Good morning, everyone. This is the first time that I've sat in the Zendo for a period of Zazen, and given the talk here, but I sat the last period in seven months. It's really, it feels remarkably ordinary. and I'm very glad to be sitting here, and I hope that in the foreseeable future, we'll all have opportunities to do that. Can you hear me okay? So, sound level okay? Yes? Good. So, today we're having a one-day sitting. And we've been experimenting with this for the last several months. We had shorter days and now we're lengthening it a little.

[01:01]

So we're sitting from 7.30 until about five. And there are about 25 or 30 people who are sitting all day. And we're sitting in front of our screens and being creative about how we're doing Sesshin in this Brave New World. So as with Sesshin, as with Daily Zazen, what we've experienced in the last months is that our plans are always subject to change based on the conditions of our life, the conditions around us. So I want to just acknowledge that Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, began at sundown last night.

[02:02]

And this morning we can offer each other the blessing Shana Tovah, which basically means have a good year. I think we need it. I think maybe we deserve it. This has not been an easy year, but we'll see. And the impact of this holiday has also shifted a bit with the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. just she died on the very threshold of Rosh Hashanah at the age of 87. So a little while ago for our service this morning, we dedicated, we dedicated it to her memory. And I'd like to dedicate this seshin to her memory and to the deep wish for peace, tranquility,

[03:14]

And equality. For all the people of our country. I know that we may have different views. Of what these qualities look like. Which to some degree is what the rest of my talk is about. But I really believe that we all yearn for peace. Certainly in our own way. And what we're doing in our practice is trying to clear away the cobwebs of delusion so that we can find a piece that is really stable and is not based on our self-centered views. So last week, if some of you were here, Luminous Heart Penelope Thompson spoke about a koan, Case 54, in the koan collection, The Book of Serenity, which is the case is known as Yun-Yan's Great Compassion.

[04:28]

And in another collection, it's known as the Bodhisattva Kuanyin's Thousand Hands and Eyes. There's a line in the verses commentary that Luminous Heart quoted, and it says, the great function works in all ways. So I'd like to look a little further at this point. And today we can explore another case, case 12 in the Book of Serenity. And it's titled, Dijon Plants the Field. I think it's going to be up to us to find the relevance of this case, but it's traditional in Sachine to actually present a koan, present a point of dharma.

[05:31]

And so I'm going to try to point this, but I'm not going to, I'm not going to interpret it, I hope. So there are three parts to this case, and I'm going to read them to you. This is traditional. There's a pointer, like an introductory comment, and then there's the main verse, which is a dialogue between two teachers, and then there's a capping poem, by one of the compilers. So I have to read these to you, and then we'll circle back around them. The pointer to case 12 says, scholars plow with the pen, orators plow with the tongue. We patchwork monks lazily watch a white ox

[06:37]

on open ground, not paying any attention to the rootless, auspicious grass. How should we pass our days? So that's the pointer. I really, I'm not much of a monk, but I really relate to the patchwork part of you can see my robe, it's literally patched together where it fell apart. And I sort of appreciate, really appreciate that. It's very soft. So the main case, Dijon asked Zhushan, where do you come from? Or where are you coming from? And Zhushan said, from the South. Dijiong said, well, how is Buddhism in the South these days?

[07:41]

Zhushan said, it's being widely discussed. Everybody's talking about it a lot. Dijiong said, how can that compare to me staying here planting the fields and making rice balls to eat. And Jushan said, well, how does that save beings in the world? Dijon replied, what do you call the world? That's the end of the case. We'll go back through it. The verse is lovely and really helps you get a perspective on it. The capping verse, the capping poem. Source and explanation variously are all made up.

[08:47]

Passing to ear from mouth, it all comes apart. planting fields, making rice balls. These are ordinary household matters. Only those who have investigated fully would know. Having investigated fully, you clearly know there's nothing to seek. Zhifang, after all, that's a classical reference. Zhifang, after all, didn't care to be acknowledged as a marquis. Forgetting his state, he returned home, the same as fish and birds, in autumn, washing his feet at the Great Wave Pavilion in the murky waters. So a little about the people in this case.

[09:54]

Dizhang, whose name is also Luohan Guishan, lived from about 867 to 928. And his name translates, Dizhang translates as Jizo. As in Jiso Bodhisattva. So Dijon was named. He had been asked by the governor of his province to become the teacher at Dijon Yuan, Dijon Temple. And that was dedicated to Jiso, to the Earth Store Bodhisattva, who was known for his vow to take responsibility for the instruction of all beings in the six worlds for the period of time between the death of Shakyamuni Buddha and the rise of the future Buddha Maitreya, which it seems has not come yet, although some people think it has.

[11:11]

And he also, Jizo also took the vow not to achieve Buddhahood until all the hells in all these realms were emptied of beings. So in a sense, you could say that his name itself answers Zhushan's question, what do you call the world? Zhushan also known as Longji Xiaoshun, was a disciple of Dizhang. And the classical reference in the verse, Zhifang, who doesn't, he just is a reference. The emperor of the Han dynasty wanted to reward him for some service that he had done, but he declined the reward and just stayed home.

[12:16]

So when you look at Dijon's life, we can go back a moment to look at his enlightenment story. And there are echoes of this koan in this story. And this story is found in another koan collection. Dijon was asked by his teacher Swansha, how do you understand that the three worlds are just one mind? Dijong pointed to a chair and said, master, what do you call this? Swansha said, a chair. Dijong said, you don't understand that the three worlds are just one mind. Picking up a stick, Xuanzang said, I'd call this bamboo, a bamboo stick.

[13:25]

What do you call it? Dizhang said, I also call it a bamboo stick. Xuanzang said, shook his head and said, it's impossible to find a single person in the entire world who understands Buddhism. So this is, I feel there's all kinds of echoes and resonances of the original case in the enlightenment experience of Dijon. So there's a story also in the formal commentary on this case. You can see these cases are storytelling, right? They're just, they're wonderful stories that turn on an enlightenment experience, which is all well and good, but the function of them is to help us wake up.

[14:26]

It's not to show us a particular answer, but it's to reveal how things unfolded for these teachers and students. So in the commentary, it says, there were three Zen teachers, which includes Zhushan, and Fayan, and Wudong. and they were on pilgrimage. At Dijon's temple, they were blocked by the snow and the rain and swollen streams. So they sheltered at this temple, which was in the mountains outside the city. It was cold, so they circled around the fire. And they completely ignored Dijon, who was the abbot of the temple, who was very unassuming.

[15:30]

He was a patchwork rogue monk and they didn't pay any attention to him. But Dijong had these visiting monks and he wanted to test them. So he came near the fire and he said to them, there's something I would ask you about if I may. So as if he's asking for them to teach him. Xushan said, if there's some matter you're not clear about, please ask. Dijiang said, are the mountains, rivers, and earth identical or separate from you elders? Are the mountains, rivers, and earth identical or separate from you guys? Xushan said, separate! Dizhang held up two fingers. He held up two fingers.

[16:37]

Zhushan said hurriedly, oh, identical, identical. Dizhang, again, held up two fingers. And he walked away. After he walked away, Zhushan commented to his friends, well, he just did that arbitrarily. Fayan said, don't be so quick to put him down. And Zhushan snapped at his friend. Are there any elephant tusks in a rat's mouth? And the next day, the weather was a little better and so they decided to leave. But Fayan said, you brothers go ahead. I'm going to stay here at Dijiang's temple. He may have some strong points. If he doesn't, then I'll come and find you.

[17:39]

So after another while, while Fayan was studying with Dijiang, Zhushan returned, and they had the dialogue that made up the main case. So let's go back to these details a bit. In the pointer, the opening commentary, the compiler writes, scholars plow with the pen, orators plow with the tongue. So to me, there's some ambiguity here. Scholars and orators each have their worlds. So we're talking about what do you call the world? Which is actually an urgent question for all of us, I think.

[18:45]

Scholars and orators have their world. Dijong has his, planting the fields and making rice balls. Wansong, the compiler, seems to imply that words, the scholar's words, the orator's words, are somehow inferior to acts, to actions. And this kind of aligns itself with a very famous teaching in the Zen tradition where Bodhidharma said, that Zen is a special transmission outside of the scriptures, not dependent on words and letters. So the question is, what do you think? You.

[19:48]

Sometimes in our relations, We can't necessarily rely on one or the other. I'm sure that many of us have discovered in difficulties in relationships that we have in our lives, sometimes there's someone that you really want to work things out with, that you really feel they're not understanding you or you're not understanding them and maybe a letter or a deep conversation would resolve this difference and allow you to be in unity with each other. I can personally say that As someone perhaps over-attached to words, I have thought this, I've made this mistake often in the past of thinking we can work it out by talking, and discovered maybe not.

[21:12]

At the same time, since there's an essential connection between us, and I wouldn't, let's not discount the connection that we have with people that we are in conflict with, which is often very intimate. It can be painful, but it's intimate. And sometimes words are not, sometimes words are not the action that you need. Sometimes, you know, what you need, sort of here at the Zen Center, perhaps, or in other aspects, is like, cook a meal together. or work in the garden together, or fix a car together, or play a song together. This is a special transmission outside the scriptures, not dependent upon words and letters. And it's also true that sometimes

[22:17]

Words and letters are what are called for. So I wouldn't denigrate either. That's why I feel there's some ambiguity here. Scholars plow with the pen. Orators plow with the tongue. And we patchwork monks lazily watch a white ox on an open ground. We watch this empty self just meandering about. Actually, we had this experience this morning as I was sitting here, left the back door open and the temple cat that Ross takes care of, Sweet Pea, walked right in. And usually there's someone here to chase Sweet Pea out. So Sweet Pea walked in, and sort of took a look around and walked up the west aisle and got to Sojan's seat.

[23:29]

And he hopped up on the seat for a moment and settled on it. And then he hopped off and he walked back kind of nosing around under the taunts and just walked out. So Sweet Pea is our gray cat, not the white ox, but close enough, a gray cat in the open zendo. So let's look at the main case. Zui Shan, I'm gonna sort of take this line by line. Zui Shan, I'm sorry, Dishan asked Zuishan, where do you come from? Or, you know, that's, I think that this is an archetypical Zen question, you know, where the teacher would ask the student, where are you coming from? You know, what is, what's, what's in your heart? What's, what's an essence?

[24:32]

And so Dishan, I see him, it's like, he's fishing. He made his cast. And Zuishan Dijon, suddenly we can't hear you. There you are. I wonder what happened. Did you miss much? No. You missed the part where I told you what was really the essence of everything? I'm sorry if you missed it. I can't repeat myself. So anyway, it said Dijon is fishing. You know, where where did you come from? And you, Sean, said he takes the bait and he says from the South, which means he's already he's always kind of he already lost that round. Right. So Dijon said, well, how is Buddhism doing in the South these days?

[25:35]

And you, Sean, said it's being widely discussed. And so there, not only is he kind of nibbled at the bait, but he's swallowed it entirely and let the hook get set. It's being discussed. You know, everybody's talking about Buddhism. Dijon says simply, how can that compare to me here planting the fields and making rice balls to eat? This is, yesterday, Sojin Roshi did a presentation, a kind of interview, with the people at Lions Roar magazine, where they're preparing to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind. And one thing that struck me

[26:40]

It's nothing new or earthshaking that we've learned from about Suzuki Roshi, but it's just that Sojin's words really struck me. When I think about how can that compare to me here planting the fields and making rice balls, what Sojin said was that Suzuki Roshi was always settled in himself. Never rushing. Always in time. I think that's Dijon. Always in time. Just in time. But Jushan is sharp. He's not a dullard. And he asks this challenging question. How does that save beings in the world.

[27:42]

Now, in some translations, it says in the world. In a number of translations, it says in the three worlds. And just to explain that a moment, the three worlds, the Triloka, are common in Mahayana Buddhism. They refer to the world of desire, which happens to be the world that we live in. That's the world that has the six realms, the realm of humans, of hell beings, of hungry ghosts, of animals, of gods, and of fighting demons. which is basically emblematic of all of the different types of personalities and beings that one can imagine. It's just kind of shorthand for that. But that's the world that we live in. I'm sure we know by looking around.

[28:47]

The second world is the Rupa Loka. It's the world, it's called the world of form, but actually what it tends to mean is it's the world we occupy when we're sitting Zazen. It's the world of meditation where our basic desires are really tamped down. And it's a it's a world in which if you've been practicing steadily and have accumulated some ability to practice when you are reborn, you're reborn in this world. And of course, in our context, we are reborn moment by moment. So even though you may walk in this endo with a lot of anxiety and difficulty and anger, fear about what the world without Ruth Bader Ginsburg is gonna be like, when you sit down

[29:53]

and face the wall and face yourself in Zazen, you have an opportunity to enter the Rupa Loka, the second world. And the third world is the Arupa Loka, which is the world of formlessness. And it is the world of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas who can freely move among all of the worlds. So that's an interpretation of this line, what you call the world. But I think the fundamental question, at least for me, is in the dynamic tension of those last lines between Xushan and Dijon.

[30:58]

Dijon has his way, which is just doing ordinary tasks. Everything that comes up right before him, one after another, and in that he finds his freedom. There's another poetic line from one of the verses in the Book of Serenity. The family way of peasants is most pristine. It's only concerned with village songs and festival drinking. So it's just what's unfolding in front of us. And there's a great joy and freedom and pleasure in that. But what about the real palpable aching suffering in this world?

[32:04]

Echoing Dijon, there's a poem by the great haiku poet Basho. Journeying through the world, to and fro, to and fro, cultivating a small field, a small field. So we can look at, I think in the context of this koan, remember in the poem, he says, investigate fully. This is what each of us is being urged to do, to investigate fully. a small field. Small field for me right now is looking at this screen in front of me, and behind me I can see the scope of the Zendo, and out the window I see the blue sky. So the small field can be very close in, but according to your eyes and according to your ability, size is relative.

[33:20]

compared to the universe, the earth is tiny. It's like an atom. And the same thing is true with time, that what I could say, what I say is, my reading of this line by Dijon, what do you call the world? I would ask of each of us, what do you call the world right now? right now. Now can be as brief as the flare of a match. Now can be as long as a calpa. The time is completely fluid. It can expand and contract according to the nature of your mind. So when we think about this real suffering in the world, I don't think Dijon is ignoring this at all.

[34:36]

I think he's turning it, he's pointing Yushan to look at his own suffering nature and to look at the world that he is inhabiting in his body and in his mind. And when Dijon offers. That question, what do you call the world? That's a moment in which he is completely united. With you, Sean. That he he feels the probe and the sticking point, the needle of that question in his heart, and he opens it completely to Xusheng.

[35:38]

And he doesn't answer, he leaves it for him to figure out. And because this is such an important dialogue, such live words, it's been left to us to figure it out for ourselves. So just to say, Lori and I, for the last number of months, we've been reading aloud and discussing the Lankavatara Sutra. which was kind of the text that Bodhidharma relied on. It's a core text of the Zen tradition. And it's quite wonderful. And what it's saying often is this world, there's not a world apart from one's perceptions.

[36:39]

There's not a world apart from the imputations that you have in relation to anything or anyone that you encounter. At the same time, it says there's not not a world. Doesn't let you off the hook. And We have to work with that for the rest of our lives. And we're lucky we have this wonderful practice. And we have our teachers and friends to rely on when we drift away to point us back towards our own heart, our own self, to point us back to the wall that we have to face. And we never, it's never done.

[37:44]

Last week, I got an email from the Honolulu Diamond Sangha, which was the sangha that Aitken Roshi created. And it was a wonderful exchange in a, Again, a Koan exchange in a commentary by their tanto, their head of practice, or one of them. Her name is Kathy Ratliff. And she talks about an exchange with Old Master Joshu. A monk asked Joshu, what is the fact that I accept responsibility for? And Joshua said, to the ends of time, you'll never single it out. Our lives are entwined with each other's.

[38:52]

Our lives are entwined with the conditions of our so-called world, even while we recognize that the world that I see is not identical with the world that you see. So to close, and then we have time for discussion, I want to read you a poem that I wrote last night. It's titled, Dijon Plants the Field. Your world and my world are different. I can't know your world even for a moment, nor can you know mine. Yet here we are together, equal and connected in the fact of birth, in the inevitability of death, going along, planting the fields, each in our own way.

[40:02]

yearning to be free, even as we walk above the earth and under the sky. By the way, don't think I am making light of suffering, but what do you call your world right now? Thank you very much. And I look forward to hearing your comments and questions. So we now have time for Q&A, about maybe 10, 15 minutes. You want to hear as many voices as possible. There are two ways that you can ask a question. You can raise your digital hand in the participants box, or you can send me a question in the chat. Susan Moon.

[41:29]

Hi, Alan. Thanks a lot. This is a quick question about interpretation. That was very interesting. But you said that the text kind of implied that actions were the way to go, not words and letters, to some degree. Anyway, I was just wondering if, when it says the scholar plows with a pen and the orator plows with words that the word plow to me is something very valuable and precious. And that's what we need to do is plow the fields like an ox or whatever. And so that's a kind of compliment. And I heard it as a compliment to what the scholar and the orator does that they're actually doing same kind of work as a farmer with their words. But I wondered what you thought of that. I think you're right. What I'm looking at, what I see is that in the, I've checked out a number of commentaries, and in the commentaries, they feel like it's kind of a put down.

[42:47]

But I don't, I think the language here is exactly as you say. And also if you read, when you read Dogen, You know, Dogen doesn't deprecate words and language. And I think that's, that words and language are just another form of action, you know? But I think that there is something in the story, you know, when he asks, well, how's Buddhism doing in the South? And he says, well, there's lots of discussion. You know, that is, That is idle intellectualism, I think. Yeah, that's not so great. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Thank you. I mean, just to say, to take it a moment further, what, Laura, I often fall into this trap when reading the Lankavatara Sutra, you know, make this kind of incomprehensible statement or a general statement that I find

[43:50]

I try to argue with the generality. And what Laurie has been kind enough or fierce enough to point out is it's not about the generality, it's about who are you having trouble with? So for example, if there's an instruction, love everybody, you should love everybody. and I retort, well, what about Hitler? You know, it's like, that's really besides the point. You know, it's not what about Hitler, it's what about your brother-in-law or what about what person in the sangha that you're having. It's really about who are you in a challenging situation with right now. That is where words or actions both rise to the level of action.

[44:55]

Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Katie, you can unmute yourself. Thanks, Mary Beth. And thank you, Hozon, for your talk. Hopefully, I can articulate this. I found the question what is your world or what is the world really evocative? And it's, I think, along the lines of just what I've been thinking about since last night in this kind of struggling with despair and rage and at the same time that, you know, here I am in my sister's lovely basement and I'm okay. my family's okay. There's a lot of things that are okay or better than okay even in the midst of this really challenging time.

[45:56]

And I guess what I was reflecting on and what seemed to resonate with what you're saying is that being able to see these challenges as just what they are and not a verdict on the world. Not, you know, something that means that I'm under fundamental threat or something like that, but to be very concrete about it rather than letting my fearful and abstract mind conclude that like, this is just terrible. So I just was wondering if that was along the lines of what you were talking about. Yes. I mean, it was a hard night for me and for many people.

[47:01]

For other people, it might be a night of rejoicing, but I really, I've said this, I've often come back to this teaching, which is the teaching of two book titles by Kategori Roshi. The first book was Returning to Silence, which we always have an opportunity to do, even in our most difficult suffering. And the second book was called You Have to Say Something. You know, and it's the same thing as what Thich Nhat Hanh talks about when he says mindfulness must be engaged. What he means is that mindfulness must, he says explicitly, mindfulness has to lead to action. Otherwise, what's the point of mindfulness?

[48:03]

And so to recognize the conditions of what each of us calls our world, I think that there's, within the whole Buddhist system, and actually within almost every religious system, there's a sense of responsibility that flows from that settledness. Because Suzuki Roshi was just in time, and always, you know, just really aligned, settled with himself, then he could be wide open to the people around him. And we can still be experiencing that openness, you know, 40, 50 years later. 50? Yeah. So, yeah. This is why, this is how we practice. So, thank you.

[49:07]

Karen Dakotis. Thank you. Can you hear me? Yep. Hi, Khozan. Thank you for your talk. Thank you. My comment or observation sort of echoes Katie's. When I lived in that community for a while, we studied Arnaud Desjardins, and he used to say, French non-dualist, he used to say, you don't live in the world, you live in your world. And that always stuck with me. And your talk brought forth a couple of ahas for me, but the one I wanna bring forth and sort of express my gratitude is, like those moments of despair or self deprecation or lostness, whatever we, what I have been going through, I tend to, work it from the perspective of I need to join with the world.

[50:14]

And the gap is so wide and so insurmountable. And so I can't conceive it, that it just widens the gap and causes more suffering. And what you're reminding me is start with my world. Start with what I'm creating, what I'm seeing, what I'm believing. And it's just all of a sudden given me a like, oh, I have a step now. I have a way to practice that isn't about transcending and seeing the whole situation. It's about seeing this situation and what I can do and offer. Is this along? Yeah. This situation and this situation and this situation. And right now you and I are having a conversation. and we're looking at each other through the ether, and that's remarkable. But I think that what I was trying to get at in these lines of this poem that I wrote was that

[51:19]

each in our own way yearning to be free, even as we walk above the earth and under the sky. So we're yearning to be free, even as we actually are. But we think we want something else. And then the next line is, but there is suffering. Thank you. Ben? Thank you for your talk, Hozon. I feel like Karen, it's so nice to see you, Karen, sort of hit on something I was going to say, but I guess I'll still say it anyway. To me, what I feel like the end of that case is pointing to, what Dijon is pointing to is if you think there's a world of sentient beings that somehow outside of the field of your actual activity every day, that that's, maybe you're lost.

[52:27]

Because the world is just, to some extent, can we say the world is just imagination, right? Even the fears we have of what the nation will become after what happened last night, like, those are not unreal in a certain sense, but they're all, they're all ideas which then cause trouble for our body and state of mind, and I feel like I'm rambling now, but at the end of the case, I could sort of... The way to save sentient beings in the world, right, is to take care of what's in front of us. Is that your understanding, Ozan? Yes, but I don't want to minimize that, because that's what I said, that going to and fro in the world, cultivating a small field, also your field is your field, and that field may look wide to me or narrow.

[53:33]

And so But we have to keep looking. The ideas that I have about what may ensue following the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, those are just my ideas, but things will ensue because the conflation of ideas are going to bring about something. And if I just If I just watch, if I bear witness, and this also gets to what, this gets to what Luminous Heart was talking about last week. If I don't know, if I say to myself, I don't know what's gonna happen, and I'm gonna really watch, investigate fully is what this koan says, and then trust that based on what I see, once training, an appropriate response will arise.

[54:38]

And to me, what appropriate response means is a response that connects people and doesn't divide people. And we have to recognize that there's no one way that's gonna do that, and sometimes things will do some or both. So I have a very quick follow-up. So that all makes sense to me. And that maybe hits more towards direct action or literal action. I don't mean direct action like activism, but what we actually, how we do, what actions we take. But is there a deeper sense here in that Dijon grows rice and somewhere in the South, something changes? Like, Can we say that the small field of our activity is in some way changing things elsewhere that's beyond our ability to conceive?

[55:41]

I don't know, because it's beyond my ability to conceive. But what I would say is that the actions that he's taking are about nourishing. Uh, and he, you know, you can take that as a pretty clear hint. Uh, and, uh, it may have an effect in the South. I don't think he's particularly concerned with that. He's, he's concerned with you, Sean, who's right in front of him. That's the issue at hand. What's in front of you. Thank you, Jose. OK, we will now close off Q&A. Let's have one more. OK, one more. Daniel. Daniel. Thank you.

[56:42]

I'm wondering about the part uh, where you talked about, uh, like, we'll never know, uh, my world and some other person's world. Like, but like, in terms of like, like touching or like, if you like, you want, if like your world, like, like hugging another world, kind of in a sense, like the other world kind of, but like, Like, is that like the action of the two walking away? Say it again. Is that like the action of the two walking away? Oh, I see. Oh, that's a really good question. Let me just go back and look at that a second.

[57:45]

I really want to take your question seriously here. So your example, you said, was it the world hugging the world? Is that what you said? I think so, yeah. So hug is a very interesting thing. Because when you're hugging someone, in that moment, you're merging, right? There's a physical merging, and in that embrace, you don't know exactly where your skin begins and ends and the other person's skin begins and ends, right? There's a merging.

[58:47]

Now, you're not merging your minds exactly, but you're bent on the same activity and doing it together. And there's a kind of boundarylessness in that moment. The thing about a hug is it ends. And I think that's what he meant when Jushan hardly says identical, identical, and he holds up two fingers, basically this is a Zen adage, not one, not two. And I think that that's, this is a demonstration of that. Don't fall into either side, but keep, yourself as open as you can, do the best you can to understand another's perspective, understand another's life, recognizing that there may be an impossibility to it as well. So, thank you very much, and thank you all.

[59:55]

And for those who are staying, let's enjoy the rest of the day. And for those of you who are not, get outside. The air is clean, the sky is blue. Wonderful. Thank you.

[60:08]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ