This podcast is offered by the San Francisco Zen Center, on the web at www.sfcc.org. Our public programs are made possible by donations by people like you. I'd like to welcome our guest lecturer this evening, Reverend Shagawa. We're very honored and happy that you're able to come. this evening, and Daigaku Umei will be translating for him. Reverend Ishikawa is the resident priest of Kotoku-ji in Japan. His trip to the United States is sponsored by the Soto-shu, the Soto-sen head office in Tokyo. And he's made quite a trip of speaking at a number of places.

[01:04]

And this is toward the end of his many speaking engagements in Washington and Oregon. He was born in Tokyo in 1955 and graduated from Nihonu University, majoring in Chinese literature. and trained at one of the two head temples of the Sōtōoku, Sojiji. In 1991, he became a Tokuha Fukuyoshi, a specially trained lecturer. And those of you who were here a year ago probably remember we also had a Tokuha Fukuyoshi come to speak with us a year ago. He was on the editorial board of Temple School, which is published by the Soto Shun, and has worked at transmitting the tradition and experience of senior priests to younger ones. And I understand that his talks are often based on the Denko Roku, the record of transmission of the light by Kezan Zenji.

[02:13]

I don't know if that's what he's going to speak on this evening, but we're about to find out. My name is Kougaku Ishikawa. I'm glad to see you. That's about the extent of his English. I just said that. That's all he can say in English. In April of this year, I became ill with a certain kind of illness that affects my face. The right side of my face was paralyzed.

[03:16]

And so, for that reason, I was not able to close my eyes, my right eye. My, also, with the mouth and so on, it was not, as usual, it was kind of dropping down, and very difficult for me to move my face, as usual. Um... Before I was coming on this trip, they asked me to send a photo, a recent photo. Well, now my face is pretty much returned to normal. And I was quite sure it would. But when they asked me to send a photo, Actually, my face was kind of twisted. So I didn't send one of those photos.

[04:22]

The reason I didn't send it was because if I sent a photo like that, then you would say, well, it really looks like a different person. And so what I did was I sent a photo that was taken 10 years ago. That's the one. So that's a photo from 10 years ago. Well, my face has pretty much come back to normal. However, there still is one symptom, which is that When I eat, it tears. There are tears forming around my eyes. Especially when I eat something delicious, then it's really tearing quite a bit.

[05:36]

And that just happened right now. I was eating in the dining room and there were just tears were constantly falling. So I am going to speak about Zen, of course, but tonight I'm speaking about the desire between men and women. Even if I were to talk about this in Japan, I think most people would not understand what I'm talking about. In Japan, people are taught to suppress this desire.

[06:37]

But I do not say that. I do not say you should suppress it or get rid of it. While I was eating, I realized what I was going to talk about. Yes. So you are going to hear this for the very first time. You are hearing this for the very first time, this story. I heard this from the person that I studied Zen with, this story. He told me that it's all right to understand what I say Or it's all right to not understand what I say.

[07:40]

Well, it was easy to understand the part about understanding. Okay, it's all right to understand what he says. I understood that clearly. But when he said that it was all right not to understand what he said, that was very difficult for me to understand. It did seem over the years that I did understand what he was saying, but I realized finally that each of those times I was not really understanding what he meant. It took me 20 years to understand what he meant by that. So if you people can understand in one hour, if I speak for one hour, I'll be very happy. Even if only one person understands, I'll be very happy. It may be that no one understands what I have to say.

[08:54]

But... I think that at least within 20 years, somebody will understand. We have a precept which is translated, I believe, in this lineage as do not misuse sexuality. Somebody is walking on this path right now. So imagine that I think, judging from the footsteps, that I think that person is a woman.

[10:01]

My teacher told me that if I were to perceive that that person was a woman, that would be to break that precept. Do you understand the meaning of that? In this case, I have not spoken to that person. I have not even seen that person. Of course, I haven't touched her. He told me that even if I had that sense that it was a woman, that I was breaking the precept. So the question is then why is that to break the precept simply to have the impression that that person is a woman?

[11:22]

This could be turned exactly around the other way, so that if the person speaking now was a woman, and she perceived that someone was walking outside, that that person was a man, that that would be the same thing, of course, that that person was breaking the precept. When I first heard this, I had no idea what was being said, what the meaning of this was. As you know, in Zen, we often talk about koans. This is a very famous poem, the one I'm going to relate, and I'm quite sure many of you, if not most of you are familiar with it. In the countryside, there was a woman who was living with her small daughter.

[12:33]

In the countryside, there was a woman who was living with her small daughter. It happened one day that a monk, a man, who was practicing came by the place where these two women, these two females were living. He said, I would like to practice here. So she agreed that that was all right and she even had a little hut or hermitage built for him. And so he sat Zazen inside this little hut.

[13:33]

Every day, the woman would bring food 20 years passed like this. About that time, after 20 years, the woman thought, well, he's probably pretty far along in his practice. And she said, So that time she had a granddaughter. Her granddaughter was about 20 years old. So then she had her granddaughter take the food to this monk. So then she had her granddaughter take the food to this monk.

[14:40]

So the old woman had, she told the granddaughter, after you give him his food, give him a hug and ask him, how does that feel? And then this was the answer the monk gave. So the image that he gave was of a rock, like a cliff, right? And out of that cliff, there was one pine tree growing up, okay? And not only that, the cold wind was blowing.

[15:43]

That's how he felt. So the meaning, of course, was that when the granddaughter hugged this guy, embraced him, that he felt like a cold rock with this... pine tree growing up. In other words, he didn't feel anything. In other words, he didn't feel any feelings towards her as a woman. So then the granddaughter returned to the grandmother's house. And she asked her granddaughter, well, what did he say? What happened when you hugged him?

[16:46]

And so the granddaughter related what happened. The grandmother got angry. She said, I was really mistaken. I fostered this hopeless monk. She drove him away. And not only that, she burnt down the little hut that he'd been living in. By the way, I'm wondering if hug is the right word. Maybe embrace is the better.

[17:51]

After all, we're in California, right? So embrace. Yeah, that's it. So that's the end of the story This is a story that has been passed down for about a thousand years What is the meaning of the story? So the monk said, well, I don't feel anything for you. It's just cold. When the

[18:59]

Grandmother heard that she got angry, chased him away, and burnt down his hut. So the question is, what would have been an appropriate response from the monk? I first thought that he should have said, I love you. And embraced her too. But then I thought, no, that wouldn't have been the right answer. I thought about that for a long time. What would have been the appropriate response in that situation? When I was young, I did ask a Zen master about this and he gave me this answer.

[20:02]

So one Zen master, now wait, I may have misunderstood this, but anyway, one Zen master, when I was young, he said, now this monk was enlightened. He was enlightened and so he He was not bothered or disturbed by this girl. And so, it wasn't the monk who was wrong, it was the grandmother who was wrong, this person said. This man, the woman had tried to tempt That monk, and that was wrong. But it seemed to me that if that was the correct answer, that this story would not have been passed down for 1,000 years.

[21:21]

That then, It is often said by some people that when we do Zazen that we should not think. Some teachers teach us whether we should not think when we are sitting Zazen. If that is the teaching we receive, then we would sit there and say, I shouldn't be thinking. I shouldn't be thinking. Or don't think. Or whatever. We say that to ourselves. Nevertheless, you are thinking about not thinking. If you think that you should not be doing something, then that means you are completely full, your head is completely full of that thought.

[22:38]

I'd like to speak about another story from China, an old story from China. This is also a very well-known story. I'm sure you, many of you know it. This is also a very well-known story. I'm sure you, many of you know it. One monk, when he was asked to express his understanding about practice, said that practice is like a bright mirror. And that practice is a matter of constantly keeping that mirror clean. This is the same as what I was just saying now about Zazen.

[23:43]

考えてはいけない考えてはいけないと自分の心に誇りがつかないようにつかないように So in the same way of thinking, well, I should not be thinking, this person is constantly wiping or cleaning that mirror to keep it from getting dusty. So Zazen then is being used like a wiping cloth to constantly keep the mind pure or clean. You are using Zazen like a broom. On the other hand, another monk, when he was asked to express his understanding, he said there is no mirror. There is no dust.

[24:45]

And so in that case, it's impossible for dust to collect anywhere. For a long time, I thought about both of these responses. Of course, in this story, dust represents something unpleasant or something dirty. What does it mean that dust would collect then? So then I began to look for something that dust would not collect on. So first of all I thought of becoming like a river.

[25:50]

If I was like a river then no matter how much dust settled on me, you would just get swept away. You would flow away. It would be swept away. But no matter how much the river water flows by, dust continues to settle in it. Next, I thought of being like the ocean. So if the dust were to enter the ocean it would just settle and become part of the ocean. Nevertheless it is a fact that dust does settle on the ocean. Then I thought well maybe I should become like the air. If it's just the air, air doesn't know where the dust is.

[26:59]

But even though we cannot see the dust with the eye, it is there. At the end, finally I thought I should be like the wind. If I was the wind, that would just blow the dust away. But all those ideas were a mistake. So the question then is, what is it that dust cannot rest on? That is to become one with the dust.

[28:02]

If everything in the world was dust, that would be to say that there is no dust. There is nothing that we could compare that was not dust. dust doesn't settle on dust or we can say dust does not become dust in this room there are men and there are women How would it be if there were only men in the world? Of course, if there were only men, that means there would be no women.

[29:06]

If there are no women, that also means there are no men. We only use the word men in opposition to the word women. This would be the same that if there were only women in this world, there would be no men. If there are no men, There are no women. What would the world be like if the world was completely white? There's no black.

[30:12]

If there's no black, there's no white. 分かると分からないも同じです。 This also applies to understanding and not understanding. 全部分からない、世界が全部分からないとしたら分かるがないんです。 分かるがないということは分からないがないと同じです。 If there is nothing understood that means that there is nothing not understood. In Buddhism we use the word giving or generosity.

[31:17]

Usually we think I'm giving you something. If it was only giving, then what? If there's no self, there's no other. returning to the koan that I mentioned earlier of the monk who was driven out and whose hut was burned down what if he had only been desire? if I want you that is to perceive the self

[32:23]

If there's no self, there's no other. We have the teaching in Buddhism that desire, or no, excuse me, that delusion is enlightenment. Imagine that we have some water in a cup and that this cup The water is cloudy, dirty. So you empty out the cup and you put in some clean water in order to make it clean. This is not the meaning of delusion is enlightenment. If the world was completely dirty, then there would be nothing clean.

[33:26]

If there's nothing clean, then there's nothing dirty. If it's just the thing itself, there's nothing in opposition. As you know, there was a Japanese teacher named Keisan Zenji. Keisan Zenji was asked by his master to explain reality. And this was Keisan's answer. This room is now lit with light, but imagine it was completely dark, pitch black.

[34:32]

He said, his feeling of reality was like a jet black ball rolling through this pitch black darkness. What is the meaning of this? If this ball were red or yellow or blue, then it would be in opposition to this room, which is black. If this ball were red or yellow or blue, then it would be in opposition to this room, which is black. If this ball was [...] black. If this ball was red or yellow or blue, then it would be in opposition to this room, which is black. If this ball was black. If this ball was red or yellow or blue, then it would be in opposition to this room, So a black ball rolling through a pitch black room is to describe a situation where there are no borders. Where that thing is one with the environment. To be one with the environment. That means there's no conflict or opposition.

[35:41]

To be one with the environment. What color could we use to dye black? We might think of yellow or green or red or blue. But actually, black is the color that cannot be dyed by other colors. It's not possible to make black any more of a dark color than black. The heart of Zen is one. So if you're thinking I will not think or I shouldn't think I won't think and so on this is unnecessary.

[36:48]

Leave thought as it is. Leave feelings as they are. So the story of the man who didn't feel anything for the woman was a case where he was perceiving the woman. If he was completely one with the desire, there would be no object. No self, no other. If it's just the desire itself, it will, in time, disappear.

[37:55]

This is the same as during Zazen. Certainly there are many thoughts arising and disappearing. That's the end of my talk. So there is time for questions or comments. If you have something to say, feel free to inquire or comment. Please. Is it equally a violation of the precept if you're a man to perceive that the other person is a man? Yes. If you sit there, you're a man.

[38:57]

If you're a man, you're a man. [...] What do you mean? It really doesn't make any difference. I mean, in any case, you are making a distinction. It doesn't really make any difference.

[40:15]

so imagine that somebody is walking outside we could all hear it maybe we think it's a woman maybe we think it's a man but for that for a person who does not hear well that person does not hear anything going by. In that case, that person's mind is not disturbed at all. What if in the case of, say, someone objectively speaking is walking by, that person perceiving is perceiving only those sounds in relation to other sounds? It's within the breaking of the precepts. He meant it was just another sound. Right.

[41:19]

Yes. [...] That's a good thing. [...] So if you were just hearing that sound of somebody walking by, like the sound of the wind or the sound of the rain or whatever, this is a good direction to go. He's talking about the mind which is moved by something we hear.

[42:22]

We like it. We don't like it. I want more of it. I don't want any more of it. And so on. All of these attachments that come up. But in this case of somebody walking by, we all have ears. It's not the ear itself which determines or decides anything about that sound. It's the mind which is really the one, the thing that discriminates about those sounds. There's a book about the tradition of the lamp.

[43:43]

It's people recognizing each other. What's being recognized? Is there a discrimination there? So, that's the case. That's the case. That's the case. In Zen, we do not really say that the teacher recognizes the student. In Zen, we do not really say that the teacher recognizes the student.

[44:44]

In Zen, we do not really say that the teacher recognizes the student. Except in the usual way we think of this in the world is that a teacher would recognize a student after they have done a certain amount of study and so on. If someone is writing their PhD thesis, for example, then his teacher or the teachers who are working with him, they read the thesis and they say, yes, you have passed. Shakyamuni Buddha, in the same way, authorized or verified his disciple Makakasho.

[45:54]

Mahakashoppa [...] And that has been passed down to the present day, 2500 years later. But returning to the very beginning, who was it that authorized or verified Shakyamuni Buddha? Who was the teacher of Shakyamuni Buddha? There was nobody, no teacher who could authorize or pass him.

[47:09]

Who was it that verified that the enlightenment of the Buddha was authentic? This is different than in the usual sense we think in the world where a teacher verifies that the student has learned a certain amount of information. So the question then, who was it that, now the Buddha is dead, but who was it that gave, who authorized or passed There are people who have verified the realization of Shakyamuni Buddha. That was Makakasho.

[48:14]

The Buddha verified Makakasho. The Buddha verified Makakasho's understanding. At the same time, Makakasho verified the Buddha's realization. So both of them were involved in this authorization or this verification. And this is the way that the Zen has been passed on, this transmission. That the teacher authorizes the student, the student authorizes, or verifies the teacher. The teacher authorizes the student authorizes, or verify the teacher.

[49:16]

The teacher authorizes the student authorizes, or verify the teacher. So when the teacher verifies the understanding of the student at that time the student verifies the realization of the teacher. So when we talk about the transmission of the Dharma it's this interaction between student and teacher.現在に師匠が So he's saying the same thing. So it's a matter of, first of all, the student, or excuse me, the teacher verifying the student, then the student verifying the teacher. Since this is all

[50:21]

lined up together in one line, going all the way back to the Buddha, that means that when the student verifies the teacher, that student is verifying the understanding of Shakyamuni Buddha. The only people who can verify the Buddha are those who are living right now. That's his answer. Any other questions here? Please. Thank you very much for your deep teaching. I wanted to ask a more mundane question. You've been traveling in the United States and seeing different places. And I wonder if you could give us your impressions of what you see when you see that in this country.

[51:24]

I've been in the U.S. in the U.S. in the U.S. in America. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. Well, I've been using some stories from China when Zen was just beginning to build up in China.

[52:38]

And that's my impression that here in America, it's a little bit like that time in China when Zen was really starting to take off in China. with the students and the teachers training together and asking questions and so on On the other hand in Japan where we have lots of Zen very few people I really have deep questions about Zen in this sense. So I had the impression there's lots of activity, Zen activity here in America.

[53:44]

So in Japan, it's like the story of the monk. It's like a rock, a rock cliff with this pine tree growing out of it, very cold. Here, there's lots of desire. How do you practice non-dualistic? [...]

[54:46]

How do you practice non-dualistic? [...] That's the most difficult question. Dogen Zenji said that to study the way of Buddha is to study the self. So when you have a question like, well, what should we do?

[56:12]

Or how should we do it? And so on. When there's only that question, At that time you have forgotten the self. There is no self. So it's important just to be the question or the doubt. I don't see any more hands. Anybody? Is this the end? It's okay. We can wrap it up here. I wonder if you would tell us a little bit about his temple in Japan, how he practices.

[57:17]

How do you practice this? How do you practice this? My temple is really in between a big city and the countryside. My teacher's teaching was not a matter of doing Zazen and reading sutras. His idea of practice was work to work. So all he thought practice was was sweeping the garden outside picking the weeds and cleaning the temple.

[58:18]

But I didn't like to clean very much. There was nothing I could do though. But if we do clean then of course that area becomes clean. For someone who sees that clean place they feel let's say the people who are visiting the temple they feel good because it's clean. If they feel good about it, I also felt good about it too. Everything becomes clean. The other people, me and the place. I thought that was a great practice. So I really feel settled now when I'm cleaning.

[59:24]

But there's no end to cleaning. Even if I clean the outside garden, then leaves fall, more weeds are appearing and so on. If I sweep them, then they fall again. It's just a continuation of that. There's no end to it. When I shave my head, when my hair grows out. It grows out, I shave it. It grows out and I shave it. Sometimes that's very bothersome.

[60:33]

I thought it would really best be best if it didn't grow. Then I wouldn't have to shave. But then I realized that It's because I'm alive that my hair is growing. If I'm alive, my hair will grow. So that's to say that when we're living, all sorts of thoughts arise. In other words, we shouldn't dislike these thoughts. What kind of practice is created by men and women practicing together?

[62:09]

I think this is a big question as you know from India In China and Japan, the tradition was that men and women trained separately. One of the big reasons for that was that the idea that for men, women were bothersome in some way. And of course, that would apply for the other things, the other way around, that for women who are practicing, that men were bothersome.

[63:19]

I don't know if bothersome is the right word, perhaps, you know, disturbing or something in that... Distracting. Distracting, okay, that's good. Distracting. Right. So I think the reason that that happened was that there was the idea, let's put it that way, the idea that men or women would become captured by the other in terms of they would be distracted too much, in other words. Shugyoでは in other words in their practice they tried to keep things away from them that would distract them so as you know there was the idea of

[64:34]

So, no television, no music, no newspaper, no internet, and so on. They tried to shut out, in other words, those things that would distract practice. I don't think it's a bad relationship. Personally, I think the idea that men and women would disturb each other is not a mistake, but it's strange. Not quite right. Let's put it that way. That's what I'm saying. That's what I'm saying. We have the, is it called the universal dedication, the fueko, that we often read, a short one, often done in the evening and so on, where we return the merit of reading these sutras to all living beings, right?

[65:56]

So that, All living beings can realize Buddhahood. Something like that. So the idea is that both self and all other beings realize or become Buddha. So the idea is that both self and all other beings realize or become Buddha. So I think in that situation that we should think of men and women both realizing Buddhahood. So rather than being in conflict or opposition to each other, I think they should work together

[66:56]

to make that happen, to realize this Buddha nature. So, men and women can be a temptation for each other, and they can also cooperate and help each other, support each other. And I guess the next part of that question would be... I mean, not necessarily just with men and women, but with all temptations. If you put yourself in a position where you're removing them, isn't that kind of similar to saying the world is all white, that you have no opportunity to find equanimity, because there's no longer two things to choose from? Hmm. Yes. I mean, I don't know.

[68:21]

I don't think that practice really is just a matter of thinking that everything is one. It really begins from the realization that everything is one. Everybody is different. This way, this way, and so on. But that difference is equal in the sense that I think it's necessary That we recognize and accept other people's differences.

[69:55]

He's married. He's married. That's a good question too. I'm married also. I have four children but this is something that happened when my son was about six years old. At that time a Frenchman

[70:58]

came to my temple. At that time, so I showed him around the temple and my son was following around afterwards. My wife was there too. After I showed him around the temple, he said to me, Who is this child? Whose child is this? I said he's my son. At that point he asked is it alright for Japanese priests to marry? So, right.

[72:09]

So, right. So, right. So, right. At that time, my son said to me, He said, does that mean that I shouldn't have been born? Traditionally, monks did not get married, I told this Frenchman. From all the way back to Shakyamuni Buddha. I think the reason for that was they felt that by being married that the wife and children and so on would be an obstacle in their practice.

[73:19]

I didn't want to do that. I wanted to do that. But I saw it in a different way that my family would be my sangha. That as a group we would practice together. At that time he said the Frenchman said I think that's the ideal. I think that's the ideal. So I had inspired then that to have it be that my wife, my children, those people who were the closest to me would be believers in Buddhism.

[74:26]

I thought that if they were not able to become Buddhist believers that I would not be able to get other people to believe in Buddha. I could practice by myself. But I feel that through the support of my family that I can do even better practice. As it works out now, I am helped, or let's say they helped me in my practice, my wife and children. So in terms of my own practice, I'm very grateful for my wife and children. I'm sure that I will be grateful from now on as well.

[75:36]

Thank you.

[75:54]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_47.82