What I want to do today is talk a little bit about the difficulty of finding guidelines for our actions. Perhaps for some people it isn't much of a problem. For other people, the more you look at what you're doing, why you're doing it, the more the reasons for it, or the validity, disappears.

[01:16]

And I think many of you, maybe most of you, under the strain of a tangaio or a difficult sashin, come to the point of not knowing why you're there or why you've ever done anything, or why you should do anything. But most of us at this point, at the end of this flagpole, we don't jump off. Strain through it in some way, mostly, often with some experience of fear extreme discomfort or resignation, but as soon as Sashin or Tantraya or the experience is over, we relax that state of mind or questioning and rebuild, replace back again our

[02:46]

framework of reality. For all of us at some level, whether our direction is toward life or death or just going, getting on with it. We have some substratum, some idea of reality I don't mean necessarily as we have a philosophical system or we think something is out there that's real. We may think, for instance, that at least our perceptions are real, or what we think about things are real, is real. Time and space are real.

[04:16]

Or we think that some harmony is real. Disharmony is bad and harmony is real. Or natural is real. to concentrate about the idea of natural. And I'm using it as a suggestion that you look at other such ideas which occur to you when you try to decide what is appropriate. You might notice when you decide, oh, this is okay, this is appropriate. For instance, I don't think anybody has ever painted a picture of a tree rolled up, trunk and leaves, the trunk on the outside and the leaves in the center, and everything all rolled up. No one's ever painted such a picture, and we saw such a picture, and we think it was unnatural.

[06:12]

Also, some people, I guess on some people, decorate their pottery with this elaborate pattern. You ask them what it is, they say, oh, it's a tree seen from underneath. Seeing the pattern of the roots as if you were looking up. You never look at a tree that way. Well, we say that our cities are unnatural, but the example I use is a... Is it any more unnatural for us to build cities than a termite to build a house? So, can we say our cities are unnatural?

[07:21]

Many people now are trying to save the whales. But some animals kill other animals. Is it unnatural to kill the whales? Why do we not kill the whales? Is it just a preference? We don't like to do it, maybe. But our blue jays... Are those blue jays? Those noisy birds? Our Blue Jays are many people who don't like them. And I know several people who shoot them. Joe Wheelwright, I don't know if I told you this, I told somebody this, but anyway, Joe Wheelwright is the head of the International Union Society, and he and his wife are Jane, the old-time pacifist, and they wouldn't hurt anything, but they'd shoot Blue Jane. Keep the rifle out. Windowsill, and she has a stump up behind it. Bird feeder.

[08:52]

And she'll shoot a few. She's quite a good shot. She'll open a ranch. And then she'll wound a couple. And the wounded ones spread the word. This is an unattractive neighborhood. They don't come back. People get angry at blue jays mostly because they kill all the other birds. I guess they eat the young of other birds and pretty soon you'll have no birds in the valley but blue jays. Is it natural for the blue jay to kill the other birds and for us to respond by killing them? Is it unnatural of us to have some Buddhist rule that we don't kill? This is a Zen story about, should I save the toad from the snake? we save the other birds from the Blue Jay? Should we trap the Blue Jay and bring them to Monterey and let them kill birds in Monterey? So maybe

[10:29]

At this point, what's natural or right or wrong is very difficult to determine by any rules, so you can then rely on your preferences. I want to do it or I don't want to do it. We don't want to kill the Blue Jays, or we do want to kill the Blue Jays, but succumbing to our likes and dislikes is some rather dangerous morass, some hesitation I've talked about. paramita of energy, which means, probably most fundamentally, no hesitation, no thinking about what to do next. But if we don't do that, what do we do? Oh, well, we just behave naturally. But what's naturally? This religion, this kind of religious life,

[12:00]

with ritual gestures and etc., natural. Maybe it's not natural. But if you go back in the most early societies we know anything about, they may have noticeable form in the society, may not even be a chief but be a priest, religious practice, as fundamental or early or simultaneous as hunting or gathering, as one unified activity. So it's very difficult to say what's natural. And if you're not going to think before you act, what is guiding you? This idea of no hesitation in the Japanese monastery

[13:31]

I suppose no hesitation is the most fundamental thing that you learn. That and politeness. I suppose no hesitation and politeness characterize every act in a Japanese monastery. This is something you can't read about in a book about monastic or Buddhist life. First rule is no hesitation and politeness. They don't write down things like that. So I can't say that that's the way a Chinese monastery is, but I'm pretty sure that that's the way a Chinese Buddhist life was too. And the way Japanese Buddhist life I know from first-hand experience. So every time you meet somebody, you bow, greet them the way we do. Usually you say... You say a greeting. Everyone, in addition to bowing, usually has a verbal greeting, which means...

[15:00]

Thank you for doing what you're doing. There's an idea of not that you're doing anything special that you should be thanked for. You're doing just what's expected of you. What you're not doing less than is expected at that moment. So you say, thank you for doing what you're doing. There's a word for that in Japanese. and the other, no hesitation. When anybody speaks to you, under any circumstance, immediately you say, I, which means, not hello, and not yes, and not no. Translated in dictionaries as yes, it actually means, I hear you. I'm ready to hear you. So it's a kind of yes.

[16:06]

There's no resistance, there's no no in it. But you don't yet know what's going to be asked of you, while you're ready to respond or to do what's asked. So, actually, there's quite a lot of pressure put on people at first in how they respond, not a weak little, yes, yes, yes, Right immediately, with no hesitation. What is it? Okay. And it doesn't have anything to do with whether you want to do it, or don't want to do it, or think it's a good idea, or anything. It was quite a A world of difference, you know, between doing something because you want to do it and doing something because another person wants to do it, even if they're the same activity. If someone says, would you please do such and such, and you say, yes, because you think it's also a good idea, that's very nice, but the thing gets done.

[17:32]

But there's not much relationship between you and the other person that way. You're over there and he's there. But if you say, yes, it may be because you think it's a good idea too, but you're actually doing it because he wants you or she wants you to do it. As you know, to me I told you, Buddhist precept, Buddhist admonition is not just do unto others as you would have them do unto you, but also do unto others as they wish to be done unto, as they want to be treated. So if you always reserve right to do it, if you think it's right, but not do it if you think it's wrong, something's missing in your ability to be in another person's shoes.

[18:56]

But again, then this raises a real moral problem for us. Do you do anything that someone tells you to do? You know, war crimes and all that stuff. Do you give up your own judgment and become an automaton? But, of course, that idea is based on some mistrust. I mistrust what you may do, so I reserve the right to do it, to decide. But then that means you trust yourself. But on what basis are you deciding for yourself whether it's right or wrong? How do you trust yourself? I said the other day in a meeting that as soon as I saw clearly how I took some indefinable

[20:53]

or definable, but not ready yet, maybe, to be articulated. Energy, something like that. And express that build-up by smoking a cigarette. As soon as I saw I did that, stopped smoking. Maybe not that day. I stopped maybe that day by cutting down, but unconsciously. But from that time on, even though I smoked off and on for maybe some years later, like coasting, you know, and eventually I just stopped. So out of some knowledge or that kind of knowledge, knowledge which is completely convincing, you can

[22:24]

rid yourself of certain tendencies or combinations. But also, once you start this process, there's some danger, because pretty soon you recognize that it wasn't just the cigarette. The place you were going to, that the cigarette was a substitute for, also was a kind of cigarette and was unnecessary. So you can stop going to that place or doing that thing. And by a series of eliminations. Having this stick to play with is like having a cigarette. You have some energy which isn't entirely perfectly used, so I have something to play with, where I can move my fingers. So, if I eliminate all cigarettes at all levels, I'll be dead. See here, no finger will move, nothing will move. That's one of the criticisms of Buddhism, early Buddhism by Zen.

[23:56]

too quietistic, too based on the idea of the extinction of dharmas, which leads to some quietism. But it's the same way, you know, of writing poems or painting. a painter like Paul Klee, say, and you try to eliminate everything that's unnecessary, pretty soon you have one line and a splash of color, and maybe you don't need that, and then you don't need the canvas, and then you take a big eraser and erase yourself. It's all unnecessary. and you're stuck with a hand in space with an eraser in your hand, trying to erase itself. Or you write poems and you eliminate all the unnecessary words, increasingly of these cryptic little statements, two or three words, then two words, then one. Then you turn to jumbling words from the newspaper. But at that point, of course,

[25:24]

As soon as you see that, then anything you say is okay. So you're back where you started, you know, with the long poem and color in mind. So when you're back there, what guideline again do you have? So, usually, what I'm talking about is very, very difficult to express. So, anyway, Buddhism tries to

[26:49]

Face the question, because you face, because we face the question, or we face the question. What is real? What is reality? What is reality? What is reality? Why even ask the question? Is it real? Is it in the realm of reality to ask what is reality? Is it necessary to ask it, or even ask the question, is it in the realm of reality to ask what is reality? Just forget about the whole thing. But if you're doing a session or a tangario, and everything goes, still something's there. And in the next moment, that something is going to do something. And you can't obliterate your consciousness.

[28:14]

In fact, understanding or consciousness is something, maybe we can say something real, almost we can say something real. Anyway, Buddhism reduces, tries to reduce everything to elements, dharmas. And the combinations are less real. So we eliminate combinations. You see through combinations. As if you, every place you looked knots came untied. Or if they didn't come untied you saw the knots like some magnified photograph where you can see the spaces between the tied knot, or the knots were tied quite loosely, could easily be untied or tied. What's the difference between a straight rope or a curved rope, or a rope curved in with some other rope? Isn't a knot also not a knot?

[29:40]

So the idea of a dharma, dharma is a... includes time and space and some concept the Buddhists have come up with. elements, fundamental this or that, and it's all in one word, so it's a word which is almost impossible to define, impossible to define. And yet the idea of dharma and jnana are fundamentally one. So the fifth paramita of meditation or samadhi Yana. Yana are one thing. Yana is... If I said, as I said, some... the certainty of

[31:15]

of perception or knowledge eliminates some combinations. But most subtly, samadhi or jnana eliminates untied knots and allows you to have that state of mind where everything is a certainty. If you get into this process of examining yourself or reality by inclination or you're forced into it by your own life condition, there is, in the end, no response to it except samadhi, except a state of mind, a collected state of mind,

[32:22]

We can say that much, a collective state of mind. Physical and mental activity which is one with what is perceived. And that process isn't something that belongs to you or belongs to another person. So the problem of, if I do what the other person wants, will I be giving up my own responsibility or identity or something? Because often when you respond this way,

[33:23]

I can't characterize it, you know, or explain it, but I can give some kinds of examples. When it will strike you something different is happening, for example, you respond to some situation and it's... the other person didn't expect that response, but it's not what they thought they wanted, but their experience of it, oh, that's what I wanted, And you yourself didn't know that's how you were going to respond. But when you do it, it's a completely unique act. But when you do it, it also is... you realize, oh, that's what I wanted. I don't know if that makes sense to you. It means some kind of... we can say letting go, but it's more than letting go, you letting go, or some other... It's not in conflict with anyone.

[34:30]

It's... zazen in that sense, meditation in that sense, is an extinguishing your self. But sometimes we want to extinguish our self because we actually want to extinguish the world. Understand what I mean? Which is actually an attempt to preserve the self in conflict with the world. That's some heroic, stupid gesture. But our sense of what's real in that case is so powerful we will deny everything. But most of us are involved in little denials. I'm not quite sure I understand that. Would you explain it once more? Meaning, that doesn't conform with the way I want it to be and would you please come around? Or adjust your position a little more and then I'll adjust mine. But when you see into this,

[36:29]

you see that the first step is to extinguish that which is distorting your likes and dislikes and preferences. And zazen is some opportunity we have several times a day, when nothing's going to bother you and you're quite safe, to see what happens when you drop away mind and body. At that point, of course, something else, maybe the world is extinguished too at that point, it also drops away. But this process requires a constant energy, like the fourth jhana precedes, the fourth paramita precedes the fifth paramita of energy. No hesitation, no idea it's impossible or it's difficult or I can't do it, just I.

[38:09]

No figuring out, do I really mean it? Can I say that with honesty? Just, I'll try. How are you going to figure out, do you really, really, really mean it? Really? Somehow you just have to start doing it. If you are involved always in negotiating that space between you and others or you and reality, you'll either be left there with a moat around you or you'll fall in. So samadhi is some state of mind in which you've given up all ideas of reality. You have nothing to depend on, and yet something. At first, as I've said, it's patience keeps you afloat. Willingness to stand anything.

[39:54]

And then you see that the world isn't as simple as you thought. You don't need to swing from tree to tree. But you can stand in mid-air. As everything is standing actually in mid-air. Look up in the sky. Is there something you want to talk about? Let me share a story with you. When Karl Marx was living in England, he used to get letters from fellow conspirators in Russia, full of a lot of theory.

[41:22]

March is the right vaccine. Dear Fred, please send one. There is one way you can know at least that you're hungry or you need something.

[42:30]

What's your samadhi on? You can't base samadhi on perception. What do you mean? You can base perception on samadhi, maybe. How do you choose what to perceive? if you eliminate what you choose to perceive and what you refrain from perceiving, then what's left? Consciousness, our thinking and our consciousness is something unbelievably subtle. I don't like to keep using the word subtle, but from our point of view it's subtle.

[44:07]

It's hard to understand mantric consciousness. It's rather end product. But there is a What I'm saying is there's a long continuum between your perceptions and your... What are perceptions and what are thoughts and what's consciousness and what's consciousness without thinking? Or what are thoughts which are so... Most thoughts we... It's interesting, I can't explain it. You have various thoughts which you think are real. This, I see that or I think that, that drum is actually there, something like that. That rolled up tree is actually there. You see and you've decided it's there.

[45:40]

But then, if you practice, you find that most of your thoughts are extraneous, whether you think or not. In fact, thinking itself is already some letdown. Then you find that consciousness and thoughts are different. But then you find that what you think you produce, If you think, I'm Buddha, you're a Buddha. So at that point, mantric consciousness is very powerful. I'm sick, I'll be well. I want to treat this person well. The thought makes you do it. I want this person to be free of that difficulty. The thought does it. It's not magic.

[46:45]

I want to be enlightened. I want to practice Buddhism. That thought, if it has no associative elements, is extraordinarily powerful. But most of our thinking has associative elements. So first you have to see what is a perception, what are feelings, form, consciousness? How do we put those things together? And then eliminate them. And then various ways in which you come to find how form and energy and mind are one phenomenon, not separated, here's this and here's what's perceived. So perception, here's this and here's what's perceived, is a kind of contradiction to samadhi.

[48:16]

So, what I'm raising – I'm trying to confuse you, actually – is how do you know what to base anything on? If you can ask yourself that question most fundamentally and with some attention and concentration, what can we base anything on? We can almost say you'll know everything if you can pierce that.

[48:50]

@Transcribed_v004L
@Text_v005
@Score_49.5