect Buddhahood, are attaining perfect Buddhahood, and will Reverend Shariputra, the expression, the Buddhas of the past, present and future, is a conventional expression made up of a certain number of syllables. The Buddhas are neither past, nor present, nor future. Their enlightenment transcends the three times. But tell me, Elder, have you attained sainthood? It is attained because there is no attainment. Just so. There is perfect enlightenment because there is no attainment of perfect enlightenment. Then Vimalakirti said to Sariputra, Reverend Sariputra, this goddess has already served 92 million billion Buddhists.

[67:58]

She plays with the super knowledges. She has truly succeeded in all her vows. She has gained the tolerance of the birthlessness of things. She has actually attained irreversibility. She can live wherever she wishes on the strength of her vow to develop living beings. So we have this goddess who's obviously this very great bodhisattva, and somehow, you know, with patriarchal history being the way it is, they never give her name, you know? It's, I don't know. Anyway, maybe she's... She probably appears under many names, right? Just kind of passing, it's interesting, this translation here, flavor of the Dogasana. Right. It's a one-room house. Yeah, right. This is all something happening in this magical room of Vimala Kirti's, right?

[69:03]

But there's this goddess who lives there. I don't know if that's Vimala Kirti's female side or if there's… Anyway, there's this goddess, Bodhisattva, who's there and who you know, dispels this most basic aspect of our sense of self-identity, right? Sariputra is transformed. And so this question, which seems pretty outrageous that Sariputra asks, God is what prevents you from changing out of your female state. This has to be understood in the historical context that in early Buddhism that Sariputra was part of, there was this prejudice that a woman cannot become a Buddha. So you're all going to run away and go back to Christianity or something. I guess not. Me. And this isn't the Dharma. This is, in my humble opinion, this is just the way things were in that culture. But there was this notion that if a woman becomes a very good practitioner, she can turn herself into a man, and then she can be a Buddha.

[70:08]

Except for the little girl in the Lotus Sutra, right? Well, yeah, see, in the Mahayana, there starts to be some challenge to this whole thing. And so the Lotus Sutra also plays with this stuff a lot. But this goddess in this, the Malakirti's goddess friend, goddess Bodhisattva friend, really pulls the rug out from under this whole thing. Even in the Mahayana, though, did you have to be a man for 10 seconds or something? Well, yeah, there are all these ideas in there. They never erase the past, the unrighteous. They supersede them. Well, I mean, we can see that this is, in the Mahayana, this, I mean, she's making great fun of this whole thing. You know, obviously she's a Buddha, she's beyond Buddha, she's a return to Bodhisattva, who can play with the super knowledges. She's at least as advanced as Vimalakirti, or I don't know, we don't have to talk about it in those terms. Yeah, Joy? Was there any specific reasoning behind this? Like, is there? I think the men were afraid. But I mean, is there, is there documented, like,

[71:11]

I'm not sure the exact history of why they got into this in various religions since the patriarchal culture of the last millennium. I'm not sure specifically in Theravada Buddhism why they had this idea. It's probably the same reason that in the Catholic Church women People that had probably had a really hard time getting past that. Well, Indian society was really sexist as well as, you know, they had the untouchables. There was this whole caste, you know, discrimination. But the Buddha did have an order of nuns, somewhat, you know, after some prodding from his stepmother. From Ananda, right? And from Ananda too, yeah. But in this sutra, we see that the whole notion of female, I mean, from the Mahayana precepts and principles and from the inconceivable realm, this idea of male and female is shown to be as ephemeral as the sentient beings who are, I mean, we are male or female, but the essence of that is as empty as bubbles bursting and so forth.

[72:27]

And in terms of the practice, there's obviously this model of this goddess Bodhisattva, who was not deficient in any means in terms of her practice. When the goddess says, I have sought my female state for these 12 years, is she being facetious? Well, can you identify your female? I mean, what is the essence of your being female? I mean, we could talk about it in terms of psychological levels and obviously physiological levels, but essentially, is there really any difference? I mean, there's a difference. And from the point of view of Buddha, from the point of view of Buddha nature, which all of this is talking about, from the point of view of how does the Bodhisattva share love with all these beings who are in essence empty, is there really, what is the essence of the difference?

[73:32]

And the demonstration, I mean, the thing about turning Shariputra, changing body with Shariputra is this perfect expression of that. And Shariputra can't identify how to get rid of his, Shariputra is this fully, realized Arhat who has gotten rid of his desires and his anger and yet suddenly finds himself in a woman's body and is probably horrified and can't do anything about it. He can't see what the female state is all about. It means he can't see what his male state is about either. What is the essence of being a man? Well, I mean, we have cultural models for that. What is the essence of being a woman? I mean, we know that there are differences, but if we try to find the essence and look at different cultures and, you know, look at the animal kingdom and so forth, anyway, this is, but this is a really, you know, this is an example that touches us deeply, right? We all have our own complex, and particularly in this culture and in our confusion about this and in the traditional

[74:36]

macho models and, you know, all of the... I think this is a really good example for us of something that we all have very complex, deep relationships to our own sense of identity as male or female. That doesn't mean that we're not male or female, but here the goddess is showing us that actually, you know, here are these distinctions, fine, but in terms of the inconceivable liberation, you know, what's the essence of that? In terms of, from the point of view of how do we generate love for all beings, from that point of view, what is the essence of that distinction? And that doesn't mean that we stop being men and women, but we also, I mean, we can look at this from modern psychological interpretations, too, and males having female sides and animus and anana and so forth. Anyway, this is, I think that this is an example of our, a very deep example of how we deeply identify ourselves.

[75:37]

I mean, that's probably one of the foremost identifications we make of ourselves. And even that, you know, is ephemeral, is conditioned, is not ultimately real, unless. Also, though, I think that Karen is right. She's really teasing. Sure. But I think also that she's serious. I think that that's kind of about studying the question of what is the essence of this. I think that that's kind of, that's practice, that's bodhisattva practice, is to continuously look for what is the reality of the appearance of essential qualities or essential nature or self-nature But also to study the illusions. Identity, yeah. Specifically because they're illusions, these illusions appear. To love the illusions even. To study them, right. To see liberation in the illusions. To be liberated as a man or as a woman.

[76:40]

But to see that that's not the essence of liberation. The manhood or womanhood is not the essence. Right. I think I was kind of fussing around the same thing that you were just saying. But I get really stuck on the art form of when, like she's playing here with Sharaputra who's projecting onto her that she's a her. So the merely female is the part, to see yourself as merely X, Y, or Z. Yeah, I might have myself as merely female, but how do you dance when you come up against someone who's not merely female or merely male, whatever, they're playing their role wholeheartedly and not get caught there somehow in that dynamic.

[77:48]

You mean if you were Shariputra, what would you do? Yeah, well, maybe that's what I mean. I'm not sure what you're... I mean, I hear what you're saying. I'm having a hard time asking it, because it's kind of like you can kind of get it conceptually. Are you talking about the stereotype? Yeah, how to dance with that in a way, with the stereotype, whatever it is. But you said he projected that she's female. She is female. I mean, she's manifesting in a female body. Yeah, she's a goddess. But what is the essence of that? There's different levels here. Fundamentally, always, she keeps returning to this deepest level, and he's talking about it in terms of all these distinctions. From the flowers on, he's talking before that, he's talking about flowers or ornamentation is bad because it looks like attachment to you know, being attractive or something.

[78:53]

And she's, his aversion to those forms, his aversion to, you know, the decoration is an example of that. So he's doing that with, well, he's making all these distinctions all over the place. And male and female is just another one. But it's particularly, in the context of the sutra, in the context of Indian culture, and then later in Chinese culture, which is maybe even more patriarchal, it's pretty powerful. And then in our context, where we've had various gender liberations or revolutions or whatever, it's still, it's very powerful. To just suddenly imagine yourself changed And what is the essence of that, you know? So we can do it with gender, but do it with, I don't know, do it with being Caucasian or non-Caucasian, or I don't know. Whatever we think of as, whatever is this kind of underlying, I mean, there's many ways in which we identify ourselves on this very deep level, and we make distinctions about it.

[80:05]

And those distinctions are not in the realm, those distinctions are not what liberation is about. And I think in our practice, we think of, you know, we think when we go to sit zazen, we think we're sitting zazen well or not, or we have a clear mind or not, or we have, you know, we're compassionate or not. We make those distinctions. And this is going to, the goddess is pointing to something deeper than those prejudices that are unexamined. So the point is, as you were saying on the subject, To examine the qualities we identify in terms of who is this and how is this liberation, and also in terms of how we see practice. Does that make sense? Does he ever get rid of the... Maybe Shariputra's still walking around with flower petals on him.

[81:08]

Do you think he's still attached? Maybe he showed up in the late 60s and became a hippie. No. I think he's still attached, yeah. I think he's learning. So when the goddess became him, they fell off. Yeah, right. Well, they never actually left, though. It's all an illusion. It's an illusion that is liberation. Anyway, we'll keep looking at that question, how is Sariputra doing here? I think he's loosening up a little, you know, I hope. Yeah, they're really doing a good job on it. We're going to meet again next week. If there's more things to talk about about this chapter, let's do that. I kind of want to focus some on Chapter 10. We don't have time in six weeks to really thoroughly study this whole sutra. I invite you and welcome you all to read the whole thing.

[82:17]

I think we'll look a little bit at Chapter 9 next time, but I'd like to get some suspense, to look in a more concentrated way at Chapter 10, too. Is there something in 10 that you selected out? Yeah. There's this inconceivable feast, and there's the Buddhist loaves and fishes. Yeah, there is. And there's this fragrance universe that appears. And so it kind of is another example of the Malakirti's inconceivable display. And this whole thing about inconceivable is not that there's something that is inconceivable. It's not that there's a liberation that's inconceivable that's different from some other liberation. It's about actually getting us unstuck from the flowers, from whatever flowers we're stuck with. It's about getting us, each of us, as we read this, unstuck from our preconceptions and prejudices and ideas about who we are and what the world is and what liberation is and what spiritual practice is.

[83:30]

That's what The Inconceivable is about. It's about deconstructing our conceivabilities or disconceiving our constructions or something like that. Anyway, chapter 10, I think, is a good one for that. We'll move along next time. Everything is in the realm of inconceivable. Everything is. Greed, hate, and delusion is inconceivable. Excuse me? We'll never be done with any of this. I will try and leave space, in fact, remind me at the beginning of next time, any leftover questions from chapters 1 through 8, we will talk about. And we'll talk about, we'll look at a little bit at least at the most famous chapter in the Sutra, in chapter 9, and then we'll maybe get to chapter 10 next time. Are we meeting next week and not the following week? Yes, we're meeting next week, and we're not meeting the following week, and then we will conclude the week after that.

[84:33]

Excuse me? This is our fourth class, isn't it? It's amazing. I agree. I think six weeks is too short to do much of anything. Way too short. That's why my idea for this class was to do two or maybe three chapters. So earlier in the morning, be nice. That's right. AR, attention.

[85:00]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ