I vow to taste the truth of the darkest words. Good morning. In my recent talks, I've been commenting on Suzuki Roshi's commentary on Master Sekito's treatise on, or his poem, the Sandokai, the merging of difference and unity. which he composed in the 8th century in China.

[01:01]

Sekito was one of the major teachers in the Tang Dynasty in China. So I'll read the poem up to the point where I'm going to talk. The Harmony of Difference and Equality is the way the title goes. This book, The Branching Streams Flow in the Darkness, is the book I'm reading from. The mind of the great sage of India is intimately transmitted from west to east. While human faculties are sharp or dull, the way has no northern or southern ancestors. The spiritual source shines clear in the light. The branching streams flow on in the dark.

[02:03]

Grasping at things is surely delusion. According with sameness is still not enlightenment. All the objects of the senses interact and yet do not. Interacting brings involvement. Otherwise, each keeps its place. Sights vary in quality and form. Sounds differ as pleasing or harsh. Refined and common speech come together in the dark. Clear and murky phrases are distinguished in the light. The four elements return to their natures just as a child turns to its mother. Fire heats, wind moves, water wets, earth is solid. Eye and sight, ear and sound, nose and smell, tongue and taste. Thus for each and every thing, depending on these roots, the leaves spread forth. Trunk and branches share the essence. Revered and common, each has its speech. In the light there is darkness, but don't take it as darkness.

[03:08]

In the dark there is light, but don't see it as light. Light and dark oppose one another, like front and back foot in walking. Each of the myriad things has its merit, expressed according to function and place. Phenomena exist, like box and lid joining. Principal accords, like arrow points meeting. Hearing the words, understand the meaning. Don't set up standards of your own. If you don't understand the way right before you, how will you know the path as you walk? Practice is not a matter of far or near, but if you are confused, mountains and rivers block your way. I respectfully urge you who study the mystery, don't pass your days and nights in vain. But I read the whole poem. The part that I'm going to present today is eye and sight, ear and sound, nose and smell, tongue and taste.

[04:13]

Thus, for each and every thing, depending on these roots, the leaves spread forth. Trunk and branches share the essence. Revered and common, each has its speech. So, Suzuki Roshi, in his commentary, says, In my last talk, I explained the meaning of the independency of everything. Although things are interdependent with respect to each other, at the same time, each being is independent. When each being includes the whole world, then each being is actually independent. So Suzuki Ryoshi coined this word, independency. We have, as I explained before, we have dependence, independence, interdependence,

[05:20]

and dependency. Dependency is not really a word that's a legitimate word, but now it is. And dependency is things are dependent and things are also independent. And in dependency, he used to mean things yes they are independent and yes they're not things are independent and yet at the same time they're not independent so independency is kind of in between state things have a tendency to be independent and a tendency to be dependent so this neither exactly completely one or the other, is the independency.

[06:27]

So even though things are independent, there's still something else. And even though things are dependent, still there's something else. But we say interdependent, things are interdependent. Nothing exists by itself. Everything exists dependent on everything else. This is real life. But at the same time, we say, I am independent. Rarely do we say, I am dependent. We don't like that so much. Not in America. In America, we're all independent. But then he says, when each being includes the whole world, then each being is actually independent. Includes the whole world.

[07:31]

Independent means having no opposite. When a thing is truly independent, there's no opposite. In order to be free and independent, there can be nothing else. So as an example, when you sit in zazen, you often have pain in your legs. And then you say, I wish I didn't have pain in my legs. I wish I had pleasure in my legs. This is dependency. Because there's another side.

[08:47]

called pleasure. So you become attached to the other side called pleasure. Then you're no longer independent. So when you become one with the pain in your legs and there's nothing outside of that, nothing to wish for, nothing else to depend on, then pain is no longer pain. Because there's nothing to compare it with. Then you are completely independent. And when you are one with the pain in your legs, you're one with everything. This is the secret of Zazen. When each being includes the whole world, then each being is actually independent.

[09:53]

So then he says, Sekito, the author of our poem, was talking about the nature of reality at a time when most people, forgetting all about this point, were judging which school of Zen was right or wrong. That is one reason why Sekito Zenji wrote this poem. If you are familiar with Sando Kai and the history of this poem, you know that there was a great controversy about who was going to be the next patriarch of the school after the fifth patriarch in China. And there became the Northern School and the Southern School. And the disciples of the teachers set up a rivalry trying to decide who was the true ancestor and which was the right school, the most legitimate school.

[11:03]

And Sekito wrote this poem saying, there's no ancestor of North or South. You should stop your arguments. So this is one reason why Sekito wrote this poem. Here he is talking about reality from the viewpoint of independency. The Southern school is independent and the Northern school is independent. And there is no reason why we should compare them in order to decide which is correct. Both schools are expressing the whole of Buddhism in their own way. Just as the Rinzai school has its approach to reality, the Soto school also has its own approach. Sekito Zenji is pointing this out. Although he refers to the dispute between the northern and southern schools, at the same time he is talking about the nature of reality and what Buddha's teaching is in its true sense.

[12:07]

When you belong to one school of Zen or something, you always have your rival, right? In college, your college is the best and the other college is your rival. I think it's okay to have rivalry, but there should also be appreciation. When one tries to dismiss the other in one way or another, then that's delusion. We should see the differences. This school is different than another school. It's true. Every practice place is different than every other practice place. The teacher usually sets the tone for a practice place. So naturally, each one is different. And so you are used to practicing at your place, and then you go someplace else.

[13:28]

And you say, they're doing everything wrong. Why can't they do things the right way? So it's just because you're used to a certain way of doing things. Someone else does them a different way. Someone may express their understanding in a different way. Each teacher expresses their understanding in a different way. So sometimes someone will be practicing here for a long time, and then they'll go someplace else and listen to a lecture, and they say, oh, I understood completely something that I've never understood before. That's very good, because the teacher is expressing the same thing, but in a way that you haven't heard it before. and it kind of turns your mind. So that's nice. So we should appreciate some other way without thinking, well, that's the right way. This is the wrong way. So the teaching is expressed in many different ways.

[14:34]

And there are many different styles of teaching. and ways of expressing. But each way expresses the whole thing. So he says, now he's talking about the first line of the part of the poem I'm talking about. He says, now I want to express these lines which describe reality from the viewpoint of independency. Eye and sight, ear and sound, nose and smell, tongue and taste. This is the first line. It looks as if Sekito is talking dualistically about the dependency of eyes on their objects. which he is talking about that, he's saying, for eyes there is sight, for ears there is hearing, right?

[15:41]

It looks as if he's talking about the dependency of eyes on their objects. But when you see something, if you see it in its true sense, there is nothing to be seen and no one to see it. This is a little bit difficult. There is actually nothing to be seen and no one to see it. This is the non-dual way of seeing. Only when you analyze it is there someone seeing something and something that is seen. Only when the mind discriminates is there something seen and someone seeing. If there's no discrimination, there's just seeing. But there's nothing seen and no one seeing. When discrimination arises, a self arises.

[16:53]

When grasping arises, a self arises. Or when clinging arises, a self arises. So through analysis, a self arises. When there's only bare perception, there's no self arising. So subject and object are not split. Discrimination discriminates the subject from the object. Without discrimination, there's only one thing. So we discern our world through discrimination. And our interaction is through discrimination. But that's only one side of reality.

[17:56]

The other side is no subject and no object. It is one activity that can be understood in two ways. I see something, but really there is no one seeing it and nothing to be seen. Both of these are true. Here, Sekito is talking about this oneness of I and form. That is how Buddhists observe things. We understand things in a dualistic way, but we don't forget that our understanding is dualistic. So when we are very young, before we start to learn language, and before we are taught to discriminate, the world is just one.

[19:04]

Seeing and subject and object are really one. And then as we grow older, we start to discriminate. and see objects as out there and different. And we differentiate. And then as we grow up, we see only the dualistic world because our discriminating mind becomes developed. And then at some point in our life, we realize that there's something missing and that discriminating consciousness has limitations. And then we look for some reality. What's the nature of reality? And then we start to practice, but we're not sure why.

[20:13]

So just seeing, you know, the act of bare perception in zazen, the point of zazen is to just have bare perception without discriminating mind. Or even though discriminating mind is present, to not be limited by discriminating mind, to return to our true nature, to resume our true nature, which is beyond discriminating mind. So we understand things in a dualistic way, but we don't forget that our understanding is dualistic.

[21:21]

I see, or something, or someone is seen by someone. We don't say, I see this, but something is seen by someone. These are interpretations of subject and object that our thinking mind produces. Subject and object are one, but they are also two. Sekito is saying that for eyes there is form, but at the same time there are no eyes and no form. When you say eyes, eyes include the form. When you say form, form includes the eyes. If there is no form and nothing to see, eyes are not eyes anymore. Because there is something to see, eyes become eyes. The same is true of ears, nose, and tongue. In other words, things only exist because of something else.

[22:32]

Things only work because of something else. If there was nothing to see, there are no eyes. If there's nothing to hear, there is no ear. If there's no ear, there's nothing to hear. So hearing and the object of hearing are really one. But our discriminating mind divides them in two and says, oh, this is the thing heard, and this is the hearing apparatus. Both is true. But we're usually only aware of one side. Dogen Zenji says, if there is no river, there is no boat. Even though there is a boat, it will not be a boat. Because there is a river, a boat can become a boat. Dogen also says, the boat is in the water, and you enter the boat.

[23:46]

You climb aboard the boat. and you hoist the sail and you man the tiller. And because you do these things, the boat becomes the boat. But the boat is not really the boat until you step on board, hoist the sail and man the tiller. It's just an idea of a boat. When you become one with the boat, then the boat is completely a boat. And you and the boat are one activity without separation. But at the same time, there's the boat and here's me. But when you are sailing the boat, there's no boat and no you. There's just sailing.

[24:49]

When you are completely sailing the boat, that is. Because there is a river, a boat can become a boat. Usually, the reason that people become attached to the objective world or to something they see is because they understand things in only one way. Their understanding is that something exists independent of them. That is the normal way of understanding. Here is something very sweet to eat, but cake becomes cake because we want to eat it. So we make a cake. There is no cake without us. When we understand things in this way, we are seeing cake, but we are not seeing cake. This is in keeping with the precepts. Maybe you will kill some animal or insect, but when you think, there are many earwigs here,

[26:04]

and they are harmful insects, so I have to kill this one. You understand things only in a dualistic way. Actually, earwigs and human beings are one. They are not different. It is impossible to kill an earwig. Even though we think we have killed it, we have not. Even though you squash the earwig, it is still alive. That momentary form may vanish, but as long as the whole world, including us, exists, we cannot kill an earwig. When we completely, when we come to this understanding, we can keep our precepts completely. And then he makes a qualification. He says, but even so, But even so, you should not kill anything without a reason. Or we should not kill by making up some convenient reason.

[27:08]

That's easy to do, you know? Done all the time. Because earwigs eat vegetables, I must kill them. There is nothing wrong with killing animals, so I am killing earwigs. To kill an animal, excusing your action through some reasoning, is not our way. Actually, when you kill an animal, you don't feel so good. That is also included in our understanding. Even though I don't feel so good about it, I have to kill. Even though it is not possible, still, I may kill an animal. In this way, things go on in the big world. So this is a big point for discussion. about killing and not killing. And because everything is alive, everything will die.

[28:09]

So there's no question about that. But at the same time, nothing Nothing really dies. Only the forms change. Transformation of forms. But life is continually springing up everywhere. So, although it's possible to change the forms, it's not possible to kill life. But at the same time, we don't feel so good about changing the forms. And everything wants to exist and live in the form, in the present form. So we have to be very careful about how we treat everything.

[29:25]

So he says, sticking to some idea of killing or not killing, or to some reason why we kill or don't kill, is not the way of observing precepts. The way to observe precepts is to have a complete understanding of reality. That is how you don't kill. Do you understand? How you understand my lecture, how you practice Zazen, is how you don't kill. In other words, you should not live in the world of duality only. You can observe our world from the dualistic viewpoint and from the viewpoint of the absolute. It is not good to kill, is the dualistic viewpoint. Even though you think you killed, you didn't kill, is the absolute viewpoint. Even though you violate your precepts, if after doing it you feel very sorry, if you say, I'm sorry, to the earwig, that's Buddha's way. In this way, our practice will go on and on.

[30:32]

You may think that if there are precepts, you should observe them literally, or else you cannot be Buddhists. But if you feel good just because you observe some precept, that is not the way either. To feel sorry when we kill an animal is included in our precepts. Everyone is involved in this kind of activity, but the way we do it and the feeling we have may not be the same for everyone. One person has no idea of precepts or attainment. Another is trying to make himself feel good through religious activity or by observing precepts. That is not the Buddhist way. In other words, you may feel very proud that you are keeping all the precepts, in which case your practice smells. He's bad, but I'm good. He's always transgressing the precepts, but I'm always keeping them.

[31:33]

That's a very smelly practice. So the Buddhist way is in one word, jihi. Jihi means compassion. And Jihi means to encourage people when they are feeling positive and also to help them to get rid of their suffering. That is true love. It is not just to give something or to receive something or to observe precepts that we practice our way. We practice our way with things as they naturally occur, going with people, suffering with them, helping to relieve their suffering, and encouraging them to go on and on. That is how we observe the precepts. We see something, but we do not see something. We always feel the oneness of the subjective and objective worlds, the oneness of eye and form, the oneness of tongue and taste.

[32:36]

So we don't have to attach to something in a special way, and we don't have to feel especially good because of our Buddhist practice. When we practice in this way, we are independent. That is what Sekyuto was talking about. So absolute precepts, you know, means that even though you try to kill the airway, you can smash it and so forth, there's no way it can be killed. And literal precepts is don't kill anything unnecessarily. And in between those two is where your life takes place, where your actual engagement in life takes place on each moment's occasion, and taking into consideration the literal precepts and the absolute precepts. So you have a handle on each one, and then you decide what to do on every occasion, on each moment, given those two extremes of understanding.

[33:55]

You can't ignore either one. So then, he talks about the second line, Thus, for each and every thing, depending on these roots, the leaves spread forth. Eyes, nose, tongue, ears, sight, smell, taste, and hearing, all these are dharmas. And each dharma is rooted in the Absolute, which is Buddha nature. When observing many things, we should look beyond their appearance and know how each thing exists. Because of the root, we exist.

[34:56]

Because of the absolute Buddha nature, we exist. Understanding things in this way, we have oneness. So the important thing is to understand your Buddha nature. understand your true nature, to resume to your true nature, and realize that everything comes out of Buddha nature. Everything is an expression of Buddha nature. So we may relate to things as things. We relate to people as people, and we relate to trees as trees, but at the same time, to relate to people as Buddha nature, and to relate to trees as Buddha nature, to relate to everything around you as Buddha nature, then you begin to understand the root of everything. And when you understand the root, then you see how the branches exist.

[35:59]

and you realize that everything is really an expression of Buddha nature, then your way of relating to things is tempered. And you have, tempered means the right, correct temper, you know, You don't get too angry, and you don't get too exuberant. Exuberance is fine, and anger is also okay, but you realize the middle. You realize where everything comes from, and that everything is related, and you don't get isolated, and your emotions don't get isolated. and you realize that everything is really yourself.

[37:04]

So he says, the third line, trunk and branches share the essence. Revered and common, each has its speech. The words we use are different. Good words and bad words. Respectful words and mean words. But through these words we should understand that the absolute being or source of the teaching, that is what Sekito is talking about here. But I think there's another meaning here. Good words and bad words is not so good, I think. words which express, well, as someone said, in Buddhist practice, there's the ascending and the descending. The ascending is like leaving the earth, leaving all the hard stuff behind and going toward release.

[38:28]

And then descending is coming back to the mundane and back to the earth. So there is, there are rarefied, there's rarefied language and there's earthy language. And I think this is talking more about rarefied language and earthy language. It's not about good and bad language. It's rarefied language expresses something, oneness. And earthy language expresses diversity. So within the diversity, there should be oneness. And within the language of earthiness, the oneness should be able to be expressed.

[39:30]

And in the language of, the rarified language, diversity should also be expressed. So I think it's talking more about ascending and descending, rarified language, Dharma language, and mundane language. So, someone who has good realization should be able to express the Dharma in the most mundane language, everyday language. This is a true test of someone's understanding. So idle talk for someone who has realized is not idle talk. So trunk and branches share the essence, revered and common, each has its speech.

[40:35]

The words we use are different, good words and bad words, respectful words and mean words. Anyway, but through these words we should understand the absolute being or source of the teaching. That is what Cekito is talking about here. In the Bon Mo Kyo, an important scripture in the precepts, it says, to see is not to see, not to see is to see. To eat meat is not to eat meat. Not to eat meat is to eat meat. This is a difficult passage. Especially for vegans. You understand the precepts in only one way. You observe the precepts by not eating meat. But not to eat meat is to eat meat. Actually, you are eating meat. Do you understand? That is how we observe the precepts. Don't commit unchaste acts.

[41:37]

To see a woman is not to see a woman, from a man's point of view. Not to see a woman is to see a woman. And then he talks about this story, which is a very popular story, which most Zen students know. There were two monks traveling together, and they came to a big river where there was no bridge to cross. While they were standing on the bank, a beautiful woman came along, and one of them carried her on his back across the river. Later, the other monk became furious. You're a monk. You violated the precept not to touch a woman. Why did you do that? The monk who had helped the woman replied, you are still carrying the woman. I already forgot about her. You are the one who is violating the precepts. Maybe as a monk, it was not completely right for him to carry the woman. Even so, as all human beings are friends,

[42:38]

We should help them. We should help them, even if it means violating a Buddhist precept. If you think about the precepts only in a limited or literal way, that is actually violating the precepts. So to see the woman was not to see the woman. When the monk crossed the river with her on his back, Do you understand? So not to help her was to help her in the true sense. So what he's talking about here is our attachments. The lady said, I'd like to go to the other side. And he said, well, hop on. So he took her to the other side, but when he was taking her to the other side, he wasn't thinking about taking her to the other side.

[43:43]

He was just doing something. He wasn't thinking, oh, I'm a good boy. He was just doing something. He was just doing the next thing. And who knows what he was feeling, but he just set his feelings aside. Just did the next thing, no problem. So to eat meat, to not eat meat, is to eat meat. What does that mean? If you think I am being a very good boy because I'm not eating meat, then you're eating meat. When you are involved in the dualistic sense of precepts, man and woman, monk and layman, that is violating the precepts and is a poor understanding of Buddhist teaching.

[44:49]

Without any idea of attainment, without any idea of doing anything, without any idea of meaningful practice, just to sit is our way. Or just to practice, just to do something. To be completely involved in sitting meditation is our zazen. And this is how we observe our precepts. Sometimes we will be angry, and sometimes we will smile. Sometimes we will be mad at our friends, and sometimes we will give them a kind word. But actually, what we are doing is just observing our way. I cannot explain it so well, but I think you must understand what I mean. So Suzuki Roshi's understanding of non-duality is expressed very well in simple words, but it's not so easy, not so easy to grasp.

[46:04]

Do you have a question? Dependence and independency is because this exists, that exists. Right there it says both things at the same time. It means that something, that this and that exist, but because this and that exist, there's independency. Because this exists, that exists. I think it's a pretty neat statement. Things are dependent, or interdependent. It's true. It expresses that. Independency, it's a little bit, a little bit different in that it's, he's expressing tendency to go one way or another.

[47:19]

If we say independent, yes but. So it's the yes but. The secret of Soto Zen is yes, but. So even though you say something, yes, but. So things are yes, but. Read? Oh no, it's Peter. You have to speak up. You can feel like a good boy, but just let go of it. I am a good boy, okay?

[48:35]

I'll let go of that one. Just be a virgin. Nothing extra. Ross? No, I didn't say that. I didn't say that. Oh, idle talk. Yeah. And now I'm thinking about the monk who carried the woman across or someone who's realized that it's easy to sort of say, have nice things and surround yourself with beautiful people or beautiful objects and all that. trying to push it to the side of not going there with the accumulation of things or related One could infer that relation with a person that he was engaged in would not be sort of the typical mundane engagement that we as ordinary beings have, or we potentially have, and it caused a lot of problems.

[50:14]

Can you comment on that? I remember this student who was very promiscuous. I mean, he's known for his promiscuity. I mean, I'm very proud of his promiscuity, as a matter of fact. And he asked Suzuki Roshi if that was okay. And is it okay to have indiscriminate relationships with lots of women? And Suzuki Roshi said, well, as long as you remember the name of each one. In other words, A relationship should be a relationship, whatever that is. Typically, monks like Ikkyu are supposed to be celibate, but Ikkyu was a different kind of monk, right?

[51:28]

He felt like his way of having relationships with women was a kind of spiritual practice. I think that's what he thought. So EQ was, maybe it was his strength and maybe it was his weakness. People in Japan really loved Ikkyu because he was so human, whereas the austere monk was a little inhuman in a way, superhuman in some way. The Zen monk was always thought of as being superhuman. Ikkyu was more human on the human level. There are various examples of monks, but Ikkyu is not, Ikkyu is the example of, it's like the exception in a way, but you don't use the exception as the example.

[52:42]

you admire the exception and wonder at this, because his practice is so complex in a way, a lot of complexity to his. So maybe for Ikkyu to indulge or to practice having sex with lots of women, or whatever he did, I'm not sure exactly what he did, was not to have sex. And maybe for someone else, not to have sex would be to have sex, in that sense. But this always comes up, you know, what about so-and-so? What about so-and-so? IQ is answerable to IQ. You know, his karma is what it is for him. But as I say, the exception should not be the rule.

[53:48]

Because we always bring up the exception and say, well, what about this? Maybe that should be the rule, since he did that. And maybe we all should do that. Yeah. Well, I think the thing to keep us on track is to be faithful in relationships. And if you look at, you know, everybody struggles with this, right? This is a big struggle. You know, how do you maintain some integrity in your sexual life? The hardest thing. So, That's, you know, and then this one does this and you do this and that one. We have to, you know, have compassion for everybody for what they do.

[54:55]

And at the same time, have some standards. Sometimes we go off this way and sometimes we go off that way. And if we're practicing, we try to keep it some integrity. But our, passions tend to influence our integrity. And so, you know, we're reining in the horses, you know, turning down the fire, you know, whatever we can do to maintain some kind of integrity and not get carried away too much.

[55:31]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ