Okay. Let's see. Oh, why don't we say our names? And I think there's... Is there a name? Anybody in the class? Linda. Carol. Virginia. Brooks. David. Amanda. Virginia. Rick. Paul. Scott. Sue. Scott. Liz. John. Lennon. Swan. Judith. Linda. Chris. Walter. Bill. Martha. Anne. And how many of you weren't here last week? Two. Two. Two. Okay. Well, what we did last week was kind of look at historically how the Prajnaparamita in Eight Thousand Lines fits in with the other Prajnaparamita sutras and a little bit about the history of it.

[01:07]

Anyway, are there any questions from last week or clarifications about any of that? I thought we could move right into our memorization. How many of you memorized a four-line couplet? Yeah? Because part of the class is going to be to memorize Prajnaparamita, part of the text, and recite. I know that these came a little bit late, but we're doing two things, and we have two texts here. One is this verse, these verses, which is the Prajnaparamita, which is the storehouse of precious virtues. That's the Ratna-Guna-Samajaya-Gata. So that's kind of one Prajnaparamita. It's not a sutra, but scripture that we're dealing with.

[02:12]

And the other is the Ashtasahasrika, which is the Prajnaparamita in Eight Thousand Lines. So that's another one. We're kind of doing both together. I think there could be a separate class on either one, but they're kind of combined in this book. And the verses are very, a lot of them are very short and easy to memorize, so I thought we could memorize the verses rather than try to memorize big passages of the sutra, although we could do that through big paragraphs. So why don't we start with reciting, and I'll recite first. This is the opening, Chapter One, the opening verse. Let's see if I can do it. Call forth as much as you can of love, of respect, and of faith. Remove the obstructing defilements and clear away all of your taints. Listen to the perfect wisdom of the gentle Buddhas, taught for the wheel of the world, for heroic spirits intended.

[03:22]

Good. Do you want to try? Good. When free from doubt, a bodhisattva carries on his practice. For skill in wisdom is not to dwell. All dharmas are without, all dharmas are not really there, their essential nature is emptiness. To comprehend that is perfect wisdom.

[04:24]

The practice of perfection is perfect. Now this is verse 26 of Chapter One. I'm not sure if I can add it on the first two lines of the next verse. He wisely knows that all that lives is unproduced as he himself is. He knows that all that is, no more exists than he or other beings. The unproduced and the produced are not distinguished. That is the practice of wisdom, the highest perfection. All words for things in use in this world must be left behind. All that is produced and made must be transcended.

[05:26]

Thank you. Anyone else who wants to give it a try? Okay, so let's continue with that assignment for everyone to memorize a verse from the Ratna Guru Samjhaya Gatha. And did you get a chance to read Chapter One? Yes, so you read through Chapter One? Why don't we, they're short, you know, the chapters are really not too long. Why don't we say that we can read Chapter One and Two. Actually, let's read Chapter One in class today and then we can memorize from Chapter Two for next time. How about that? So this is what I would hope we would do today. One thing is I wanted to talk a little bit about the characters that come up in the sutra and in the verses. So we all know kind of what the terrain is, who the speakers are and try to read.

[06:37]

Part of the class is to read and recite, actually hear the sutra. I think part of the problem is there's all these sutras and sometimes we never get around to actually reading them, you know. So I wanted to try and actually read them out loud. So let's see. Why don't we, let me just talk a little bit about the characters who are going to come upon just so we know who these guys are. So the main speakers in the 8,000 line are Subhuti, Shariputra and Ananda. And we pretty much know who Ananda is. You know, Buddha's attendant for 30 years and he was the one who was the treasurer. They call him the treasurer of knowledge because he could memorize, he could hear 60,000 verses. And, you know, after hearing it, remember them. And he was kind of amazing in that way.

[07:39]

So this is Ananda, legendary though he may be. Right, that's right, that's right. And then we have Subhuti. And Subhuti, the sutras themselves have a lot of, because they were memorized, there's a lot of repetition, there's stock phrases, there's repetition and things. Because that will help you come upon a certain thing and you can memorize it once and then it keeps coming up in different places, certain stock metaphors. And similar to Homer, I was reading that in the Odyssey, 30% of it are stock repetitive kinds of phrases. So with an oral tradition, I think this is something that you come upon. So Subhuti was one of the Buddha's closest disciples. Subhuti and Shariputra were the arhats who were closest to the Buddha. And Subhuti was known as the foremost in loving-kindness and friendliness, maitri, loving-kindness, which is a virtue, definitely a virtue and was kind of a minor virtue in earlier Buddhism.

[08:53]

And then it became very much, the reason why Subhuti is so important is this practice of loving-kindness and compassion in the Mahayana gets to be very, very important. The Bodhisattva's way, compassion is very important. So Subhuti is drawn out and the Buddha speaks through Subhuti. So often Subhuti is speaking through the Buddha's might or through the, you know, the Buddha kind of gives him the power to speak. And it's the Buddha's words. And an interesting thing about this that Dr. Lancaster brought up was that all these earlier sutras were supposed to be what Ananda had actually heard the Buddha say. But this, when the 8000 line was being created or written, there was this very, there was a lot of scriptures written during this time.

[09:59]

The Lotus Sutra was written just about the same time. And, but this was, you know, 400 years after the Buddha lived. So how are you going to make these be sutras? But the fact is that these disciples speak through the Buddha's might. And so it is the words of the Buddha. And the accepting of this as a truth that the Buddha can speak through these disciples through the years made these just as legitimate sutras as these earlier ones that have, that Ananda heard. So this is a kind of important point in terms of all these other Mahayana things that came later, you know, after the Buddha had died. So is that the same as in Christianity with the New Testament? You know, they always say that they were divinely inspired or, I mean, it sounds sort of similar.

[11:02]

Yeah. Well, I think for later writings, there's always this thrust to have it go back to the source, you know. So this is, it's a kind of convention, you know, they do start out, thus I have heard with Ananda as if he was there. But there are usually dialogues, the Mahayana sutras are dialogues between the Buddha and these different disciples who ask questions and get answers. But the Buddha may not be speaking, but yet through the Buddha's might, I don't know if it's exactly divine. It's not divine revelation, but it's the Buddha's omniscience, you know, knows his mind, you know, they'll say the Buddha knew his mind and that kind of thing. So I don't know if it's exactly divine, but there is some kind of, what shall I say, sort of paranormal kind of sense to it. So that's Subhuti. So Subhuti gets kind of pulled out as a kind of a major character in the Prajnaparamita when he was not so in the earlier.

[12:08]

And then Shariputra, you know, in the Heart Sutra it says, O Shariputra, form is not different from emptiness. Shariputra in the early sutras was the foremost of those who understood wisdom. And so we're talking now about the perfection of wisdom, this transcendental wisdom, the wisdom that's gone beyond. And Shariputra in these sutras is a little bit of a fall guy. He supposedly is the foremost of those in wisdom, but he doesn't understand this emptiness. He understands the earlier wisdom, which either in the later sutras it's the Abhidharma, the wisdom of the Abhidharma. So Shariputra is often asking the questions and doesn't really know what's going on. He's a little bit bewildered. And Subhuti, who is relatively minor, but is this compassionate guy and friendly person, he has all the answers and is basically the Buddha's voice.

[13:13]

So those are kind of the conventions. So when you know who's speaking, you know kind of what's going on underneath what they're trying to put forth. And then some of the other people or beings that we meet are these gods, you know, the devas, chakra, who is... There's these different worlds. There's the world we're in, which is the world of sense, desire. And then there's the form world and then there's the formless world. There's the triple world. You know, we talk about the triple world. And there are these various gods who are from the Brahman, Brahmanical mythology, I guess. And they come down to listen to the words of the Buddha and they're always shown to be, you know, like they don't know so much and they come to listen.

[14:14]

And they're always taught all these things. And chakra, who is king of the 33, these are things that come up. Chakra is king of the 33 and he's addressed as Kaushika because he's involved with a certain clan called the Kushika clan. So they call him Chakra or Kaushika. He often asks some questions and chakra has a lot of things to say sometimes. So anyway, there's these various beings who come to hear, who come up in the sutras. We'll see when we come to it. Okay. Yes. It's okay. I have a question concerning historical mythology. Yes. And it came to my mind because you mentioned Kona. Yes. Like oral traditions. So my question is, is this form of dialogue, which as far as I understand is very important in Buddhist sutra, have people investigated in possible connection with European activity?

[15:23]

I'm thinking of course of the Greek philosophy and the dialogue being a very similar form to people talk about things. You know, there's an article... It's about the same time. Yes. There's an article that Dr. Kansa wrote where he postulates some early connection between early Christians and maybe these Prashnaparamita people. And so would that be Roman maybe? Or Christians? Yes, because there's this place where they talk about the seven seals. And it's also in, I guess, the New Testament, something about seven seals. And it doesn't come up any other place. Anyway, he has a theory. So I think there's been some investigation of that, but I don't personally know. But I can bring that article to you. You can read a little bit about some of these earlier contacts that we don't know about.

[16:25]

I'd like to read it. Okay. It's in the book, Thirty Years of Buddhist Study by Kansa. We have it in the library. And there's a lot of these essays about the Prashnaparamita and things he's done. Okay. So let's read chapter one of the verses, and then we'll try and read chapter one of the 8,000 line. And then we can pass the book around. Okay. So let's see. How many of this are... Why don't we do... You know, they're broken up into these little sections. But some are longer than others. So let's see. Yeah. Yeah. Does anyone else need one? Anybody else? Virginia. Virginia, let's see.

[17:31]

Actually, one of them is the kind of... I think this is the original, which doesn't have a cover. But I think this is... Yeah. So... Yeah, you need to buy one? Yeah, you can buy that. I think... Why don't you hold on to that. So, whatever you want to look up. So, someone counted numbers, and there's enough... Well, it says there's 28. 28 little... Okay, well, should we do that? All right. So let's just go by the numbers, so each person will get like a four-line thing. And who would like to start? Scott, why don't you start, and we'll just go from... We'll just kind of circle around. Call forth as much as you can...

[18:35]

Actually, why don't we start with the... Why don't you read the homage? Or I'll read the homage. Homage to all the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. Thereupon the Lord, in order to gladden the Four Assemblies, and to further lighten up this perfection of wisdom, preached at that time the following verses. Call forth as much as you can of love, of respect, and of faith. Remove the obstructing defilements, and clear away all your pains. Listen to the perfect wisdom of the gentle Buddhas. Talk for the wheel of the world, for heroic spirits intended. Now, we'll go to that next. So, Paul. The river is all in this rose-apple island, which caused the flowers to grow, the fruits, the herbs, and trees. They all derive from the mind of the king of the Nagas, from the dragon residing in Lake Anupatata, his magical power. Just so, whatever dharmas the Jinas disciples establish,

[19:45]

whatever they teach, whatever effort they explain, concerning the work of the holy, which leads to the fullness of bliss, and also the fruit of this work, it is that the target is doing. For whatever the Jina has taught, the guide to the dharma, his pupils, if genuine, have well been trained in it. For direct experience derived from their training, they teach it, they're teaching stanzas, they're teaching stanzas that come from the mind of the Buddhas, and not their own power. No wisdom can we get hold of, no highest perfection, no bodhisattva, no thought, no enlightenment either. When told of this, not bewildered, and in no way anxious, a bodhisattva courses in the well-grounded wisdom, well-grounded wisdom. Informed in feeling, will, perception, and awareness,

[20:50]

nowhere in them they find a place to rest in. Without a home they wander, dharmas never hold them, nor do they grasp at them. The Jinas bodhi they are bound to gain. The wanderer, Shranika, in his gnosis of the truth, could find no basis, though the skandhas had not been undone. Just so, the bodhisattva, when he comprehends the dharmas as he should, does not retire into blessed rest. In wisdom, then, he dwells. What is this wisdom, whose and whence, he queries. And then he finds that all these dharmas are entirely empty. Uncowed and fearless in the face of that discovery, not far from bodhi is that bodhi being, then. To course in the skandhas in form, in feeling, in perception, will, and so on, and fail to consider them wisely,

[21:51]

or to imagine these skandhas as being empty, means to course in the sign, the track of non-production ignored. But when he or she does not course in form, in feeling or perception, in will or consciousness, but wanders without home, remaining unaware of coursing firm in wisdom, his or her thoughts on non-production, then the best of all the calming trances cleaves to him or her. Through that, the bodhisattva now dwells tranquil in himself. His future buddhahood assured by antecedent buddhas, whether absorbed in trance or whether outside it, he minds not. For of things as they are, he knows the essential original nature. Coursing, thus, he or she courses in the wisdom of the siddhantas, and yet he or she does not apprehend the dharma in which he or she courses.

[22:52]

This coursing, he or she wisely knows as no-coursing, that is his or her practice of wisdom, the highest perfection. What exists not, that non-existent the foolish imagine? Non-existence as well as existence they fashion. As dharmic facts, existence and non-existence are both not real. A bodhisattva goes forth when wisely he or she knows this. If she knows the five skandhas as like an illusion, but makes not illusion one thing and the skandhas another, if freed from the notion of multiple things, she courses in peace, then that is her practice of wisdom, the highest perfection. Those with good teachers, as well as deep insight, cannot be frightened of hearing another's weak tenets. Those with bad teachers, who can be misled by others,

[23:55]

are ruined hereby, as an unbaked pot in contact with moisture. What is the reason why the speaker of bodhisattvas desires to extinguish all attachment, to cut it off, true non-attachment, for the body of the genius is the future thought? Beings who strive for body are they therefore called? What is the reason why great beings are so called? They rise to the highest place above a great number of people, and of a great number of people they cut off mistaken views. That is why we come to speak of them as great beings. Great as a giver, as a thinker, as a power, she mounts upon the vessel of the supreme genius. Armed with the great armor, she'll subdue Mara the artful.

[24:56]

These are the reasons why great beings are so called. This message shows for all beings as like an illusion, resembling a great crowd of people, conjured up for the crossroads. By a magician who then cuts off many thousands of heads, she knows this whole living world is a mock show, and yet remains without fear. Form, perception, feeling, will and awareness are ununited, never bound, cannot be freed, uncovered in his thought he marches on to his body. That for which is the highest of them is the highest of all pervs. What then again is the vessel that leads to the body? Mounted upon it one guides to nirvana of all beings. Great is that vessel, immense, vast like the vastness of space.

[25:57]

Those who travel upon it are carried to safety, delight and ease. Thus, transcending the world, he eludes our apprehensions. He goes to nirvana, no one can say where he went to. The fire is extinguished, but where, do we ask, has it gone to? Likewise, how can we find him who has found the rest of the vessel? The bodhisattva's past, her future and her present must be witnessed. Time's three dimensions nowhere touch him. Quite pure she is, free from conditions, unimpeded. That is his practice of wisdom, the highest perfection. Why is bodhisattva's coursing thus reflect on non-production, and yet while doing so engender in themselves the way to optimize compassion? And yet while doing so engender in themselves the great compassion,

[27:07]

which is, however, free from any notion of being. Thereby they practice wisdom, the highest perfection. But when the notion of suffering and beings leads him to pain, suffering, I shall remove the wheel of the world, I shall work. Beings are then imagined to stop with imagine. The practice of wisdom, the highest perfection is lacking. Everybody's read? He wisely knows that all that lives is unproduced as he himself is. She knows that all that is no more exists than she or any beings. The unproduced and the produced are not distinguished. That is the practice of wisdom, the highest perfection. Anybody? All words for things in use in this world must be left behind. All things produced and made must be transcended.

[28:10]

The deathless, the supreme, incomparable gnosis is then one. That is the sense in which we speak of perfect wisdom. When free from doubts, the Bodhisattva carries on her practice. As skilled in wisdom, she is known to dwell. All dharmas are not really there. Their essential or original nature is empty. To comprehend that is the practice of wisdom, perfection supreme. What does wheel mean? Wheel means like for the common good. Gnosis is related to cognition. Prajna, the J-M-A of Prajna, that is etymologically related to gnosis.

[29:18]

Wisdom, cognition, and... You know, when Rez has been talking about the three afflictions, the karma avarana and the kushala avarana, then there is the jnaya avarana, J-N-E-Y-A, the afflictions covering the consciousness. So it has to do with consciousness. So, when they talk about the Gnostic Gospels... Yeah, yeah. Can I ask you a question? Yeah, yeah. I have a phrase that I just... Books you read, it could find the basis, though the skandhas had not been undone. The skandhas being undone. Oh, I'm sorry. Copy page ten, seven. Copy page ten, ten. No longer undone. Though the skandhas had not been undone, Shrenika was a non-Buddhist who, you know, upon hearing the teaching of emptiness,

[30:25]

kind of went over to believing. Though the skandhas had not been undone. Where does that mean? Seven, on page ten, up at the top. If they are undone, does that mean, like, taking apart particular skandhas, and not undone means not having a family? I'm not sure whether it means... It could find no basis, though the skandhas had not been undone. So the skandhas were still arising, were still there, but he could find no basis in them? Just so the bodhisattva, when he comprehends the dharmas as he should, does not retire into lesser... You know... There's a note, by the way.

[31:26]

Oh, what does the note say? It says, He was a wanderer, non-Buddhist ascetic, whose conversations with the Buddha from one section of the... It's unpronounceable. On one occasion, Shrenaka raised the question of the true self, which he identified with the Tathagata. The Buddha told him that the Tathagata could not be found in the skandhas, outside the skandhas, or in the absence of the skandhas. In a supreme act of faith, Shrenaka was willing to accept the Tathagata in spite of the fact that he could not be related to any of the skandhas. So maybe that's what the undone is. He could find no basis, though the skandhas had not been undone. It could mean that he saw some insight into that matter, even though he himself did not actually transcend it. The skandhas and siddhas were empty, but he still saw that they had no basis anyway.

[32:29]

Well, it says a supreme act of faith, so he took it on faith. The teaching of emptiness is this ungraspable thing. So the Buddha says it's not in the skandhas, it's not outside the skandhas. So where are you left to stand? So now what? It's in there that you have this, that faith arose for him, and that he accepted it. I'd actually like to just stop for a minute and talk about the teaching of emptiness, what it is that's being brought up here over and over. One thing also is that this repeated line where it says, this is the perfection of wisdom, the highest... Let's see. You read it once, Lena.

[33:36]

That is the practice of wisdom, the highest perfection. Yeah, that little phrase in chapters one and two kind of links together. The first, I think, it's 44 or so verses, and there's some feeling that that phrase makes a kind of body as the oldest part that has that repeated phrase. This is the practice of wisdom, the highest perfection. So, would anyone like to attempt to say what they think emptiness is, or what we're talking about here? Or would that be a good idea to talk about? Yes. The lyric refers to things as being empty, and saying that they're empty of inherent existence, that there is no solid, independently existing entity within. Us, or plants, or anything else, all phenomena are empty of inherent existence,

[34:41]

and that teaching ties in with the teaching of dependent arising, since it said then that since all things arise dependently, then all things are empty of inherent existence. Well said, Subuddhi. So, did you follow that? No. Okay. You know, we're talking, registering these teachings of nāgārṣa and dependent co-arising. So, the two in Madhyamaka philosophy, and this is like the way beginnings, this predates the Madhyamaka, but it's the earliest kind of sutras that bring this out. So, inherent existence, if something was inherently existent, and existed by itself, then, for example, let's say there was like a cup,

[35:48]

let's say, so like this, we say here's this cup, and it exists all by itself from its own side. It's a cup that is in the world. There it is, this cup. But as soon as you, if that was true, if there was something with inherent existence, this cup could never not be or change, because if it changed, the change would depend on something, either it fell down and hit something hard that broke it, or got worn out, and this changed because the color changed, because it was used a lot, or it got chipped, or whatever, it would begin to change. And that would show that it's not inherently existent all by itself. It's dependent, it's interdependent, because it's impermanent, right? So, but we have this way of thinking about it

[36:48]

that if we believe that it exists right there, there it is, all by itself, you know, that's the way we think, and whenever we look at people or objects, our usual way of thinking is we impute inherent existence all over the place, all the time. So, now, the thing about the dependent co-arising is that this cup is empty of an inherent existence, therefore, it's dependent, it's got to be a dependent, it's got to be connected with other things, and it just so happens that it's connected with, well, it's the entire universe right here, and it's, and we can, like this glaze, I don't know very much about glazes, is there a potter here? Yeah. Tamaku.

[37:48]

When? It's called Tamaku. Tamaku glaze, this dark black and brown, and the clay came from the earth, right? And what is the clay? It's, you know, this... It's the bones. Bones and plant life and rocks. The sun is there and the water is there. The sun, the water, everything is in... Clouds are there. Right. And then you have, then somebody had to dig it out of the ground and bring it somewhere, and then the potter and the wheel, whoever invented the potter's wheel, I don't know, but some wonderful person. So that's all included, and the mother of the potter and the father of the potter and all their ancestors, and then the person who fired it and did the kiln and invented kilns, and then you get it to the store, and then the storekeeper, and the fact that we can see it, it's because there's light and Thomas Edison, and, you know, it's... And everything is here. You cannot...

[38:49]

Every single thing is here. The fact that you see it and then I feel it, you know, you can taste it and stuff, it's everything. It's absolutely everything, this cup. So... Wow. So it's just... Which is why... It's a bargain, isn't it? Which is why we take care of everything, right? We pick up the cup with two hands, and we do it carefully, and we set it down, and we... Because we're not talking cheapo cups from Japantown. This is the entire cosmos. Right? And the same is true of each and every one of you and everything. That's the teaching of emptiness and dependent co-arising. You see how they come up together? The emptiness of an inherent existence and the dependent co-arising,

[39:51]

and then there's a third. It's like a three... It's a triangle, and the third is the middle way. The teaching of the middle way is that emptiness, independent co-arising are... You know, come up together. Pericular. Well, I must say, now I have a deep problem. A deep problem, oh. Speak your deep problem loudly. I try. Thank you. It has been a deep problem of mine for a long time, but it has been growing for the past few weeks since I came here. Like, um... I can share that. I can understand that. But, of course, I already think you know what I'm going to say. This is cognition. This is maybe also what's interesting to consider in translating that. Making emptiness into a cognitive thing,

[40:54]

a philosophy very much parallel to how we used to understand the philosophy of the people still doing the West. You understand this. Your explanation is wonderful. It's very sweet. But it's this cognition. Well, my problem, of course, is with Redd's teaching. It's much more... There's this wall in front of me right now. Because, of course, as he also says here, it's free from that. Emptiness is free from that, or beyond, or outside. You know all these terms. So... Free from cognition? Outside of cognition. I think. I don't know. So... Well, maybe I would, first of all, like to state my problem. It's becoming more and more virulent these days. But I would also like to ask you,

[41:56]

Linda, how... And I'm amazed by the ease with which you do what you do, which I admire and recognize, but... How is it that you... You don't seem to share this... Well... Contradiction, let's say. There's also the emptiness of emptiness. You know, it's like what I just described is... I remember the first time... See, for... You know how I said last week that the word emptiness, I couldn't stand it, you know? It made me sort of sick, you know? Right. I... I can relate. Because it was like a wall, and it would get me angry, kind of, because I didn't know what they were talking about, and what are they bothering me with this for, and how about Zazen, and... Like that. I mean... So... The... The...

[42:58]

These particular teachings and that particular explanation kind of gave me a kind of... Oh! You know, like this glimpse into some whole other way of viewing everything, you know? And... It... And you can... And this is an analytical... You can analyze and study in that way using your intellectual capacities. But until you... Until you realize the non-inherent existence of self, you know, the lack of inherent existence, which is described as water poured into water, you know, when you realize it thoroughly through Darjana Marga, which is the path of seeing,

[44:00]

when you see it, it's not like the explanation anymore that you're following and kind of get intellectually, but you see. That's the point at which you... You... It's kind of... You can't go back. You can't... It's irreversible once you see the lack of inherent existence. So, I feel like this is a kind of... For me anyway, it's... It shifts things in a certain way. It's, you know, you could call it sweet or you could call it... Whatever, but it... For me, it was a very new way of looking at kind of the world and it was very... It was kind of fresh and also a little bit scary, you know? So, through

[45:01]

this thing about making new liberative pathways in your brain, we can actually use the analytical faculty to look at emptiness or attempt to analyze in this way to the kind of nth degree, which can can be... can shake you up a little bit, in which case you go back to stabilizing calm or maybe concentration practice or calming practices until you're ready to kind of take another glimpse, you know? So, self over there, you know? Each thing. So, I don't know if that addresses what you brought up, but... Yes, it does.

[46:09]

It does. Sue, you had your question, your hand up. Well, it was actually a little related to Barrett's, but just the word emptiness just immediately suggests a great yawning void that's going to swallow me up and bring me down or something. But if I think of it, if I just keep thinking of this, to articulate the emptiness of inherent existence and coming back to that, and then it seems as though the interconnectedness is almost almost synonymous with emptiness. I'm just trying to sort of warm up emptiness and make it a kind of almost like a comforting thing. I mean, I remember Tia once said to me, Oh, well, I feel okay because I believe in emptiness. And I thought, wow, she believes in emptiness. It must be pretty hot stuff then, not this cold void.

[47:10]

Well, you know, the translation of shunyata, shunyata emptiness, it's been sometimes translated as void and nothing and that kind of thing, which tends to fall off. And the danger, of course, with this emptiness teaching, which is why it isn't often kind of the first thing you give somebody, you give them stabilizing, calm practices, you know, rather than, you know, the fact that they don't exist. It's not very helpful if somebody comes to Green Gulch for the first time to start out with that. So you have them sit down and follow their breath and eat and drink moderately and all those things, right? And then, when you're kind of calm enough, then you can kind of be what? You are basically empty. Right. So, so the danger with it, with the emptiness teaching, and you find this all over the place, refuting this,

[48:12]

is that it falls into nihilism, you know, nihilism, nihilism. Well, oh! Which is? Which is, there ain't nothing, it's nil, you know, it doesn't, oh, so nothing exists, there's no one here, all these people, they don't exist, well, I can do what I want or I can do anything I want to them because they don't really exist. You know, you can fall into that, right? Can't you just feel your mind kind of going that way if you're in a bad mood? I don't see, like, I don't, when you just explained it, it's like, it's not, to me, what I heard was, it's not saying that we're empty, it's that we're empty, yeah, that we're empty of just this small existence. That's right. Right. Right. But when you read, you know,

[49:12]

what we just read about, you know, there's no this and no that, or that. I don't understand, like, when I read this, Yes. I barely understand every other sentence, I mean, you know, it's like, and until you explain it, Well, see, that's the thing. It's just sort of, I sit here and I go, okay, you know, one of these days maybe a sentence will make sense, or, you know, Yeah. reveal itself or something, and that's how I feel about a lot of... Yeah. Well, don't, as, you know, don't, just let it come in, you know, just let it go in, and don't worry about it so much, and, and if you commit it to memory, you know, if you memorize a little, like one of those ones that feels very obtruse, obtuse? Obtruse. Both. Obtruse. If you memorize one of those, then it's inside and it kind of begins to work

[50:13]

on you in a different way, you know, and then you get to turn it and you can barely memorize it because you don't even know what, you know, what they're getting at. So... Like, I went through, when I was trying to think of which one I would, uh, memorize, well, I don't understand. Maybe I could find one in here that I don't understand, and I didn't, so, maybe now I'll do one I don't understand. Yeah, try, try to do one you... Which is all of it. Let's see, there is, um, a couple hands, Scott, you, you were asking, you wanted something, you... I was going to say that, um, the teaching on emptiness is really central to what made the Buddha the Buddha. I mean, he, he realized all the highest teachings, teachings that, that the Brahmanism could teach and mastered them and realized he was enlightened. And... What was the last thing you said? And... Mastered them. Even by, even by mastering the highest teachings that Hinduism, Brahmanism could teach, he still wasn't enlightened. And,

[51:14]

and when he sat down to finally, you know, to finally do it, and finally did it, um, on the final watch, the, the thing that turned him into Buddha was his insight into emptiness, all beings of impending existence and, and the condition of co-production. and when you read the sutras about that, you see that the Buddha actually spent weeks after his enlightenment in what he did, nothing but going over and over again, back, looking forwards, this whole matter of how he saw the emptiness of, of existence, the, the emptiness of inherent existence and how that make all things dependent, arising, and he went through it time and time again so that he could, could in fact turn this teaching that was so abstruse into something that he could talk about later with other people. That was

[52:14]

he, that was that was actually the key thing for the Buddha and his realization that made him the Buddha. So even when, and, it, and it was even hard for him to understand. And it's hard to understand. In fact, he said that many times in the sutras. He said, this is very hard to understand. one time Ananda said, this is a wonderful teaching, it's so clear, and he said, no, it's not clear, this is really hard to understand. Yeah. But it's key to understand what the Buddha's teaching was all about. This, sometimes when I think of, um, myself, um, not inherently existent, kind of the way I, I walk myself through it is saying something like, oh well, you know, these feelings that are arising in me are just human feelings. They're the kind of thing that would, that arise out of a human consciousness or, um, this arises out of the nature of, like, what humans are like and so trying to make

[53:15]

it not so personal but just, it is happening in me, but it's, um, you think there's, um, uh, danger in that, of mistaking myself? Because I, sometimes I, well, then it's so hard to understand, well, I mean, it is, I can, if I take it a step further and say, well, what are humans? Well, that's, it's just pure mystery and beauty of life that you can't understand really what anything is, you know, how, how, you know, how we can be here and be, um, perceiving and talking and all of that, but, um, sometimes I, I, I see that I, I do kind of think that people have this form and I can't, like, break it down onto the molecular level or the, you know, I still feel kind of the difference between this form and rocks and stuff like that. Yeah. Well,

[54:16]

the, I don't think it's misleading, I mean, I think it's, there are these, we appear in the world, the cup appears in the world, and, um, oh, it's got tea in it now, but, um, um, so, we do, um, it's not that we don't exist at all, I think that's the, you can, you can fall into well, nothing exists, nothing exists, but it's not saying that, the, the teaching says it exists, but it doesn't exist the way you think it exists, so, to deny that we all exist or that the cup exists at the table is ridiculous, it goes against common sense, and the teaching does not go against what regular everyday people think, or how they act, so you, that's going too far,

[55:17]

you know, that we don't exist, well, we do exist, but we exist in a way that's not, um, this inherent self, so, and the bodhisattva, you know, sees this and works to help suffering beings who are suffering, as long as you think in this way, you do suffer. Lena? It, it helps me sometimes to do this, like, I think of the self and other, and it really just really helps me, um, find compassion, like, not go to the nihilistic, but to really find compassion, so that's when, like, when I go into that feeling in human, like I'm human, it's like I can, I would be much more compassionate for someone outside of myself, so, it's almost like I take myself a little bit, like, it helps me separate, so I can find the compassion for myself, because I can find that compassion in the other, but there's nothing separate, so, like, the humanness

[56:18]

is that we're all human, and I need to be as compassionate with myself and those feelings that I have, as I would like to be compassionate with everyone else, so, for me, it's the self and other that gets gets bridged. Yes? Um, have I heard the term suchness used instead of emptiness? I'm trying to remember. The term what? Suchness. Suchness, um, suchness is not quite emptiness, suchness is is thusness. Is thusness. Yeah, suchness, thusness. Um, so, the suchness of things is how they, um, come forth and appear in the world, and they are empty, you know, but it's, it's the nature, and, and, um, I'm just reading with this, the, um,

[57:18]

the term, or natures, the, um, oh God, sorry. True nature. True nature, thank you. Like the true nature, that the suchness is the true, true nature, like a, a rock being, just hanging out being a rock, that's its suchness, it's being a rock or a flower just hanging out, you know. It's the undefined. Sorry? The what? Undefined. Undefined. It being just, the flower, the flower being, flower. Yeah. Is it, like, in Zen Mind Beginner's Finds Disagreement, she says, when a frog is a frog, you are you. Is that kind of, I mean, you know the passage you mean? Uh, yes, I do. In terms of suchness? Yeah. Yeah. Is there someone over here? Yes. I'm,

[58:21]

I'm confusing myself now, listening to everything, but I found it easier to, to contemplate emptiness when I recognized that my resistance to contemplating it was that I had an previously unacknowledged confusion in my mind between the term emptiness and the term meaninglessness. Yes. And, when I got clear on that, it made it easier. I think in English, empty means, you know, kind of, meaningless, no significance, devoid of, you know, the spark of life. And that's when it goes to nihilism. Yeah, existential, you know. So, but, but the term shunyata, um, it has to do with, um, something that's swollen, and it, when you look at it, it looks like there's something there, big and round, but it's actually, there's nothing there inside.

[59:22]

So, um, that's where it comes from in Sanskrit, shunyata. Walter? No, I was just thinking in terms of emptiness, that all the bodies, all the bodies here can be seen really because there is space between each person. Without that space, you could not see the person. So, in one respect, that would be an idea of emptiness, that it requires, it's dependent on space, and space is dependent on the person. Yes, and we're not used to kind of keeping the background and the foreground to appreciating that. You know, artists often, I feel, can appreciate it because they're looking at shadows, you know? That's what they draw from,

[60:23]

I was just going to say. Yeah. Is that you draw not the... That's right. But your negative space. So you see how they're in relation, and the, you know, you, what's left over when you, you know, that's very much, it's, but I think we get in the habit of sort of working with foreground only, you know, and the background is not remembered. I remember seeing a painting being painted, and, you know, for a long time it was just stroking, stroking, color, [...] and then all of a sudden it went, and it was the landscape, you know, and it's kind of like that, you know, it's, you, I imputed landscape onto it through my conception, you know, but it was really just, or like, you see, you know, like a newspaper photograph, all the dots, you know, have you ever seen really blown up, and it's just these dots, but, you know,

[61:24]

it's got all in its face. So that, that sometimes that sense where it comes in, where you, it's like a gestalt or something, you know. Actually, there was a, I was told when I first started practicing to watch the shadows, you know, like in trees, and when I walked around to look for the shadows, which I thought was kind of a strange kind of a guideline, but you might try it, you know. I had this experience where I saw shadows, like physical shadows out on the ground, and I remember one time there was a sheen, and thinking that between the light, you know, between, yeah, the light coming from the sky, the sun, that there had to be something there in order for there to be a shadow, and somehow, you know, they were so deep. Walter,

[62:28]

then Judith. You talked about shadow, and in Castaneda's book, Don Juan, Don Juan instructs Castaneda to look at the shadow, and he said the whole universe is right there. Boy, that Don Juan was great, wasn't he? Judith. I was just going to say there was a period of time where I photographed nothing but shadows. Oh. The cave analogy is based on that too, isn't it? The what? Plato's dialogue is the cave analogy. Oh, yeah. The, you know, this thing about when a frog is a frog, then you are you, you know, if you, when, when you are, you,

[63:30]

when you know yourself to be you in this way that we've been pointing at, you know, sort of pointing at this, as empty of inherent self, then, then, then it's not you anymore. You know, when you know yourself thoroughly as you in this way, then it's not you, therefore we call it you. That's this kind of the formula of the Prajnaparamita. Let's see, was there one in here? This is where I get really confused. Okay. Therefore we call it you. Yeah. Well, let me see if I can do it with the cup. So, it starts out when the cup is truly the cup and it's the cosmos like we went through, then it's kind of no longer

[64:32]

just this cup that we had. Therefore, meaning, it comes back down to the fact that it is a cup and you get to, as I said previously, you get to drink out of it, wash it and handle it and do things. It's not like it kind of becomes the cosmos and then you can't relate to it as a cup anymore. It doesn't sort of blast off into the stratosphere never to be seen again. It is this cup that's in the world as a cup. So, that's how it comes around. It's when it's truly when, I remember hearing this and I was so bored. When A equals A, that equals not A, therefore it is A, that kind of thing and it was like, what are you talking about? Leave me alone. But anyway, we can't forget

[65:36]

that we are together in the world and eating and drinking and living our lives. Not with non-inherent existence. So, it comes back around to every day minus the Buddha. It's what it comes back to. So, the Bodhisattva sees that, you know, it sees that there's nobody there inherently and therefore it saves these beings, you know. The therefore still is... The therefore, yeah. Well, I don't know about therefore the Bodhisattvas, but... Is that the middle way that it's a cup and it's not a cup? I mean, that it's a cup but it has no inherent existence as a cup? Both of those are true. Is that the middle way? It neither exists nor doesn't exist and that's why it's the middle way. It neither exists

[66:37]

nor does not exist nor both exists and not exists, you know. There's no category that you can put it into because, you see, the dependent co-arising is unconstructedness and stillness. It's outside of our conceivability. It's beyond conception which is what, Bernd, you were bringing up. Oh, that's fine and dandy what you say, but isn't the true realization outside our conception? This is just cognition. Kind of like that? Anyway. I got the feeling that you were kind of... You can tell the truth of it without being able to put it into words. Yeah. I think that the actual realization of dependent co-arising is... it's beyond our conception, you know. It's outside of our ability

[67:37]

to actually put it into concepts, you know, so we're kind of struggling over here with words, but we can, you know, speak. We can. Through that realization can one... I mean, if you read Dogen, you know he is speaking from there, you know. Scott? I have a question about suchness. Would another definition for that be before conditioned consciousness puts a definition on something? Would that be something more dependent co-arising? That you already exist with all things before kind of like what Rett would say, the bump on the universe appears. Could you say that again? Would another definition for suchness be before our... before we impute like the idea that that's a table

[68:37]

or... I see what you're saying. Well, I think there's also the suchness of our conception of table. You know, I don't think it's necessarily the idea that there's the suchness of our thinking, too. You know? So I think the... before we call it a table, the way it exists is... well, is the truth of emptiness is the way it exists before we call it a table. Once it becomes a table, it's born. Yeah. But I mean, that definition itself is part of emptiness because it's just an infinite way of giving definition to the table. Make sense? Well, emptiness... form is not different from emptiness and emptiness is not different from form. So there's not an emptiness kind of just out there floating. It's...

[69:40]

So even my fixed definition of table is emptiness. It's not... Does that make any sense? Your... Let me see if I can... if we can do this together, okay, because I'm kind of groping to... So you have a... you look at this... See, basically, we look at this and we see... we see brown, but already that's, like, already pretty far down the line because brown, to call it even brown, brown square, you know, is already... We have to know that it's square, not round, so there's a lot of conceptions in there. Even to visually get... having our eye faculty even see this is already... And then we call it table. you know, the form... Table is after we see brown,

[70:46]

you know, color and shape, color and shape, and then we... These are the skandhas. Right. So the skandha form sees a shape and a color. It doesn't even see brown yet. That comes into, let's see, form, that's perception, that's samnya, where you say brown because you've seen other colors like that and you know from previous experience that they call that brown. I'm kind of getting into this right here with you, but anyway. And then, you know, the fact that it's at this height and various things, you say table rather than crate or something, you know. So it's based on past experience. Well, the perception part is. And then there's vijnana, there's the consciousness of it, so there's form and then feelings, whether you like it or don't like it or neutral. Perceptions.

[71:47]

Impulses or samskara, which are the together makers, which have to do with personal experience, why it's a table not a crate, you know. And then consciousness of the whole thing. So, those are the skandhas. so, explains the consciousness of it, the consciousness that I've seen this table before and I can match it up with another table and it looks good. there's all those things, there's consciousness of the table because you could also be in the room and not be conscious of the table. So, that has to be there. the awareness. Yeah. So, and that's all different from emptiness, right? What, the skandhas? Well, the skandhas, as we say in the Heart Sutra, practicing deeply

[72:50]

the Prajnaparamita, perceive that all five skandhas in their own being were empty and were saved from all suffering. So, the skandhas are empty of inherent existence. So, that whole thing that was described does not have its own and it's dependently co-arisen, all that. So, it's not saying it doesn't exist, it's just saying that it's dependent on... That's right. It's not saying it doesn't exist, but it doesn't exist independently. Right. Yeah. So, Scott, so about suchness, so the suchness of the table is the table just the way it is. Right now. Yeah. Yeah. But the table itself is made up of boards and we call the table, we gave it a name. Yes. Which is, you can call it

[73:51]

the glass or you can call it anything. And the boards come from trees and we call it trees, but it's not trees. And you go back and back and back so that if you take it forward, you got what we call a table which is made up of a lot of boards and trees and et cetera, et cetera. Yes. Which line that the table is in. Of tableness. Yeah. Therefore we call it table because we got a name and something. See, that's where language comes in because we're going to have to ask somebody to put the teapot down somewhere. So we say, well, let's call it table. We call it X-tree. X-tree. You could call it anything, you know. But, but, Right, that's a widget, a shorty. So that's the thing about naming, you know, why, but we begin to think

[74:53]

it's table, you know, and that it exists by itself kind of in the world. It's there and it's solid and it, and certain things you feel like they're going to last forever, you know, but everything is, there isn't anything that's not subject to, is not dependently co-arisen. you know, if there was a fire or whatever, Or a termite? Yeah, or a termite, or a chainsaw, you know. Yes? Yeah, termite calls it dinner, right? Virginia was first to say that. Termite dinner. Termites call it dinner, that's right. They don't call it table. That's right. That's a great name for a book, Brooks. Thank you. That's a way to call your house dinner. I'm sorry, but I've lost, I'm sorry, but I really lost track of why we're studying emptiness. This is not a criticism, I just,

[75:53]

all of a sudden can't figure it out. Yeah. Don't know why we're doing this. Do you want to make a guess? Or would you make a guess? Well, it has to do with having compassion, somehow. Yeah. Because everything is connected to everything else, and everything is us. We are everything, and everything is us. Yeah, that's a big part of it. Another big part has to do with if we believe that we are this independent critter, then we find that we want things for us, you know, like, we want those things over there, and we want to make sure we get enough dessert. Oh, they're taking it all, you know. Those big jerks, you know, or whatever. We begin to be pushed, we begin to operate in the world, or, not we begin, we operate in the world

[76:55]

from I, me, and mine. Because we believe that if we don't, who is, who's going to take care of us, and who... So, this is a very painful situation. There's enormous suffering, enormous suffering, in clinging to the skandhas. See, that's in the Heart Sutra. Avalokiteshvara, while practicing deeply the Prajnaparamita, perceived that all five skandhas, which is what we're made up of, these five heaps, were empty, and were saved from all suffering. So, the, the, the skandhas in themselves are not suffering, but the, it's panca, upadana skandha, panca, upadana panca skandha, what, panca, it's the clinging to the five skandhas. Five skandhas, in and of themselves, are very useful, right, for getting along in the world while we're alive, to, but it's the clinging,

[77:57]

it's self-clinging, and if we don't understand the emptiness of inherent nature, then we're, that's what we're involved with, self-clinging, and that's suffering. So, you know, taught for the wheel of the world, for heroic spirits intended, listen to the perfect wisdom of the gentle Buddhists, this is gentle, you know, it, you know, got to be gentle about this, because it's, it's not very easy to swallow, you know, especially about ourselves. So, see there was something over here, yes? I just kind of thought about, that you might help me a little bit with, about a cup or a table or a person, could one say that a cup is what it is when it's witnessed before ego?

[78:59]

I don't know if ego hinders a cup, I mean, I, you know, I think you can, as long as you don't believe in the inherent existence of ego, we need our, we need to have ego, you know, so I don't think, ego needs to be an obstruction to... But can, can one witness a cup or a person or anything through one's ego and really see it as what it is? Maybe as long as you like I was just thinking about building a house and then at the end of the day I turn around and I go, wow, you know, just from what I did during the day, but as long as I understand that I'm not the only thing that's involved,

[80:10]

you know, then, like I'm not, like my ego isn't the thing that built it or... See, I don't think ego is, when you understand that ego is dependently co-arisen as well, there's no problem with ego, it's just when we think that ego is, or when ego gets out of whack or takes over, but ego is a healthy part of being a human being that you have an ego that can negotiate, you know, through various things, so when you, um, I don't feel like you have to get rid of anything, you just have to understand how it dependently co-arises, you know. I wasn't so much suggesting get rid of it, but just to see our, and I chose for no apparent reason the word witness instead of see,

[81:12]

as a more passive but a tainted way of connecting, a less judgmental, it's just witnessing as it is. So, you know, I... So it sounds like when you say that, that the ego is kind of, it's not, you're not looking at it and looking out for what's in it for you, but you're just, there's awareness, mindfulness, awareness, and like that feeling? Yes, the ego is, is more or less suspended because it's not needed to negotiate a concept of some kind. It's allowing something to be what it is by staying out of the way. I don't know what to say about the ego. Somehow I feel sort of stumped by that.

[82:13]

So I'm going to write it down, about the ego, and I'll see what I have to say next week, if that's okay. It's nine o'clock. We have to go bow. Let's see. Ego. Witness. Could you say it just one more time? A cup or table is what it is when witnessed without ego. Okay, thank you. So, how was it tonight? Was everything okay? Yes. I feel sort of...

[83:15]

It was a very helpful discussion about emptiness. Oh, good. Okay. The best discussion I've ever had. Oh, great. So, let's all think of... We haven't gotten to the Ashta yet, right? So, we're going to read Chapter 2, which is not very long, of the verses. In fact, it's very short. Maybe we should read Chapter 2 and 3. Let's read 2 and 3 because it's really short for the verses. And... Do you think you'd be able to read Chapter 1 of the 8,000 line? I don't... This is what happened the last time. We just stayed with the verses the entire time. The book hasn't come in yet. It's coming in tomorrow, right, Tia? Is there one in the cover? And I asked that one go on to the... And I actually have Xeroxed a couple of first chapters. No, just one chapter. No, here's two. Would anyone like the first chapter of the Ashta to read? I'd love it. Thank you. Anybody else for next week? And so, more books are coming in,

[84:18]

and... Six. Six books are coming in. Does anybody want to order another one of these guys? Okay. We indicated last week if we wanted one, right? Yeah. Sorry. What, Brooks? What is this extra thing? The comment spreader. This is just... It's the 8009, the first chapter Xeroxed. So, we're two and three of the verses and the first chapter of the sutra. Memorize from either chapter two or three. And you can memorize more than four lines or just four lines. Okay? And I think... So, everybody be ready and then we can hear the dharma spoken by all these different voices with great attentiveness. Wasn't it great to hear Bert and Suze? It's wonderful. So, we'll... And you get a chance to do it. I'll try. I know. Why don't we all memorize and say, well, we'll hear the different voices. Yeah, it's good. It's nice to hear.

[85:19]

Yeah. Certain ones are really... Would anyone from the office like to take care of this money for the study center? It gets put in the cash register for study center. Okay. Let's see. Anything else? Do you need this to take with you? We're done. Okay, great. So, let's do our chant. May your attention...

[85:55]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ