If you're me, please. Just hang me in the hand of those and then figure the hammer out. Thank you. .

[01:03]

. . . That's a beautiful summery.

[02:37]

Where did you get that? Oh, that's awesome. Oh, that's awesome. Oh, that's awesome. There you go. Thank you. Sir, you're saying? Sir? You're saying? I don't know what to do. It's a nice. It's a very small story. Thank you. Thank you.

[03:48]

Don't forget to get some tea. Tea time. Now or later? Now. Get it now, please. And you can have it later as well if you want one. you think?

[05:40]

I'm going to skip to page 20. Sort of like page 14 and page 20 are sort of the heart of all of you to offer. Thank you. Yeah, I read that. Yeah, what will I ask about? What [...] will I ask about? We're all going to sit and wait until you're done reading. Would you get some tea, Michael?

[07:27]

No, I'm good. It's always... Thank you. Thank you. My opinions are at all, but I'm more and more fun at the time, aren't you?

[08:29]

I'm not talking a little bit about translations. They're pretty different things. Looking at all three, at least looking at these two, is really cool. I always think it should change the process. I love being a artist. Thank you. Hi. I don't know, but it's actually relatively similar

[09:45]

I'm glad I could look between three otherwise I'm glad I could look between three otherwise I'm glad I'm glad I could look between three otherwise I'm glad I'm glad I could look between three otherwise I'm glad [...] Yeah. Yeah. [...] There's ice tea tonight.

[11:10]

Welcome, everyone. It's 7.30, so we're going to get started. Welcome to this, the third in our series of Bouchot Salons. My name is Tim Wicks, and I currently serve as the tanto or head of practice here at the city center. And this is Kim who did our presentation last week. That's right. Kim Kogen Daiho Hot. I'm a priest here at San Francisco Zen Center and appreciating offering this with my two dear friends. I'm glad my week is over. And this is Dan, yes, who will be presenting tonight. Yep, I'll be guiding the conversation today. And I also am one of the resident priests here at San Francisco Zen Center.

[12:37]

Yeah. Everything else I'll talk about. And we should have bowed in. We're going to bow. We're going to do it now. We'll bow in now. Thank you for remembering somebody. I'll get them, I'll get them. Okay, so tonight we will do as we have been doing, where Dan will present for 10 minutes to begin with, and then the three of us will talk for about 10 minutes, and then we're going to split up into smallish groups, and you'll have 20 minutes to talk amongst yourselves, and then we'll get back together.

[14:11]

the last 10, 15 minutes or so. Okay, Dan, over to you. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Let's see, a couple of housekeeping things. We do have an online portal that is connected to this salon, so anyone who would like access to that, you can sign up. It's totally free of charge, as are these as are these sessions. If you go to the San Francisco Zen Center website, you can find this on our calendar and sign up for free and get access to our online portal where we have posted the readings and sort of those sorts of reminders of what's happening here in the salon. Any other housekeeping things? Not that I can think of right now. I think everything else we'll get to as it happens. Can you push your chair back a little bit so that I can sit down and move forward?

[15:14]

Great. So tonight I have chosen a section to talk about. And Tim, I think if anybody said it would like another hard copy. So the section that I chose tonight is somewhat long. Too long to talk about the whole thing. So I'm going to sort of pull out a few parts that we'll focus on a little bit. Don't worry at all if you are coming here fresh and have not done this reading. I'm going to read out the important bits, and we'll talk about them a little bit. So I have been looking mainly at the Waddell and Abe translation. which is in the left-hand column of our three-translation compilation. And I thought, since I had pulled them out to find some notes, I just thought I would bring in the three books that these translations come from.

[16:15]

So, The Heart of Dogen's Shobogenzo. This is the Waddell and Abe translation, which is just selections from the Shobogenzo. This is the Nishijima and Cross version. Mm-hmm. This is in four volumes, so this is just volume two of the four-volume set. And this one I refer to for sort of the notes and the factual stuff. My understanding and feeling is that this one is a little more word-by-word accurate in its translation. And sometimes the sense can be a little harder to get out of that word-by-word accurate translation. And then this is the Kaz Tanahashi version, which was also supported by many teachers here at San Francisco Zen Center. And this version is actually quickly becoming my preferred version for sort of getting the sense of Shobogenso.

[17:23]

This, I feel like, really goes sort of in the direction of... underpinning the translation with practice. So it is clear to me that this was translated by dedicated practitioners and really beautiful language as well. So those different versions I find, I'm just sort of constantly flipping between the three versions, looking at who has the particular note that I'm looking for to explain whatever portion I'm confused about. So I'll mostly be talking about the Waddell and Abe version. I'll give you page numbers as I go. But there are a few things from the other translations that I think are interesting enough in this section to point out as well. So I'm going to start page 14. So this section, as most of the sections in Bouchot, starts with a

[18:24]

koan story that Dogen then unpacks. So I'm going to read just sort of the second portion of this koan story starting about a paragraph in on the top of page 14. At another time, as Nagarjuna was sitting, he manifested a body of absolute freedom. It was just like the round full moon. Not a person in the assembly saw the master's form. They heard only the sound of the Dharma. Among the gathering was Kanadeva. Can you discern his form? He asked the others. Our eyes see nothing, they answered. Our ears hear nothing. Our minds discern nothing. Our bodies experience nothing. Kanadeva said, that itself is the form of the sage Nagarjuna Sonia, manifesting the Buddha nature.

[19:26]

He is doing it to teach us. How do I know this? Because the form of formless samadhi is like the full moon. The meaning of the Buddha nature is absolutely empty, clear, and distinct. When Kanadeva finished speaking, the round shape disappeared, and Nagarjuna was sitting on his seat as before. He recited a verse. body manifesting a round moon shape, expressing thereby the body of the Buddhas, expounding Dharma without any form, expounding without sight or sound." So this story would have been well known to Dogen and well known well-known as a story of one of the major ancestors.

[20:28]

Nagarjuna is a key figure in the Mahayana and the sort of main explainer of the emptiness teachings. So I'm going to skip to page 20. So this is then Dogen's little vignette about an experience he had in China. And I won't read the full thing, but I want to point out a few things here. So Dogen was in China as a young man. He was born in the year 1200, so the dates in year 1223 and 1225, he would have been 23 and 25. So one of the monasteries he visited while he was in China was on Mount Ayuang, and those who have read the Dogen's instructions for the monastery cook will recognize the name of this monastery.

[21:32]

This is where he encountered one of the tenzos, or monastery cooks, who he learned a great deal from. In comparison, in this visit to Ayuang Monastery, he met some monks who he seems to have been wholly unimpressed with. So he sees in one of the corridors of the main hall these painted images of these sort of miraculous transformations of the first 33 patriarchs. And he says he didn't recognize them at first, but on his second visit, he pointed out this painting of Nagarjuna manifesting the full moon and asked the monk who was showing him around the monastery what it was. And he just said, that's Nagarjuna bodily manifesting a moon-like shape. And Dogen says in this translation, but the nose holes in the face that uttered those words were drawing no breath.

[22:42]

The words themselves were hollow in his mouth. And here I think the Tanahashi translation maybe is just slightly clearer. He had no nostrils on his face and no wisdom in his explanation. So that no wisdom in his explanation is really sort of the key thing Dogen is saying. This monk did not really understand this painting of Nagarjuna manifesting the full moon. This nostrils thing is worth explaining. The nostril is used as one of the sort of shorthand for an essential or core feature or function. I looked up how else Dogen uses it, and in other portions of Shobogenzo, he'll include it in lists like the bone, flesh, marrow, and nostrils of the teaching, meaning like the heart of it.

[23:47]

meaning the essential point. So saying that this monk had no nostrils, and he actually repeats this. This phrase is repeated in here a couple of times. Having no nostrils means he had no understanding. So this monk says, that's Nagarjuna manifesting the full moon shape. And Dogen's reply is, just like a picture of a rice cake, which again references another sort of well-known and frequently referenced Zen story, which, if I can be so bold as to try to summarize, essentially is pointing out that a painting of something like a rice cake, the sort of idea or representation of something, is not the thing itself. So you cannot eat and be nourished by a painted rice cake.

[24:54]

So Dogen says that this painting of Nagarjuna is like a painted rice cake. And the monk laughs, but Dogen says it was not a laughter of knowledge, it was a laughter. He was just laughing. This monk was not showing that he knew anything. So Dogen presses this monk on this point a couple of times in their tour, and he says the monk just never understood, never had anything that he could say. And when he suggested talking to the head priest of the temple about it, this monk, who Dogen already thought didn't understand, said, oh, the abbot doesn't understand. The abbot has no nostrils. And so Dogen did not question further. So Dogen sort of has this experience, which obviously stayed with him. So I'm just going to read a couple little excerpts of a little bit earlier in this section, what Dogen has to say about how this might have been represented.

[26:13]

So this then is page 18. the last full paragraph towards the bottom of page 18. For a long time, people in the land of the song have endeavored to illustrate this episode in painting, this episode being Nagarjuna manifesting the full moon. They've endeavored to illustrate this episode in painting, but they have never been able to paint it in their bodies, paint it in their minds, painted in the sky or painted on walls. In vain attempts to paint it with a brush tip, they have made depictions of a round mirror-like circle on the Dharma seat and made it out to be the moon-round shape of Nagarjuna's manifesting body. In the hundreds of years that have come and gone since then, these depictions have been like gold dust in the eyes, blinding people. yet no one has pointed out the error.

[27:18]

How sad that matters have been allowed to go unremedied like this. If you understand that the round moon shape manifested by the body is an all-round shape, it is no more than a painted rice cake. It would be ludicrous in the extreme to divert yourself by playing with that. And then on page 19, the first full paragraph on page 19, you must know that in painting the form of the body manifesting a round moon shape, the form of the manifesting body must be there on the Dharma seat. Eyebrows must be directly and authentically raised. Eyes directly and authentically blinked. Skin, flesh, bone, and marrow. Again, this is one of those lists we could add nostril to.

[28:22]

Skin, flesh, bone, marrow, and nostril. The treasure of the right dharma eye must without fail be sitting immovably in zazen. This transmits Maha Kashyapa's smile, for it is becoming a Buddha, becoming a patriarch. So it sounds a little like Dogen is saying, to really represent this, you have to actually show the body of the person rather than showing this round moon shape. And then in the next sentence, he says, if this picture is not a moon shape, the shape of suchness is not there. It does not preach the Dharma. It makes no sight, no sound, no sermon. If you would seek the manifesting body, you must trace the shape of the round moon. So, I read all of these things. I think of these sort of conflicting reports that Dogen gives.

[29:25]

And it brings up this question for me, which is going to be our discussion prompt for tonight. What depiction of Nagarjuna or what response from these monks would have actually satisfied Dogen. Is there anything that anyone could do or say that in Dogen's view would actually get this right in some way? And I think there is, to my mind, a piece in here about the authentic action. This... drawing a mirror-like circle and saying, that's Nagarjuna manifesting the moon shape is too simple in some ways, is just painting a rice cake and saying, this will feed you. So these criticisms

[30:35]

that Dogen has. Clearly, he feels very strongly about this, and yet he's not really saying, at least as far as I understand, he's not saying very clearly, here's exactly how it should have been. He's pointing out a lot of errors, but not necessarily telling us what we should do or how we should experience this, how we might represent it. So I'm going to pause there and see what these fine folks think. I think the word represents is very interesting because it means re-present. And I would say that what Dogen's pointing us towards is presenting and not re-presenting. And it's about our body sitting in Zazen, Nagarjuna's body sitting in Zazen, but the actual experience of that sitting is manifesting the moment.

[31:36]

as emptiness, and bam, that's what it is. And as soon as we try and conceptualize that and put it into a painting, we're missing the point. Even if we repainted Nagarjuna and not some conceptualization of a full moon, we'd still be missing the point, which is obviously the experience of sitting zazen. However, there's something else that strikes me very interesting. As an artist myself, there's a famous painting by Magritte that is like, excuse me, I'm massacring French. But it's like, it basically says that this is not a pipe and it's a painting of a pipe. And it's because, yeah, it's a painting of a pipe. You know, don't be confused between the two, which is a concept kind of easy enough to understand. But I remember once I was in Dokusan with Ryushin and I was talking about, you know, relative and absolute truths. And I was saying, well, you know, it was just a thought. It wasn't, you know, hard reality. And he was like, be careful. It's a thought. It's not just a thought. So we can't dismiss it because it's a painting. It is also a painting that exists and expresses as a painting.

[32:39]

It's not something that has no substance. It's not something to be dismissed in contrast to some kind of alternative expression. So these are the things that kind of really come out to me. And there's one last thing I wanted to say, actually. The very beginning thing that you read, you said, they answered, Our eyes see nothing, our ears hear nothing, our minds discern nothing, our bodies experience nothing. And that I just think is a beautiful turn of phrase for the expression of shunyata, which is emptiness. That lovely phrase I heard once, which is nothing is sacred, which is actually saying nothing, emptiness is sacred. So if you hear that, instead of our eyes see emptiness, our ears hear emptiness, our minds discern emptiness, our bodies experience emptiness. Don't take the authority in my voice as knowing. I tend to have a little authority when I speak, but this is the things that struck me as interesting.

[33:41]

I just think it's a real shame that Dogen never saw Francis Bacon's paintings. He's saying he's contradicting himself in his usual way here. He says, on the one hand, don't paint the unpaintable. But then it also sounds like he's saying there just needed to be, he's being a bit of an art critic and saying there just needed to be the painting of the actual person. But there'd still be a painting, though. There's still a representation. It's a conceptualisation. Yeah, it would be. It's still a conceptualisation. Yes, it is. People would confuse that for Nagarjuna instead of confusing it for the full moon. Sure. They'd still be confused. Yep. Because he says later, he says they're skin bags. which I like. In the translation that I read, the direct translation refers to people as skin bags. Yeah, that, do not paint the unpaintable. I think that is page, yeah, and bottom of page 20.

[34:57]

Things that are undepictable are best left unpainted. If they must be painted at all, they can only be painted straight to the point. Yet the body manifesting the shape of the round moon has never yet been painted. He's pointing, I think, towards abstract painting. That's where Francis Bacon comes in. Right, yeah. Where it's an expression of painting itself as opposed to trying to represent some conceptualization of something else, you know? Do you think Dogen would have been satisfied with the Francis Bacon painting or would he just have? It would have certainly changed all of this right here. I don't know if he would have been satisfied with anything, any painting. But that's what we get to talk about as a prompt. And I think we are just about at that time. Yeah. All right. Just about at that time. So we have to read your prompt. Yeah, let me read this out again. We're reading as well for the people online. Yes, for folks online.

[36:00]

And I believe David Clow will also be able to put this prompt into the chat, though that doesn't follow you into your Zoom breakout rooms. So take note of the prompt now. What depiction of Nagarjuna or what response from the Chinese monks would have satisfied Dogen? Is there any way to get this right? And... I think another fair topic of conversation is just also, what do you think about Dogen's attitude in this section? I think it's an interesting question, the sort of tone and attitude. What do you make of his style of critique? Okay, so we're going to split up into slightly smaller groups this week. If you folks right there in the back, if you want to go into the sunroom, except if a couple of you could come in here, because that'll, we want to have about six people in each group, if we can.

[37:04]

So you, six right there, and one of you come over here, and then there'll be another group right there. And if anybody finds themselves at a loss, they can come join us up front as well. And so we'll have 20 minutes. We'll ring a bell. Yeah, if you can come over here. If the three of you can come over here, there'll be five people. We've got a microphone here to pass around so that folks online can hear our discussion as well.

[58:10]

And if anyone online has comments or thoughts, I believe we can get your voices into the room or you can drop any comments into the chat as well. Take up any issues about what we said. If you think that we completely missed the mark, we'd love to hear what some of you think. come up with a strategy for satisfying Dogen? Hello? Yes. We had a brilliant group of actually we were very inspired by this. Thank you. The thing that we kind of came to was that if you're calling it a painting you're already upsetting Dogen.

[59:10]

So if you call it, this is somebody's effort to capture the wind blowing through the trees, or this is catching the action of the Dharma coming through a great master, that he might have been somewhat satisfied with the monk as a tour guide. And he would have looked at the crowd and said, but they don't probably get it anyway. We're not so sure about his warm attitude. So that was our little bit. First of all, having two professional fine art painters presentation. I think it might have been a little biased. But so I've been wondering, and what we discussed and had a bit of a debate about in our group was, could Dogen have used more skillful means in his, not just in this situation, but in general?

[60:29]

And so we had a little bit of debate whether that would have been so or worthwhile or what, maybe it's, better that he presents it as he does to make the point more definite and clear. What do you think, Roger? I think he could use more skillful means. I think, you know, he overstepped his bounds in many ways, but that was part of the way that he taught. And, you know, it makes me think, and I mentioned Brad Warner's, he had a presentation, Dharma Talk, which was titled, Was Dogan a Jerk? And in some ways he was, but maybe that's the way he had to teach in those days. Yeah, that's great. I think that's a great point. Yeah, I mean, it is kind of a... There's a little, I notice in me, a little sadness.

[61:34]

Oh, these monks who Dogen clearly thought did not get it, did they go the rest of their lives not getting it? Did they ever get it? And maybe as a 25-year-old visiting monk from a foreign country, maybe it wouldn't have been his place to say something. And yet he doesn't seem to really be one to hold back very much otherwise. So yeah, it does seem a little, yeah, there's a little, maybe there's a small, a little regret there. Maybe he could have helped these folks out a little bit. I like Dogen's style. I like that he shakes people out of their apathy, wakes them up, you know. I think it's good. If people have got ears to listen, it's great. If they don't... This is some feedback we're offering for Dogen.

[62:36]

got a question or a comment online. I'm just going to unmute here. The box is closed. Joel, can you speak up? How's that? Yes, we can hear you. Awesome. Yeah, we talked about the same issue. Do you need to get a bit closer? Can you get it closer to your speaker? How's that? That's better. That's great. Thanks. Okay. Yeah, we talked about exactly the same issue. And it's a real issue. One thing I felt is that I think, yeah, these people are monks. Yeah. and they might have been there for 20 years.

[63:40]

And if Dogen was talking to someone who'd been there two days, I hope he would be different. And yeah, so that it's kind of where the person is, the cause and condition of that person and that context and things that are really, you know, Mel once told me, when I want to see how mature a student is, I do something stupid. And that was his style. And he would do that, you know. I also think about Trungpa, who's talking about panicking students and panicking teachers. That sometimes when teachers do this, they might, in a sense, be panicking. They're not sure the student is ready for this kind of teaching.

[64:46]

And then they're stuck with the karma of they did this, the student wasn't ready, and the student could learn. Anyway, that's stuff I've thought about this teaching style, which I found can be helpful in the context of teachers who are unbelievably compassionate like 99% of the time. And then there's a singer that comes. And if they get it right, it's very helpful. I have a question though. Wasn't he like 23 years old during this whole thing? So maybe he wasn't a teacher. Maybe he was just like a very zealous student at this point. Well, he was 40 something when he wrote this. So he was like relaying it. Yeah, so I'm not sure if it's totally accurate. Interesting. Yeah, I think there is a great question about skillful means in there and probably also something really being highlighted about the cultural difference as well.

[66:03]

I think the... Chinese and Japanese monasteries of the 1200s probably just fundamentally had a different flavor and feeling than San Francisco Zen Center in 2024. I think there probably were lots of things happening there we would not stand for. And sometimes a sort of surprise in-your-face teaching can really wake you up. But that really... requires great care. Because, yeah, that regret of having caused harm in trying to have a sort of teaching moment is, that stings. That'll stay with you. Well, that can sometimes be a good thing, though. You know, it stays with you and you reflect upon it. Everybody learns that. Yeah, yeah. All right, I think we're at time. Almost.

[67:03]

We probably have time for one more. All right. Let's see if there's anybody else who has anything to say. Here we go. This comes from the chat from Sarah. Sarah writes, from our group, in terms of presentation... Can you speak up a bit louder? Just bring it closer to your mouth. In terms of presentation, representation... Why did Dogen approve of the Buddha holding up of the flower versus the painting? Thanks, Sarah. Because holding up the flower wasn't representing something. It was the expression of the universal truth right there. Yeah, a direct action. Direct transmission. If you'd hold up a painting of a flower, then it would have been a problem. I do think the kind of direct, authentic activity of the body in this world, in the present moment, I think is one of the key things that Dogen is pointing at here.

[68:13]

And Nagarjuna. And Nagarjuna, yeah, absolutely. Talking about it, painting it, thinking about it, representing it... whatever it might be, is not the same as being there and doing it. Yeah. Okay. Thank you, everyone. Next week will be the last of our salons. It's hard to believe it's coming to the last salon, but it is. It is. And... Mine, that will be me. And my section is... Timbo's translation is like the middle one. My section is... We'll send it out on email anyway.

[69:15]

Yeah, page 21 to 22. It's not on this bunch that you photocopied. No, not the one that I handed out today. Not the one we handed out today. We'll email you all the new one. Yeah, and it's quite a short section, right? Yeah, it's a short section. And that will be next week. So thank you all. What else do we need to do right now? Having bowed in, should we bow out? Yeah, let's bow out. All right, we'll bow out, and then if anybody wants to stay just to help us put the room back together, that would be... Yes, that would be wonderful.

[70:03]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_91.85