I'm glad that you all have patience. Maybe it's interesting for you, or maybe it's not. I can't say. It's very interesting for me. But tonight, we're going to look at the difference. We've been studying the Hinayana. so-called Inayana precepts, which are written in stone, so to speak, so that we can compare them with the Bodhisattva precepts. So tonight we will study the difference between Inayana precepts, Mahayana precepts, and hopefully we'll get to Suzuki Roshi's understanding, his way of expressing his understanding, and see where we go from there.

[01:08]

So, when we study our own 16 precepts, You know, the most important part is because our Bodhisattva precepts, they're 16, and the first three are called the indivisible three pure precepts. Indivisible means they can't be divided. I take refuge in Buddha, I take refuge in Dharma, I take refuge in Sangha. And that sounds like three different things. But it's really one body with three aspects. I just want to put that forth. Now I gave you, I'll come back to that.

[02:13]

That's actually the basis of our Bodhisattva precepts. All our precepts stem from those three, by pure, pure means indivisible. Pure means non-dual. So these are three non-dual precepts. Taking refuge in Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. So, I gave you two papers when we first started. Remember that? That's all I've given you so far. That's a lot. So, one was Suzuki Roshi's talk, which Amasalu has in her hand. Right hand? That's the end. I gave you the definitive Vinaya.

[03:19]

This is note 10, the definitive Vinaya. So the definitive Vinaya is an excerpt from Sutra number 24, also called Upali's Question Sutra. the Maha Ratnakuta, translated by Garma Shishichan. So this is a question that Upali, one of Buddha's disciples, asked the Buddha. I'm going to find who Upali was. Upali, here's his brief, Upali's brief, description of who he was. He was a monk, one of the ten chief disciples of the Buddha.

[04:21]

Buddha had 16 chief disciples. Before joining the order, he was part of the royal barber caste. So, he was a barber, although he was a royal barber, he wasn't just an ordinary barber. And he worked as a barber. When he cut the Buddha's hair, the Buddha told Upali that he was breathing too fast. He said, Upali, you know, you're breathing too fast. So he learned how to control his mind by controlling his breathing. Later, he asked the Buddha if a person of low birth, such as he, could join the order. So this is a little contradictory. He was high birth, low birth. Anyway, the Buddha ordained him before the princes and asked the princes to pay homage to Upali, who had by then become a Narhat and was an elder compared to the seven princes.

[05:25]

So he became the chief disciple in knowing the rules of the order and the foremost disciple in keeping precepts, later developing the Vinaya. So this is interesting. he became, according to the sutra, the chief, the one who really understood and promoted the precepts. So we would think that he would be promoting the precepts as do this and don't do that. You think you'd be attached to the precepts, but actually, here is, I'm not gonna read the first part, which is nice, but thereupon, I'm gonna start with thereupon. The world honored one told Upali, now Upali, you should know that the pure precepts observed by bodhisattvas

[06:35]

And those observed by Shravakas are different, both in aim and in practice. So we know what Shravakas are, right? Shravakas are those who listen to the Buddha, basically, sometimes called the Arhats, but Buddhist disciples. Upali, a pure precept observed by the Shravakas may be a great breach of discipline for Bodhisattvas. Now we studied the last two times the precepts of the Shravakas, right? 250 precepts for men and a lot more for women. Upali, a pure precept observed by Shravakas may be a great breach of discipline for Bodhisattvas. A pure precept observed by Bodhisattvas may be a great breach of discipline for Shravakas. What is a pure precept for Shravakas but a great breach of discipline for Bodhisattvas?

[07:43]

For example, Upali, not to engender a single thought of taking further rebirth is a pure precept for Shravakas but a great breach of discipline for Bodhisattvas. What is a pure precept for Bodhisattvas but a great breach of discipline for Shravakas? For example, to follow the Mahayana doctrine and to tolerate rebirths without abhorrence for an incalculable number of kalpas is a pure precept for bodhisattvas, but a great breach of discipline for sravakas. I talked about this in a talk not too long ago. I read this actually. So here, you know, the sravakas, According to history, their practice was to find, you know, they had four stages, the once-returner, the twice-returner, the stream-enterer first,

[09:05]

The stream-enterer, the once-returner, the twice-returner, and the never-returner. So after four stages, they were finished with life on this planet. So whatever that means, some people take this literally, and some people take it figuratively. But the bodhisattva, His vow is to never enter nirvana. So it's basically to enter nirvana, which means, in this case, par nirvana? It's a question. Par nirvana is like the great deceased, you know? One who is totally not attached to this world. So because it's called the world of suffering, and no matter what you do about it, it's suffering.

[10:13]

That's their understanding. No matter how happy you are from time to time, it's the world of suffering. So the idea was to get beyond it, whether it's figuratively or actually. So, Bodhisattva ideal was to stay in the world and to help other people. So, if a Bodhisattva practices Hinayana precepts, that's a heresy because He's changing his vow, changing his goal. And if a Shravaka practices Bodhisattva precepts, then he's not practicing his goal, right?

[11:19]

Because his goal is very narrow. So we say Hinayana means very narrow. And avoiding Samsara in order to reach Nirvana. So this is kind of like the split. This is the dualistic split that the bodhisattvas are always accusing or criticizing the Hinayana for practicing a dualistic practice, trying to reach nirvana by eliminating samsara. In other words, do the good but eliminate the bad. For the bodhisattva, the good and bad, ultimately there's no good and bad. And at the same time, there is good and bad. Samsara is the realm of good and bad, right and wrong, dualistic world. And the bodhisattva vows to stay in the world of suffering and to

[12:26]

suffer with everyone, according to where everyone is, at the same time to find their nirvana or their freedom within the world of suffering, without leaving the world of suffering. So that's a much nobler cause. The Shravaka is doing something for himself, which is leaving behind the samsaric world and his goal by practicing those precepts is to not transgress precepts, not to break the precepts, and to follow them in order to reach the goal of nirvana. The Bodhisattvas, like in the Lotus Sutra and many other sutras, especially the Lotus Sutra, criticizes that. the Shravaka and the Parcheka Buddha, who is just doing stuff for himself as being selfish practice and dualistic practice.

[13:44]

So the Bodhisattva forgets about nirvana and just works for the salvation of everyone. So that's a much nobler endeavor. That's the bodhisattva vow. Yeah, according to Mahayana. Yes. Yes, that's right. According to Mahayana, that's a criticism. So, our sotos, our soto practice, sotos, in our service, we respect the shravakas. And in one of the echoes, which we do on Saturday or something, the echo, we chant our appreciation for the shravakas, the arhats, because of their dedication to practice.

[15:02]

and a great effort. So although we criticize their, although the Mahayana criticizes the goal, they don't criticize the practice. And Dogen says contradictory things. He says, you know, We should follow precepts, but we shouldn't be attached to precepts. Precepts are important for helping guidance, but we should not be attached to them. He said, when I was in China, people didn't pay that much attention to them. But on the other hand, When he founded Eheiji Monastery, he developed the Shingi.

[16:08]

Shingi is basically monastic precepts. I mean, and he created a Shingi. There were every aspect of your life was in conformity with very detailed precepts. Especially going to the bathroom, if you've ever read that one. And how you carry your towel, and how you wash your face, and all this, you know. So, that's why I mean Doug is a little bit contradictory. On the one hand, he says it's not important. And on the other hand, he says it's really important. Yeah. So Jim, but isn't the reason it's not important is because it needs to be a part of us? Yes. Well, I don't know about that. I don't know exactly what you mean by that. That we don't want to do something to hurt someone.

[17:09]

Yes. That it should be, we would hope that it would be a part of us and we wouldn't have to attach to it and say, OK, I'm not going to hurt someone today. That we don't need to be attached to it because hopefully it would be a natural link for me. Well, yes, that's what Suzuki Roshi talking about. He says, you should practice the precepts without having any thought of precepts, ultimately. But we'll get to that right now. I'll continue here. For this reason, the Buddha teaches bodhisattva precepts, which need not be strictly and literally observed. but teaches Sravaka precepts, which must be strictly and literally observed. He teaches Bodhisattva's precepts, which are at once permissive and prohibitive at the same time. I'll explain that.

[18:12]

Who's talking here? Okay. I'm trying to find where I was. Oh, the Buddha. but teaches Shravaka's precepts, which Shravaka precepts which guide them step by step. I think that Shariputra is talking, because the Buddha asks Shariputra, I think, to explain. So why do bodhisattvas' precepts not need to be strictly and literally observed? Well, those for sravakas must be strictly and literally observed. When keeping the pure precepts, bodhisattvas should comply with sentient beings. In other words, mingle, not be apart from. If a bodhisattva who is resolved

[19:21]

to practice the Mahayana breaks a precept in the morning, but does not abandon his determination to seek all-knowing wisdom at midday, his disciplined body remains undestroyed. If he breaks a precept at midday, in the evening, at midnight, or before dawn, but does not abandon his determination to seek all-knowing wisdom in the morning, his disciplined body remains undestroyed. For this reason, people who follow the Bodhisattva vehicle keep precepts which are both permissive and prohibitive. If they violate any precept, they should not become dismayed and afflict themselves with unnecessary grief and remorse. In other words, if a shravaka breaks a precept, it's really meaningful. I mean, it's because that's what they're not, they're in this strict precept discipline. Whereas for bodhisattvas, we don't say breaking precepts.

[20:28]

Ishvara could break the precepts, but a bodhisattva stains the precepts. As long as they're not, as long as the bodhisattva is not abandoning the precepts, then there's space to and continues their practice with their vows, then there's space to reform. Whereas, you know, there are strict rules about, with the Shravakas, about what their consequences are. With Bodhisattvas, it's more... And I'll explain why that is. I'm gonna turn the page. Precepts are on three different levels.

[21:34]

So there are the Sravaka precepts, which means the precepts of literally following rules and regulations. So it's important to have rules and regulations. The rote rules. And then there is, so the rules keep order and give us a shape. You know, Dogen wrote a classical called Bendo Ho. Bendo Ho is his Shingi, an aspect of Shingi, which everybody follows exactly the same processes, the way you walk, the way you do everything.

[22:47]

Back in the 80s, late 70s or the 80s, early 80s, a Japanese priest came and held a bento hall training for Zen Center. And a lot of people went. And after the first day, half of them couldn't stand it, and they left because it's not, It doesn't conform with American temperament in 1979 or something like that, because it's like everybody walks the same way and they eat the same way and they act the same way. And it was just too conformist. It was very hedonistic. So, Dogen had that hedonistic tendency, which is very austere. And if you walk in the Buddha's footsteps, then you're practicing Buddhist practice.

[23:55]

There's that idea. If you're following the bento ho, where everybody walks in the Buddha's footsteps according to the program, then you're forgetting yourself totally and letting go. following along. But it's too literal for people in America and even in Japan. It seems like it would be a very intense mindfulness practice. Yes. Is that there's rules and you follow them and then you're doing it with everybody else. Yes. Song-oriented mindfulness. practice way, which could, you know… Yes, well, the parts that we have of that is how we act in the zendo, the way we eat with oreoki, the way we do kin-hen, the way we do zazen, but bendo… I mean, we're very kind of loose.

[25:12]

Some people think we're very strict, but we're kind of loose compared with that, yeah. And it would also be a really good practice for Americans to do just that, because we have so much resistance to it. Yeah, that's good for us, actually. I thought, I didn't go to it myself, but I thought it'd be interesting to do. Yeah. I've read somewhere a description of Buddhism as being orthopraxy as opposed to orthodoxy. Western religions are sort of oriented around things that people believe. Yes. Whereas Buddhism is oriented around the practices. And there's what this essay was saying is that there's considerable flexibility within a given practice as to what you believe. But the practices themselves were definition of the spiritual community.

[26:16]

Yes, yeah. Well, that's what developed, because some people think the Mahayana, you know, in the early, before the 20th century, 19th century, when the scholars were beginning to find Buddhism and study it and translate, they thought there was only Hinayana practice, and they hadn't discovered the Mahayana Sutras, so they thought the Mahayana Sutras came later, which they did. but that Mahayana practice was not part of Buddha's delivery. But as the scholars now understand that both Hinayana and Mahayana arose at about the same time and developed their own different schools.

[27:20]

And through many schools, mostly up till not too long ago, I don't know what too long ago means, maybe 500 years ago, the monasteries included all the different practices. So there were monks who were, you know, Zen monks and esoteric and Tendai. Pure land. Pure land, yeah. They all practiced in the same monasteries, and they weren't necessarily stuck with one practice or another. They could practice freely the different practices, which is the way Chinese Buddhism ended up before the communists drove them out, purged them. So Chinese Buddhism has that characteristic.

[28:23]

Even if you go to the Chan Monastery, they don't strictly have just the one practice, they have various practices. But Mahayana practice developed in Japan with divisions. Tendai and Shingon were the two main practices in Japan before Zen. There was no individual Zen monastery before Eisai, which was just before Dogen in the 13th century. So the 13th century is where Zen came to Japan.

[29:28]

I mean, Zen independently, because the Tendai school is an eclectic school. In China, Tendai, they practiced all the practices in their monasteries, all the schools. And when Eisai went to Japan, Eisai was We think he was Dogen's first Zen teacher. When Eisai went to China, he brought back Chinese Chan, and Keninji was his monastery in Japan. And he wanted to set up an independent Rinzai Zen school, but the Tendai school wouldn't let him do that. They said, well, we have Zen. Why do we need a separate Zen school? And so he was kind of frustrated.

[30:28]

He did set it up, but he couldn't do it completely. Whereas Dogen was a little later, and he came to Japan. And what came to China and back to Japan was Soto school, or at least the Soto seeds. and set up a separate Soto school. So Dogen's really the first complete Soto school initiator in Japan. But he had a lot of trouble too, although he didn't let it bother him. I mean, too much. I don't know how much it bothered him, but he was able to continue independently. So here, however, if a shravaka breaks any precept, he destroys his pure discipline.

[31:41]

Why? Because shravakas, to eradicate their defilements, must keep the precepts with such intensity as if they were saving their heads from fire. They aspire to nirvana only. For this reason, they keep precepts which are prohibitive only. Don't do this. If you break these precepts, there's some consequence. So as you remember, when we studied The Parajika precepts, the first four, if you kill a Buddha, or if you have sex of any kind, or if you tell a lie, and if you claim that you are enlightened and you're not, these are Parajika offenses in which you're cut off from the Sangha. Whereas Bodhisattva precepts, you're never cut off from the, unless you do something really

[32:45]

There's always a redemption. So Bodhisattva precepts are much wider and more compassionate. So furthermore, Upali, why do Bodhisattvas keep precepts for the depth of the mind? while shravakas keep precepts which guide them step by step. So precepts for the depth of the mind means that precepts come from inside rather than imposed from outside, even though there are precepts imposed from outside. But the precepts posed from outside are guidelines. They're not rigid rules. And the precepts are to help you to stimulate the inner precepts, which are your own request.

[33:57]

So even if bodhisattvas enjoy the five sensuous pleasures with unrestricted freedom for kalpas as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, as long as they do not give up their bodhichitta, bodhichitta, you know, means, you know, striving for Buddha, and dwell securely in it, they are not afflicted by any passions, even in dreams. Further, they should gradually root out their defilements instead of exterminating them all in one lifetime. So in contrast, shravakas ripen their roots of virtue as hurriedly as if they were saving their heads from fire. They do not like to entertain even one thought of taking further rebirth. For this reason, followers of the Mahayana keep precepts for the depth of the mind, precepts which are both permissive and prohibitive and which need not be strictly and literally observed, while Shravakas keep precepts which guide them step by step, which are prohibitive only and which must be strictly and literally observed.

[35:12]

I remember Suzuki Roshi talking about step-by-step practice. Mahayana Buddhism is not step-by-step practice, but Hinayana practice is step-by-step. First, various levels, it's like going to school, whereas Mahayana or Zen precepts is like jumping into the ocean and starting to swim. even if you don't know how. It's a beauty. How do you see the Hinayana avoiding the pitfall of fundamentalism? You know, this is written down.

[36:29]

What actually happens is not the same as what's written down, but what's written down is a kind of view, right? Compassion is not one of the major precepts in the Hinayana, whereas compassion and joy is one of the major precepts of Mahayana. So, The criticism of the Mahayana for the Hinayana is that it's selfish, self-centered.

[37:33]

It's about your own escape. It's like the bomb drops and those people who want to save themselves run away. Whereas those people who are concerned about everyone else stay, no matter what, and share the suffering of beings. So the Hinayana don't have the opportunity to experience that. Well, it also sounds like delusion. It's seeing self as separate from... Yeah, well, that's right. So that's the pit. Fall. She had her hand up, I think. What are defilements? Defilement means dualism, dualistic. Duality is called defilement. What is it defiling? It's defiling the unity of existence.

[38:42]

Purity means non-duality. It means that purity is found within the impure, and impurity is found within the pure. So, Hinayana understanding is purity is found is not found within the impure. That's defilement. Defilement means, your understanding is that purity means separating yourself from what is impure. Separating yourself from the woes of the world, in other words. You can talk about purity and impurity in various ways, but in this understanding, that's what purity means, non-duality.

[39:56]

Stan? So that sutra that you're reading from is a Mahayana sutra? Yes. It was written by Mahayana people I don't know exactly who it was written by. It wasn't written by the Buddha, right? It was like generating Buddhist thoughts in a Mahayana stream. Yes, that's right. So, it's a caricature of Hinayana, I think, isn't it? I mean, is that really what, are there Hinayana people and do they actually think like that? Well, Hinayana is not a special school. There's no school that's called Hinayana school. Hinayana is an attitude, right? And so when they say, but it's an attitude, but it's a criticism of that narrow school. So it's like setting up this dualistic thing to try to understand non-dualism.

[41:10]

Well, it's, yeah. It may be setting it up, but it's an observation. I don't think they're setting up some, you know, idea in order to make a contrast. Well, that's what I'm asking. It's a strawman. It's not a strawman. It's set up by the Sutra to, you know, to criticize people who aren't practicing correctly in the view of Mahayana. I don't know. Yes, well, it is, it's set up that way, but the criticism is that it's not like, the criticism is that the practice It is impure.

[42:14]

Even though their goal is purity, it's really impure because it's dualistic. It's dualistic because it separates nirvana from samsara. And the Mahayana criticizes the Hinayana attitude because it's dualistic and doesn't reach far enough. If you read the Lotus Sutra, which, you know, Mahayana Sutra, there's many, several stories about, you know, like the one about the, when Buddha was giving a talk and he, And there were 500 arhats who all felt that they had reached nirvana.

[43:17]

And the Buddha said, I'm sorry, you know, I've been leading you along, giving you a little, nice little gifts here and there, but you have to understand you haven't really got there yet. And then the 500 arhats got up and left the assembly. That's of course a Mahayana story. Yeah. Once you describe the distinction between Hinayana and Mahayana is that the Hinayana view is a view of analysis, analytical. Mahayana view is a view of synthesis. Synthesis. Whereas a synthesis school is— Well, yes. Yeah. Well, analysis is always dualistic. Words are always dualistic. Language is dualistic, necessarily.

[44:19]

It's really hard to get to non-duality. That's why, you know, Suzuki Hiroshi talks about zazen, right? Zazen is the non-dualistic practice that we can actually touch. And that the precepts all come from there rather than rules of behavior that are set up to be broken or to match yourself against in order to reach a certain goal. So Zazen is goalless. Precepts are goalless. We don't do them for some reason. We only do them because we don't practice precepts for a certain reason. We practice precepts in order to help people, not just for our own benefit. You were saying, given the example of the Lotus Sutra and these Buddhists who got up and walked out because they were not completely

[45:25]

They were insulted. Yeah, they were pissed off. But that kind of thing happens in Mahayana places. Like even here, people have gotten pissed off if they didn't get what they wanted, and then they left. Yeah, that's true. What difference does this make? No difference. But it's different. It's not the same. People get pissed off when they leave. But this was like people who thought that they had reached the goal. And Buddha said, you haven't reached the goal. That's why they left. But people leave for different reasons. But sometimes people here think they've gotten to a certain point. I don't know. You point out that they haven't. Yeah, that does happen sometimes. That does happen sometimes, yeah. There's arrogance. Some people come in with a lot of arrogance, and so we cut them off.

[46:35]

No, but we work with people that have arrogance. We all have some. Oh, indeed. things and if you can tell me if I'm on the right track here, it almost sounds like Pinyana's got something to do with there's some, for lack of a better word, some achievement? Yes, achievement. It's sort of like delusions are inexhaustible, I vow to end them. I'm never going to end them, but I'm also never going to stop vowing to end them. So I know that I'm never going to achieve it, but it almost sounds like with Pinyana there's an that is there some expectation of achievement? Yes. Yeah, there's some expectation. There's the expectation of achievement, which is Nirvana. Which is a wonderful goal. I mean, who can criticize that?

[47:40]

Except the Mahayana. It's just that the Mahayana, it's like, you just do the work. And if you try to reach a goal, You become goal-oriented. And then your whole life is, you think that you can finally reach a certain goal. The pot of gold is at the end of the rainbow. But for Mahayana, just to work is what's important. We just say one step. at a time, just one step at a time, and each step includes everything. Is this suffering also important? Yeah, suffering is really important. Why is suffering important?

[48:41]

Because it's reality. What's important is what's real, not what we imagine. So, how to find your freedom within suffering rather than trying to eliminate suffering, which is not really possible. Jake? A question about the Arhats. Yes. Did they self-proclaim their state of nirvana? Yes. Yes, they would say, Aho! It's true. I mean, I don't know if it's true, but that's what they say. We should have compassion for that person, but we have to understand what compassion means.

[50:02]

Compassion can be a good kick in the ass. Practicing. It's all about the practicing. So here's Ivan, in contrast, shravakas ripen their roots of virtue as hurriedly as if they were saving their heads from fire. They do not like to entertain even one thought of taking further rebirth. For this reason, followers of the Mahayana keep precepts for the depth of the mind, precepts which are both permissive and prohibitive. and which need not be strictly and literally observed. While shravakas keep precepts which guide them step by step, which are prohibitive only and which be strictly and literally observed. Okay, now I'm going to talk about that. There are three levels. One is, and I started talking about that, and I got off kind of, is the literal level, which this is a Hinayana practice.

[51:10]

The shravaka practice is the practice of rules and regulations. That's the ground of practice. It's not that it's wrong or bad, it's just that it's short-sighted. The second one is the Buddha nature precepts. Buddha nature precepts is things as it is. In other words, everything is just as it is whether we like it or not. We have to accept the way things are. It doesn't mean we can't change things that can be changed, but it means things are the way they really are. And when we see things, as Suzuki Roshi talked about this all the time, to see things as it is is really hard.

[52:13]

It's not hard to do that, but it's hard because of our attitude and our limitations, our biases. You know, we used to talk about the tambangkan. Tambangkan is the board-carrying fellow who carries a board on one shoulder and can see this way, but he can't see over there because of the board we're holding on our shoulder. So we all hold this board on our shoulder, which limits our complete view of things. And so we have our opinions and our desires and so forth, which have nothing to do with seeing things as it is. Seeing things as it is is to let go of all bias and partiality. and just see it clearly. So that's Bodhisattva precepts, is to be able to, it's like, if you look at ourself, it looks like we didn't ask to be born, and it looks like various things,

[53:38]

as we get older and older and older, we can't stop that. We can't stop change in the world, right? Change is the one thing that, and so to be able to follow change and work and to know how to, how to flow with change, that's precepts. That's, Buddha nature precepts that are given to us. So, and that's a big challenge. Yes? So, during the Bodhisattva ceremony, the sangha says, you know, I vow not to kill. And then the vishad says, respond. Is that response the Bodhisattva precept? You know, it's like demolishing. I vow not to kill. But to polish, well, yes, but to polish, that's, you know, without saying the second part, there's the prohibitive part, don't kill, then there's the positive part, but to polish clarity.

[54:55]

I put those two together. I mean, I didn't do that myself, but I introduced that to our sangha. But ordinarily, it's just the prohibitive part, which is kind of hinayana, ishtic. and then the Buddha nature precepts, it's the positive side. The negative side and the positive side should be, yeah. That's right, yes. It's like the statement and the response. Right. Right, yeah. When you said things as it is, it seems like it's just observing as it is. and polishing clarity has that sort of active quality to it. It's not like, as it is, it's actually what I'm going to do maybe to make it. As it is or as it should be? As it is.

[55:56]

When as it is and as it should be are the same, that's not duality. That's a good point. Suzuki Yoshi has a fascicle about when should be and to be are the same, and should be, should be, to be, to be, should be, should be. He does this little play on words. It's very cute. It's called emo. Did you get to the third level? Yes. So the third level, okay. Well, you're doing this right now, right? Do you know what you're doing? Yeah, yeah. Are you aware of your body posture and your, you know, it's like, where's your awareness?

[56:59]

So is that a, that's a precept. Yes, that's precepts. Precepts is simply your way of life. I'm getting to this. I'm trying to, so I'll get to that. So the third level is like a sandwich in between the basic rules and nature's rules. Human rules and nature's rules. You cannot escape from nature's rules. And then in between is how you actually act knowing both of those sides, knowing the rote precepts, not ignoring them, but not being attached to them, and following nature's rules and regulations and laws, and responding to circumstances as they arise.

[58:03]

So the responding to circumstances as they arise is called the live precepts. and the other two are called the dead precepts. I think that's a little extreme. That's what Suzuki Roshi talks about. He talks about it in that way. So it's very complex. Precepts are very complex. The third, the middle way, which is the bodhisattva's way, is improvisation. It's not just following rules. It's improvising every moment. Something comes up which determines how you're going to respond. How would you respond? You respond by knowing what the rules are and knowing what the, being in touch with your deeper nature, which is the Buddha nature.

[59:06]

Responding from your deeper nature, guided by the rules, and then you respond. So you do this without thinking, I'm gonna follow the precepts. Because you know the precepts, and your response comes through not knowing. It comes through, not knowing means knowing completely. Not knowing means knowing which is not biased. It's really improvising, moment by moment. Okay, you can, when we talk about three in Buddhadharma, usually you see how they're all kind of connected. So, Buddha nature precepts would be dharmakaya. Bodhisattva precepts would be Sambhogakaya, and rote precepts would be Nirmanakaya.

[60:21]

So we embody all three. The three kayas are actually our Buddhadharma Sangha. but they're expressed in different ways. So we use those terms to express, you know, we say sambhogakaya, we could say various things about it, but the sixth ancestor says sambhogakaya is your wisdom body. So wisdom body is dharma, and essential body is dharmakaya. And nirmanakaya is our activity body, transformation body.

[61:28]

So in the realm of transformations, we act with wisdom. In the realm of transformation body, which is rules, Basically, we all have rules. There's no such thing as doing something without rules, even though we don't even know what the rules are. Because the rules don't mean necessarily man-made rules or women-made rules, but we act in certain ways because of nature. Nature determines how we act. So, and these are all precepts. This is what we call precepts in Mahayana. It's nature's way. But we, so, we don't say that the Hinayana precepts are bad. They're good. I mean, and they, you know, tell us a lot about how to act, but we are not attached to them.

[62:35]

Our real life, takes place in the area of the Bodhisattva precepts, which is how we relate to everything around us moment by moment, and how we respond. And so we know in our inner Buddha act, so when we let Buddha act, then when we let go of body-mind, drop body-mind, Buddha acts freely. So we have to trust that, but it's not like it's not informed by our understanding. So when we interact with each other, what kind of interaction do we have? Are we fearful, are we reticent, or are we open? How do we behave? How do we let our So for a Zen student, Zazen is the place where our precepts come from, proceed from zero.

[63:50]

Zazen is zero. So all the precepts are held. You can't transgress the precepts when you're doing Zazen. So Zazen is called you know, the place of perfect precepts. And then when we stand up and do something, hopefully, our activity comes forth from Zazen. That's called the genjo koan. Every moment is a koan. Every activity is a koan. really attached to the rules. It seems like they're expressing themselves a really strong nirmanakaya. Ross is saying it's got to be this way. And that feels kind of dead. It's not taking into account what's in front of me because I'm so caught in my own idea.

[64:55]

On the other side, the other extreme of the Buddha nature is dead because it's not actually this person, so the sandwich of being in between is taken into account. Yeah, it's inert. It's not dead. Yes. Yeah, it's full of potential. Yes, it's, yeah. But it's, the Buddha nature precept covers everything. It's only the rules that are the dead precepts, not the Buddha nature. Because the Buddha nature is not up there, it's here. And this is the source. Buddha nature is the source of precepts, of true precepts, of life precepts. I just expressed it that way. I wouldn't, yeah.

[66:06]

Let me get to, before we have time, Suzuki Roshi's talk, How to Observe Precepts. That's the other paper. I'll just start. This morning, I want to talk about Zen, precepts. As you know, the real meaning of the precepts is not just rules, but rather our way of life. When we organize our life, you see something like rules. You see something like rules, even though you are not intending to observe some particular rule, the rules are always there. As soon as you get up, in order to wake up completely, you wash your face. That is a precept. one of the precepts. And at a certain time, you eat breakfast when you become hungry. That is, you are observing some rules when you eat breakfast at some certain time.

[67:12]

It is actually the way of life you follow naturally. So if you practice Zazen, there will be rules in your practice. So at the same time, Zazen practices precepts, one of the precepts and all of the precepts. If you really understand how Buddhists come to the idea of precepts, you will understand the relationship between Zen and precepts. Precepts are just our way of life. As a Zen student, we put emphasis on our everyday practice, including Zazen practice. And when you think about how to cope with the problem you have in your everyday life, you will realize how important it is to practice Zazen. The power of practice will help you in a true sense. For instance, And I talk about this all the time. When you hit the mokugyo, you try to control the chanting. If you think, this is too fast, so I must make their chanting slower. Or, oh, this is too slow, I must make it a little bit faster.

[68:13]

If you try to do it by way of your hand or your mind, it doesn't work. Only when you do it from your hara, by the feeling you have in zazen practice, can you do it. Just by your mind or your hand, you cannot do anything. It doesn't work. The students will not follow your Mikugyo. Only when you do it with your Zazen power can you control it. When you can control yourself very well without having any idea of controlling anything, when you set the right pace, then you can control yourself. And when you can control yourself, just as you sit in Zazen posture, then you can control the chanting perfectly. This is also true of your everyday practice. So when you just, it's hard to explain. When you do something just through your skill or just by your mind, you will not be supported by people and so you will not help others. When you do it with zazen mind, you can help others and you'll be naturally supported by people.

[69:16]

So if the precepts are just some moral code, which you have in your mind, those precepts will not work. When you forget all the precepts, and without trying to observe them, in the same way as you eat when you're hungry, then naturally, precepts are there. When you forget all about precepts, and when you can observe them naturally, that is how you keep the precepts. In your zazen practice, you just sit. You have no idea of attaining anything. What do we mean by just sit? When we just sit, we already include everything, and we're not simply a part of this cosmic being. We are one with everything. This is just an explanation, but the feeling is that you include everything. And actually, this is not true just for Zazen. When you drink a cup of tea, that activity includes everything. Actually, it is so. When you say, this is tea and this is me, it does not include everything. You are here and tea is there. This is just tea and it does not include everything.

[70:21]

But when you drink it without any idea of tasting what it is, being completely one with the tea, then you have no idea of tea and no idea of you. This activity includes everything. That's why we hold the teacup with both hands. So as Dogen Zenji said, you know, it's interesting, we hold the teacup with both hands. It's okay to hold it with one hand, but when you hold it with one hand, it's often just in order to drink it. When you hold it with two hands, you're actually becoming one with the teacup, which is different than just using the teacup for your own satisfaction. This is drinking the tea just for your own satisfaction when you hold it with both hands. you're actually merging, you become one with the cup, and then the cup is, you're appreciating something about the cup allowing you to drink the tea.

[71:24]

It's not automatic. It's not automatic. No, that's right. It's not automatic. Where was I? Oh, yeah. So as Dogen Zenji said, if your everyday activity doesn't include everything, it is not Buddhist activity. It seems almost impossible to feel that way. But actually, if you realize, if you experience with Zazen, what is Zazen practice, then you will understand what your everyday life is and how everyday life should be for yourself, for others, and for each activity. So it's you and others plus activity. You will realize that each activity should be Zazen. The words of the famous Zen master Uman are often used as koans and are very well known for their subtlety. The point of his words is difficult to explain.

[72:26]

The only way to understand his words is through practice. It is almost impossible to understand through words, but he tries to express it in Zen mondo, question and answer, in various ways. Later, Zen masters said Uman's words are like a cup and a lid, which fit perfectly. Or we can say, follow the wave and drive the wave. You understand? You're following and driving at the same time. The boat follows the wave and drives the wave, like the mokugyo follows the chanting and drives the chanting. If you just follow the chanting, the mokugyo will get slower and slower. Still, unless you listen, you will lose control. So you have to listen and at the same time you should lead. You should drive the chanting. It is not just to follow the chanting, you should drive the chanting too. Following and driving the chanting, how do you do it? If you ask Uman how you do it, he may say, what are you thinking about?

[73:29]

He may say, just sit. How can I make the perfect cover for this cup? The only way is just to make a lid and cover it. But if you think too much about it, and if you work on it too much, the lid will become smaller and smaller, and it will not fit. If you do not observe the cup, it may be too big. Observing the cup and making the lid, that is the way and that is how you practice Dazen. That is the power of practice, or how you fit the situation. How does your lid fit every cup? And how does your cup fit every lid? In other words, how do you meet circumstances? That's the Bodhisattva practice. That's the bodhisattva precepts. How do you meet every situation like a cover and a cup and its cover?

[74:29]

So, to know the center of things or to have a whole picture of things or events is the point of our practice. And how you do it is to find, to know the center of yourself. When you know where your center is in Zazen, that is the center of yourself and everything. When you do not lose your center wherever you are, it means that you are the boss. But if you lose your center, you are already mixed up. And even though you insist yourself, you are not in the center. How you keep the precepts is how you organize your life. And how you organize your life is how we practice Zazen. The point can be explained in various ways. When we practice zazen, there's nothing outside of us. Everything, whole being, is included in our practice. So the merit of practice is just for you, yourself, because there's just one whole being. You, yourself means you include everything.

[75:33]

So the merit of practice is just for you, yourself, because there's just one whole being. There is no you and no objective world. Objective world and subjective world are one and the same in our practice. We explain it in this way, but that is just an explanation of our Zazen practice. When you just sit without being involved in the thinking mind or emotional activity, when you just remain on your black cushion, then that is the practice we mean, which is explained in various ways. So as Bodhidharma said, no merit. What will be the merit of practice? No merit, because there's nothing but practice. There's no merit to give anyone or to have for yourself. Merit itself is zazen. Zazen itself is merit. So no merit, just zazen. If you say merit, there's no zazen. So he said, no merit. Whatever you do, there is no merit. If there is merit, that is dualistic practice. If you observe precepts in that way, that is heresy. If you think, I have to observe the ten precepts one by one, that's wrong practice.

[76:39]

For a long time, many Buddhists tried to observe our precepts with great effort. But that kind of practice violates the precepts because observed in that way, precepts become dualistic, something outside of ourselves. So he's talking about 250 precepts. For Mahayana Buddhists, dualistic practice is a violation of practice. Why is that? Because when we observe rigidly, or when we are caught by precepts, that is a violation of the precepts. But when we have no idea of precepts, what will happen? This may also be a violation of precepts. Either way, dead precepts and living precepts. So there are precepts, but you know, precepts should be observed without any idea of observing. That is how we practice, how to observe precepts. In short, when you observe precepts in the same way as you practice Zazen, that is perfectly transmitted precepts from Buddha to us. So as Mahayana Buddhists, whether or not we know each other,

[77:42]

Whether or not we know each of the 16 precepts or the 250 precepts, we should still be able to observe precepts. And when we practice Zazen, we should not practice in such a way that we think, this is just Zazen. This Zazen includes all the various studies of Buddhism. So that's his statement. You know, people sometimes criticize this understanding, and it's understandable that they do, because this is the end of practice that he's talking about. He's talking about the fully realized person. But since our practice is not step-by-step practice, we practice the realized practice from the beginning. That's Zen. We don't have step-by-step practice.

[78:44]

So you should depend on zazen. Yes? Isn't that because at any given moment maybe we'll have a realization and at the very next given moment we'll be clueless? Yes. You can't, you know, that's why you can't count on your realization. You can't count on it. But there will come a time and a situation where you can't. So you have to be able to respond. It's not like there's some fixed realization. Realization has to do with how we respond to each situation. without thinking this is realization. It's very radical understanding.

[79:48]

Because we know the precepts, we shouldn't ignore the precepts. We know the precepts. So by having a foundation of knowing the precepts, We act according to the true precepts, because you cannot legislate how to act in every single situation. It's not possible. So, next time, we're going to, I told you that I wanted us to write our own precepts. So, here's the story. If you want to, you can, before you come next time, think of some precepts, like how we relate to, how you think we should relate to something, or how you feel we should act, all of us.

[81:01]

What is some things that we, you know, Things that, let me give you an example. Think twice about giving a mini lecture when someone else is giving a presentation. That's a good precept. Think twice about making yourself the center of attention. Think twice about dominating the conversation. These are all within a certain, you know. Think twice about overstepping your boundaries. Don't boast about your knowledge or experience or who you know. Name dropping. Don't try to spend more time than anyone else detailing or indulging your feelings during a check-in.

[82:08]

Don't strut around like the cock of the walk. Don't try to practice one-upmanship or to impress others. So these are some, from my experience, I wrote these down. And I think they're good precepts. They're not major precepts, they're minor precepts. Major precepts we don't fiddle with, but the minor precepts, are local, I mean, they're there to be, you know. I would like us to hear, you know, what our ideas and thoughts are about behavior and what kind of precepts you think we should be following. It can be almost anything, you know. Don't walk around with a cup in your hand or eating something Don't come to work circle eating a piece of cake and drinking a cup of coffee.

[83:15]

I mean, that's already a precept. So does that sound like, so if you write some of those down when you come next time, we can look at them and see what we're thinking about as far as our behavior which is freeing, not... I think precepts are about how we act in a way that frees us, not hinders us. That's what precepts should be about. Sometimes there are prohibitive precepts, which are for our own good, as your mother said. So, okay.

[84:13]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ