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. So, good afternoon. Now, can you hear me okay? Loud enough that I speak this way? I have sometimes a very soft voice, and sometimes when I have the most important things to say, it gets very soft. So... If I get too quiet, please... If I get too quiet, if you could just raise your hand or tell me to speak up, then I'll do my best I can. Working okay? So... In that... We're doing this Jukai ceremony this evening. It's been on my mind the Zen precepts. And for some time now... I've been wanting to, when I offer the precepts, to offer a slight change in the traditional way it's been taught.

[01:08]

And so I thought that maybe I needed to explain the change. But then we just went through rehearsals now, and it became obvious they've been changed all over the place since the time I used to be at Zen Center. So I guess the idea that the precepts can be changed is not a very radical one around here. But still, I thought I would discuss a little bit. And some years ago, I did a lot of research on the history of the Zen precepts. And so I thought I might share that with you a little bit, since they're very important. The precepts in Zen, they say that is really at the heart of Zen. There's no Zen without precepts, though that wasn't always understood at Zen Center. When I was ordained at Zen Center, at that time, I don't remember any particular emphasis on the precepts. I mean, certainly I took the precepts being ordained in 1982, but, you know, no one expected me to be accountable to them or to memorize what they were.

[02:17]

It's just kind of like almost in passing was the impression I had. And in Akin Roshi's book, Akin Roshi, a Zen teacher who wrote a book in 1980s, early 90s, called The Mind of Clover, which was the first book I know in English that went into some detail describing and discussing the Zen precepts. He writes in there that it's very rare in Japan, in his experience, he was steeped in Japanese Zen, for people to consider the precepts or discuss them or teach on them, and they're quite unusual. In the Rinzai tradition, I was told when I was in Japan, They'll go through many years of a monastery and a koan curriculum, going through all these koans, and only at the very end of this whole long curriculum do they spend a little bit of time on the koans, on the precepts. So what I've seen at Zen Center, I believe, that over the last 20 years, 25 years, there's been an increased appreciation of the precepts and value of them, and one of the ways we saw that was in the...

[03:26]

early 90s, mid-90s, the creation of the ethics document that Zen Center has now, where it goes into some little explanation, modern explanation of how it works, the 16 Zen precepts at Zen Center. The implementation of that document initially met with a lot of conflict at Zen Center. In the 1980s, there was a series of... ethical misconduct by Buddhist teachers. And so a number of Buddhist groups wanted to give more emphasis on the importance of precepts, and Zen Center was one of them. And so in the early 90s, I think Mel and Reb and someone else organized a small group of people to come up with an ethics statement, ethics document for Zen Center. And when that committee presented its, it wasn't replacing the precepts, but kind of a new understanding of the ethics, modern understanding of ethics of teachers and people at Zen Center and how it would be.

[04:35]

When that was presented at Zen Center, it was met with a tremendous amount of hostility. And I was here. I happened to be here during practice period. I don't know why I was here. But I was here, and that particular committee, it was a board meeting. I think they had a board meeting down here. And I was on the board. And that set of ethics document was presented in that dining room there to the residents here in the middle of practice period. And I was sitting right behind the committee who was presenting it. So it was like over their shoulder I was looking. And I have never seen as much hostility expressed at Zen Center or at Tassajara as was expressed towards those people in that committee for trying to establish an ethical understanding of how to be here at Zen Center. I think now it's a surprise that that's in the history that there were such things, but something touched a raw nerve at Zen Center around emphasizing precepts and emphasizing ethics a little over 20, under 20 years ago.

[05:44]

Also then a little later we had a meeting of the board and people at the board were swearing at each other across the table because of this document. We needed to have an ethics document, a process of reconciliation in place to heal from trying to get an ethics document going at Zen Center. It was quite an event. I don't think anybody here was there, right? Leslie's not here? Leslie was probably there. She remembers, I'm sure. And it was out of that difficulty that a committee was formed They went back and looked at the 16 Zen precepts that we have and tried to explain them in a way for the collective life here at Zen Center. So there now exists an ethics document for Zen Center that goes through it. I don't know how many people know about it or study it or make it available, but the idea was that it was made available to people when they came to Zen Center. And so they kind of have a common understanding of the ethics here. So this is a long way of saying that I believe that the focus on the precepts in Zen has taken a new turn in the last 20 years in American Buddhism and American Zen as a whole.

[07:01]

And it's easy to assume that it's always been this way. But in fact, it rises out of our collective experience, rises out of the need we had to address this in a deeper way. But it also arises out of taking seriously the teachings about ethics and the precepts that exist in the tradition itself. And so there's kind of a mixed thing, as I see back into the tradition, where there is the rhetoric and teachings that are quite beautiful about the precepts and their value and how they're inseparable from Zen itself, and this odd thing where they're not quite emphasized in the way that maybe we would now find them emphasized. They weren't quite emphasized as much. So the Zen precepts that we have now are considered to be 16. And those 16 are divided into three groups. The first group is the three refuges. The second group is called the three pure precepts.

[08:01]

And the third group is called the ten grave precepts. And those three each have their own history. There's a kind of idea that in the mythic idea of Buddhism that the precepts were handed down from the mythic times, maybe Vairachana Buddha, or somehow there's been a perpetual lineage going back even before the historical Buddha. But if you start looking at the texts, where they come from, you see that you can't really say they've been unchanging since that time, that they've actually been changing down through the centuries, and it seems like every few centuries there's a change. And in fact, in the modern world coming to the West, there's been quite a bit of a change in some of these precepts. And I think it's worthwhile considering these changes and considering perhaps the reasons they've been changed and the nature of these precepts, that they can be changed. Who has authority to change them? What's our relationship with them if they can be changed so easily as they seem to be?

[09:04]

So much so that when Paul Haller and I were rehearsing the ceremony, we saw the wording of the three pure precepts and Paul looked at me and said, you sure you want to say it this way? As if we had a choice, right? But he had never seen that wording before because people change them and all that. So they're not so unchanging as we realize. So I want to present to you one idea I have or one history of these precepts that maybe puts them in a certain context. And then I'd like to end with an explanation for one of the ones that I want to change, one of the ten grave precepts that I feel quite strongly about when I offer someone precepts to change it, and I'll explain why and my rationale for that. So I believe that the spiritual ancestor for the ten grave precepts

[10:06]

is what's called in the early Buddhism the ten skillful actions. We don't find a direct historical lineage between them, but they map quite closely together. The first four are the same, not to kill, not to steal, not to engage in sexual misconduct, and not to lie. Then the next four of the ten skillful actions have to do with... precepts of speaking, so no malicious speech, no harsh speech, no slander, and no, let's see, maybe it's no gossip. That's already there. That was in the first four. Sorry? Louder, please. No, that's in the Zen one. This is the ten skillful actions. So in early Buddhism, time of the Buddha, there was something called the ten skillful actions.

[11:09]

And these were the primary kind of ethical guidelines that the Buddha gave to people. He taught them many times. Often people don't notice them so much because even in other forms, in Theravada Buddhism, when they talk about the precepts, they don't list those. They talk about the five precepts. And so the five are a little bit there, but they weren't actually, they're amazingly under-emphasized in the time of the Buddha. The Buddha emphasized the ten skillful actions. And the word skillful begs the question, skillful for what purpose? And the purpose is for liberation, for awakening. These were the ethical behavior that was most connected for people, most supportive for the process of awakening, waking up. And so... And the word action means karma. And these are the actions, the activity that are consequential. In early Buddhism, we take responsibility for our actions because the actions we choose to live on are consequential.

[12:14]

They create the path that we walk on. We have to take responsibility for that path. And then the last of these ten skillful, the last three, are connected to what's called the three poisons. The three poisons are greed, hate, and delusion. So the last three of the skillful actions are to avoid covetousness, greed, being avaricious, to avoid ill will, and then rather than avoid delusion, it says avoid wrong view. Those three. What's missing in these ten is there's nothing about alcohol in them or intoxicants. As Indian Buddhism continued after the time of the Buddha, people noticed this absence. And in the centuries later, some people substituted avoiding intoxication for one of the speech ones. Or some people simply just added one more precept and had 11.

[13:16]

No intoxication. So, you know, they were a little bit flexible back then, but this is kind of something that I consider the ancestral background for the ten great precepts. Then, The big turn, a big radical and pivotal moment for the arising of these, the creation of these Zen precepts that we have was the mid-fifth century in China. What was happening in China was the Chinese in the three, four hundred years before that were receiving Indian Buddhism wholesale. A tremendous amount of these Buddhist texts were being translated into Chinese. And it was really a big endeavor for the Chinese to try to make sense of what they were receiving. But around that time, the fifth century, there arose in India and then even more so in China a very strong Mahayana identity in a way that probably never existed in India before that.

[14:18]

In probably Afghanistan area, the Silk Route area, and into China, the idea of what now we call Pakistan, the idea of a Mahayana distinct from other forms of Buddhism became extremely important. And the Chinese took this on even more than existed probably in India. And so they were receiving all these texts, and some of the texts they were receiving were very disparaging of the earlier forms of Buddhism, like the Hinayana. And the idea of being a bodhisattva was very important. And so... they were kind of trying to figure out how do we be a bodhisattva. And they wanted to be ordained as monks in China. And at the same time, in the mid-5th century, the code of monastic rules for monastics was also being translated, which was a bit of a shock or surprise to the Chinese. Until then, they had become monks.

[15:19]

but they didn't actually know the full set of monastic precepts and rules yet. And there were all kinds of ways in which the monastics were being ordained in the first two or three centuries in China. They were being self-ordained. They were just making up ordination ceremonies. They were getting ordained in visions with seeing Buddhas. They were very creative things. But once they got the full ordination ceremonies, the full set of codes translated into Chinese, they noticed that that these were not bodhisattva ordinations. They were ordinations that belonged to the earlier Hinayana. And so they were getting quite self-conscious about this Hinayana thing. They didn't want to be too many, you know, they wanted to have, so they wanted to have a bodhisattva ordination. So, very luckily, a text appeared in China in the mid-fifth century called the Brahmajala Sutra, the Fan Wang Ching. And this became one of the most important sutras in the history of Chinese and Japanese Buddhism.

[16:27]

Nowadays, scholars who study this text say it's an apocryphal text that somehow was written in China in the mid-5th century, attributed to the Buddha. Thus have I heard. And there was a series of texts like that. Nowadays they're called apocryphal. But the fact that it's apocryphal doesn't mean that it's not valuable and important. I think it expresses something very meaningful in the practice of people who are putting it together. But in that text, they created a bodhisattva ceremony and a bodhisattva set of precepts. And in that, there were 10 grave precepts and 48 minor precepts. And these were meant to be related to in the same way as the earlier monastic code existed for the so-called Hinayana monastics. And so this became then, starting in the mid-5th century, something that became common in Chinese Buddhism.

[17:31]

One of the differences about the bodhisattva precepts from the earlier monastic precepts is these could be done by both lay people and monastics. They were not limited to only monastics. It wasn't only monastic ordination. And so in China... the people ordained as monks would take the traditional Hinayana monastic precepts and, in addition, would do this Bodhisattva precept. It was great. Until it came to Japan. And in Japan, there was a very famous Japanese monk by the name of Saicho. who started a very important school of Japanese Buddhism, and he wanted to be free. Because he was a new school of Buddhism, he did not want to be under the weight of the old school of Buddhism in Japan, which had been there for, by that time, 600 years maybe, 400 years.

[18:36]

And they were kind of in cahoots with the government. They had control over who could get ordained. And so there was a kind of bottleneck of who had the authority to create the ordinations and who had the religious power in Japan. So he petitioned to the government, could I do my own ordination ceremony and not do the Hinayana, the earlier Hinayana ordination, and just use the precepts from this apocryphal text, from this Ramajala Sutra? You following me? Any questions? Is this clear enough? This history lesson? You with me? Yes. In this Brahmajala text, were there different precepts for the man to eliminate? No. No, it was all the same. All the same. And so until that time in Japan, if you wanted to be a monk, you had to have this traditional monastic ordination plus the Brahmajala ordination, right, to both.

[19:45]

Right after Saito died, the government granted his school the right to perform these ordinations without the monastic, the traditional old monastic ordination. And therefore in Japan, they started this new tradition of only using the Brahmajala precepts. And this was in what's called a Tendai school. Dogen was a Tendai monk. So Dogen would have taken these. Now, he would have taken, we don't know exactly, did he only take the 10? Did he take the 10 plus the 48 minor precepts? What we do know is that the Brahmajala Sutra was very important in Japanese Buddhism down through the centuries. And so Dogen was intimately familiar with it. And so were the people who ordained in Soto Zen down through the centuries until recent times. Everyone would have known this text. And why this is significant is that the precepts there are longer than the precepts that Dogen used.

[20:52]

So, I don't know if I have it here, but to give you one example... Am I losing everyone? Some people? Dozen instruction. So... they drop the monastic precepts and just do the ten? So the reason why they dropped the so-called Hinayana monastic precepts was twofold. One was that Tendai was particularly committed to the Lotus Sutra, and the Lotus Sutra is very critical of the Hinayana. You shouldn't have anything to do with the Hinayana. And so it was a little bit of an awkward thing to do this Hinayana ordination when you weren't supposed to be doing anything to do with it. And... And also Sideshow was looking how to become free from the older Japanese school of the Buddhism.

[21:57]

So he could have his own power. He didn't have to be under their authority. And so he wanted to create his own. I understand the two reasons. And so maybe I don't have it here. Anyway, the... But here it is. Okay. So the first precept, not to kill, this is what the text says. A disciple of the Buddha shall not himself kill, encourage others to kill, kill by expedient means, praise killing, rejoice at witnessing killing, or kill through incantations or deviant mantras. He should not create the causes, conditions, methods, or karma of killing and shall not intentionally kill any living creature. As a Buddhist disciple, he ought to nurture a mind of compassion and filial piety, always devising expedient means to rescue and protect all beings.

[23:06]

If instead he fails to restrain himself and kill sentient beings without mercy, he commits a parajika offense, a major offense. So this goes into more detail rather than saying a disciple Buddhist does not kill. So by the time you get to Dogen, in his fascicles, when he describes the ten grave precepts, he does so in a much more simplified way, close to what we have nowadays. So the first one is, a disciple of Buddha does not kill. At his time, everyone knew that that was a shorthand for this longer Brahmajala Sutra explanation of the precepts. So that was in the background. It was more like, this is the abbreviated version implying the rest. And so each of these ten precepts have these longer kind of way of wording from that text. And somehow, we don't know if it's Dogen himself or whether it is the Tendai tradition itself, but somehow it got simplified.

[24:10]

It's close to what we have now. And then we have no evidence that Dogen had anything to do with the 48 minor precepts from the Brahmajala Sutra. Only the ten. So that's a 10. In the Brahmajala Sutra itself, I think it's there, but they bring in the refuges and they bring in the three pure precepts and they get into 16 precepts. I think it's brilliant to have these together. It kind of elevates them all and they all kind of shine on each other and kind of explain each other to each other. It's kind of like mirrors on each other. The three pure precepts probably are derived from teachings by Indian philosopher named Asanga. And he organized all the precepts, the monastic precepts, the precepts in earlier Buddhism, into three categories.

[25:20]

The categories of restraint, the categories of developing good mental qualities, and the category of saving others. So this kind of organizing way somehow made itself in some unknown way into what we call now the pure precepts. However, the wording of the pure precepts, in the early years of Zen Center, we would say avoid evil, do good, and save all beings. And I believe that that wording came a little bit from kind of a mistranslation borrowing from the Dhammapada. The Dhammapada, it says, the teachings of the Buddha is to avoid evil, cultivate skillful qualities, and purify the mind. And so that became avoid evil, do good, and save all beings.

[26:22]

But the way it's actually worded in Chinese is the precept of taking on the monastic codes and rules. The precept of taking on good qualities. And the precept of benefiting sentient beings. So the Japanese-Chinese wording of it, the first precept is not to avoid evil, but rather to take on monastic codes and rules, ritsuji. And so the shingi, the rules for the monastic life, are extremely important for Dogen, extremely important in Buddhism, and here to take on these things. That's one whole kind of area in which we practice.

[27:25]

The precept of taking on good qualities. Nowadays, some people say this precept means to do all good, but good is amazingly vague. What does that mean? And I think it's too vague to be really practical and useful. But the... I think the original word of the Dhammapada is skillful. You do that with just skillful for the purposes of awakening. The word here for do good is actually good qualities and the word for qualities is dharma. You practice good dharma. Dharma has many meanings, but one of the meanings is mental qualities. And this is the precept, this is a part of practice where we're also developing the paramitas. We're developing good qualities of heart and mind to support our practice. And laying the foundation of developing ourselves and cultivating our hearts is historically an extremely important part of Buddhism.

[28:34]

You don't expect to get awakened without having developed a strong, stable heart and mind and these good qualities. And then it says benefiting sentient beings. So that's quite a difference from the early American Zen version to do no evil, practice good, actualize good for others. And then the three refuges have been unchanged since the time of the Buddha. And I find that so what's interesting is some things are unchanged and some things change over time. And I think the interplay between what can be changed and what's unchanging What changes and what is unchanging is a very interesting issue in terms of our practice. What is unchanging? How do we relate to what's unchanging? And what is it that changes and how do we relate to change? And how do we participate in change? It's a very interesting question. In the Japanese ordination ceremony, I don't know how it is really here, priest ordination, when you take the refuges, it says explicitly that when you take refuge in the Buddha,

[29:47]

you're taking as your guide the awakening of the Buddha. So it's not really the Buddha that's the refuge, but rather it's the awakened state, the awakened condition of a Buddha that's really the refuge for us. And this idea that it's awakening that's the refuge and not the Buddha goes back not to the time of the Buddha himself, where in the early texts, in the suttas, that's explicit as well. That when you take refuge in the Buddha, you're taking refuge in his awakening, in that possibility of awakening. You with me? I'm worried this is so historical and so detailed and so many facts and you guys, some of you are so sleep deprived. How could you follow this? So questions? Go on a little bit more? Okay. So Dogen's precepts are different than what is used in modern Soto Zen, the ten precepts, ten great precepts.

[30:57]

And what's used in modern Soto Zen in Japan is different from what's used in American Zen, including here at Zen Center. So the sixth precept for Dogen was... Who wants to tell me what the sixth precept is now that you guys use here? Sorry? How not to slander. Anybody have a different version? Don't dwell on the faults of others. Don't dwell on the faults of others. Can we settle on that? Okay, so for Dogen, this was And also for this Brahmajala Sutra, same there. It's not talking of the faults of lay and monastic bodhisattvas.

[32:08]

So not slandering lay or monastic bodhisattvas. Now you know what that gives you permission to do? LAUGHTER It lets you slander or it allows you to talk about the faults of people who are not bodhisattvas, which, if you start reading some of the Mahayana Sutras and commentaries, boy, are they laying into the faults of the Hinayana. Boy, oh boy. When I was in Japan, I spent a year in Japan practicing in Japan, and then I spent ten weeks in the middle of that time in Thailand, practicing meditation in a Thai monastery. I went back to see one of my Japanese teachers. I told him where I'd been, and he looked at me and he said, you've been consorting with the devil. I don't know if that was kind of like, you know, a Zen thing to kind of, you know, poke me or challenge me or something, but I took it that he was very traditional, and he had read all these texts that talk about...

[33:15]

you know, how terrible the Hinayana is and the doing of Mara and the devil. And he was kind of horrified that I had been down there. It's a little bit unusual in the modern world to have someone with that kind of mindset because it's, you know, it's not really sustainable anymore. But there's a history of that. So this precept allows for that kind of language to be there. By the time it got into modern Japan, Soto Zen, the precept was changed to become universal. You don't talk about the faults of others. You don't slander others. So, period. How that happened, when it happened in Japan, I don't know the history of it. But by the time it came into the modern times, it became, you know, don't talk about the faults of others. And then as it got translated into English, sometimes it becomes don't slander others. Yes?

[34:16]

So in the Buddhist times, it would have been different, but the early Bodhisattva Pritha were just not to slander or just not to slander lay and monastic Bodhisattvas? So the ten skillful actions, it was don't slander others. In the Brahmajala Sutra, it says don't talk of the faults of lay and monastic Bodhisattvas. So, So there's been a change, right? Now here's another change. What is the fifth precept? You're supposed to know. We're finding out if these people know. Who knows what the fifth precept is? Who's Hajiokai? Tell me. He doesn't know. I thought we're in the modern era and precepts are being emphasized more around here. No intoxication. Is that what you were told?

[35:19]

That's what you promised? Uh-huh. When you did your first ordination, what was the fifth precept for you? Remember? I think for a while it's been not to intoxicate mind or body of self or other. Other versions? Yes? Not to sell or abuse the wine or drugs of delusion. Not to sell or abuse... Not to sell or... Sell or abuse the wine or drugs of delusion. Not to sell or abuse the wine or drugs of delusion. Good. I was used recently. Great. but I remember reading it not to sell alcohol. Right. Exactly. So in this Chinese text, the Brahmajala Sutra, that's what it says.

[36:23]

No selling of alcohol. So what does that allow you to do? A lot. It lets you to drink. You can drink as long as you don't sell it. And I remember once, I mean, once I went to, I won't tell you who it was, but I spent a week in a... village, you know, one of the local village Sotozen temples in Japan with the priests, and it was very nice. And then it was the last evening, I was leaving the next day, and he said, Gil, come with me. And we sat down in the dining room area, and he brought out the bottle of whiskey. I was kind of surprised by that, but he wanted me to drink with him. There was a lot of drinking. When I was in Japan, when I was in the monastery, I did a practice period at Zuyoji, one of the main training monasteries in Japan, and there was a lot of alcohol. We had this wonderful experience, I thought.

[37:24]

So I was a new monk, and so all the new monks had to, at the beginning of the practice period, had to line up in this room and, like, stand at attention. And, like, the most, Tanto or someone was going to lay down the law for us. And he was kind of like a drill sergeant. I didn't speak any Japanese then. I didn't understand what he was saying. And so he was really laying into us for a while. And then he stopped and he went to the door, sliding door, opened the door, looked up and down the hallway, came back, and then he spoke to us in the kindest way possible, kind of like our friend. So I asked later, what was that about? Well, he was talking harshly. It was, you know, follow the rules. when he went to the door, made sure no one else was around, and came back and talked to him, he said, by the way, the closest liquor store to us is, he's a member of the temple.

[38:32]

So don't go buy your liquor there. Go further away. And then, And then the monks would go off and do these memorial services in people's homes. And one of the payments that the monks would get was that they'd get these beautiful big bentos of meals. And so our supper often was these big bentos. It was great. It was great food. But once we got, I guess, some cases of beer. And so it was, I don't know when it was. I guess it was after Zazen one evening. I was asked to go to the kitchen. And... And the senior monks there handed me all these bottles of beer and said, take these over to the sleeping quarters because everyone's going to drink. So I had to carry these bottles. It was kind of awkward. And I had to go through the Zendo. And I'm probably one of the few people in the history of Zen who had the opportunity to drop and break a bottle of beer in the Zendo floor. I don't think that's happened here as far as anybody knows, right?

[39:36]

It was a cement floor. So anyway, so this idea of not, you know, so for Dogen also, the precept is no selling of alcohol. And in modern Soto Zen, that's the precept, no selling of alcohol. When I finally understood this, then it made sense what goes on in Japan. The Japanese monastics have no prohibition against drinking alcohol. And the relationship to alcohol is very different in China and Japan than it is in India. So I don't think it really kind of worked for Chinese and Japanese to have a complete prohibition the way the Indians could do. 48 minor. 48 is to prohibition no drinking? I see. So I didn't know that. So one of the 48 minor is to no drinking. So when they dropped the 48, that left the possibility. So anyway, so modern Japanese Soto Zen monks...

[40:38]

don't take the prohibition to drinking alcohol, just don't sell alcohol. And that explains why they're not breaking the precepts, which was very confusing when I was there because I assumed that the precept was no drinking. But it's actually not the case. But when it comes to America, then Americans, it kind of didn't work to kind of, this idea of not selling alcohol as one of the precepts, I don't think people could really kind of, most people could get behind it. So there was a variety of different things people tried to say. So one of them was don't sell the wine of delusion. So, you know, I guess you could understand two ways, the wine that causes delusion or delusion which is like alcohol. So it's kind of ambiguous what it is there. And I think that came from G.U. Kennett was the one who came up with that kind of idea. So in the ceremony that I was handed to do today, for Danny, I was very pleased to see that the precept is, I vow to refrain from intoxicants.

[41:45]

So this is like the five precepts in Theravadan Buddhism, early Buddhism. I feel much better about that. I think this makes a lot of sense to me. And then this, you know, don't sell alcohol, please. So, and I don't know whose idea was to put this in here, but... you know, do change it this way, but it gets changed all the time, right? So, are you with me? I changed it. You changed it. You did it? No, I'm sorry. Let's speak up about that. No, no. You did not change it. You don't know who did it? I got enough a lot. Okay, but you don't... No, no. Yeah? Yes. In the Ten Skillful Actions, the... There's nothing but alcohol there. And in fact, it's very interesting that in the earliest body of literature we have, the suttas, the Pali suttas, there's very little emphasis on not drinking alcohol.

[42:47]

You do find some. It's there. But it doesn't get a kind of prominence that you kind of would expect. And there's many places where the precepts or ethics is presented and a lot of rules of ethics, various things, and it doesn't appear. So just to give you one example, a really important teaching from the early tradition is the Eightfold Path. And one of the Eightfold Path steps is right action. And right action is defined as not killing, not stealing, and not engaging in sexual misconduct. Nothing about no alcohol. So if you just follow the Eightfold Path explanation in this early tradition, alcohol is not in there. Yes? You mentioned alcohol. Is it specifically alcohol, or is it maybe a frivolum of alcohol? I think it's equivalent. The idea is any substances that causes your mind to be heedless.

[43:49]

So that was alcohol at a time? So alcohol, so drugs, anything that makes your mind heedless, so you're not really... Don't have your right mind anymore and you can make mistakes. Yeah? Is it more about the substance or is it more about the state of mind? Is the idea to maintain clarity and not get so intoxicated that you can't think or see or behave well or whatever? Or is the idea that these substances are bad? The wording in the earliest version, the precepts, is to avoid the substances that causes the mind to be heedless. And so most people, especially the Orthodox tradition, interprets that very clearly to mean no alcohol and no drugs. Some scholars, there's some controversy about this, but some scholars will say the grammar is ambiguous.

[44:55]

And the grammar could be read... don't engage in substances up to the point of becoming heedless. So you're sipping a little bit and keeping your mind clear and responsible would be okay. So the point I'm making is that the whole thing about alcohol, there's something about the alcohol precept which is different from the other precepts because the others are clearly causing harm to people. And that one is not necessarily causing harm. And so it has a different place. And so maybe that's why the ambiguity in the early tradition where it's not really plugged in in such a powerful, strong way as we have it now, like in this one here. But I think that I'm pleased with it because it's become so clear the tremendous amount of suffering that exists in our society around alcohol and drugs.

[45:59]

And I mean, it's really dramatic. And as a footnote, I suspect that the religious tradition that saved more lives in the 20th century, in the last 100 years, than any other religion is probably alcoholics and venomists. It's done so much for people because of the tremendous, tremendous challenge that so many people have around these things. And I would hope that, you know, one of the reasons why I believe there should be no alcohol, there is no alcohol here except for these guests, right, is at Tassajara, Gringold, places like this, is that I think we do a tremendous service to people who are struggling with addiction issues to create these oases of safety where they know they're protected and they can kind of get stabilized and find their way through it. And I think that people who are going to take these bodhisattva paths want to make themselves people that can support that kind of safety. for others as well. So I think there's a lot more.

[47:06]

For me personally, I know there's a lot more for me to understand about this precept of alcohol, the history of it, kind of the understanding behind it. And I haven't really taken the time yet to delve into it as deeply as I wish. But I just share with you that this is a little bit of the history of it. Make sense? Yes. Yesterday I took eight loads of wine glasses and bottles out of a room. I mean, it's a little like a tradition, but, you know, I can see it from various aspects. That's not my place. I don't want to pick it up here, that question.

[48:10]

I mean, it's a fair question. But I just leave it like that. Well, can I ask you in a slightly different way? When you author the precepts that way, and I took precepts with Thich Nhat Hanh, where he really emphasizes that, you know, about that. Do you emphasize just no alcohol for yourself or no engaging at all? Where do you say it? Yes, yes, yes. Before I heard the question, it occurred to me that maybe I should say that, how it is for me. So you asked me, so it helps. So this is what I don't want to say in public. And that is that the... So the way I use the precept of no intoxication is with using the grammar to mean up to the point of intoxication or heedlessness, losing my mind.

[49:26]

I don't even get tipsy. But very, very occasionally, which might mean like two or three times a year, If I'm at dinner with my wife and my wife asks me, would you like to share a glass of wine with me? I'll say yes. And we'll share that glass of wine. And the reason I don't want to say it publicly is as a Buddhist teacher, I don't want that to be known widely that I do this. I do it basically in private situation because I feel as a Buddhist teacher, I'm supposed to... I'm trying to lie to people and present myself what I'm not, but I'm a reference point for people who are struggling around this issue. And it helps them to know that other people are not easily drinking and all that. And I think the degree to which I'm drinking, I don't think I have a problem yet. I think it's two or three times a year at the most. It's half a glass.

[50:29]

Sometimes I drink more of the half than my wife does. So... But that's because she stopped early. So that's what I do. That's how I understand the precept. And then each person will decide for themselves. Yes? So do you have anything to say about the Theravada Brahmajala Sutta? There is the first text in the long discourses of the Buddha is called the Brahmajala Sutta. And it's very likely the Brahmajala Sutra was partly based on the Brahmajala Sutta because the huge middle section of the Brahmajala Sutta, the Pali version, has all to do about ethical kind of precepts, long, long lists of them. And it's kind of nice because they're not precepts

[51:30]

that you have to commit yourself to, but rather they are descriptions of the ethics of a Buddha. And so rather than this is what you do to become a Buddha, this is how you are as a Buddha. And this idea that someone who is spiritually mature naturally acts a certain way that's expressed by the precepts goes back to this earliest tradition. And that's, I think, a very integral part of the Zen tradition that the precepts, part of the understanding of the precepts is that precepts are not separate from you. It's not separate from your awakening or your Buddha nature. They are an expression of it, that if you get out of the way of your own Buddha nature, that's how you will naturally live your life, according to the precepts. So in a little bit different wording, they don't use the language of Buddha nature. That kind of idea is there in the early tradition as well. Yes? Would you say that's also the teaching of Sila Parvita? Sure, yeah.

[52:33]

That's also that... Well, the paramis, yes. I mean, there's so many different ways of understanding them. All these qualities and all these precepts have the aspect of what you train in and what you are. And so you train to be... And what's beautiful is you... If you not yet stop killing people, then you stop... And then you become someone who... Not killing people, right? So we train to become... We do what we want to become. That wasn't so articulate, but... So I want to spend a few moments before we end. I don't know what time we stop. Oh, two minutes then. Oh. Is... The precept that I'm offering... to Danny, which I do when I do Jukai, is I word the last of the ten great precepts.

[53:34]

Instead of calling it not disparaging the treasures, I say refraining from wrong view, which brings it back in alignment with this ten skillful actions, which is what the tenth skillful action is. And here's the reason for it. A few reasons. That the way that the other... nine precepts are for us nowadays, they're universal precepts. It's applicable for everybody. Here's a wise way of living. Not disparaging the three treasures is something very particular about a particular religious tradition. It's not so universal anymore. So it seems a little bit out of place there for me. But more important for me is that it's very easy, in my mind at least, to go from the precept, don't disparage the three treasures, to condemning someone for blasphemy. And there's a lot of suffering in this world today from religious traditions who are concerned with blasphemy.

[54:37]

Some religions, if you're charged with blasphemy, you can get killed. And all kinds of terrible things can happen to people. All kinds of terrible things can happen between people. Different religious traditions, interreligious rivalry. I want to stay very far away from anything that any kind of Buddhist can pick up and say, these people are blaspheming our religion. We have this precept, don't disparage the three treasure. Maybe I'm being overly cautious, but I would rather not be anywhere close to this whole blasphemy thing. And the three treasures don't need to be protected. They're fine, just the way they are. There's not a problem. It isn't like... I mean, the other precepts, you're kind of harming somebody. The three treasures can't be harmed. And in fact, this Brahmajala sutta, the beginning of it is very interesting. So the way that the Pali, the earliest discourses, were organized, the Diganakai, the long discourses, is the first collection.

[55:47]

The Brahmajala sutta is the first of the sutta in that collection. And it begins with this issue of blasphemy. If you read it, you'll see. And basically it says, don't bother you, don't concern yourself whatsoever if someone criticizes the Dharma or the Buddha or you. That's not, you stay equanimous, stay peaceful. It's not your issue. Don't react to it. Don't engage. Isn't that great? The first teachings and the whole, you know, is that. Wouldn't it be great if all religious traditions had as the first teachings up front? Don't be concerned about people who criticized you for your religion. Also, the emphasis on not disparaging three treasures in the Brahmajala Sutra, the Chinese version, appeared in the same milieu, the same time, when they were very concerned about criticizing the Hinayana.

[56:50]

And I think it was a kind of a blasphemy kind of issue. You know, one of the precepts back then was don't talk about the faults of the lay and monastic bodhisattvas. So, you know, this kind of separation, sectarianism, existed at that time and was very strong. So maybe we don't do that with that precept, but I think it's there back there in the archaeology of it if you go digging. So I'd rather not have it. I think we're better off without it. We don't need it. And I think that the precept of avoiding wrong view or maintaining right view covers it anyway, because it's wrong view to go around criticizing anybody's religion, condemning it. Yes? I think we're refraining from raw view. I have to make up something.

[57:52]

Well, I'm not so sure. It's interesting in the ten skillful actions, the first nine are stated in the negative, but the last one is actually stated positively, maintaining right view. So maybe it's better to say maintaining right view, but I haven't thought it out so carefully yet. I'm still learning how to do all this. The old one? The long discourse? Oh, it's a whole different list of precepts of ethics. It's a long, long thing. Longer, yes. Yeah, I don't remember what it is offhand. I mean, I don't have it here. I'm sure you have it in the library. So that's, yes. Yeah, could be. Yeah, I think so.

[58:59]

So, that's the history of the precepts and the unchanging precepts that come down to us from teacher to teacher. I think what gets transmitted, it's very important in Zen, the transmission of the precepts. In the Dharma transmission, that ceremony, one of the things that happens there is a transmission of the precepts. And that's what kind of qualifies someone then to continue passing them on to other people. And I think it's really central and really important, this. But I think what's being transmitted is not the literal wording of the precepts, but rather the spirit behind them. The integrity, the sincerity, the ethical virtue, the connection to compassion and to awakening that is the source of these precepts, this ethical life. And that's kind of more formless. It doesn't really have particular set wording of it.

[60:02]

And so when that resonates, when that somehow is transmitted or that's kind of tuned into between teacher and disciple, in enough way that that's what's being supported and seen. And hopefully that has a deeper and more trustworthy way of transmitting the precepts than if you only transmitted the literal, you know, meaning of the law, you know, letter of the law kind of meaning what the precepts are, this inner sense, this inner integrity. that comes out of practice. I think that's really what we want to really transmit. And then we find our way, and we come to a different culture, different times, different situations, and that inner integrity will help us find how to express it, how to live it in whatever situation we find ourselves in. So, make sense?

[61:05]

Enough? So, thank you. For more information, visit SSCC.org and click giving.

[61:31]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_91.97