Good morning. I seem to always start with what's happening to me in this process of speaking to a screen. I guess I feel I have to give myself permission for what I'm doing. But what is happening to me is you, finding ways to speak to you who I don't see. At least I see some of you, though. This is good, except the bright lights are a little bit bright to see you either. But what happens to me, that's you.

[01:07]

I try to find ways to talk to you, to those of you that I don't see, except those who are sitting here with me. Yeah, and speaking to you who I don't see and don't know how often you'll be present in successive talks, I am speaking more fundamentally in some ways, maybe, than I ever have. And in the effort to looking at practice as fundamentally as I can for your sake, I find I'm trying to answer questions I've been asking

[02:12]

myself for centuries, well, I mean decades. But maybe for centuries, because there are questions that our generational lineage has been asking for centuries. And I suppose when we enter a new phase of a new context in which practice re-evolves, redevelops itself, we have to ask these fundamental questions. And I think that if we now enter a phase in which the practice develops and reinvents itself, then perhaps this is a time when we should ask these fundamental questions.

[03:34]

Yeah, and they're, it sounds like a big deal, fundamental questions, but really they're very basic, simple questions that are rooted in fundamental assumptions. And that sounds like some big, fundamental questions, but in reality it's the same. These are questions that root in fundamental assumptions. So last week I mentioned three particular questions. yogic practices that I didn't know before I met Suzuki Roshi. And then I spent the rest of my life trying to look at those three and others too. Yeah, and I recognize that those three, implicit in my bringing them up, those three are not only extremely basic, but they're also monastically evolved practices which can be displaced or introduced into Zen lay practice, adept lay practice.

[05:14]

And the three were simply zazen, The distinction between contents of mind and field of mind and the phrasal path or Wado practice. And the three again, very simply, that was Zazen and the distinction between the field of the mind and the contents of the mind, second. And the third, the Wado or the turning sentence practice. Now, the gestural path and the, so far barely mentioned, the path of interiority are monastically evolved practices which are rather harder to translate into lay adept practice.

[06:23]

Which one, the gestural and which one? And the path of interiority. Okay. Also, die Praxis des gestischen Pfades und die Praxis des Pfades der Innerlichkeit oder Innenwendigkeit, das sind Pfade oder Übungen, die etwas schwerer sind, sie in das Laienleben einzuführen. These two, I'm only mentioning two right now, but these two both require... A recognition of more basic assumptions and a variety of yogic skills. These two, and I'm just naming two right now, but these two, they set a wider range of yogic basic concepts ahead, the knowledge of these yogic basic concepts, and a larger selection of yogic abilities.

[07:30]

Right now I feel they're at least... Right now, I don't yet know how to make these two paths, which I'm mentioning now, these two paths more accessible. I have to find a way to... conceptually, accessibly express them. And I think it's probably going to turn out to be easy. I just haven't discovered how to do it yet. Wahrscheinlich werde ich am Ende feststellen, dass es gar nicht so schwer ist, aber jetzt im Moment habe ich jedenfalls noch nicht entdeckt, wie das gehen soll.

[08:38]

Wahrscheinlich sage ich euch das auch, weil ich euch mehr verspreche, was dann noch alles passiert und was noch alles kommt, nur dass ich gerade noch nicht weiß, wie es gehen soll. Or I'm expressing how much I want to share this with you and want to find a way to do it because it's so extraordinary and exciting to me. Okay, so let me go back to Zazen. Now, I would like to speak about Zazen practice right now in a way that not only illuminates Zazen practice or refreshes how we talk about it. And also illuminates, we can call it an illumination, also illuminates or explicates perhaps a bit, instrumentalizes how we can realize the field of mind.

[10:11]

And the field of mind is, of course, in contrast to the contents of mind. And the teaching and the third thing I would like to, just by this one example, also illustrate or raise the problem of, that agency and self are not the same thing. Self-agency and non-self-agency, how can I put it? That not all, the best way, not all agency is self-agency.

[11:19]

And the third point I want to address here is that agency and self-agency are not the same. How can I say that exactly? Maybe the best way to say it is that not every form of agency, i.e. of action, Now, in this inner debate I'm having with you and with myself, And just to cause a problem. If one of the three marks of existence or aspects of existence are, you know, change, suffering and no self.

[12:22]

Wenn eines der drei Daseinsmerkmale, und die drei sind ja die Veränderung des Leiden und das dritte kein Selbst, nicht Selbst. Wer zum Kuckuck, wenn es doch kein Selbst gibt, wer macht denn dann eigentlich diese Praxis? Who is following or not following the precepts? Wer befolgt oder befolgt nicht die Gelöbnisse? Or how do we initiate or develop intentionality if there's no self? Oder wie initiieren wir oder entwickeln wir die Intentionalität unserer eigenen Absichten, wenn es kein Selbst gibt? Well, if there's no self, then we have to think, yes, maybe we have to separate agency from self.

[13:28]

And if there's no self, then maybe we have to make this distinction between what I call agency and the self. Yeah. You know, in yogic Buddhist culture, the ten directions are not a location where you are. It's not a directional location. Anyway, the ten directions point toward you. The eight compass directions and up and down. They point toward you. It's not somewhere you can go to. In Buddhist culture, the ten directions are designed in such a way that they show you. In other words, these are not directions you can go in. So this is a way of looking at it, which isn't just a simple difference, because it turns the ten postures, excuse me, it turns the ten directions into a mental posture.

[14:42]

And as a mental posture, the ten directions can also be felt as a wado. So, if you are the ten directions, if you start to walk, In any direction, there's some intentionality there in directionality and intentionality in the walking, whether you like it or not. Now, what the challenge and the problem I'm presenting here, if there's no self, is somehow everything all at once, the instantiation of everything all at once, somehow fundamental agency?

[16:05]

And the problem that I imagine here is then, then the question is, then the question is, somehow everything at once, the fact that everything exists at once, this instantiation, this, it doesn't even exist in German, this manifestation or so, is that then a different kind of fundamental act of action? Now, I'm presenting this also to say that there's some things like this, what I just presented, we can't, it's a real problem, but we can't actually answer it without really simplifying it into something trivial or nonsense. Yeah, we can't verbally, languagely get to a conscious understanding of it, but we can instantiate it or make it into something we feel the actuality of it in our actions.

[17:34]

Wir können das sprachlich vielleicht nicht fassen, bewusst sprachlich fassen, aber es ist etwas, was wir instantiate, was wir darstellen können, was wir manifestieren können, vielleicht was wir in unseren Handlungen entdecken und umsetzen können. Okay, so I'm just saying this to give you a feeling, too, of how Zen practice, which assumes that ultimately there's no explanation, there's a certain amount, there's an epistemological understanding up to a point, but ultimately there's no final answer. So how do you enter into a situation as practice where there's no final answers? And the Zen practice assumes that there are no explanations. And of course there is an epistemology, a knowledge of knowledge, but the question here is also, the difficulty here is also, how do you get into a question for which there are basically no answers, no explanations, as it is assumed?

[18:52]

So here I'm basically speaking about the dynamics of the phrasal path, which are, in this case and today, the mental posture and the hua dou phrase that's processively entered into your activity. Und hier spreche ich auch über die Dynamiken der Wado-Praxis, der Wendesatzpraxis, die bestehen aus der geistigen Haltung und dem Wendesatz, den du in deine Aktivität einführst. Okay, so now I'm getting way ahead of myself. Let's go back to Zazen. Also nochmal zurück zum Zazen. And today I want to speak about zazen as the practice of two attentionalities. Two? Two attentionalities.

[19:58]

You want three or four, but we'll come to that later. Two now. All right. One is you bring attentionality, as most of you know, to your spine. Das eine, wie die meisten von euch wissen, ist, du bringst Aufmerksamkeit. And by the way, I can only say attention. I don't know how to say attentionality in German. If it's important to you, you may want to say what the difference is. I don't know if it's... Is it important in German? Attention-ness? We don't know because we wouldn't know the difference. It's just attention in German. All right. What's the difference in English? If I bring attention to something, I'll have to think about how to express the difference.

[21:05]

If I bring attention to something, I'm bringing it very specifically to that. If I bring attentionality, I'm bringing an already developed field that feels everything as in a field of attention, and then the particular thing within that field. Yeah, we don't do that in German. Oh, you don't. You're just very concentrated and to the point. Okay, the difference in English is... It's interesting, so let me try to say something. The difference in English is that when I say, when I use attention in English, it's more like, as we say, attention, then I bring the attention to something very specific. I'll have to explore the difference. I mean, we say there is clearly a difference between, in English at least, a person and... Personality.

[22:18]

Yes, we have that too. Oh, good. I'm glad to know. Okay. Well, this is fun. Okay, thanks. All right. So the two fields of attentionality or of attention. One is you bring attention to your spine. And that tends to bring attention to your whole body. And that pervades the body with attention. And you bring attention to your hands. And... And just the fact that you're bringing attention to your legs, and your legs are, left leg and right leg are kind of overlapping, changes the way your body works.

[23:25]

And you bring attention to your legs, and just the fact that your right and left leg are switched sides, that alone changes the way your body works. And hands overlapping and thumbs touching. There's a deep sleep is a biological fact. And deep zazen is a biological fact. And if you don't have much deep sleep, as well as peripheral sleep or whatever it's called, it affects your day and your living. And if you don't get too much deep sleep, then it has an influence on your day and on your life.

[24:28]

And deep zazen has a profound effect on your lived life. So all these little separate instructions are ways to engage the body's potential deep zazen. All these different small instructions are ways to extract the possibilities of the body for deep zazen. Yes. And there's also, particularly in Zen practice, a trust that the body knows what to do. I don't know what words to use exactly, but when there's a certain attunement, overall attunement within the body, the body is healthier and functions with more power.

[25:44]

Then there's what? What happens? The body functions with more... Power and authority. And it isn't the feeling that you're doing it consciously, making it happen. You're creating the conditions that let it happen. And it's not so much the feeling that you're doing it, but rather the feeling that you're creating the circumstances that allow it to happen.

[26:49]

Yeah. I mean, it's, you know, the whole sudden and gradual enlightenment question. This whole sudden or versus, the gradual, gradual question of enlightenment. The basic underlying assumption in that discussion is enlightenment is always present, but it's only present when you create the conditions that let it happen, or the conditions happen that let it happen. Die gesamte Annahme, die unter dieser Frage liegt, ist die Annahme, dass Erleuchtung immer schon da ist. Und dass das, was du machst, ist die Umstände zu erschaffen, die zulassen, dass es geschieht. Oder dass die Umstände, in denen es geschieht, selbst zulassen, dass es geschieht.

[27:54]

I'm sometimes quoted as saying, enlightenment is an accident and practice makes you accident prone. Manchmal wird mir das Zitat so geschrieben, wo ich mal gesagt habe, Erleuchtung ist so etwas wie ein Unfall und die Praxis macht den Unfall wahrscheinlicher. But I first heard that turn of phrase, I think, from the Maharishi. And I think the Maharishi got it from someone else. But anyway, I'm happy to take a little credit for it because I use it. It's true. Ich glaube, ich habe den Satz das erste Mal vom Maharishi gehört. Und ich glaube, dass der Maharishi ihn noch von irgendjemand anders hat. Aber ich nehme gerne ein bisschen Credit, ein bisschen... Okay, so you're creating by bringing attention to your hands and your feet and the... Organization of your posture, primarily through the spine, lifting through the spine.

[29:04]

You're creating a field of attention or field of attentionality. And then the mental posture of don't move also then develops its own field of attentionality. Now the feet... Oh, you're back. You disappeared for a moment. Now I probably should say something about a mental posture.

[30:11]

Okay. Stand up is a concept. And it has content, which is, it means don't sit down or... Be attentive, vertically, etc. Something like that. It's a concept, but it's not a mental posture. Okay, now when Charlotte Silver said to me one day, many years ago, Come up to standing. Now, come up to standing is a mental posture.

[31:12]

not a static concept. Mental postures have legs and a nose. And we can think of their two legs. One of the legs is intent. Intent. Und wir können uns ihre zwei Beine vorstellen. Das eine Bein ist die Absicht. And one of the legs is its process. Und das zweite Bein ist, dass eine geistige Haltung ein Prozess ist. So there's an intent to come up to standing. Es gibt eine Absicht ins Stehen hineinzukommen. And there's a succession of postures all the way up until finally being standing. And once this was told to me by, mentioned by Charlotte Silver, whose teaching was called Sensory Awareness,

[32:30]

This mental posture of coming up to standing is a gestural posture and opened me into what I now call the gestural path. And I... Right away when she said that, I noticed a succession of four or five postures that happen as you're coming to standing. And after then bringing that mental posture into awareness, that process of posture into awareness, I noticed there's many little steps.

[33:49]

And I could even say each The succession of postures each have their own presence. Und ich könnte sogar sagen, dass in dieser Aufeinanderfolge von Haltungen jeder einzelne ihre eigene Präsenz hat. And the own presence of each successive posture is actually also developing intentionality. And when you get as old as I am, the number of postures you go through to stand up get more complicated and more difficult.

[34:50]

Russell and I understand that. Yeah, okay. Okay. So, again, here we're in a yoga culture which emphasizes intentionality More than intelligibility. You said intentionality this time. Was that what you meant? Not attentionality? Attentionality. Yeah, I meant attentionality is emphasized more inclusively than intelligibility. Okay, all right.

[36:02]

And here we have an example of the difference between intelligible and intelligibility. Oh, dear. It's not important. Well, no, I think I said something that made a difference. That's fine. Well, good. It wasn't intelligible to me, though. No, yeah, but that's your fault. Yes, that's true. But in general, there's a certain amount of intelligibility shared between us. Maybe I'm translating this incorrectly.

[37:03]

Intelligible means it's reasonable, right? No, intelligible means you can understand it. Ah, okay. Then I should say it a little differently. Also intelligible, wo der Verstand das Verstehen betont wird. Okay. Yeah, okay. Okay. So come up to standing, again, is a mental posture, not a static concept. it has the two legs of intention and, uh, uh, uh, processively expressive, expressionable. And it, um,

[38:05]

And it has a nose. In other words, it's a kind of investigatory, investigative instantiation. In other words, it's a... Okay. So, like, don't move can become Suzuki Roshi's statement, which I have written down here. He's speaking about how impermanence can, in unforeseen ways, open up or unfold.

[39:33]

And he talks about how we can deal with it if the past, the uncertainty opens or closes in an unprecedented way. So the process of trying not to move or finding ways not to move in Zazen over time, process of over time, through time. He says, don't move. Don't anticipate. Nothing can save you now. Because you have only this moment. Not even enlightenment will help you now. Because there are no other moments.

[40:55]

With no future. Be true to yourself. And express yourself fully. Don't move, don't move. Just die over and over. Now this beautiful expression of imperturbability arises, develops from not moving in zazen over many, many periods of zazen. Dieser wunderschöne Ausdruck von Unerschütterlichkeit entwickelt sich daraus, wenn man immer und immer wieder über viele Sazen-Perioden hinweg übt, lernt, sich nicht zu bewegen im Sazen.

[42:06]

Okay, now I'm running out of time as usual. Jetzt läuft mir wie immer wieder die Zeit davon. So let's, what do they say, cut to the chase? Also kommen wir mal zum Punkt. Okay, so you're doing zazen. You have the field of attentionality, of postural, physical attentionality. You have the field of attentionality that arises through not moving, through the mental posture of not moving. So don't move is not just an instruction. It's also a mental posture and a field of attentionality which overlaps with and becomes a mutual field with the physical field of attentionality.

[43:12]

So you're consciously creating this opportunity. But consciousness and intention is only creating the conditions. The real work, the real actionality is being done by these two mutualized fields of attention. Okay. Now, when your posture begins to be very settled and your posture is in effect, in fact, doing itself,

[44:20]

Wenn deine Haltung ganz gesetzt ist und die Haltung tatsächlich eigentlich sich selbst herstellt. Eines der Zeichen dafür ist, dass die Atmung beginnt von allein zu geschehen. You're not counting your breath anymore. You're not bringing attention to your breath, intention to your breath anymore. There's just the experience of breathing, breathing itself. Du zählst deinen Atem nicht mehr. Du brauchst auch nicht mehr unbedingt die Aufmerksamkeit zu deinem Atem zu bringen, sondern es gibt nur noch die Erfahrung des Atmens, des Atmens, das sich selbst atmet. No, you can stop and watch that happening in a way, watch it happening.

[45:35]

Sometimes, you know, for the beginner, as soon as you notice you've entered samadhi, the noticing it brings consciousness in and your samadhi collapses. But the skilled practitioner can be in the experience of samadhi and have an observer of that samadhi that doesn't interfere with the samadhi. And when that happens, you're now beginning to have The experience of the field of mind, separate from the contents of mind.

[46:44]

And when that happens, then you have now... Contents, in this case, being samadhi. Wenn das passiert, dann hast du jetzt die Erfahrung vom Feld des Geistes unabhängig von den Inhalten des Geistes. Und in diesem Fall ist der Inhalt des Geistes Samadhi. So I should say the contents of body as well as the contents of mind. So ich vielleicht sagen die Inhalte des Körpers genauso wie die Inhalte des Geistes. Okay, so and what's happening with this the Many things are happening. What you notice is breathing is breathing itself. And your metabolism is doing itself. You can feel a kind of throb of your metabolism. heartbeat, breath, it's all beginning to tune itself by itself, through itself.

[47:49]

And I've tried to imagine what kind of metaphor I could use for this. So, and I thought of a self-driving car. So maybe we should say an auto-driving car, an auto-driving, an automatic, you know, an auto-driving car. Yeah, or own-driving instead of self-driving, own-driving car. Okay. Now imagine I'm the driver of this own driving car or auto driving car. I've been driving and using the shift or whatever, you know, and the steering wheel.

[49:01]

And I turn on the auto driving and I just can sit there and let the car drive itself. And before I used the steering wheel and the clutch and so on. And now, when I turn on the automatic button, I can just sit there and the car drives itself. Now, the experience of this is somewhat similar, if I can imagine it. I've never been in an auto-driving car, but I imagine that suddenly you're just released. Your body is doing itself. Your breathing is doing itself. And you can feel something profound is happening way beyond what you could do consciously. And the experience of it, even though I've never sat in such a self-driving car, but the experience of it is probably quite amazing. Like in the Sazen, when you suddenly realize that breathing makes itself, that breathing goes by itself and the posture is made of itself.

[50:07]

There you have the feeling that something very profound is happening to you. So what are you experiencing at this time if I conceptualize the experience? You're experiencing the difference between the contents of consciousness and the field of mind. And what you're experiencing also is a field of mind in which there's no self-agency. There's agency But it's not self-agency.

[51:12]

Okay, so now you're having a direct experience of what Buddhism means by non-self. Non-self-agency. Now, when Matsu speaks about the Wado phrase, this very mind is Buddha. This is a phrase, a Wado phrase, which has legs. So at first it just means you're noticing mind arises on every object. I look at this, mind is arising and the microphone is there, but mind is also part of the appearance.

[52:19]

Aserst bedeutet, dass das Geist mit jedem Wahrnehmungsobjekt bemerkt wird. Also du siehst das Mikrofon, aber du siehst gleichzeitig auch, dass Geist mit dem Mikrofon für dich erscheint. So this very simple phrase, this very mind is Buddha, begins to teach you, show you, the dual arising of percept and mind. And when this very mind becomes, as the Wado has legs, like a mental posture, when this repeating this phrase turns into the experience agency only or agency free, self-agency free mind,

[53:37]

And that's what Matsu, the Sung Dynasty Matsu and the Tang Dynasty Matsu, his teachings were revised somewhat, means by this very mind is Buddha, is the mind free of self-agency. then it is what the Song Dynasty, or the Tang Dynasty, its teachings were a little overworked, what Matsu meant with it. Exactly this spirit is Buddha, a spirit that is free from self-control. So I hope you practice this very mind as Buddha. developing your phrasal path practice, developing and evolving the difference between the contents of consciousness and the field of mind,

[54:54]

and realizing this very mind is Buddha. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks for translating.

[55:13]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_82.06