This podcast is offered by the San Francisco Zen Center on the web at www.sfzc.org. Our public programs are made possible by donations from people like you. Good morning. So I was just looking at the calendar and how soon The Sashin is coming up. I was thinking about it's always an interesting time in the practice period, this period of time. The weather warms up, the nights, the days stretch longer, and there's an enlivening quality.

[01:14]

And it points to one of the great intrigues of Zen, which is how do we enliven this human life? And at the same time, how do we not get carried away by the habits, the tendencies, the self-preferencing, the way in which we get consumed or entranced by the process of the self? And in a way that... is expressed in the corn about the fox. One handed saying, don't fall into cause and effect. Don't fall into trying to get what you want, avoid what you don't want.

[02:23]

Getting carried away by the agendas and fears and anxieties of the self. Don't fall into that and then at the same time the other admonition is don't ignore. Don't somehow set up practice as some transcendence or some way of being that is separate from the workings of the self. And then the verse says, a thousand missteps and a million mistakes. So last time I was talking about how, yes, a mistake happens in the context in which it's operating, functioning, like serving.

[03:36]

And then in the broader sense, it can't be defiled. The suchness, the completeness of the moment is the completeness of the moment. It isn't subject to whether or not you remember to follow the prescription. Okay. So you remember all that, right? Thank you. So here's the place I'd like to start this morning. There was a psychologist, Abraham Maslow, and he came up. He later refuted it himself, but we won't go there. Well, maybe he didn't totally refute it, but he refined it. But he came up with what he called the hierarchy of needs. Anyone not heard of him? that hierarchy of needs?

[04:38]

You have not? Okay. It's quite thoughtful in its own way. He came up with five tiers saying, okay, the most basic is, you know, food, staying warm, sleep, you know, your basic mammal needs. Okay, then the next one... I'm not even sure if I've got this right, but the next one is in the realm of love and intimacy and belonging and connection. And then the next one is in terms of our social needs, an extension of that, to be part of the group, to have friends, to belong in that sense too. And then the next one is self-expression, that way in which we want to express who we are and what we are.

[05:39]

And then the fifth one is awakening, or as it was called in those days, self-realization. So without thinking too much about that hierarchy, whether that's Originally, he presented it as sequential. This one was foremost. Food, sleep, and staying warm was foremost. As we all noticed in the cold of winter. You satisfied this one, and then you worried about this one. Then when those two were satisfied, you were worried about this one. And in a way, we could say the process of practice is to turn it upside down.

[06:44]

The most important one is waking up to how all the others are functioning. And that's the starting point. How do those basic needs come into play? And what happens when they come into play? Do I become angry? Do I become fearful? When there isn't enough food in my bowl, or it's not what I wanted, do I become disappointed and hurt, or do I become resentful? What happens? And when we turn that pyramid, as it's usually described, upside down, then inquiry into that. So does not ignore cause and effect, does not ignore the karmic process of being.

[07:46]

And then each one of them becomes its own realm, of study its whole realm of teaching, its own realm of discovery, its own realm of integration. So within its own context, it sets up an imperative. And then rather than be defined by that imperative, you know what I mean when I say that? No, thank you. Yes. Okay. Rather than be defined by it and caught up within it, we see it and learn from it. This is how we study cause and effect. This is how we study conditioned existence.

[08:53]

And Dogen's energy says, this is This study of cause and effect, this study of the nature of how things function for human beings and awakening to it is the transmission of the Buddha way. Yes? Total engagement in cause and effect? Well, the teaching as presented by Dogen and many others, Dogen would say, by all Buddhas and ancestors, is that you don't have a choice in that.

[10:04]

You are part of cause and effect. You are already a human being and you are already Whether you want Maslow's prescription or some other one, you are already in the throes of being human. I was saying at the start, so one aspect of practice is we can say this actualizing what we are, this being fully alive. And then the counterbalance is how do we not just become utterly consumed and distracted and caught up in the issues that that inevitably presents. So that's what I was trying to get at, that balance between the two. Yeah? Okay. And so I was starting there by seeing this inverting the pyramid of agendas to where

[11:07]

seeing what's happening and learning from it and then the integration. The making whole, the becoming harmonious with the energies and the agendas of Personal existence and collective existence. How to do this. And then I was saying, Dogen says, this is the key transmission of the Buddha way. And in another fascicle he says, this is essential. And then he goes on and he says, this is what is manifest in Zazen. As I mentioned a while back in one of his fascicles, the point of Zazen, he admonishes, as he's prone to do, the teachers of the Sung Dynasty saying, by not emphasizing this key point, by saying that Zazen had this particular accomplishment that

[12:43]

That was distracting from the key point, which is to realize, to experience directly, to wake up to the functioning of cause and effect. And this is, you know, what Shaka Joe, in his own colorful way, puts together in that coin. You don't fall into it, you don't get stuck in it, and you don't ignore it. And then the question for us is, a very practical question, how do you do that in zazen? To what degree do you try to tame the arisings of your heart and mind and body and breath and everything else?

[13:45]

And to what degree do you just open up with an unqualified yes? And that's what I'd like to explore this morning with another couple of coins. So in the Mu Munkan, in the gateless gate, as I said, it starts with Mu. Sweep away everything. Whatever comes up, don't grasp it. In a way, in a practical way, we could say whatever's contracting, whatever's agitating, whatever's

[14:49]

compelling you to go off into a flight of fancy or fantasy or become embroiled in sorting out some issue. You know, I have a group in Northern Ireland, and they're having a big controversy now as to whether to invite a certain teacher or not. And this teacher... has taken a stance of, he likes to talk about edgy things. What would they consider edgy in Northern Ireland? That's strange land, yeah. It's far away. They've had a lot of edge. Yeah, well, interestingly, he's not talking about sectarian issues.

[15:52]

He's talking more about sexual mores and things like that. What's appropriate sexuality and what's not. And so whether or not to invite him has stirred up a controversy. And my position was, listen, what you're all saying has a lot of thoroughness in its argument, but how to come to agreement, how to integrate, how to see both particular and to see both the context and the particulars of the context, but also to see that we're not trying to create a perfect answer within the particulars.

[17:05]

We're trying to understand and appreciate how to bring forth the Dharma. Does that point make sense to you? And it's the very same point with which we engage our own experience and zazen. You're not trying to control, perfect, avoid, suppress, but to wake up. And not balancing. know just like I'm not saying there's no practice realization I'm just saying it can't be defiled or to put it another way it's not like we can argue about this until we come up with the right answer it's more can we wake up to how this is being considered does it

[18:15]

Are we all becoming quieter and more thoughtful and more open and flexible in our thinking? Or are we contracting, becoming more agitated, having more of a sense of us and them? And how do we manifest the intrapersonal version of that? is the question of Zazen. And Dogen says, this expression of being, this awakeness, this openness, this fluidity is the expression of Buddha. It is the communication, the transmission of the Buddha way. So the first case, sweep it clear.

[19:16]

The second case, don't avoid it, don't get stuck in it. Okay? And then in the sota way, in the Blue Cliff Rackage. The first case, don't know. Don't know what should happen or what should not happen. in your sitting. Don't sit there with an agenda of manufacturing the right way to be. And out of that not knowing, of not having an idealized notion, discover each moment. Discover each time you sit. And then the second case is in the Hekigan Roku, the Blue Cliff Records, is just avoid picking and choosing.

[20:30]

And I want to read you this case because again, as we discovered in the last one, This is a thoughtful perspective and thought-provoking perspective. Joshua said, the Supreme Way has no difficulty. It just rejects picking and choosing. As soon as there are words spoken, this is discrimination. This is clarity. And then speaking of himself, he says, I do not remain within clarity. Do you preserve anything? I do not remain within clarity. What do you make of that? He remains within don't know.

[21:39]

He remains within don't know? Let me just close this window. That's good. That's good. He's gone beyond the relative. and the Absolute. Any other thoughts? Yes. I contain multitudes, I contradict myself. Yes. Anything else?

[23:05]

I thought that was all kind of pretty good in the territory. He says, I do not remain within clarity. And then he says to the congregation, do you preserve anything or not? And I would say this, if you think of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, forget the sequence. But just think, we are a human organism. From basic to complex, from our mammal needs to our social needs to some provocative way in which we want to express our being and be fully alive. And these impulses stir up for us. And they assert themselves, inevitably.

[24:08]

Even when we want to be simple and just be in Zazen, they come forth. Are you preserving anything? That rigor of don't know. That rigor, you know, in a way, what could be more radical in human life than turning the whole thing upside down and saying, waking up is primary, and all the rest follows from there. It's a little bit like totally confining the impulses and agendas of a human life. So he's saying, can you do that? Can you be that radical? What is it to be that radical?

[25:14]

Then the monk asked, since you don't remain within clarity, what do you preserve? Since you don't remain within clarity, what do you preserve? What do you think of that statement? That's what he's asking him? He's playing in a sandbox and he's saying, well, is there anything outside of that? Are you setting up a new context called don't preserve anything or called not abiding in Kairi Day? And if you are setting that up, what does that mean?

[26:24]

What's implicated in that? Any other thoughts? What's that? Pretty good question for a student? Don't underestimate Zen students. Like these arguments that people in Ireland are producing, I was looking at them and I was thinking, that's pretty darn good. Someone wrote this manifesto on, you know, the feminine perspective. When I was reading it, I was thinking, wow, that's good. And then someone rebutted it coming out of it. I mean, certain kinds of people seem to be attracted towards Zen. They do.

[27:28]

It's not trite. So the people who come to it usually are not content with a trite perspective. Yes? What are you taking care of? When you say takes care of something, what do you mean? serving something. Not human purpose necessarily. Everyone is in service to some. When there is complete illusion, I'm in service for my desires. I care about others. I care about my family. It's expanded. I care about them.

[28:31]

I care about my village and my country. Okay. Okay. So what is, in that endeavor, what is he in the service of what? Or taking care of what? Thank you. What logic? Water. Water logic, yeah. I don't know what Joshua's answer will be, but maybe they'll say, you know, water logic.

[29:33]

Well, if you were Joshua, what would you answer? with a branch on, it just keeps going and doesn't complain about the branch. It just stays water, just stays fluid. And if you're, and so, Joshu's not abiding priority. If he knows he's setting up the context, then at least he's aware of the context. Or he's gonna answer, I'm not saying, We'll see. Anyone else? Yeah.

[30:39]

Yeah. I guess my understanding of what we're doing here is that we would like kind of like lop off the self-realization part of the pyramid and then the whole The whole idea was that self-realization isn't separate from being and drinking and expressing yourself. And so what I was saying, Sam, was that to put that into effect is to reverse the pyramid because our human nature is to be caught up in the urgency of any one of those other ways of attending to our human life.

[31:40]

There's one way you could look at what goes on in Zazen and you could say, okay, well, that way mind and attention were caught up was about this and that way mind and attention was caught up was about this and then what would it be without either being caught up in that or suppressing that what would it be to be aware of it don't ignore it and don't fall into it be aware of it and maybe you know in the wisdom of what you're saying, that that doesn't become an agenda in itself. So what you're trying to do is you're trying to create a super agenda that trumps all the other agendas.

[32:45]

And that's part of where Josh is getting at it. inwardly instead of externally. Could you say a little more about that? We subconsciously seek for wholeness outside of ourselves. And that very seeking, if we could just somehow keep that inward, we'd realize some reference for life or some sense of wholeness. Keep it inward. I think the other coin, you know, the suchness of what is cannot be defiled, is saying, of course you can set up whatever kind of constructs you want to set up, inward, outward, this is a better agenda than that, but in a way they don't interfere or defile the completeness of what already is.

[33:58]

It is completely itself. Right. Whether we're awake in the moment or not awake in the moment, the moment is complete. So that would be the fundamental. Maybe as we're trying to be skillful with our own being, I do think You know, if you think back to where we're looking at that gradation, you know, that, you know, okay, one is where you impute a truth, you know, and this is really an expression of where you're at. And then the other one is more interactive. You know, it's like, oh, this arises and I have this response and look at these two, how they co-create. And the third one, well, look at that whole process of co-creation.

[35:02]

So we can gradate the truth or the expression of reality like that too. So in one way you could say, well, you have to kind of wind back in your projection to get in touch with this co-creation. Or as I was saying, notice, acknowledge. acknowledge it, even cognitively, starts to bring it back into an interplay rather than just what I'm asserting out there. That's reality, which I've just asserted. Anyone else who doesn't know the koan one? What would you say if you were in Joshua's shoes? Okay.

[36:14]

So the monk asked, since you don't remain within clarity, what do you preserve? Joshua said, I don't know either. I'm not holding that up as a new and improved perspective. Not that either. The monk doesn't give up. The monk says, okay, since you don't know, why do you say not clarity? Isn't that a kind of assertion? Since you don't know, why do you say you're not in clarity?

[37:20]

Any thoughts or comments on that? Because he's not in clarity? Well, can't you say, well, I'm clear that I'm not clear? Is it not in clarity its own assertion? That's why what? I think, you know, Joseph's a straightforward guy. He said what was happening. I'm not clear. Okay. Yes, Michaela. Could you link that over to the notion of clarity or lack of clarity?

[38:35]

In that equation, what are you attributing the attribute of form and emptiness to? Not abiding in clarity is... Emptiness. Okay? And so that's emptiness, and then abiding in clarity would be formed? Hmm? Either way. Okay, let me read it as the monk understands what clarity is.

[39:50]

You're right. Supreme way is not difficult. It just rejects discrimination. As soon as words are spoken, this is discrimination, this is clarity. That's the expression of lack of picking and choosing. Speaking of himself, Joshua says, I do not remain within clarity. Do you preserve anything? The monk asked. Since you don't remain within clarity, what do you preserve? I don't know The monk said, well, since you don't know, why do you say? You're not incarnate. Isn't that asserting something? I added that part. So the monk has a fixed idea.

[40:59]

You can't work it out? Well, that was your notion, right? That he had a fixed idea of what he was saying? Of what clarity is? Clarity looks clear to him? Yeah. Or maybe it looks clear to him what clarity is and what not clarity is. There's either this or there's that. Either you're clear or you're not clear. And if you're not clear, how can you say anything? Even, I'm not clear. Okay? Yes? Then Joshua said, you posed the question, now you can go.

[42:14]

Like the group in Ireland, you've posed both sides of the argument, now we can repeat them. You can shout them loudly at each other. You can work out the fine nuances of your differences. Or you can just say, okay, now we've established what we're working with. Let's bring to it the mind and heart of practice. You've posed your question. You've raised your point. Now, practice with it. Someone over there? Yes, Steve. How does it? Could you say a little bit what you mean there?

[43:28]

In a sense, non-clarity and clarity support each other. They're not that different. But then to a discriminating mind, there's clarity and there's non-clarity and there's non-discriminating mind. Those are the same thing. Could you transpose that whole notion onto being aware Being aware of not being aware. Being aware of not being aware. If you remember, this was the point. Heather was... What? That was the point that I was trying to make foolishly.

[44:50]

Being aware without discernment. Now, there's an interesting notion, isn't it? Yeah. Yeah. Again, in the first case, we don't know. In the commentaries and in the introduction, it says, not knowing, but with discernment. not knowing but with awareness. It's a different proposition from utterly spaced out and not knowing. No, it's in present and not clinging to some perspective. So then if we take that into this, you know, and... Thinking about it that way, okay.

[46:01]

What is that kind of clarity like? What are we going to say, Dan? You can be clear about something in that bigger awareness or unclear about something in that bigger awareness. Yeah. Right. Right. So not knowing with discernment without holding

[47:05]

an awareness that doesn't hold a fixed view. Can the process of thinking support that? Could this be what Dogen... Dogen was very moved by the phrase, because he mentions it a lot, think not thinking. Can the process of thinking help facilitate a noticing, an awareness that doesn't have a fixed view? As you start to sit zazen, can there be something in your thought process that tunes into a non-discriminative awareness? Because in a way, this is what this koan is about.

[48:12]

How do you do that? How do you tune in? Think, not thinking. How do you think, not thinking? Non-thinking. Not holding on to what thinking creates. Yes? I can't help with listening to the discussion around this. some of my background in Lester's philosophy is coming up, but I think it's so useful in this discussion of clarity and non-clarity as concepts versus clarity and clarity as phenomenological experience. So they are saying, oh, clarity necessarily contains non-clarity. That's actually only as concept, I think. It's sort of like linguistic philosophy. Yeah, the concepts of clarity as such, necessarily, we have to have some understanding of the definition of clarity.

[49:20]

But like, the more so that it's that, and then... But then we moved, right? We moved. Yes. So we can sort of become aware, oh, this is a language game that I'm trapped in. Or this is a language game that we're using to access, to get into the territory of, to tune into. You know, that was the last point I was trying to make. Can we do that? Can the language, can the thought, can the concept tune us in? But I think for me, I'm like, even having trouble so... So if I step back and go, okay, then there's actual experience, say, like, in sinning zazen, clarity versus non-clarity. So clarity in relation to, like, a referent, whether that's, like, a concept or a stream of thoughts or a thing outside myself, like, there's that kind of clarity, like, clearly understanding that, you know, what time lunch starts at.

[50:34]

Like, you know, there's, like, that kind of clarity. So that kind of clarity versus non-clarity. And then another, I think, sort of what behind that experience of clarity would be dropping both of those that you're seeing sort of just like non-referential awareness. Like there is no different. But then that just That's what the monk is asking Joshua about. Yeah, so this non-referential clarity is now set up in opposition to this other level of awareness of referential clarity versus referential clarity. Or you could read Joshua's comment as saying, don't go there. Because this is an infinite regression. Exactly, yeah.

[51:36]

We can keep... adding another layer by using the same mechanism. So it's enough, that's what he says to the monk. He says, it's enough to get this far. And then we practice with that. And that's why I switched over to saying, well, how do you practice with it? How can this be an ally in our practice? rather than some way to keep chasing your own tail, or to go into an infinite regression, because the same mechanism can be repeated endlessly. That's my understanding of Joshua cutting it off, saying, yep, you could say that, and then I could say this, and then you could say that, and then I could say this. Right.

[52:40]

And you can go on forever. Right. And I'm going to come at it in a little bit of an odd way. I'm going to come at it from the concept of trust, or the particular term in Sanskrit is shraddha, which covers confidence, trust, and something like faith, but more like the faith that Josh is pointing at. When he says, I don't abide in clarity, he's saying, I trust something, and trusting that doesn't oblige me to hold on to a fixed idea.

[53:58]

What are we going to say, Greg? Well, it occurs to me that everything in Zenfeng, almost everything in Zenfeng, we have established fairly well in Takahara, and especially the Zasen, is like set up to help us do this crazy thing, turning the pyramid upside down, and avoiding picking and choosing. Just do it, you know, like this is where she says, just follow the rules and see what happens. That's really hard. But that's only halfway. It will all come to you. Everything. Clarity, non-clarity, justness, peace. It will all come to you.

[55:02]

And can you accept it? We do two things here. We set up an exhaustive prescription. We set up a recipe for picking and choosing. We don't say when the bell goes, toss a coin and decide whether you will or will not go to Zanzit. We say when the bell goes, go to Zanzit. Within our prescription, follow the schedule completely in the service of discovering something about going beyond prescription. So they're both in there. And it's the relationship between the two that's awakening.

[56:15]

Exactly. But your first comment seemed like it was not acknowledging that within the paradigm there's picking and choosing. You see, and I would modify to say that our resistance or our diligence or our devotion are both in the service of waking up. You know?

[57:16]

And you can get You can get caught up in either one. You can get caught up in your devotion and you can get caught up in your resistance. Okay. So, yes. I don't remain. This is Cleary's translation, Thomas Cleary's translation. He says, I don't remain. And there's another translation that says, I don't abide. Here's what I would say.

[58:48]

It's important. Now we're talking about the translator's choice of words. We're not talking about Josh's choice of words. This is part of the difficulty for us. If we had the original Chinese text up in front of us, then we could discuss his choice of kanji, but we don't. That's why I was interchanging them, because different translations use one or the other. And this is maybe the deficit of what we're doing, or maybe it helps us to not get caught up in the language. Because even if you get Joshua's language, he's still trying to talk about something beyond his own language, right? Okay, okay.

[59:54]

Sorry I didn't get that first time around. So the abiding makes more sense to you? No, the remaining. The remaining. Obviously I didn't get it. Okay, let me just come to the point of shvara, trust. In some ways, if you look at our endeavors, let's stick with Maslow's paradigm a little bit. Within that paradigm, we have these agendas, somewhere between our wants and what we consider our needs. We function on them. We bring them forth. And then we come to Zazen and whatever's echoing around in a chord of them is still playing itself out.

[61:05]

Sometimes it's playing itself out almost like a nuisance habit. You know, you watch these thoughts going on in your head and then repeating and you think, this is just like the momentum of patterns of thought that just keep playing themselves. Or sometimes you feel some kind of burning issue come up for you and you feel compelled right then to think about it and engage it and have feelings about it. All in the service of needs and wants that will produce a happy, satisfying, safe, fit in your own adjective life. And then we have this radical proposition of practice that says, how about you entrust your life energy to being awake to all of that, rather than entrusting your life energy to getting all that figured out, actualized, however you want to describe the verb.

[62:28]

And can you entrust this process? This process of waking up. And in some ways, it's as simple and as demanding as the Four Noble Truths. Here's what's going on. It causes suffering. And you can go beyond that by doing this. And so in a way, this is not saying anything different. It's just saying coming at it from this perspective of no gain or loss. It's not a matter of winning or losing. It's not a matter of you get nirvana and everything's wonderful or you fail to get nirvana and you're stuck in endless suffering.

[63:31]

You know, it's saying this is the human condition and you are human and you are inextricably part of this. Can something in you exhale and allow that to be what it is? Can struggling with that not be where your energy goes in zaza? And so earlier, I was using phrases like, yes, I will, or just yes. And then the modifying feature or the complementary feature is, can you, without falling into it,

[64:35]

Can you not ignore it? Can you see it all play itself out? And can you trust the process enough to give over to it completely? And then on one hand we can say, okay, well, how do you do that? You just sit there. You notice. when you don't give over to it. Oh, look at that. I'm sitting here determinedly fantasizing about not being here because whatever that fantasy entails is a fuller, richer, more satisfied, happier, more successful life than right here. Can you look at that? Can you contact it and can you integrate it into being here?

[65:44]

And what I'm saying is there's a sense of trust in all that. Because there's some way you're being asked to trust the process of letting go of self-construct. and that the conscious and unconscious agendas of that self-construct will inevitably assert themselves in the process of session. And you will like them and not like them and you will have all sorts of simple and complex responses to them and can something in you profoundly and deeply and consistently open to that. So, any thoughts or comments on that?

[66:48]

Yes, Alison. don't abiding clarity follows from what you preserve? Because he's answering his own question. He asks the assembly, what do you monks preserve? He says, I don't. Yeah. In a way he's saying, or one way to interpret it is, I don't. How about you? In a way he's saying, or to use this word trust, he's saying, trusting this as it is without it having some sense of accomplishment.

[67:53]

It's like in our conditioned existence, We're happy when we get what we want. We're satisfied when we get what we think is satisfying. We feel secure when whatever conditions that evoke security have been fulfilled. So he's saying, well, how about a willingness to be without our conditions being met? He's saying, I... I'm willing to be in that state. How about you? Willingness to be... My desires, my aversions, the full range of the human experience. Any other?

[69:01]

Yes. A common sort of appreciation is kind of a continuation of what I was talking about before. Just, yeah, the strata, the trust, the way it's enacted here, I think, is just kind of great. We help each other. We really help each other. practice together, we sit together, and we trust that at some point, Sadoan will wave the bell. And in the meantime, we stay put. And that takes incredible, I don't want to say superhuman, but it's very human, but it just resolves. How does that happen? It's so amazing. Then you get to do what?

[70:02]

Unless you know, then you get to have a club. Yes. That trust. Well, it is, and it's amazing. It is amazing that each of us has the courage to... and the determination to make this kind of commitment. And then right in the midst of that, as the Cohen says, a thousand mistakes and a million what? Something. Maybe a million distractions or something. A thousand missteps and one million mistakes. A thousand missteps and one million mistakes. Thank you. That too. That we're here, we're deeply grateful for each other, we're deeply annoyed by each other.

[71:09]

All of that. We're inspired by someone's practice and then we're deeply critical of somebody else's practice. Or the same person. Or the same person on another day. Yes. And it's just an extension of Zazen. It's saying the same way can you be with your own process unreservedly? Can you be with our collective process unreservedly? And not because you're going to convince yourself everybody here is perfect. No, without even that condition. That everybody is just how they are and what they are. including you, and that this absence is a little bit of what Josh is talking about.

[72:10]

I don't abide in that certainty, that clarity, that condition under which my needs, my agendas have been affirmed. And can you see how, just a second, can you see how it links back to don't know? They're very close. To not know is to not set up agendas. To be willing to abide or remain, however you want to put it, without them, to trust the process of being is a very similar notion. And so these two come up together and in the Soto school, Shikantaza is the direct expression of this.

[73:15]

What are you going to say, Yoshi? What is the meaning? Just sitting would be the most common translation. To just sit, just be without Yeah. And that's what I got from the last exchange between them. Yeah, that would be a good way to put it. Yeah. Or as I was saying with Zach, you know, we could refine and refine this. Yeah.

[74:20]

But it wouldn't, it wouldn't, it's like two parallel lines. They're never going to meet. Yeah. Yes. Yes. So it's really, amazing questions, like what kind of intuitive process needs to happen in mind to directly, if possible, to look at the origin of thoughts, maybe? We have the call, like, just take a backward step. Yes. Look at the origin of things, look where things are coming from. Like to go beyond whatever. where there is no self, and it recognizes itself. Actually, in previous classes, we said just die.

[75:23]

Yes. Well, it is. You look at the attachment to I like it, I don't like it. There is always a self that asserts itself. That's why I like it and don't like it. Because there is somebody, the reception of somebody, that has choices. And it's got like, see a state beyond choices. See a state where people in marriage is formed. Which brings, again, like we are speaking in words now, we are using words, it's a thought. Yes. Yeah. Right. And sometimes that non-thinking is translated as

[76:36]

You know, not thinking. It's beyond thinking. I would say trans-thinking. What was that word again? Trans-thinking. Oh, trans-thinking. Trans-thinking. It's not not knowing. It's trans-knowing. It's not knowing the mind. It's beyond mind. See, and here's what I would say. For each one of us, there's initiating an internal process of communication. You know, and whatever word you use, in a way, doesn't matter as much as long as you get the gist of what's trying to, I mean, if you say non-thinking, beyond-thinking, trans-thinking, how can you connect, how can you communicate

[77:39]

in as thorough a way as possible with yourself. When you do Zazen, you will see that as Zazen becomes more present and more vibrant, the communication process is enhanced. It's not unusual in Zazen As you settle into that connectedness, something arises and it has a radical truth and in an interesting way it has a kind of familiarity. And it's not so much because of the thought content. It's not like, oh, that concept. It's more a deeper appreciation, to use a Buddhist word, for the suchness of being.

[78:50]

And in that state, there is the trusting arises in a more thorough way. and this integration. We see more thoroughly that agitating around the issues of self is unhelpful. It becomes a much more persuasive notion. When the agitation is activating a reality, well then, that reality is very compelling. It's like, I will never be happy unless I have that. Okay then. Gee, that's terrible. You better go and get it. But then when you settled on, or when there's a settling that becomes appreciative

[80:02]

of the agitation in relationship to the subject matter, something shifts. There's a communication. It's like we experience directly the karmic nature of existence. And in that state, there's more of an inclination towards compassion for the human experience and less of a conclusion that says, I have to get what I want. It seems to me that self isn't being agitated, agitation is self. self that's the agent of adaptation or self that's producing the grasping or the aversion, but the sense of self is actually the results of the grasping or the aversion.

[81:09]

Otherwise, it sounds like or it feels like they're an activist that is grasping or they're avoiding something, but it seems actually that is not. The sense of self is being created I think that's a quite accurate way to attend to it. The more involvement, the more agitation, the stronger the sense of self and the less the more fluid and pliable. In some of the texts it says that sense of being becomes more adaptable, pliable. And I think that's what we find. When we're in the schedule and we're flowing with it, it just turns a certain way and we just turn with it. And when we're resisting it, it turns a certain way and we say, No!

[82:13]

It also just sort of occurred to me, like, well, I feel like sometimes sense of self-arisons, but I'm going to have to figure this out. I'm going to be so good at noticing list pump arising. Mm-hmm. Oh, wait a second. Oh. Oh. You know? I mean. Exactly. That's kind of like. Yeah. The ability, not the, like, somehow this bare attention or awareness where no self is created, and I think that that's what can be by Parma not being created in those things, I was saying. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Don't fall into it and don't ignore it. I'll get to you in a second, Alice. Where I want to end today is like this. It's almost inevitable because our minds can count.

[83:36]

Your mind says, this many days, this, you know, and left. And in the beautiful, dutiful way and diligent way, you have sort of like, let all the karmic stuff settle as best you could. Now it's putting up buds and shoots and... Can you practice with, okay then. Don't fall into it. Don't get busy annihilating. Be aware. Because there's this beautiful opportunity with the awareness that's arisen through your diligent practice.

[84:38]

this beautiful opportunity to see, acknowledge, and integrate. See, acknowledge, take responsibility. This is what's happening in me. This rather than, oh, well, that's that person's problem. That person that It so happens I don't like them. Of course I don't like them. Look at the problems they have. Can that experience be integrated? How? How is it? What's the mental formation? What's the feeling? Is it a deep, visceral sense of survival? Is that my aversion? Or is it something on a more complex social level?

[85:41]

Not that you need to do all that, but sometimes our acknowledging helps us appreciate the complexity of our human being. Just being able to acknowledge the ways in which you get stirred up. and integrate to study the self and let it become an agent in this grind of joy shoots I don't abide in some fixed notion of what should and should not be I don't abide in that kind of clarity I abide in being present with however and whatever it is. And so in this period, especially between now and Shashin, I would say if you pay attention you'll notice quite lightly there's more stirring up.

[86:56]

There's more of the mind, oh, and then after this terrible thing is over, I'll be so free, I'll be so happy. Or maybe you have a reverse. After this is over, life will be so afflictive and the golden age of Zen will die. What were you going to ask, Alison? I was just going to ask if you could say something. What's the difference between not picking and choosing and just not knowing what you want? And discriminating. Not picking and choosing and not knowing what you want. Well, picking and choosing is having reached a conclusion.

[87:58]

I want this and I don't want that. And then not Just being confused is not finding yourself at a point of conclusion. So in some ways, it's just a different consequence from the same dynamic. I mean, we can still be caught in it. Do I want it? Do I not want it? We can be caught in the agitation of that. And that's different from, okay, I'm just letting it go. Those are very different. We let it go and something releases. Yes, Sarah. When you're talking about entrusting, to me it just feels like you're admitting that you are entrusted already. This is what's going on with this idea that I can make things work out, that I can choose this or that.

[89:03]

And that's me being in control, but that's actually not what's going on. That I'm entrusted. That's how it feels to me. Right. And this was the Cohen from the last class, where he's saying, it's not that there isn't practice. Of course there's practice, but it isn't that we manufacture that which can be trusted. It always existed. It's already there. Exactly. Exactly. Right. But I went the other way around. I said, okay, well, let's understand this. It can't be defiled. However, given that we're human beings, and given the tendency of being a human being, we've got something to work with. Now, when we drop it, wonderful. Yeah, and I wasn't talking about not working with it. It's just more like that's how it strikes me when I feel that way. I would say that's the potential all the time.

[90:17]

And then, given our human tendencies, sometimes we're closer to that and sometimes we're not. And then I was just saying, well, given this point in the practice spirit, rather than say to you, just be thoroughly coursing in the non-dualism of suchness. You know? I'm saying, you know, try this one. And whatever it is, you know, just open to it. And, you know, not to say then just get lost in the throes of it, but open to it and then rediscover the trust. And then what I was saying, and that has its own merit. There's something about integrating that. And I would say to you that at this point in the practice period, this integration can be a very significant discovery.

[91:26]

How thoroughly can we release our deep need for things to be a certain way or things not to be a certain way. As I mentioned before, if you look at the process of deep absorption through single-pointedness and to some degree through continuous contact, there would reduce human consciousness to a pristine elemental state. where literally almost nothing is being constructed. And then you can discover within that non-attachment. And then this other way which is saying, just open up to the whole darn thing and however it manifests, let it flow. Don't abide in some pristine being.

[92:34]

And I would just say to you, unless we want to start Shashin this afternoon and stay in Shashin between now and when we leave. It's great. Others go, others going, why not, why not? And Kim's going, Don't do it. Don't do it. I would offer you something in the middle. Don't neglect the little practices that you've discovered that keep you grounded, that keep you centered, that keep you connected. Don't put them in opposition to what's arising.

[93:36]

I have to keep suppressing this so these ways of being present stay alive. Stay close to these. Keep being diligent about what keeps you present. And don't know what should or should not happen. Let it come, let it go. And what you've discovered through your diligent practice will help you do that. And I would say that is the art of our practice, especially in the soto style. Our daily life is permeated with points of contact and whatever comes up that's the grind of awareness. That's what's being asked to be held in awareness, related to, discovered, integrated, all that good stuff.

[94:48]

Okay, any closing comments or questions? Yes, Kim. Mm-hmm. given that there's no self. Well, Buddhism doesn't propose that there's no self. Buddhism says that to think of the self as a permanent, independent, autonomous, functioning existence is illusory. That the self is just another... aspect of referencing and creating this collective being, which is dynamic, ever-changing, interdependent.

[95:54]

And then I would also say, you know, one of the things I like about Maslow's order is because sometimes you can experience the self in a very primitive way. And this is the beauty of the deep cold winter. You come out of your cabin and it's really cold and it's kind of like this visceral aversion. I don't want to die. You know? Accompanied with, I don't know, maybe it's accompanied with anger. Maybe it's accompanied with fear or whatever. And I think it's instructive when we have those kinds of fierce responses to experience. And I think it's also instructive when...

[96:59]

The sun shines and there's a warm breeze blowing and there's fragrant flowers and beautiful birds. And I mean, I don't know how it is for you, but to me it's good to be alive. There's some part of me quite naturally just sort of like turns towards it with charmed, happy, optimistic. And that too. And then hold them both. And all the other complexities that we come up with. I was noticing the other night, it was warm and it was still light, and there were many more people around talking, and they seemed to be talking in a friendly, happy manner. I'm just thinking, oh, here we are.

[98:04]

It's just conditions of our atmosphere, our local climate. But it touches us so profoundly. We're happier. We're more social. All those things. So I would say... Don't try to annihilate all that in the purity of Zen practice. And don't get lost. Don't let this last couple of weeks here be nothing but rehearsing and anticipating something else. Honestly, if you do that, I think you're losing your precious gift of the presence that you've brought into being with your practice. I'll stop saying that now. I think you've heard it.

[99:05]

Okay, thank you. Thank you for listening to this podcast offered by the San Francisco Zen Center. Our Dharma talks are offered free of charge and this is made possible by the donations we receive. Your financial support helps us to continue to offer the Dharma. For more information, visit sfcc.org and click giving.

[99:32]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_87.3