I thought this morning we could start with an exercise in inquiring mind. To hold yesterday's field trip with inquiring mind. What's that inquiry? What did you learn about the Dharma? What struck you? that, as I was saying before, a certain kind of attentiveness, a certain kind of receptivity and appreciativeness, a mind that isn't so much grasping at something or figuring it out or understanding, but more letting it be received with a clarity, a settledness, a mind that's being informed both in its lucidity and in its disposition by the spiritual source.

[01:14]

The spiritual source. So just let that mind and body, heart and whatever else settled. And our time. Over in Berkeley at the monastery. What did it teach? What did it illuminate? did it illustrate about the Dharma, about practice. word, a phrase, a couple of sentences.

[02:59]

Dharma gates are always present. And if you could speak out so everyone can hear, it would help. Thanks. Differences in form that are common undermining threads. Frustrations don't get involved. Next slide. of Buddhist practice that no matter what the forms and the traditions are, there was a unity between us and the Chan practicing between us in Carolinas.

[05:55]

last week, and that makes it joyful. Expecting differences. Giving appreciation with others. and practices. The whole world is supporting Monday. it, it grows more effective, efficacious.

[07:27]

Not effective that it produces a particular consequence, but effective that it's more easily tapped into, connected to, that it's more available to shift what things are related to or eliminate them, something of that nature. The very same experience can somehow, the disposition that has been related to influences what's experienced. So what we're going to look at today, this is what Sekito was talking about, what makes world is held in that way.

[08:43]

Can we sit and be inquiring mind so that each statement is completely itself? When it's completely itself, it's like from that perspective, it's beyond comparison to what everybody else says. So we could write them all on the board and then we could vote which one was most appropriate, which was most profound, which described best the day. You could create all sorts of standards and then judge them or gauge them by it. Or we could say, well, if we put them along together, how do they encapsulate the experience? There's all sorts of ways they can interact. But then in another way, each one including itself. They do not interact. So with inquiring minds, it's not like we're saying, okay, then one or the other is right.

[09:52]

Interacting is right or not interacting. Seeing the interrelationships of all our ideas, of all our subjective expressions. There's that. And then there's each one that's completely itself. And not to say that what arises in your being isn't the consequence of your being, and your being is the consequence of all the incredible number of circumstances that produced that karmic disposition that experienced Buddhist monastery. So these are the kinds of ideas that Sekhika was bringing up. But let me mention one other thing. I set my mind and I'd like to bring your mind to when the monk, what was his name?

[11:03]

I forgot. When he recited the mantra, if you think of If you think of the immersion of body and breath into engaging sound, this is part of our chanting. It's this kind of immersion. And then if you think of the quality of sound,

[12:05]

Not exactly the melody, not exactly the tone, not exactly the rhythm, but some combination. This is mantra. Mantra has, in the combination of all these elements, it has a transformative quality. Not exactly to say that it engenders the mind of inquiry. But something like that, it shifts from a more mundane, karmic, individualized, preoccupied being into something that's in harmony, something that's more appreciative, something that's more open. So when we chant,

[13:10]

Before we have a class, a lecture, whatever, we're entering into that way of being. And we're doing it collectively. So it's both an individual entry, but it's also a collective. And this is also part of what Sekito is trying to get at when he's talking about sound. It's not just sound, it's how something's embodied, embraced, made manifest. And then part of the yoga of it is learning to connect, to give over body and breath. It's like in the Zen school, when we chant, you dispose body and breath and mind to be fully available.

[14:22]

When we arise the mind of inquiry, we dispose body and breath and mind to be fully available. We become one with, and then out of that oneness, individual expression arises. And so this is the merging of difference and unity. You give over to everything and then, guess what? The individualized, the fruition of karmic being comes up and holds up its unique flower of the moment. And what the Sandokai is saying, this has its own aesthetic. That's how it is.

[15:25]

It has its own beauty. You know, like yesterday I was saying, you know, this is illustrating this stream of thought. The truck passes, unpleasant, unpleasant, gives rise to this and this and this. And then all of a sudden, we're living in this afflictive environment. And we're afflicted. And then, of course, we blame each other for it. And then, as a group, we're just a source of each other's suffering. Maybe we don't need a left and a right. Maybe everybody needs their own corner of the room. We just don't need to separate men from women. Each person needs to have their own realm. We're all a problem for each other. But from this aesthetic we're both one connected whole

[16:34]

and we're all individual to just say we're all one and there's no difference doesn't do justice to the beauty because we're all extraordinary individual and unique each voice offers up a different flower of experience from visiting the place To just say, oh, we're all one, we all have the same experience. It misses something. It doesn't... You could say, oh, well, that's how wonderful they are. They're all one. They all have exactly the same experience. But it misses something. And part of that, it's not true anyway. That's true. So from this disposition, the uniqueness of our individual karmic heritage is not a problem.

[17:46]

The fact that each of us has the thoughts and feelings that we have is not either an individual source of affliction or a collective source of affliction. More exploring is possible. So this, then how to bring this forth. This is the koan of the son of God. And a koan is actualized. A koan is realized. As the line says, merging with principle is still not enlightenment. It's not enough to say, oh, that's terrific. It's to actualize it. It's to go to the Berkeley Buddhist monastery and actualize through direct experience and contact.

[18:49]

It's to come back and actualize it. It's an inch and every experience is asking to be met with the con. What is sandukai? This is the flavor of his end scope. All the objects of the senses interact and yet do nothing. Like I was just saying, if you read both of these commentaries, there's one place, and I'm getting into a certain area, where both Ching-Yan and Susan Kubarashi are relating to darkness in different ways.

[20:17]

Ching-Yan is saying, it's the darkness that's created by the obscurity of grasping karmic horizons. Sign of the fire engine creates affliction. You conclude, San Francisco is a wise place to live. And you start to wonder, why did I end? What bad luck brought me to live in such a wise place? From the point of view of the dharma, this is an obscuring question. The illuminating question is, what's going on? What's the nature of mind and emotion that's being brought forth, that's creating these ideas and feelings? Yes, Chris. When you hear a loud noise or startling, whatever, below cognitive level, you go into some pre-programmed

[21:31]

Our species have a high alert. So we take a lot of adrenaline, and you get prepared for fire and flight. Then you connect it to your brain. And you attach it to whatever is there. See, the Sandokai is in complete agreement with that. The Sandokai is saying human existence is intrinsic to karmic. It is saying it is the fruition of cause and fight. whether you want to describe it in the neurology of our brain or any other way yes now how that arising is related to then we shift from as Shenyang would call it the obscuration the darkness of grasping karmic formation But we can say that the Dharma is the Dharma about karma.

[22:44]

Because when the karmic formations arise and we bring to them clarity and insight, then you go, oh, look at that. Look at what's arising. Look at how it's arising. Look at the fruition of what's arising. Look at the sense of self it creates. Look at the sense of connecting to weather. Look at the definition of weather. And the very same karmic arising becomes dharma. Tsukiroshi is holding up a different kind of darkness. He's holding up the darkness of not clinging to discrimination. So when you cling to the discrimination, there's obscurity.

[23:46]

When you don't cling to the discrimination, something else, non-clinging, gives birth. in the sense that he not known is most infinite. But in a way, they're both applying him to a different context. Now, what we could say, the qin yin is applying it to their mandakaya, the world of manifest form, in as much is that the formations are being clung to. And then Suzuki Roshi is applying it to the Sambhogakai, where these very same formations are not being clung to and are going beyond that.

[24:53]

There's no discrimination at all. There's nothing arising and nothing to cling to. But in the realm of it arising and being seen for what it is, is also a release of clean karma. So I hope that made some sense. It sounded great, Paul, but I'm not sure exactly how that's called darkness in Shendrini's. Let's say you're in a dark room. see what's in the room. So you can't say table, chair, sofa. You can just make contact. You can just have the momentary experience. So there's an intimacy of contact.

[25:57]

And to use Bishop Agui's phrase, there's no conclusion being made. You touched the table, but you don't know that it's a table. You just have physical sensation of hard surface. No conclusion. So in this realm of darkness, there's the intimacy of not knowing. And there's non-discrimination. It's not like saying, well, the table is better than the sofa because Sofa and table aren't even rising. Thank you. Yeah. That's very clear. Yeah. So we could say, like, Mu, that the practice of Mu is to sweep away all the conclusions, all the definitions, each exit. Sweep away all the thoughts, all the conclusions, all the descriptions of this and that, self or other, inside, eyesight.

[27:05]

Swip them away with each action. Swip away touching the table too. Swip away to this place of not knowing. You could also say it is his toes and his first one. No. He also uses it in that way too. Talks about darkness. Don't even know your own face, your own being. don't even know some me. That's medication. But are we being asked to avoid those things which need to be recognized or need to be called out? I mean, are we being Ignore when people are being ignored or heard of.

[28:16]

Well, let's see. Don't forget the basic premise, so to speak. The sound of God is not saying, let's decide which is best. darkness alike. It's the interplay of these two that brings forth the flower of the Dharma. But it's like I was saying earlier, it's not that we're all of one mind. It can be a sense of connectedness held in this inquiring mind, as I've been told. and within that there is the beauty of our difference and that's what Sekito is getting to he's saying in there there's harsh and pleasant in there there's refined and common speech he is not saying and it's all just sweet

[29:35]

all that goes on in there and even though we acknowledge the three wrongs of existence each one of them asks for its own kind of appropriate response if someone is running around murdering people don't say but basic Buddha nature. Maybe he has basic Buddha nature, but from the way he's acting, it really looks like he's not in touch with me. He's causing a lot of harm. Let's incarcerate him. Let's get him in a meditation group and see if something that innate capacity can be kindled.

[30:38]

And some illumination can be brought to karmic behavior that sets in motion, you know, insight that sets in motion compassion, that sets in motion a sense of connectedness and caring and tenderness for others. So it's not to somehow pretend that the harshness and the violence that goes on in the world doesn't exist. Maybe it's to say is to hold in a big context and respond appropriately. How do you find the appropriate line with respect to not drawing conclusions? So this person is going around murdering people. And at some level, I have to make a conclusion that I need to stop that.

[31:39]

But at a different level, I need to not take those conclusions too far. And how does one find where that line is? Or let's say a person's not going around murdering people, but he's talking too loud in the library. Every climate arising arises in a context. And it finds its relevance in that context. Talking to live in the context of being in the library. In the context of the Zenyo, we have a lot of agreements. They don't whistle. They don't know you.

[32:41]

We do all sorts of things. You try to walk quietly, slowly, mindfully. That's not to say those things are bad. It's just that in that context, in the karmic environment, we are considering to be conducive with practice. They're considered inappropriate. Are we implying that practice can only happen under those circumstances? No. We practice within the realm of karma and try to bring skillful means to it. But skillful means is contextual. You know why it's a skillful response? I remember being part of the discussion, but what's a skillful response to substance abuse?

[33:52]

And the person making the presentation was saying that they felt nowadays there's a kind of tyranny of the 12-step program. This was the way to rehab. And he had a lot of 20 years experience in this field. He said that his personal experience was that Sometimes other ways were more efficacious or valid. To just think, 12 step is the way, with lost art, other possibilities. I'm not trying to e-argue either, I'm just trying to illustrate a point. We bring forth our best effort, we bring forth as to what's appropriate. But it's still a relative response. I guess I'm still wondering.

[34:56]

So I left it really upset. I found sexism there, and I found homophobia there. And I was really upset. And what is skillful means when people are using tradition or dharma to oppress other people. But it's tricky because or upset. I experienced it this way. Then maybe a more accurate statement says, and this is how it appears to me.

[36:05]

And I would say, in our collective appreciation of our diversity, all our opinions matter. They're not in competition. It's not that we say, wait a minute, you're not with a party line. That's not what is happening. But they're all subjective. And the richness of diversity is to listen to them all and be educated by each other. What I heard was this sexism and homophobia is subjective? No, your being says experience is subjective. Right, I recognize that. Yeah. The experience that arose from you, though, was... Yes. ...behaviors that were going on there were sexist and homophobic. Right. And that's your experience. And in saying that does not mean, and you're off-base, or you misinterpreted.

[37:15]

It's to say, To go back to this notion I was creating at the start of the class. When we have individual and collective inquired mind, each person's experience, to use the phrase I was using before, has its own validity and beauty. And in our interconnectedness, Each person's experience is part of our interconnected being and as such matters. If that's your experience, then that matters to the rest of us. Does that mean we need to ferret out, or can we even ferret out some absolute definition of what happens there?

[38:17]

I would say no. But does that mean that in listening to each other's experience we can be guided in how we relate to what's being presented? In one way you could think about it. If that's the impression that's being created, that's a problem. Then we can also explore. Is that what's intended? Well, we could explore that too. I mean, that's another karmic arising that can be explored. So I would say from the teaching of Sangokai, each and every subjective experience needs to be positive.

[39:20]

And I guess where I'm stuck is I want to get beyond this so that I can balance it, so that I can honor their tradition, their experience, and their handling of things. But there's this part in which I can't get through. I feel like what the Savior says is that we need to be able to honor and respect it. that happened, I find it really difficult to understand that. But let me offer you another notion. The Sanyukai says that each thing as it is, like when you say, I want it to be a certain way so I can bother it. I want them to be a certain way. I want to get through my own feelings about this, my own illusions about this so that I can. So then that is to hold with the mind and heart of inquiry, your own feelings and thoughts.

[40:29]

Not so much to see them as a problem. That to either fall into and god damn it I'm right or I'm gone kind of crazy I need to find the magic pill to restore me to sanity. Here's exactly as it is. This displays the fruition of karma. This offers itself up in the spiritual source, the light of the spiritual source, to reveal the Dharma. Exactly as it is. given my life experience giving all the myriad causes and conditions that have brought me to be this one meeting this experience is how it blossoms and I'm saying that's to hold that with appreciation individually and collectively and then you look at our

[41:39]

human intercourse you know how we interact with each other and then we do all sorts of things you know we draw a line down the middle and say okay there's us over there and them over there and then we we need to change to be like them because that's the true way or we need to start a war with them or whatever you know because our difference is not okay something has to and something has to be extinguished. And so that intention, to let that give rise to what I'm calling the mind of inquiry. In the Sandhu case, that's what harmonizes. difference in unity.

[42:44]

It's Scott Peck. You know who Scott Peck is? You can have pseudo harmony. You gloss over your differences. You pretend they're not there. Pseudo. Pseudo harmony. And he says, and that's pseudo harmony. We all think alike. We're all same people. We all think exactly the same about everything. I mean, it's always, it sounds so sweet. A bunch of then people talking and whoa. Sometimes you wonder, does anybody in this room agree with anybody else? But working with that, is to take the principle and actualize it. That's why the inquire of mind, that's its harmony, is that it holds all the difference and says, great.

[43:54]

This is a thing of beauty. I like the way you think the karma horizon is like, caught in the temple, and you had his karmic horizon, and the monkey karmic horizon. But all of this, if you listen to this statement, everybody brought forth something different. We were all having the same experience, and we're all having a different experience. We all went to the same place, and each of us went to a Our own, a different way. And it's thought to connect it for us in that way. So sights vary in quality and form.

[45:05]

Signs differ. And pleasing is harsh. So in a way, he's being elemental here. He's like taking the elements of our experience. We have sights, we see, and we hear signs. But then in another way, he's talking in a more global way. He's saying, you have some experiences And they just soften you and you feel warm and sweet. And then you have our experiences and you feel disrespected. You feel profoundly separate. You feel vibrated. Things happen like that. That's how things are experienced. You talked about that in terms of boundaries and wanted to say to have an open gate and when you want to keep your gate shut.

[46:12]

Personal boundaries. You say can you? Or could I? It's a terrific question, Abby. One dorm is something like this. When you rely on nothing, situation is, uprightness can be maintained.

[47:20]

Let's say someone enters into a situation and looks at you and says, you know, you're such and such a terrible thing, such and such an inadequate thing. And it's like, look at that. Look at the thoughts and feelings they're having. bring about such a flower. So from one perspective, we could say that short of violence, there is no need for binary, right? And then within the realm, to know ourselves well enough, to know this is a toxic environment for me.

[48:26]

I should choose to leave. I feel like under these circumstances, it's appropriate for me to explain to this person exactly how I'm experiencing what they're saying. Or some other response. I really think that for the common good, what is going on here is not appropriate and I'm going to take it outside. I mean, in the cognitive realm, appropriate response is a calling. It doesn't have whatever comes up, you should always do this. I would say it's a boxing-led match. A response match is the karmic situation.

[49:32]

But not in an absolute sense. It's like, I'm absolutely sure this is the right thing to do. Here's my offering to this situation. It's this. I'm going to say to this person, I think what you're saying is toxic, inappropriate, does not further the Dharma, causes more suffering, violates the precept of not harming. And given all that, I'm simply not going to stay in your presence. Part of the... What would you call it? The strictness of the Dharma is that we just offer that up. We don't know that I was saying, and I am right.

[50:40]

And they are wrong. You say what you say, I say what I say. This is the amazing flower of the Dharma. And actually, when bold and powerful statements like that can be made and can be deeply heard on either side, it's utterly amazing. It's extraordinary powerful. And sometimes statements like that need to be said in a karmic sense, need to be said for conflict resolution to start to come above. As long as there's a short-circuiting, an attempt at pseudo-harmony, no. Something doesn't need but truth. But when each person's deepest truth can be put out there and heard. So even that, when it's turned, gives forth

[51:49]

So I'd say, yes, when appropriate, we set boundaries. When appropriate, we speak our truth. And it's a call. When is it appropriate? How do we express our truth? That's right. Sights vary in quality and form. Here's the little form, original, different quality appearance. Sign, primary, different pleasure. Suffering.

[52:52]

Refined and common speech come together in the dark. So if you take Shen Yang's notion that when we're obscured by karma, then it's hard to differentiate between what's refined, what's a more subtle explanation or interpretation, or more insightful, and what's more caught up in the karmic context. If you take Suzuki Roshi's non-discriminatory mind, in the non-discriminatory mind, there is no refined and mundane. They're both just expressions.

[53:56]

Have you ever heard the expression that there's never a stupid question? With the receptive openness, whatever the person says, they're completely expressing who they are in that moment. Even if they ask a question that has nothing to do with whatever what you're talking about. They're still expressing themselves. No such thing. So that's what this is about. And then I would say this middle realm. So here we have the karmic constructs, the karmic context. And then over here we have going beyond all thoughts and ideas. And then in the middle we have This is the realm of the Sangokai. This is where we're trying to harmonize. It's like sometimes we think, oh, I go on the tree.

[55:00]

And I feel so calm. And everything works well. And I love everybody. They're serving the food. They're so generous. They're so kind. They're such people of beauty and integrity. And then I go back to wherever I go back to. It's so harsh and painful and conflicted and separate and divided. How do I harmonize these two worlds? How do I bring? How do I let this light illuminate this darkness? And the light eliminates the darkness. It's not a matter of obliterating the darkness, the darkness and the light. As Shingen says, they're like matching halves. They go together to create the ground, the activity of harmony.

[56:08]

It's like in experiencing our difference, we discover our sameness. When we tell each other, in our karmic realm, when we tell each other our truth. Like once I led a retreat in Northern Ireland, and these were polarized communities. And I said, tell each other how you've suffered. And guess what? They discovered they both suffered. And after a little meditation and quiet and sitting and listening, it was an amazing revelation. You suffered just the way I have. We have the same. We're different and we have the same.

[57:11]

This is the sign that Akai is asking us to discover how these two in form mutually interact, mutually illuminate. Refined and common speech come together in the dark. So in the karmic realm, when we're clinging to our own opinion and So, to go back to yesterday's example, I get to think, fire alarms, San Francisco, San Francisco is a lousy place. Everywhere is a lousy place. Life is suffering. It's a very interesting statement, because it's science just like the first noble truth.

[58:25]

But we could say, in one sense, life is suffering, is refined speech. And then in another sense, we could say, life is suffering, is coarse speech. From the Carmen disposition, it's like, why me? Why does this have to happen to me? from the other perspective of, oh, look at this. Look at how there's a pervasive disposition of unsettledness, of discontent, of anguish. not different in one sense and then in another sense how they're related to is profoundly different so this is so it's not that we have to shift karmic realms or even our karmic experiences it's how it's related you cannot be held with this

[59:46]

line of inquiry. This is the challenge. And I would say this is the activity of the Dharmakana. The Dharma is shining light on karma and reveals teachings. Clear and murky phrases are distinguished in the Buddha. So from Khrushchev's perspective here, light is seeing with discriminative wisdom. You notice the phrase, who's to blame for the fact that San Francisco is a wiser city? You start to notice the difference between that question and what's going on in this body and mind that brings about that conclusion.

[61:00]

So one phrase, one kind of inquiry is murky because it has all these assumptions to it. There is somebody who's causing San Francisco to be a certain way. San Francisco is definitely a certain way, and not another way. So there's a clinging to ideas, this fixed ideas, and clinging to them in there, and it makes it, as Shane would say, the karmic claim obscures. It makes it murky. The more thoughtful, insightful, the more refined approach to shed the brain to it, dharmic inquiry. What's happening? What thoughts are arising? What feelings are arising? What associated descriptions and conclusions are coming up? It's refined. And from the light of the spiritual source, from the light of awareness, it starts to become apparent.

[62:11]

If you go over again, I'm sorry, I'm being very quick at it, but I still don't get the difference or the commonality of defining how many speech come together in the dark. Well, the way I was illustrating it, Sanya, was I was saying that Shanya was saying, dark as the obscuration of being stuck in fixed ideas. When you're only seeing the world a certain way, it kind of obscures a bigger picture. And that obscuration obscures a mundane description and the Dharma description you know a mundane description is their suffering the Dharma description is their suffering but that statement arises with an insight and the other one just arises with a pointing finger of accusation or a deep sense of

[63:50]

But what is it coming together in the dark? So Shingyan is saying the obscuration of grasping doesn't let you see the difference between the two of those. And then Suzuki Roshi takes it a whole other way and he says when there's no discrimination this statement isn't better or worse than this one. We're all just karmic expressions. There isn't a hierarchy to our responses to being at the monastery yesterday. So some guy, you know, a lawnmower man comes walking in and just says, you know, what the heck's going on in here? Just guys coming together with him. Did you say a lawnmower man?

[65:07]

He did. I thought it was an interesting choice too. It's an old science fiction movie. Is that what he's talking about? It's me. I think he's just talking about a man with a lawnmower. That's the way I heard it too. Some old science fiction movie I remember called a lawnmower man. Crazy guy. What's that? No, it's just to say someone who didn't have a Zen context that wasn't related to this situation with refined Zen context. So for instance, I don't think it was implying that Ron Moore, Van Orgerdeen. We're getting off into the ethereal here. Anything else before we close? Any other thoughts or questions?

[66:17]

I just had one question that I've been turning over. When you were talking about the cable and how you know if it's dark, then you don't see it's a cable, but you have the experience of touching that hard surface. What makes that more intimate? and looking at that and saying that's a table. Why is that? I don't quite understand that. It seems like a different way of knowing. But why is it more intimate? It's more intimate because I read this article about some autism, and they were distinguishing how an autistic person perceives and a regular person perceives. And this is what the article says. A regular person walks into the dining room and goes ding, ding, ding, ding. Dining room. I know it. I've seen it. I mean, what they said was you walk into a room, you have six sense perceptions. The lights, the green, shape of the tables.

[67:21]

And then you move over to what you might think, what you might describe as. your notion of dyno. Now, the direct experience is more intimate than your notion of dyno. So, I glance at the table and say, yeah, table, yeah. But to experience it, to touch it, to smell it, to lift it, feel its weight, Forget that I know what it is and experience it now directly. It's more intimate. Does that make sense? So that's what it's given me. Like Carl Jung said, no matter how many times I've had an interview with a client, I always remind myself I don't know it.

[68:34]

Here they are today. I haven't met this person, today's person, before. That's very much the flavors. And don't walk up to somebody assuming, oh, yeah, damn, I know all about them. I know who they are. Oh, I know all about the dining room. I've been here 100 times. Suzuki Roshan's beginners now. This is the first time you've lived this day. That kind of flavor. So that would be all a person with autism that's more they would experience than I am. The article said that the person who's autistic, literally, their brain doesn't have that function. They can't just pick up six points of reference, refer back to their memory bank, and say, got it. They have to go more slowly. It's like green wall. mean silly, two sofas, or rather, a whole group of people.

[69:44]

And when they're asked to get over it, Sonny, just do it the way the rest of us do it. Their circuitry gets confused and overvoted, and they pull into themselves. It's like, this is too much for me. Can't handle it. It's even better on their own when they can go through all the necessary steps. Come to the same place. That's what the audience will say. But because it takes longer, they're actually experiencing a moment more intimately. And for no good reason, I'll tell you the rest of the article. It was written by someone who was autistic. And then she went on to work with cattle.

[70:48]

And she felt that cattle are closer to autistic people than regular people. That they also don't make so many presumptuous leaps about reality. in designing how to relate to cattle, how to get them to herd and things like that. If you come at it from that perspective, she was thought to be like a guru of cattle behavior. We need the cattle to do this. How are we going to get them to do it? And she'd go in and look at it and think, well, you've got to do it like this. And then they do what you say. It's like magic. He speaks cattle language. So in a way, from our more presumptuous mind, cattle are a mystery.

[71:56]

What's wrong? What's their problem? Why can't you be more like me? Because they're not. And that's how we confuse ourselves. We look at somebody else and say, why aren't you like me? I'm perfectly normal. And then we're angry or scornful or whatever we are, we're not. And we totally missed . We totally missed that. That kind of pseudo harmony, that kind of presumptuous sameness, The cattle are cattle. And guess what? They behave like cattle because that's their being. That's their nature. And the same just with each one of us and every other creation.

[72:59]

So the sign of Ka is this kind of embracing embracing difference and discovering a profound commonality. And it's the inquiry. So tomorrow we're going to go on another dual trip. We're going to go to a Thai temple. a little bit in the ritual of feeding the monks and you'll see all that and you'll see something similar to what the monk was saying yesterday like how the lady come and feed the monks and they bring an abundance of food and then everybody shares it and then after that there will be an ordination and you'll see all the accompanying rituals that go on in that tradition

[74:10]

And this is a vibrant Theravadanian community, mostly Thai. So you'll see a certain kind of cultural expression in the field. You'll see how Buddhism flowers in the Dharmakaya, in the Indian Buddhist field of the Thai culture. And then after that, there'll be an ordination, and you'll see how happen in this tradition, how they take the same Denaya precepts as the Chan tradition, quite different from the Japanese Soto tradition. Just bear witness to all that with this It's a field trip, and it's a, what would you call it?

[75:22]

You get to test art your scientific mind. Thank you.

[75:31]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_82.72