Last week, the featured story of enlightenment is called Me Who's Enlightenment or Not. It's case 62 of the Book of Serenity. By the way, Me Who means Me the Foreigner. He also has a nickname which is Me the Seventh. But I don't know who the other six are. So Me Who was the Dharma brother of Yangshan. Shan, in this case, means mountain and Yang means to venerate or worship. So this Zen teacher, his name is Worshipping Mountains or Venerating Mountains.

[01:04]

So his Dharma brother, they had the same teacher, had one of his students go to Yangshan and ask him, do people these days need enlightenment or not? And Yangshan said what? It's not that enlightenment doesn't exist. But how may we not fall into the secondary? And the monk went back to his teacher, Me Who, and reported, and Me Who deeply agreed with Yangshan. So thank you for writing poems in response to this story.

[02:22]

Would anyone who wrote one be comfortable and happy to read their poem to the assembly? Okay. Would you like to read yours? That's fine. If you'd like to, I'd be happy to have you do that. I taught high school for two years when I was 20, so speaking in front of groups is not very intimidating. I've seen the moon in a dew drop on streams, rivers, and tides. On the frozen pond, the ice and snow throw its sparkles into the night, white jade.

[03:25]

Amen. Two people back there are up for reading theirs. Three. Do you want yours, Bill? Okay. It's not on paper. Do you have it in your body? Okay. Please. I drove my truck off the road into the ditch, but it's all right, because there's a lot of tow trucks here. There's a lot of tow trucks here. Yes.

[04:29]

Yes. Yes. Fran? Okay. Do we need enlightenment? It's not that there's no moon with its icy tips. It's not that there are no mountains and rivers. It's not that there's no self. There's only a question. How do we live when strong autumn winds blow across the East Bay Hills? How do we fly with the wind? Amen. Rana? By the time I finish reading this short poem, that you're going to be dead, that only good love only should expire.

[05:31]

Marjorie? The path is strenuous like a second earth. Embracing, acclimating, leads one to beyond, beyond. Once again? The path is strewn... Embracing, acclimating, leads one to... No, the path is strewn with a secondary. With a secondary. Embracing, acclimating, leads one to beyond, beyond. Amen. Not nothing. Still follow breath. Mind, reach for delusion.

[06:44]

Let go. Each mountain has an end here. Amen. You and I looking. Grasping at differences. Hands whistle through the air. Amen. Enlightenment? Nah. Can't be that great if everyone already is. Can you say it one more time, louder? Yeah, but you didn't say Amen to this one. Enlightenment? Nah.

[07:51]

It can't be that great if everyone already is. Amen. Falling into the secondary, she thought she was teaching. The student said, I'm not here for education, I'm here for enlightenment. Amen. The icy moon, warm bird, cold tree, melting, dew, not this, not that, all of it together. Icy words don't reach it, you can't figure your way to it. Enacting the world in stillness, in silliness, in siltiness. A sideways glance,

[08:53]

a momentary release, moist eyes, a sharp intake of breath. Keep your eye on the ball and give it away. Amen. Carving a dainty tree, seasonless activity, for a bird that lives everywhere. Amen. Striving implies movement, setting off toward a goal. Would you say that again please? Striving implies movement, setting off toward a goal, but it is also a wall that obscures the rising and falling of math. To turn towards striving with an open heart as it stands between right and here

[09:56]

is to turn resistance like water against the mill wheel. An action that appears to be two is actually one before it surely becomes two again. Amen. Even though these people understand, shall we continue the class? Also, just a little resonance from last week, towards the end, Linda recited an English translation of a Hindi poem and, would you recite it again please?

[10:56]

Hindi poem. You didn't do a Hindi poem, you did an English poem. In English. Kabir in English please. But I think you'll like the sound of it in Hindi. Let's take a second. Okay. Now wait a minute. First of all, I just want to say that my body understood and it gave rise to goosebumps. No problem. Anyway, the somewhat late English translation was running, running, more running, how far can the mind run?

[12:01]

Mind gets exhausted, gets still. The thing, the place, the place. The first time she said, the place is right here, but then she said, I think, which is more literal and better, the place right here, right here. The place is the place. So, this is not enlightenment. This is this, is enlightenment. Okay, so we had this story and so I've been wondering what, I've been thinking of a lot of stories and which one should I offer this week? And some of the stories which I'm working on,

[13:04]

they're great, but they're too big, they're too long to be recited. You know, it would be too hard for you to follow a story with like a hundred words. There are stories like that and we can maybe someday deal with them, but tonight I'm giving you, I'm going to give you another short one. What? So, the short one that I thought of was, that's short and you'll be able to learn it easily and remember it. But before I tell you the story, I want to tell you a little bit about the person, the teacher in the story. There's also a monk in the story. Can you hear me okay, Marjorie?

[14:08]

Everybody hear me okay? There's a monk in the story and all we know is his name is Monk, but the teacher in the story, his name is Xing Yuan, Xingzi. So, in the Zen history, there's like, we start counting in China from the semi-legendary founder, the first Chinese ancestor of Zen, we start counting from him. Frank, could you move that way about four inches? Then you can move that way a little bit, I can see your face better. Is your name Joanne? And is your name Joanne? Sisters? So, two Joannes, we have three Jeffs, and we have 50 Bodhisattvas.

[15:11]

So, in Chinese Zen mythology, we have the first ancestor, second ancestor, third ancestor, fourth ancestor, fifth ancestor, sixth ancestor. That's our traditional thing. And from the sixth, there is not a seventh, because the sixth had a lot of notable successors. But the two that had the most influence, or I should say the strongest influence, the influence that has led up to the present, there were many, but two of them have led to all the schools of Zen. And those two are Xing Yuan and Nan Yue. Nan Yue. Those two. Xing Yuan. Xing Yuan, Xing Sa.

[16:16]

Xing Sa means walking and thinking. And Nan Yue means south source or south spring. Anyway, these two are the main disciples, and they led to all the living traditions of Zen. And I thought about their background, and I thought about a conversation that each one of them had with their teacher. Kind of, I think, like maybe their first meeting with their teacher, who was who? The sixth ancestor, Hui Nong, yeah. So I think it's their first meeting, conversation, which is the first, you know, enlightenment story about these teachers.

[17:16]

And these stories resonate with the story that we had last week. They're both about enlightenment, and they're also both about somehow not falling into the secondary. So I'll start with Nan Yue. So Nan Yue, by the way, Xing is a little senior to Nan Yue. Nan Yue goes to the sixth ancestor. Sixth ancestor asks him where he's from. And he says, where he's from, I forgot. Anyway, he said where he's from, and then the sixth ancestor said to him, what is it that thus comes?

[18:23]

And so that question is a kind of play on the word thus comes. So in one sense, the question is, what is this that's come here to meet me? What is this? What is this meeting? What is this meeting, and what are you that has just come? That meaning, that is there. But the other thing is, the question is, what is the Buddha? Because thus come is an epithet for Buddha. So it both means, what is this meeting? Who are you? And what is the thus come to talk? What is the Buddha? Now, it turns out that those three questions are always the same question. What is Buddha is, what's this? Who are you? It's not that you're Buddha,

[19:28]

it's who are you as Buddha? It's what's this conversation as Buddha? So it's wonderful that he, the sixth ancestor, was able to ask such a cool question. I guess because he was the sixth ancestor, he could ask questions like that. So then Nanyue says, to say it's this, misses the point. Another translation could be, to point at it, misses the point. Like, who are you? To say it's this, misses the point. What are we doing together? To say it's this, misses the point. What is Buddha? To say it's this, misses the point. Okay? That's his response of this newcomer,

[20:32]

which is kind of a good response. The history of Zen really appreciates that response. And for a thousand years, people have been quoting that response. And also the question. So then the ancestor says to the new student, then is there no practice or realization? To say it's this, misses the point. Well, then is there no practice or realization? And again, the newcomer says, I don't say there's no practice or realization. I just say that it cannot be defiled. I just say that it cannot be defiled. So first he says it misses the point, but to say that this is enlightenment, it kind of defiles it. So he's not going to say it's this,

[21:37]

because he's not going to defile it. And then the ancestor says, this non-defilement is what is practiced by all Buddhas. They practice this non-defilement of enlightenment. But he didn't say all that. He just said, this non-defilement is what all Buddhas take care of and transmit. Now I'm like this, and you're like this. You see the resonance in this story and the Yangshan story? Then when Qingyuan meets the sixth ancestor, the sixth ancestor says, I don't know what he says. Probably says, where are you from? And he says where he's from. And then he says kind of like, do you have any questions?

[22:40]

And he said, yeah. Now, how can one not fall into steps and stages? Steps and stages. Which is the secondary. Like steps and stages to enlightenment. It's not how can one get rid of steps and stages, or how can one get rid of the secondary. How can one not fall into it? So Qingyuan's question is kind of like Yangshan's question. Except Yangshan first says, I don't say that enlightenment does not exist. Just how can we not fall into the secondary? So the newcomer meeting the ancestor says, how can we not fall into steps and stages? The path has steps and stages as Marjorie said,

[23:41]

the path is strewn with steps and stages. It's strewn with crystal staircases. It's strewn with pursuit of enlightenment. How can we not fall into any of that? That's the question of the student. The teacher says, well, how have you been practicing? And he said, I haven't even been practicing the Four Noble Truths. The Four Noble Truths that the Buddha taught early on and all the way through. The truth of suffering, the truth of the origin of suffering, the truth of the cessation of suffering, and the truth of the path of suffering, which has eight stages. So this monk is coming to the teacher, asking how not to fall into stages, and he knows there's lots of stages on the path.

[24:42]

How can you not fall into them? And the teacher says, what have you been practicing? He said, I haven't even been practicing the most basic steps and stages. So then the ancestor says, well, then how could you fall into steps and stages? So I had this kind of a new metaphor, which is that enlightenment is kind of like radio waves. This room has, I would guess, innumerable radio waves in it. I don't know how many there are, but there's many, many radio waves going through this. If you had a radio, a high-powered radio, you could pick up a lot of radio signals,

[25:44]

because there's a lot of them going on in this room. But you can't see them. And also, we are not aware of feeling them either. They're kind of like, I think they're going through us. Enlightenment's like that too. There's innumerable waves of enlightenment all the time, and they're invisible. So the question is how to become a radio, an enlightenment radio. And the way to become an enlightenment radio is not to fall into them. It's not to fall into looking for stations. So the story this week is now,

[26:54]

after the six ancestors probably passed away, and Ching Yiran is asked by a monk something like, what is the highest, most essential teaching of the Buddha? And Ching Yiran says, what is the price of rice in Lu Ling? What is the price of electric power in the East Bay? And then the person who put together

[28:04]

the Book of Serenity, who writes poems about each case, Hangzhi Zhengjue, his poem about this case is, The great work of peace has no sign. The family style of peasants is most pristine, only concerned with village songs and festal drinking. How would they even know about the virtues of Xun and the benevolence of Yao? Xun and Yao are ancient,

[29:06]

semi-legendary Chinese emperors. Before the historical emperors, there's a bunch of other emperors, and a number of them are considered to have great virtue and great benevolence. For example, Emperor Xun and Emperor Yao. So the great work of peace is, enlightenment is the great work of peace. The great work of peace is what we mean by enlightenment. Enlightenment is the process of working for peace and realizing peace. That process is invisible. It doesn't have a sign. And yet, it can ask questions like, What is the essential highest teaching?

[30:13]

It can respond by saying, What is the price of rice in Luling? The way that conversation is the work of peace is invisible, but there it is. The way the great work of peace has no sign, and therefore it can work through anything. It can work through these conversations. It has no sign, therefore it reaches into and penetrates all things that do have signs. And so in that way, he's saying, the family style of peasants is most pristine. In a way, the monks, the Zen monks in the monasteries,

[31:16]

in some ways they're not so pristine because they look like they're practicing peace. Everybody says, Oh, they're up in the mountains there, harmonizing with the whole universe, bringing peace to all beings. That's what it looks like. That's what enlightenment looks like. It looks like these wonderful Zen monks and nuns. That's what it looks like. Well, yes, that's what it looks like, but that's not what it is. That's just what it looks like. What it is, is invisible. It's inconceivably wonderful, but you can't see it. However, it penetrates everything, and so it can work with everything, and you can see things. So in a way, just living your, the price of rice in Lu Ling is extremely profound and mysterious. And so is your daily life. Your daily life cannot avoid

[32:18]

being profound and mysterious. You can't make it less mysterious than it already is, and you can't make it more mysterious and more profound. You can't make it deeper or higher. It is already that way. Your job is not to fall into trying to deepen it, trying to make it more or less mysterious. That's your job. However, that stuff comes up, and we can be kind to it and let go of it. So, our classes maybe aren't quite as pristine as village songs, but they're pretty pristine. I mean, you people don't, you know, you're not going to great lengths to be really profound, are you? Your poems were just

[33:21]

enlightenment. You weren't trying to get anything, were you? Yeah, so that's the way Ching Yiran, Ching says, working with that monk, is just like the family style of peasants. This is the family style of his school. His school is a family style. It's the family style of... It's not that there's no enlightenment. It's not that there's no essential Buddhadharma. It's just that what it is, is like each of us, the way we are right now, not falling in to the way we are right now. It's not the way you are. It's the way you're not falling in to the way you are. It's like saying, this is it.

[34:28]

Rather than, this appears to be it, but I wonder what it is. Or this appears to be it, do you have any questions? I do, but I do, this is how it looks, and I have questions about it. However, my questions are not sufficient. I need you to question me too. So that I don't fall in to what I think is going on here. Now. And so that you don't fall in to what you think is going on. So it's not that you're not thinking, it's that you're not falling in to it. How do you not fall in to it? How do you not fall in to it? I'm two sentences back. I'm still waiting for you to say another synonym for falling. Or could you come forward two sentences and go back later? Pardon?

[35:30]

How do you not fall in to what's going on here? And when you said, I don't know, what was that? I don't know. And when you said, I don't... And when I said... When I said... When you said, I don't know, what was that? Some really great non-defilement. What? Some really great non-defilement. Thank you. Is it? Huh? That is a great non-defilement? Well, also the conversation. You didn't do that by yourself. You didn't say, I don't know, by yourself. Did you? You didn't nod your head sideways. Did you? By yourself. You don't do anything on your own. Not doing things on your own

[36:33]

is how you don't fall in to what you think. Conversation is how we don't fall in to what we think. We have we think, but if we want to not fall in, we have to have a conversation. Like, you know, I think I'm about to fall in to what I think. Help me. What can I do for you? That you did. Thank you. That was good. Now you can go back to your sentences if you want. I'm very happy. You're happy? You are? Yes? Well, so what's happening when you have a conversation, when you seek a conversation with somebody to agree with you? Like, instead of continuing the question and not falling in to something. Would you say that again, please? That was good. That was a good way to say it again. It sounded different, but... I'll take laughter as a repeat. But now try to see if you can say what you said

[37:35]

in similar words. When I have a conversation with somebody seeking agreement, in a way. Oh, if you're having a conversation and you're seeking agreement, okay? That's falling in to something, isn't it? That's falling in to... No, not necessarily. It's not really... It seems to me that often we look for conversations with people who... and hope that there's going to be agreement as opposed to rebuttal or even... Something like, well, that's the price of rice. To me that seems like a little bit of a... Falling in to the secondary. That seems like the secondary, what you just said, right? Yeah. So, as has been said, the path is strewn with the secondary. So, if I'm having a conversation with you

[38:37]

and I'm trying to get something, trying to get something is secondary. To have a conversation with you without trying to get anything, that's not secondary. That's enlightenment in action. However, if I'm trying to get something or get agreement with you, or if I'm having a conversation with you trying to get enlightenment, then we got the secondary. However, I don't have to fall in to that and you don't have to either. So, you can say, okay, let's both make a date. Okay, and let's meet and each of us have something to try to get from the conversation, okay? Then we meet. Okay, so what are you trying to get? You tell me and I tell you what I'm trying to get and then we start having a conversation. And we're not even trying to get the conversation. We're just admitting some things we'd like to get. And then we see if we can help each other not get stuck in what we want to get.

[39:37]

We do want to get things. That's part of our life. But we don't have to fall in to it. Like you could want to get peace and want to get freedom and not just for yourself. But you don't have to fall in to that. And one way to fall in to it is to tell me, you know, I'm trying to get peace. And, yeah. Yes? I was under the impression, and maybe this is what you just said, but that a way not to fall in to something was to just accept it completely. Yeah, I agree. That's how not to fall in to it. And that's what you're calling a conversation also? Yeah. So like Kim tells me, I have the news for you. And I say, what is it? And you say, I'm trying to get your approval. Or, I'm trying to tell you something

[40:39]

and I want you to agree with me. She tells me that. Maybe. Okay? And then we have a conversation about that. And both of us get in to fully accepting that she actually does want me to agree with her. And then we both become free of it. And she still wants me to agree with her. See, you don't have to get rid of that in order to fully engage it. And you can't engage it all by yourself. Just like you can't even say, which you might think at the beginning of the conversation you might say, well, I want to have a conversation because I don't want to get stuck in trying to get your agreement. Okay? However, I still think that I can tell you that on my own. But you can't even tell me you want to have a conversation on your own. At the beginning, you think you can. But as you get into it,

[41:41]

you realize you couldn't have the conversation from the beginning. You couldn't want to have the conversation on your own. But at the beginning, you don't necessarily understand that. As you get more and more into the conversation. Now, if at the very beginning of the conversation you understood it, then you would say, I used to want your approval and I fell into it. Now I still want your approval, but I'm not caught by it anymore. I'm so happy to be still wanting you to approve of me and not being caught by my wants. I didn't have to get rid of my wants in order to not be caught by them. And now I'd like to celebrate that with you by having a conversation and seeing if you can question me about whether that's really so. Yes?

[42:44]

Katie? Hi. I'm thinking about the story you told about the monks and maybe feeling like what they were doing is peace, but then also thinking about the peasants with their village songs. I was reading some of Sufi Rishi's talks recently and I feel like this comes up a lot where he says something like, you know, find a rule and break it and see what happens. Or, you know, don't try to be too good. And I was wondering if you could give some examples of what it means to, like, break rules skillfully

[43:47]

or to be following forms but not trying to follow them too good or just, yeah. Well, one thing that came to my mind was we have a formal way of eating in the meditation hall and you could say these are rules, but they're forms, you know. Like at a certain time in the process we unwrap our bowls, which are wrapped in cloth, and we have a way of wrapping them. And sometimes you might unwrap in a way

[44:51]

that breaks the form. Matter of fact, people quite often, because it's rather complicated about how to unwrap and then you unwrap and then you fold it and so on and so forth. And sometimes you might feel like you broke the form or you might even... And then when you feel like you broke the form you might feel upset and accidentally knock your bowl on the floor, which is also kind of breaking the form of not dropping your bowl on the floor. And you might do this, but you're not trying to break the form, but in fact you do break the form. Somebody else... Occasionally people might even get angry and then, well, and intentionally break the form. Like saying, I don't like this formal way of eating. I'm not going to follow it. I'm going to take some shortcuts and not go through the whole process and just do it more simply.

[45:53]

So rather than folding this way, I'm just going to let it fall open and not fold it. I'm sick of this stuff. And then that then seems like the person intentionally broke the form, right? Like they wanted to... They didn't want to go through the trouble of doing it in the usual way. Another person does want to follow the form, but in fact, for some reason, they forget how to do it or something. They don't follow it. So both of them maybe do pretty much the same thing. One seems to want... Didn't want to make the effort to do it in the usual way. The other person forgot, okay? And it's possible that the one who intentionally did not want to follow the form didn't want to because they were wanting to before too much. Because they too much wanted to follow the form, they were getting irritated and stressed. And they feel like, well,

[46:56]

Zen forms are really like something to like throw out the window. I thought of another story of when one of the early teachers at Zen Center who was Suzuki Roshi's assistant over at Sokoji Temple and also later at the Page Street Temple named Katagiri Roshi. When he was a training monk, he was in a monastery and one of his close friends was there with him in the monastery and they were cleaning one time the hallway of the monastery. And I think the teacher came by and pointed out to his friend that they had missed a little piece of paper in the hallway that they were cleaning. And he's like, okay.

[47:58]

They're cleaning and the usual form is to clean is to like pick up stuff that's on the floor. The teacher comes up and says, I think he said, what's this? And the monk took it and said, it's a piece of paper. Can I have that back? And he quit being a monk right after that. He quit being a monk. He left the monastery and gave up Zen training because he thought it was so stupid or something, you know, that this teacher spending his time asking people, you know, about pieces of paper. It's like so picky. So he fell into the secondary

[49:04]

thinking that Zen should not, you know, I've had enough of Zen being concerned about every little thing. And Kadagiri Roshi... Did you say that was Kadagiri Roshi's son? Kadagiri Roshi told me that story about his friend and he really felt bad that his friend quit over this incident. But it seemed like his friend kind of, I don't know, did the teacher care too much? Did his friend care too much? These are the kind of testings of care too much. I often mention, you know, that some decades ago there was this... Can you hear me okay, Marjorie? No? A few generations ago... A few generations ago... Did you get that one? There was this phenomenon called care bearers.

[50:05]

Do you remember those? No? Well, care bearers were like... Were they like little toy... Stuffed bears? Were they also candy? Cartoons. So they were cartoons and they were little stuffed bears. Care bearers. So care bearers, guess what they do, Marjorie? Huh? They care. Their raison d'etre is caring. Caring for what? Well, for bears. Do they care about anything besides bears? Do they care for people? They care for sentient beings. Those are called care bearers, okay? And their heaven, the heaven of care bearers was called Care-A-Lot. Care bearers care a lot.

[51:12]

Now, I'm not an expert on care bearers or care-a-lot. But I think that care-a-lot does not mean care too much. And certainly it doesn't mean care too little. Care bearers care a lot. Zen bodhisattvas care a lot. And they're watching to see that they fall into caring a lot. Which falling into caring a lot turns into caring too little or too much. So that monk cared a lot, but he cared too much. So then he quit. And I've seen some other Zen people who cared too much who quit. Some of my...

[52:15]

You know, when I was in my 20s, I practiced with people who were in their 20s. And some of them practiced, if you'll excuse the expression, harder than me. But they practiced too hard, so they quit. I didn't practice too hard, so I didn't quit. Maybe sometimes I practiced too easy. But the nice thing about practicing too easy is you don't quit so easily. Thank you. No. That's not my reputation. People think I practiced hard because I did practice hard. I did. And it was not hard for me to practice hard. It was really what I wanted to do. But sometimes I took it easy. And part of the reason I took it easy is because I saw some of my friends who were my good friends

[53:17]

who pushed themselves so hard, they cared too much about the form. And, you know, the main form is like sitting, right? They cared too much about the sitting. And we said, still, they cared too much about being still. So they turned the practice into something dreadful because they cared too much. So then they broke the practice. But they cared too much about the practice. So they quit. So, yeah. So break the practice intentionally or not intentionally. So when you quoted Suzuki Roshi, you don't have to intentionally break the practice to learn about what that's like. You can accidentally break it and then you can see how you feel about it. Do you want to quit? Well, then you probably care too much. Do you want other people to do it like you do it? Then you probably care too much and so on.

[54:18]

So is that enough on that for now? Very helpful. I mean, I'd still love to hear about some of the rules you found helpful and that might be true. Yeah, well, I have so many, many, many. But for now, ask it again. You could ask one a week. Yes, Haley? Well, I spent, I mean, anyway, just so many weeks and one week left. You guys said that you could exhaust the secondary and today I was exhausted by the secondary. So that's where I spent the day. Okay, so say again. You guys said that you could exhaust the secondary and today I was exhausted by the secondary. Either way. Either way, that's a way not to fall into it. If you go all the way to the end of the secondary, if you go partway, you might fall into it. But if you go all the way to the end,

[55:21]

there's no way to fall into it. But it can also come and exhaust you and that works too. But exhaust means it's something you cannot do by yourself. So if you try to exhaust the secondary all by yourself, then you say, okay, I've succeeded. Well, you need to tell somebody about that. You should go tell, you can tell me. And then I can say, oh, nice going. I don't think I've exhausted you. No, no, I'm just saying. I'm not used to being in that trouble by my own mind. That's okay. I support that. Do you say you want to find him?

[56:25]

You want... You know, you were talking about how the monks are in this high mountain practicing enlightenment and whatever they're doing. And sometimes I just think maybe some... When the teacher who came by and pulled out that piece of paper, the attitude that she did was such that he himself, the one holding the paper, was in the secondary. You might be right. But that's part of how you do it. You hang out with people who have fallen into the secondary. Yeah, that's who you... And then it's sad when you give up on them and walk away from them. See, it isn't like you're always surrounded by perfect masters

[57:27]

who have not fallen into the secondary and then they... From not falling into the secondary, they offer you this piece of paper. It's also the people who have fallen into the secondary offer you the piece of paper. And so... But in fact, you did miss the piece of paper. We're not debating that. The question is this is the way it's being brought to you. I don't know either. But the thing is he decided, he gave up on the conversation and you can defend him. Kadagiri Roshi was defending him. Yeah, he was defending him.

[58:29]

He was saying, I don't want him to give up on the conversation. I'm sad that he gave up the conversation. I want him to come back and continue the conversation. Yeah. It doesn't matter. It never happens. Well, Kadagiri was the teacher who was there at the time. He was right there and he saw it and that was chapter whatever in the evolution of this monk. And it was sad that he couldn't... He could have, instead of throwing the thing out the window, he could have said something else. And the teacher could have... So, it was the... I think it's the appearance of the termination of the conversation. That's sad. It isn't really... That doesn't really happen. The conversation does go on.

[59:29]

And that's really kind of like... Yeah. Yeah. And you're doing it right now. You're actually living it right now. This is the... This is the great work that has no sign right now. Did you say maybe not here? Yeah, pardon? And... It's a challenge for you to want to remain with them.

[60:30]

That it... When we don't see enough Dharma... Well, when you say it's hard to stay in the situation that you described, when you say that, that's the Dharma practice. Right there. You just said, it's hard for me to stay in that situation. That's kind of like a confession. Hmm? What? It's a confession that sometimes you have a hard time devoting yourself to low-quality Dharma situations. It's fine to feel... It's fine to feel better when you leave those low-quality situations. That's fine. It's fine to feel good about that. Okay? And you don't have to confess

[61:43]

that you feel fine. But you did confess that you had a hard time really engaging wholeheartedly this low-quality Dharma environment. And... Pardon? Yeah. We do feel happier in this situation than in that situation. That happens to us. When I'm here, I'm happy. When I'm there, I'm unhappy. But the practice is not about being here where I'm happy and not being where I'm unhappy, or reverse. The practice is for both situations. And some situations are easier

[62:46]

than others to fully engage. We're trying to learn to fully engage all of them. That's what we're trying to learn. We already know how to... And if you are in situations where you're happy and you fully engage that, that will make you able to fully engage situations where you're not happy. Yes. And the practice is to help us fully engage these... this changing world. Like fully engage when the power is off. Fully engage when the power is on. This is the challenge. It's hard. Right?

[63:48]

It's hard. Yes. How could you possibly know? I have no idea. But sometimes people think they're in a really high-quality Dharma situation. Sometimes they think they're in a medium or low. But I don't know how... I don't know how it actually works that we know things. But if we do know things, if anybody does know they're in a high-quality Dharma situation, that's something to let go of. Something not to fall into. Like... The second... High-quality and low-quality are secondary. Dharma is free of high and low. Pardon? Everything I say,

[64:53]

all my labels, Dharma is free of my labels. And yours. Okay? It's free of that. So the Dharma is not falling into the labels. They're secondary. However, if you don't... If we don't wholeheartedly converse with the secondary, we will probably quite frequently or almost always fall into it. And that is... Yeah, that's... It still doesn't mean there's no enlightenment. It still doesn't mean enlightenment doesn't exist. It just means we have just defiled it. It still exists, but we have poisoned ourselves by falling into our thinking. But if we're very kind with our thinking, we won't fall into it. Yes and yes. There's a line here of two yeses. Number one...

[65:54]

When I tune into my suffering and I'm just kind of screaming, it's like I refuse to accept the situation. I hate this. No, no, no, no, no. And sometimes I can get myself to say yes. And I suffer a lot less. I don't know if that's a question, but it's how do you get yourself to say yes? Oh, well, you said... No, she said, I get myself to say yes, and then she said, how do you get yourself to say yes? Okay? So those are kind of like dead ends, those two. You say to me what you say. You say, I'm suffering a lot, and I say, well, let's say yes to this, okay? And you say yes. You didn't make yourself say yes. I didn't make you say yes. But also you could say, I'm suffering a lot, and I say, well, can we say yes to that? And you say no. But you didn't make yourself say no,

[67:00]

and I didn't make yourself say no. However, you wouldn't have been able to say no. Yeah, you couldn't say no by yourself. You needed my support, and you got it. So you could say no, I'm not going to say yes to my suffering. But also you could just say, okay, yes. And I say, did you mean it? And you say no. But I didn't make you say no and yes. You didn't make yourself say no and yes. The conversation doesn't make you say, the conversation is freedom from yes and no. It's free. And I can't make you join the conversation. You can't make yourself join the conversation. We are in it. You can just refuse to join it. But you can't do it by yourself. I have to support you to refuse to join it. And we do. And it goes on. We are on the path of becoming free of our suffering and our ideas and clinging to them and suffering. That's the path we're on.

[68:00]

But we're not on it alone. We're not doing this practice alone, on our own, by ourselves. We're doing it together, through thick and thin. And thin is sometimes really thin and thick is sometimes really thick. But you don't make the thick by yourself or the thin by yourself. Yes? Oh, I keep forgetting the thing that I was going to ask you. So, can we have a conversation here using words that's free from yes and no? You mean, could we have a conversation where yes and no are prohibited? No. No. Yes. Yeah. One of the best ways to have a conversation that's free of yes and no is by using yeses and noes. Did you say, there you go? Yeah. That's one of the main ways

[69:01]

that we become free of yes and no is by using those words wholeheartedly. And wholeheartedly means not all by myself, but with you. That's how we become free. Yes? So, when you say we're always having a conversation... Yeah, that's the practice that we're living in. So, I've been contemplating that and confusing it to a lot of peace and have the conversation. And I guess my question is, is that conversation that I'm having in my head with myself or with you or with my cohort or my family, whatever it is that I'm working out in relationship and conversation,

[70:02]

although it's inside, is that still the conversation? Do you still consider that conversation? What you just described, this inside stuff? The inside stuff is conversation and it's in conversation. This inside stuff, you're not doing on your own. You cannot have that inner conversation without everybody included. But it can look like no other people are around. But you can't do this on your own. Even when nobody's around, you're not on your own. Everybody's supporting you and you're supporting us even though we don't see you. But if I'm having that conversation on my own, and let's say it's a conversation with you, but that's just my internalized notion of you. Yeah, that's right. And you don't make

[71:04]

your internalized notion of me on your own, even though that version of me that is in your consciousness is in nobody else's. They might agree with you that basically, you know, blah, blah. But really, you have a unique rendition of me in your mind and you do not make that yourself. However, you're in the place where it comes up, but you don't make it. However, the way you're confused about thinking that you do make it is your own unique thing and your own unique confusion about you and this version of me. You don't make that up on your own. We're not functioning on our own. Yes? When you're making art and writing, you're in conversation. That's right. When you're writing and making art,

[72:07]

you're in conversation. And, yeah. So, did I talk the first night about trust, relax? No? No. So, next week I'll bring that up, that little rendition, because it applies to creative activity and understanding. Okay? Yes? She said, can one become enlightened accidentally? Is that right? Well, what does accidentally mean again?

[73:13]

What does accidentally mean? Yeah. Does accidentally mean you did not do it on purpose? Yeah. Well, there is this phrase running around and some people say that, some people say that Rajneesh said it, and some people, I think some people say, maybe Suzuki Rishi said it, or somebody. Some people say a Zen person said it, and some people say that Rajneesh said it, that enlightenment is an accident, and that you can become... Some people said it. Yeah, some people said it, and that you can become accident-prone. I've heard that. Yeah. Yeah, so,

[74:15]

maybe we stop on that, and you remind me next week, I'll tell you about this other thing which relates to creativity and this process. Am I? Am I? Thank you very much. Thank you very much.

[74:41]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ